Slashdot Mirror

RIM's BlackBerry runs a proprietary OS with an extremely simplistic development environment. It's like comparing a DOS app to an object oriented development framework for a graphical desktop = no comparison.

We blame Windows for bugs, instability, and security problems related to problems that are often related to third party software. Flacks and shills are already attacking the iPhone for imagined issues that might arise from third party development. Remember how the browser was potentially "hacked" giving "full access to sending your personal information to China and/or terrorists"?

Imagine what might happen if anyone could actually control the iPhone. Nothing but Rob Enderle, Bill Thompson, John Dvorak, and Alan Kay and all day long warning us about what terrible things might happen.

Why Dan Frommer and Scott Moritz Are Wrong on iPhone Sales
BBC Prints Irresponsible Rubbish on Apple
New York Times Violates its Own Microsoft Shill Policy

RIM's BlackBerry runs a proprietary OS with an extremely simplistic development environment. It's like comparing a DOS app to an object oriented development framework for a graphical desktop = no comparison.

We blame Windows for bugs, instability, and security problems related to problems that are often related to third party software. Flacks and shills are already attacking the iPhone for imagined issues that might arise from third party development. Remember how the browser was potentially "hacked" giving "full access to sending your personal information to China and/or terrorists"?

Imagine what might happen if anyone could actually control the iPhone. Nothing but Rob Enderle, Bill Thompson, John Dvorak, and Alan Kay and all day long warning us about what terrible things might happen.

Why Dan Frommer and Scott Moritz Are Wrong on iPhone Sales
BBC Prints Irresponsible Rubbish on Apple
New York Times Violates its Own Microsoft Shill Policy

RIM's BlackBerry runs a proprietary OS with an extremely simplistic development environment. It's like comparing a DOS app to an object oriented development framework for a graphical desktop = no comparison.

We blame Windows for bugs, instability, and security problems related to problems that are often related to third party software. Flacks and shills are already attacking the iPhone for imagined issues that might arise from third party development. Remember how the browser was potentially "hacked" giving "full access to sending your personal information to China and/or terrorists"?

Imagine what might happen if anyone could actually control the iPhone. Nothing but Rob Enderle, Bill Thompson, John Dvorak, and Alan Kay and all day long warning us about what terrible things might happen.

Why Dan Frommer and Scott Moritz Are Wrong on iPhone Sales
BBC Prints Irresponsible Rubbish on Apple
New York Times Violates its Own Microsoft Shill Policy

Which is why Apple dropped the price of the iPhone to $399, when it could have continued to sell millions at $600. The iPhone was already cheaper than other phones when the cost of service was included. It cost nearly $200 less than the "$99" Motorola Q after two years of mobile service. It's now nearly $400 less than the Q, which is far inferior in every way.

Ten Fake Apple Scandals: 1 - Phony Rage About iPhone Price and Profits

We have yet to see what third party software is going to get delivered. Clearly, its in Shipley's interests to have open access to the iPhone, and I'm sure he could deliver so really cool apps. At the same time, it also looks like the OS X architecture wasn't designed from the start to accommodate open development, so providing open access now is not just a matter of "letting people in," but in making sure the system can handle it.

It's a bit like people waiting in line at a busy restaurant. They see open tables and bitch because they think they should be seated immediately, but if they were, they'd be complaining about the service being slow and the kitchen being backed up. It's easy to run multibillion dollar operations from the safety of home, but Apple seems to be doing a good job of actually delivering real technology.

If developers really wanted to impress us with their work, why haven't we seen very many web apps tuned for the iPhone like Facebook's iphone.facebook.com ? That app demonstrates what can be done, and is pretty impressive. If they can't master regular AJAX, why are they demanding to have open inside access to the yet unfinished iPhone OS X 1.0.2 system? Apple doesn't even have its own apps done yet; its waiting on Leopard to deliver iCal/Notes integration.

Using iPhone: iCal, CalDAV Calendar Servers, and Mac OS X Leopard

It took Microsoft ten years to deliver its mobile platform, and its still a steaming pile of crap. Windows Enthusiasts are saying the iPhone can't do revocation, but that's a laugh because Windows Mobile 5 can't even remote erase Flash RAM cards. Since WM phones don't have enough RAM on them to do anything, users have all their content (and "company secrets") on Flash RAM cards that the IT staff can't remotely wipe anyway. WM is a joke. WM apps are a joke. WM phones are a joke.

Six Reasons Why Apple May Never Open the iPhone outlined the rationale behind the strategy driving Apple's software plans for its new mobile. At the same time, it's important to take a reasonable appraisal of the iPhone's supposedly closed nature. While Apple is unlikely to open up the iPhone in the same sense as the Mac anytime soon, it is already an open platform in ways that matter. How Closed Is the iPhone? and How Open will the iPhone Get?

Which is why Apple dropped the price of the iPhone to $399, when it could have continued to sell millions at $600. The iPhone was already cheaper than other phones when the cost of service was included. It cost nearly $200 less than the "$99" Motorola Q after two years of mobile service. It's now nearly $400 less than the Q, which is far inferior in every way.

Ten Fake Apple Scandals: 1 - Phony Rage About iPhone Price and Profits

We have yet to see what third party software is going to get delivered. Clearly, its in Shipley's interests to have open access to the iPhone, and I'm sure he could deliver so really cool apps. At the same time, it also looks like the OS X architecture wasn't designed from the start to accommodate open development, so providing open access now is not just a matter of "letting people in," but in making sure the system can handle it.

It's a bit like people waiting in line at a busy restaurant. They see open tables and bitch because they think they should be seated immediately, but if they were, they'd be complaining about the service being slow and the kitchen being backed up. It's easy to run multibillion dollar operations from the safety of home, but Apple seems to be doing a good job of actually delivering real technology.

If developers really wanted to impress us with their work, why haven't we seen very many web apps tuned for the iPhone like Facebook's iphone.facebook.com ? That app demonstrates what can be done, and is pretty impressive. If they can't master regular AJAX, why are they demanding to have open inside access to the yet unfinished iPhone OS X 1.0.2 system? Apple doesn't even have its own apps done yet; its waiting on Leopard to deliver iCal/Notes integration.

Using iPhone: iCal, CalDAV Calendar Servers, and Mac OS X Leopard

It took Microsoft ten years to deliver its mobile platform, and its still a steaming pile of crap. Windows Enthusiasts are saying the iPhone can't do revocation, but that's a laugh because Windows Mobile 5 can't even remote erase Flash RAM cards. Since WM phones don't have enough RAM on them to do anything, users have all their content (and "company secrets") on Flash RAM cards that the IT staff can't remotely wipe anyway. WM is a joke. WM apps are a joke. WM phones are a joke.

Six Reasons Why Apple May Never Open the iPhone outlined the rationale behind the strategy driving Apple's software plans for its new mobile. At the same time, it's important to take a reasonable appraisal of the iPhone's supposedly closed nature. While Apple is unlikely to open up the iPhone in the same sense as the Mac anytime soon, it is already an open platform in ways that matter. How Closed Is the iPhone? and How Open will the iPhone Get?

Which is why Apple dropped the price of the iPhone to $399, when it could have continued to sell millions at $600. The iPhone was already cheaper than other phones when the cost of service was included. It cost nearly $200 less than the "$99" Motorola Q after two years of mobile service. It's now nearly $400 less than the Q, which is far inferior in every way.

Ten Fake Apple Scandals: 1 - Phony Rage About iPhone Price and Profits

We have yet to see what third party software is going to get delivered. Clearly, its in Shipley's interests to have open access to the iPhone, and I'm sure he could deliver so really cool apps. At the same time, it also looks like the OS X architecture wasn't designed from the start to accommodate open development, so providing open access now is not just a matter of "letting people in," but in making sure the system can handle it.

It's a bit like people waiting in line at a busy restaurant. They see open tables and bitch because they think they should be seated immediately, but if they were, they'd be complaining about the service being slow and the kitchen being backed up. It's easy to run multibillion dollar operations from the safety of home, but Apple seems to be doing a good job of actually delivering real technology.

If developers really wanted to impress us with their work, why haven't we seen very many web apps tuned for the iPhone like Facebook's iphone.facebook.com ? That app demonstrates what can be done, and is pretty impressive. If they can't master regular AJAX, why are they demanding to have open inside access to the yet unfinished iPhone OS X 1.0.2 system? Apple doesn't even have its own apps done yet; its waiting on Leopard to deliver iCal/Notes integration.

Using iPhone: iCal, CalDAV Calendar Servers, and Mac OS X Leopard

It took Microsoft ten years to deliver its mobile platform, and its still a steaming pile of crap. Windows Enthusiasts are saying the iPhone can't do revocation, but that's a laugh because Windows Mobile 5 can't even remote erase Flash RAM cards. Since WM phones don't have enough RAM on them to do anything, users have all their content (and "company secrets") on Flash RAM cards that the IT staff can't remotely wipe anyway. WM is a joke. WM apps are a joke. WM phones are a joke.

Six Reasons Why Apple May Never Open the iPhone outlined the rationale behind the strategy driving Apple's software plans for its new mobile. At the same time, it's important to take a reasonable appraisal of the iPhone's supposedly closed nature. While Apple is unlikely to open up the iPhone in the same sense as the Mac anytime soon, it is already an open platform in ways that matter. How Closed Is the iPhone? and How Open will the iPhone Get?

Which is why Apple dropped the price of the iPhone to $399, when it could have continued to sell millions at $600. The iPhone was already cheaper than other phones when the cost of service was included. It cost nearly $200 less than the "$99" Motorola Q after two years of mobile service. It's now nearly $400 less than the Q, which is far inferior in every way.

Ten Fake Apple Scandals: 1 - Phony Rage About iPhone Price and Profits

We have yet to see what third party software is going to get delivered. Clearly, its in Shipley's interests to have open access to the iPhone, and I'm sure he could deliver so really cool apps. At the same time, it also looks like the OS X architecture wasn't designed from the start to accommodate open development, so providing open access now is not just a matter of "letting people in," but in making sure the system can handle it.

It's a bit like people waiting in line at a busy restaurant. They see open tables and bitch because they think they should be seated immediately, but if they were, they'd be complaining about the service being slow and the kitchen being backed up. It's easy to run multibillion dollar operations from the safety of home, but Apple seems to be doing a good job of actually delivering real technology.

If developers really wanted to impress us with their work, why haven't we seen very many web apps tuned for the iPhone like Facebook's iphone.facebook.com ? That app demonstrates what can be done, and is pretty impressive. If they can't master regular AJAX, why are they demanding to have open inside access to the yet unfinished iPhone OS X 1.0.2 system? Apple doesn't even have its own apps done yet; its waiting on Leopard to deliver iCal/Notes integration.

Using iPhone: iCal, CalDAV Calendar Servers, and Mac OS X Leopard

It took Microsoft ten years to deliver its mobile platform, and its still a steaming pile of crap. Windows Enthusiasts are saying the iPhone can't do revocation, but that's a laugh because Windows Mobile 5 can't even remote erase Flash RAM cards. Since WM phones don't have enough RAM on them to do anything, users have all their content (and "company secrets") on Flash RAM cards that the IT staff can't remotely wipe anyway. WM is a joke. WM apps are a joke. WM phones are a joke.

Six Reasons Why Apple May Never Open the iPhone outlined the rationale behind the strategy driving Apple's software plans for its new mobile. At the same time, it's important to take a reasonable appraisal of the iPhone's supposedly closed nature. While Apple is unlikely to open up the iPhone in the same sense as the Mac anytime soon, it is already an open platform in ways that matter. How Closed Is the iPhone? and How Open will the iPhone Get?

Which is why Apple dropped the price of the iPhone to $399, when it could have continued to sell millions at $600. The iPhone was already cheaper than other phones when the cost of service was included. It cost nearly $200 less than the "$99" Motorola Q after two years of mobile service. It's now nearly $400 less than the Q, which is far inferior in every way.

Ten Fake Apple Scandals: 1 - Phony Rage About iPhone Price and Profits

We have yet to see what third party software is going to get delivered. Clearly, its in Shipley's interests to have open access to the iPhone, and I'm sure he could deliver so really cool apps. At the same time, it also looks like the OS X architecture wasn't designed from the start to accommodate open development, so providing open access now is not just a matter of "letting people in," but in making sure the system can handle it.

It's a bit like people waiting in line at a busy restaurant. They see open tables and bitch because they think they should be seated immediately, but if they were, they'd be complaining about the service being slow and the kitchen being backed up. It's easy to run multibillion dollar operations from the safety of home, but Apple seems to be doing a good job of actually delivering real technology.

If developers really wanted to impress us with their work, why haven't we seen very many web apps tuned for the iPhone like Facebook's iphone.facebook.com ? That app demonstrates what can be done, and is pretty impressive. If they can't master regular AJAX, why are they demanding to have open inside access to the yet unfinished iPhone OS X 1.0.2 system? Apple doesn't even have its own apps done yet; its waiting on Leopard to deliver iCal/Notes integration.

Using iPhone: iCal, CalDAV Calendar Servers, and Mac OS X Leopard

It took Microsoft ten years to deliver its mobile platform, and its still a steaming pile of crap. Windows Enthusiasts are saying the iPhone can't do revocation, but that's a laugh because Windows Mobile 5 can't even remote erase Flash RAM cards. Since WM phones don't have enough RAM on them to do anything, users have all their content (and "company secrets") on Flash RAM cards that the IT staff can't remotely wipe anyway. WM is a joke. WM apps are a joke. WM phones are a joke.

Six Reasons Why Apple May Never Open the iPhone outlined the rationale behind the strategy driving Apple's software plans for its new mobile. At the same time, it's important to take a reasonable appraisal of the iPhone's supposedly closed nature. While Apple is unlikely to open up the iPhone in the same sense as the Mac anytime soon, it is already an open platform in ways that matter. How Closed Is the iPhone? and How Open will the iPhone Get?

"If you think that people would pay $2.50 for a track, you would be wrong."

Ever hear about the multibillion dollar ringtone business? Sprint charges $2.50 for a song CLIP that expires after a few months. Verizon charges $3 for the same thing, but they last for a whole year. Verizon uses Microsoft's DRM to accomplish this.

Had the music industry not been blindsided by Apple's iPod, your Creative Zen and the rest of the Microsoft PlaysForSure players would have weened the world off MP3s years ago and made certain that all commercial popular music was only available in WMA format, which expired at the content providers whim, and was offered for sale at whatever price the high end of the market might bear.

As for comparing the Mac to the Zune, go back to math class and learn about how percentages are not comparable between numbers. The Zune claims ~3% of the US retail MP3 player market. Apple has 3% of the worldwide market for all servers/desktop computers, a market that is 70 times larger. That's why Apple still makes more money from its 3% share in PCs than its 70% share in players with the iPod.

Also notice that Apple just grabbed 1.5% of the smartphone market in its debut month, outselling every other model, eclipsing Palm entirely, nearly matching RIM, and biting out a chunk roughly half of Microsoft's entire Windows Mobile licensee pool.

You might like your Creative Zen, but the company is only a follower behind Microsoft, and supported the plan to homogenize the world being one absolute DRM dictator. It's in your own interests that Apple kicked Microsoft's ass, because otherwise your CDs would have WMA files on them and the only download stores would be Urge and Walmart and other MediaNet supplied DRM subscriptions.

Forbes Prints Insanely Self Serving Attack on iTunes by MediaNet CEO Alan McGlade
Forbes, best known to many readers as the soapbox Daniel Lyons used to promote--perhaps unwittingly--a pro-Microsoft agenda backing SCO and vilifying Linux and open source, has taken another opportunity to present outrageously false information serving the interests of Microsoft: an impassioned outcry of rage over the success of iTunes.

The TyTN is also a foot thick. I'm sure Apple could give users a strap on battery pack to last longer, but users want a phone the size of a phone, not one that's too big to fit in a pocket.

Seriously, take your TyTN and shave off a 13.5mm wafer - that's what an iPhone looks like, but in a metal case instead of a cheap flimsy Zune box.

Forbes Prints Insanely Self Serving Attack on iTunes by MediaNet CEO Alan McGlade
Forbes, best known to many readers as the soapbox Daniel Lyons used to promote--perhaps unwittingly--a pro-Microsoft agenda backing SCO and vilifying Linux and open source, has taken another opportunity to present outrageously false information serving the interests of Microsoft: an impassioned outcry of rage over the success of iTunes.

The iPhone delivers software that simply blows the N95 away. It also has WiFi, which is far faster than 3G. Even so, I'd rather have a phone I like that requires me to bathe in WiFi for top speed than a highly-featured N95 that requires me to juggle spare batteries to actually use any of its features. If you prefer the N95, knock yourself out, but don't complain that everyone who doesn't agree is wrong.

Apple does make money from its service contracts. It does not make anything close to 40% of those revenues however. That's a myth.

Apple is being investigated over the contracts of music labels. Jobs has laid out that he would much rather set up one EU store and charge one price (obviously) but the territorial European labels refuse to allow it. Trying to suggest that the claims against Apple's music stores is in any way similar to the monopolistic Microsoft, convicted repeatedly and internationally for cheating customers, defrauding partners, and erecting artificial barriers to fair competition--is silly.

Ripping CDs is not the same thing as burning a CD from your purchased iTunes tracks. If that's illegal, your problem isn't Apple, it's your own F-ed up country.

BBC's Bill Thompson Hates Being Fingered As a Fraud
In response to the article "BBC Prints Irresponsible Rubbish on Apple," Bill Thompson wrote me explaining that he didn't like being called out on his errors. However, he failed to explain how he was accurate in his rambling diatribe assailing Apple as equal to Microsoft in anticompetitive, market monopolizing behavior.

It's hard to imagine how a country that pays more for everything is surprised that the iPhone's service plan isn't the same price as the US version. Of course, that gives the ignorant shills an opportunity to spew such silliness as "Apple takes 40% of O2's revenues!!!" and other made up factoids.

BBC Prints Irresponsible Rubbish on Apple
The BBC has joined the London tabloid press in printing a series of articles skewering Apple over invented suppositions based entirely upon misinformed speculation and some outright lies. The worst part is that the BBC is being grossly hypocritical in its misinformation campaign against Apple, because the company is up to its eyeballs in the Microsoft-encrusted scandal surrounding its proprietary, Windows-only iPlayer imbroglio.

UK Tabloids Pick Up Zoon Awards
It's not just the American media that is desperate to publish misleading or downright false information in attempts to prevent the erosion of existing barriers to innovation. The release of the iPhone in the UK touched off a flurry of snide reporting worthy of being Zooned.

It's hard to imagine how a country that pays more for everything is surprised that the iPhone's service plan isn't the same price as the US version. Of course, that gives the ignorant shills an opportunity to spew such silliness as "Apple takes 40% of O2's revenues!!!" and other made up factoids.

BBC Prints Irresponsible Rubbish on Apple
The BBC has joined the London tabloid press in printing a series of articles skewering Apple over invented suppositions based entirely upon misinformed speculation and some outright lies. The worst part is that the BBC is being grossly hypocritical in its misinformation campaign against Apple, because the company is up to its eyeballs in the Microsoft-encrusted scandal surrounding its proprietary, Windows-only iPlayer imbroglio.

UK Tabloids Pick Up Zoon Awards
It's not just the American media that is desperate to publish misleading or downright false information in attempts to prevent the erosion of existing barriers to innovation. The release of the iPhone in the UK touched off a flurry of snide reporting worthy of being Zooned.

Yes this was a huge problem for Wii and Xbox 360 buyers who found they had to buy their PlayStation 2 games over again.

The difference is that iPod games are $5 rather than $40. Game incompatibility is a minor disappointment, but hardly a cause for revolt as you suggest. I wonder why you'd make it a big deal? Oh right, FUD!

Speaking of FUD, lets have a CNET blogger associate the ideas of Apple working to stop phone unlocking with DMCA takedowns and third party apps, then throw in the absolute bullocks of O2 paying Apple 40% of its revenues. How much more false information can one roll into a single serving?

Where's the quotes from Rob Enderle about how the iPhone might result in rape, murder, or the violent death of children? Oh right, they're in:

Why Dan Frommer and Scott Moritz Are Wrong on iPhone Sales
Silicon Alley Insider's Dan Frommer says Apple's announcement of reaching its million mark goal in iPhone sales three weeks early is actually bad news for Apple and is convolutedly "below plan." He also says the announcement only props up the speculative conjecture by Scott Moritz of the Street that Apple's iPhones sales are somehow woefully below expectations. They're wrong, here's why.

Your argument falls down around your ankles when you look at how much profit Apple and Microsoft actually earn.

Apple does not make 50% margins on its hardware. Despite making the vast majority of its money selling hardware, in the year ending in July 07, Apple earned $3.13 billion on revenues of $22.61 billion, an overall profit margin of less than 14%. Just to quash your "Apple marketing" fantasy, I'll poinit out that Apple did not spend (50% -14% =) 36% of its revenues on $10 billion of advertising last year.

Microsoft's three monopolies (Office, desktop Windows, Servers) reported revenues over the same period of:

- nearly $11.18 billion for its Windows Server products.
- just over $14.97 billion in Windows desktop sales.
- over $16.39 billion in revenues from its Microsoft Business Division, 90% of which come from sales of Office.

In terms of annual profits, Microsoft earned:

- $3.9 billion from server software.
- $11.6 billion from Windows.
- almost $10.84 billion from Office.

While Microsoft's Windows Enthusiast wags desperately try to make the iPhone sound over priced with its purported "50% profit margins," they neglect to mention that Microsoft actually makes--after expenses--a 66% profit margin on sales of Office and a jaw-dropping 81% profit margin on Windows.

Why are Microsoft shills so enraptured with screeching about Apple's "outrageous profits" when the company they blindly follow is making absolutely insane profits selling old technology and then jacking up prices even higher and adding more DRM validation and WGA spyware on top? Recall that this past year, Microsoft's profits primarily came from selling:

- The half decade old Windows XP.
- The ancient Office for Windows from 2003.
- The creaky old Office for Mac from 2004.

Who are the blind sheep drinking flavoraid: people paying craploads of money to use old technology from Microsoft, or people paying less to buy alternatives from Apple... like the iPhone that with service cost less over two years than the crap "$99" Windows Mobile Motorola Q that Steve Ballmer waved around as real compeition to the iPhone--even before the $200 price drop?

Microsoft's Outrageous Office Profits
Microsoft's Office suite represents the third pillar of the company's core trio of monopolies, next to its Windows desktop software and its Windows Server products. Here's why the company's monopoly position in productivity applications is holding back innovation and why the mainstream tech media has absolutely nothing to say anything about it.

Fake Apple Scandal 1: The Wild Profiteering on the Expensive iPhone!
This first invented Apple scandal that analysts have worked hard to establish is that the iPhone is not only very expensive, but also grossly overpriced in an effort to profiteer on the interest in the iPhone. Gizmodo likes to refer to the "iPhone Fanboy Tax" as a populist way to cater to readers who want feel better about their choice to own a phone that's not made by Apple.

Your argument falls down around your ankles when you look at how much profit Apple and Microsoft actually earn.

Apple does not make 50% margins on its hardware. Despite making the vast majority of its money selling hardware, in the year ending in July 07, Apple earned $3.13 billion on revenues of $22.61 billion, an overall profit margin of less than 14%. Just to quash your "Apple marketing" fantasy, I'll poinit out that Apple did not spend (50% -14% =) 36% of its revenues on $10 billion of advertising last year.

Microsoft's three monopolies (Office, desktop Windows, Servers) reported revenues over the same period of:

- nearly $11.18 billion for its Windows Server products.
- just over $14.97 billion in Windows desktop sales.
- over $16.39 billion in revenues from its Microsoft Business Division, 90% of which come from sales of Office.

In terms of annual profits, Microsoft earned:

- $3.9 billion from server software.
- $11.6 billion from Windows.
- almost $10.84 billion from Office.

While Microsoft's Windows Enthusiast wags desperately try to make the iPhone sound over priced with its purported "50% profit margins," they neglect to mention that Microsoft actually makes--after expenses--a 66% profit margin on sales of Office and a jaw-dropping 81% profit margin on Windows.

Why are Microsoft shills so enraptured with screeching about Apple's "outrageous profits" when the company they blindly follow is making absolutely insane profits selling old technology and then jacking up prices even higher and adding more DRM validation and WGA spyware on top? Recall that this past year, Microsoft's profits primarily came from selling:

- The half decade old Windows XP.
- The ancient Office for Windows from 2003.
- The creaky old Office for Mac from 2004.

Who are the blind sheep drinking flavoraid: people paying craploads of money to use old technology from Microsoft, or people paying less to buy alternatives from Apple... like the iPhone that with service cost less over two years than the crap "$99" Windows Mobile Motorola Q that Steve Ballmer waved around as real compeition to the iPhone--even before the $200 price drop?

Microsoft's Outrageous Office Profits
Microsoft's Office suite represents the third pillar of the company's core trio of monopolies, next to its Windows desktop software and its Windows Server products. Here's why the company's monopoly position in productivity applications is holding back innovation and why the mainstream tech media has absolutely nothing to say anything about it.

Fake Apple Scandal 1: The Wild Profiteering on the Expensive iPhone!
This first invented Apple scandal that analysts have worked hard to establish is that the iPhone is not only very expensive, but also grossly overpriced in an effort to profiteer on the interest in the iPhone. Gizmodo likes to refer to the "iPhone Fanboy Tax" as a populist way to cater to readers who want feel better about their choice to own a phone that's not made by Apple.

With iPod owning 72% of market share you should at least qualify that "not monopoly" statement. Now what would be the advantage of stopping 3rd-party devices from interfacing the iPod? Simple--all that software would have to go through iTunes and therefore pay a nice little tax to Apple. Also would stop people from owning multiple players that can't interface with each other. Also I'm not saying that this won't be cracked but rather that it's an exercise in futility.

What the US really needs is citizens who demand fair use as a right, and insist that representitives act to codify fair use as a right, rather than simply ignore politics and allow Congress to serve the needs of industry.

Apple's iTunes Ringtones and Complex World of Copyright Law
Why copyright law involves more complex issues than many seem to recognize, and why we need to start caring about it.

If they flew overseas, they would have needed to turn on "Airplane mode," which turns off the cell radio, Bluetooth, and WiFi. When they were on their cruise, they would have had to manually turn Airplane Mode off--purposely re enabling their radios--in order to rack up a phone bill. If they thought their phones were off, why would they do this? Were they browsing the web while on WiFi?

They would also have to purposely charge the iPhone every day or two or their batteries would die.

They would also have to manually click on email attachments to download them. The iPhone does not poll for emails and download the entire content if there is a large message, nor does it automatically download attachments.

So they turned the radios on, constantly charging up their phones, and somehow remained oblivious that they were manually downloading huge emails for a week long period, and then surprised that they had an international phone bill?

-

How Microsoft Got Its Office Monopoly
Microsoft's Office monopoly gives the company more revenues and delivers nearly as much profit as its Windows software. How did it gain such a powerful position in productivity applications? The history of Office is rooted in decisions Apple made in the 80s with the Lisa and Macintosh, and also has an interesting correlation to Apple's iPhone strategy today.

Yes and Windows Vista costs $1 to "make," its just $398 of Microsoft tax for an empty box and a DVD you'll only use a few times a year. Right.

Here's why Apple really dropped the iPhone price: the iPod Touch will kill the market for high end smartphones worldwide in markets where Apple can't yet market the iPhone (CDMA2000 / FOMA/UMTS-only Japan for example), because users will be able to buy the fancy touch screen iPod and hold onto their existing mobile. But the iPhone also needs to be competitive with the iPod Touch in the US, so users enamored by it will be tempted to pay the extra $100 to get a full phone, Bluetooth, camera and other stuff.

Existing iPhone users can't be too miffed, because the new, cheaper price point will broaden adoption and pave the way for more iPhone-savvy websites and third party development--not to mention further investment from Apple. I bought two iPhones, and I'm not upset to have paid a $200 premium to be free of my POS Treo as soon as was humanely possible.

Apple's iPhone Price Cut Unleashes Complaints
While introducing the iPod Touch as a version of the iPhone lacking cellular mobile features, Bluetooth, and an integrated camera, Apple also set a new price on the 8 GB iPhone and discontinued the 4 GB model. That move angered some buyers, who felt the $200 price cut after just ten weeks on the market was too much, too soon.

Since you haven't made much effort to persuade me otherwise, I maintain that there exists a design philosophy difference between Apple and the rest of the cell phone industry, and that this philosophy is a carry over from their PC design philosophy. Honestly, I didn't really expect the address book example to be contentious. Programmers (like bjourne) who understand the relative horse power requirements of different storage and search solutions should know that most phones on the market in the past several years had enough horse power to solve this problem, and there has been plenty of time. For crying out loud, iPhone was in development for three years. Apple designed a new phone from scratch. Surely Nokia or Motorola could have built a decent address book in all that time? The fact that they did not should tell you something. Furthermore, you don't need to be a programmer to get this. Anybody who has ever filled up their address book should know the frustration of being forced to pick which ones to carry with you on your phone. I chose this example, rather than others, because quite honestly it's not really controversial and it's pretty easy to understand.

There are counter examples, of course, perhaps there will soon be another, ring tones, which we are likely to discover next week will be absurdly restricted on iPhone: you'll be able to pay to use any section of a song you like as a ringtone, but you might not be able to use your own audio files as ringtones. If that happens, it will be an interesting counter example to my argument. Note, however, other music related restrictions that people didn't like about iTunes (e.g. DRM) turned out to be due to the requirements of industry partners, and Apple has been quietly working in the background to move the industry away from excessively restrictive DRM, at signifiant risk to Apple's own business model, I might add, as evidenced by today's announcement regarding NBC Universal. (DRM is only one factor in that negotiation, of course, but it is a factor.)

It would be amusing to run style (1) comparing a large sample of Anonymous Coward postings to those by logged in users. If you really think the words I use are too big, please consider that you came to Slashdot, not ZDNet, and presumably nobody forced you. Didn't you know that Paul Murphy uncovered the astounding truth that Slashdot posts have an average reading grade level higher than some other tech industry rag forums (see: Are Mac Users Smarter Than PC Users? )? The Macintouch crowd put us Slashdot geeks to shame, though, so we can't get too smug. Yeah, I'm perhaps a bit of a geek, since I really do read the dictionary for fun sometimes. And Dude... uh... like, did you fail to notice that I'm posting a series of connected statements intended to establish a proposition, logged in using my real true name no less, while you are calling me names as an anonymous coward? I'm definitely not worried about being perceived as the friendless geek with no social skills in this conversation. Since I don't care what you think, try calling me a sociopath next. You'll still be wrong, but you'll get to use a big word and I won't be much affected by your tantrum. Heck, maybe you're not a pedant, you only play one on Slashdot. Perhaps I give you insufficient credit for a fine sarcastic wit.

--
For kicks, I ran

Homeless people have laptops.

If you have nothing in a tiny flat, buying a $50 wireless card for your laptop is a lot easier than paying $40-50/month for internet service.

Sounds like the baboonery that says the iPhone is terribly expensive at $600, compared to $99 crap phones. But when you look at the real cost of service, it's actually significantly less after two years. It's the ongoing service that's always the expensive part.

--
August 2007 Zoon Awards for Technical Ignorance and Incompetence
In an effort to recognize the spectacular efforts of individuals and organizations promoting the regression of human achievement in the field of technology, a series of nominations await your vote to determine the recipients of August 2007 Zoon Awards.

The blame is entirely upon the Board of Supervisors. SF Mayor Newsom pushed the plan for years as both a way to bring WiFi to the City, and an option for free Internet access to poor residents. The BoS responded by holding things up repeatedly to tack on political BS to take credit for the mayor's plan.

Most recently, the board decided to cut Earthlink's contract in half and demand twice the bandwidth, as if they could "fix" things by jacking up numbers. These assholes do this to every project in the City, hoping to load everything up with bulletpoints that they can parade as accomplishments. What it almost always means in reality, however, is that projects never get completed or are delayed for so long that the economic benefit of their add ons is a large negative.

This also happens in housing projects, where developers come in with a plan to build new housing, and the BoS insist that increasingly high percentages of units are reserved for welfare housing called "affordable housing"--not for the poor, but a for handful of well connected people who want to live on someone else's dime. So 10-20% of a project is subsidized, jacking up housing costs and ensuring that the only people who can afford to live in the new housing are the ultra-rich. Meanwhile, all the housing construction is held up in welfare negotiations until projects are tabled or until they are held up for so long that the minor addition of more welfare units constitute an insignificant trickle of new "affordable housing." This is backed up both by those who think market pricing can be overridden by political pricing, and by those who want to keep the supply low so that the demand and prices will remain sky high.

The plot to kill SF's WiFi was the same coalition of populists who thought a community group could put together a faster system, and those who didn't want competition to their pay WiFi or internet services.

http://roughlydrafted.com/

Ongoing Maintenance Updates of Mac OS X vs Windows Vista. In addition to its major retail releases, Apple has also delivered 34 free updates equivalent to Microsoft's Service Packs for Windows. Both deliver a package of significant new features, bug fixes, and new applications. This number does not include Apple's security updates, firmware updates, other applications updates, or alternative updates ported to a specific architecture (Intel vs Power PC). It also does not included the same number of free updates delivered for Apple's Mac OS X Server version.

1. Mac OS X 10.0-10.1 received 7 free updates.
2. Mac OS X 10.2 Jaguar received 8 free updates.
3. Mac OS X 10.3 Panther received 9 free updates.
4. Mac OS X 10.4 Tiger has received 10 free updates.

Between Windows XP in 2001 and Windows Vista in 2007, Microsoft delivered two free Service Pack updates for its consumer desktop operating system:

1. Windows XP Service Pack 1 in 2002.
2. Windows XP Service Pack 2 in 2004.

And so what it depends upon may be whether a crack involves defeating a locking system, or selling a patched version of Apple's OS.

Apple didn't sue the kid who reprogrammed his iPhone. It was AT&T who warned the company announcing it would sell a patched version of the iPhone software.

http://roughlydrafted.com/

NPD's numbers only cover most retail stores (although they don't include major retailers like WalMart), and exclude Apple's own retail stores.

The also exclude online stores like Amazon and Apple, and direct marketers like Dell.

However, that means Apple's outside retail sales have jumped by nearly double. That would suggest that Apple's own sales are also doing "well."

Apple set a new record of 1.7 million Macs last quarter, which is commonly its slowest quarter. This quarter is back to school, and next is Christmas, so it will be interesting to see where sales go.

http://www.roughlydrafted.com/

Wow, OpenMoko sounds great! How well does it blend, though?

"It is a Windows Mobile unit codeveloped by the Chinese government as a mass produced people's phone. It uses a GSM/GPRS module running the proprietary Nucleus OS. In the OpenMoko version, Linux runs the device's phone-related operations like a small handheld computer connected to a GSM phone interface via a serial port."

So much for that bubble (that OpenMoko is truly "open")

Perhaps you can draw up a Five Year Plan for the video game industry and we can implement it after the Revolution, comrade.

I'll work on rounding up the proletariat to design games for the People, so we can all play without anyone being trampled under these bourgeois capitalists who build electronics for money and orchestrate evil plots to make their products more attractive through proprietary software.

--
ZDNet's George Ou Exposed as Ignorant Microsoft Shill (Zoon!)
The assault on reason isn't just a political phenomenon. Microsoft has long been developing its own cast of apologists who have eked out full time careers in the field of sputtering out ignorant, unfounded claims with such insistence and volume that the undecided simply have no alternative but to line up and applaud their seemingly convincing rhetoric. Among them is George Ou, who unsurprisingly blogs for CNET's ZDNet branded website.

Apple iPhone vs the FIC Neo1973 OpenMoko Linux Smartphone
Frequently compared to Apple's new smartphone, the OpenMoko FIC Neo1973 is described as the free and open software community's alternative to Apple's officially closed iPhone platform. Here's a look at what it really is and how it compares to the iPhone.

Perhaps you can draw up a Five Year Plan for the video game industry and we can implement it after the Revolution, comrade.

I'll work on rounding up the proletariat to design games for the People, so we can all play without anyone being trampled under these bourgeois capitalists who build electronics for money and orchestrate evil plots to make their products more attractive through proprietary software.

--
ZDNet's George Ou Exposed as Ignorant Microsoft Shill (Zoon!)
The assault on reason isn't just a political phenomenon. Microsoft has long been developing its own cast of apologists who have eked out full time careers in the field of sputtering out ignorant, unfounded claims with such insistence and volume that the undecided simply have no alternative but to line up and applaud their seemingly convincing rhetoric. Among them is George Ou, who unsurprisingly blogs for CNET's ZDNet branded website.

Apple iPhone vs the FIC Neo1973 OpenMoko Linux Smartphone
Frequently compared to Apple's new smartphone, the OpenMoko FIC Neo1973 is described as the free and open software community's alternative to Apple's officially closed iPhone platform. Here's a look at what it really is and how it compares to the iPhone.

No Linus wrote Linux as a reimplementation of BSD, during the period that AT&T sued to stop the distribution of BSD. Had BSD not been held up in court, there would have been no need to rewrite BSD from scratch using inferior networking code.

When Novell bought AT&T's Unix labs it ended the frivilous lawsuit against BSD, but by that time, Linux had gained so much marketing buzz that it overwhelmed both commercial Unix and the free BSD, serving to water down any hope for either of the candidates to prevent the expansion of Micorsoft's DOS and the promise of NT and Cairo.

By the end of the 90s, Unix vendors had mainly squabbled amongst themselves, BSD had been largely overlooked, and Linux had expended millions of dollars in efforts to reinvent a perfectly good wheel. That allowed Microsoft to take over the desktop.

Since 2000, the only commercial desktop BSD variant to matter is Mac OS X, while Linux has gone nowhere on the desktop and Microsoft has struggled to deliver upon any of its promises, having only gradually rewarmed NT over the last ~15 years.

Mac OS X Leopard is now certified as Unix, making it the heir of both BSD and Unix, and primary real competition against Windows on the desktop. Linux exists as a BSD alternative with the entanglements of the GPL.

MS-DOS was simply Microsoft's rebranding of a CP/M clone as its own technology, a regurgitation of the late 70s played back to haunt the 80s. NT is a similar effort to salvage VMS as a tool against Unix. It will be interesting to see who will continue to back Microsoft as it pretends Vista isn't just another embarrassing placeholder while it touts "Seven" as its real product, perpetually two years out.

SCO, Linux, and Microsoft in the History of OS: 1990s
SCO, Linux, and Microsoft in the History of OS: 1980s
SCO, Linux, and Microsoft in the History of OS: 1970s

No Linus wrote Linux as a reimplementation of BSD, during the period that AT&T sued to stop the distribution of BSD. Had BSD not been held up in court, there would have been no need to rewrite BSD from scratch using inferior networking code.

When Novell bought AT&T's Unix labs it ended the frivilous lawsuit against BSD, but by that time, Linux had gained so much marketing buzz that it overwhelmed both commercial Unix and the free BSD, serving to water down any hope for either of the candidates to prevent the expansion of Micorsoft's DOS and the promise of NT and Cairo.

By the end of the 90s, Unix vendors had mainly squabbled amongst themselves, BSD had been largely overlooked, and Linux had expended millions of dollars in efforts to reinvent a perfectly good wheel. That allowed Microsoft to take over the desktop.

Since 2000, the only commercial desktop BSD variant to matter is Mac OS X, while Linux has gone nowhere on the desktop and Microsoft has struggled to deliver upon any of its promises, having only gradually rewarmed NT over the last ~15 years.

Mac OS X Leopard is now certified as Unix, making it the heir of both BSD and Unix, and primary real competition against Windows on the desktop. Linux exists as a BSD alternative with the entanglements of the GPL.

MS-DOS was simply Microsoft's rebranding of a CP/M clone as its own technology, a regurgitation of the late 70s played back to haunt the 80s. NT is a similar effort to salvage VMS as a tool against Unix. It will be interesting to see who will continue to back Microsoft as it pretends Vista isn't just another embarrassing placeholder while it touts "Seven" as its real product, perpetually two years out.

SCO, Linux, and Microsoft in the History of OS: 1990s
SCO, Linux, and Microsoft in the History of OS: 1980s
SCO, Linux, and Microsoft in the History of OS: 1970s

No Linus wrote Linux as a reimplementation of BSD, during the period that AT&T sued to stop the distribution of BSD. Had BSD not been held up in court, there would have been no need to rewrite BSD from scratch using inferior networking code.

When Novell bought AT&T's Unix labs it ended the frivilous lawsuit against BSD, but by that time, Linux had gained so much marketing buzz that it overwhelmed both commercial Unix and the free BSD, serving to water down any hope for either of the candidates to prevent the expansion of Micorsoft's DOS and the promise of NT and Cairo.

By the end of the 90s, Unix vendors had mainly squabbled amongst themselves, BSD had been largely overlooked, and Linux had expended millions of dollars in efforts to reinvent a perfectly good wheel. That allowed Microsoft to take over the desktop.

Since 2000, the only commercial desktop BSD variant to matter is Mac OS X, while Linux has gone nowhere on the desktop and Microsoft has struggled to deliver upon any of its promises, having only gradually rewarmed NT over the last ~15 years.

Mac OS X Leopard is now certified as Unix, making it the heir of both BSD and Unix, and primary real competition against Windows on the desktop. Linux exists as a BSD alternative with the entanglements of the GPL.

MS-DOS was simply Microsoft's rebranding of a CP/M clone as its own technology, a regurgitation of the late 70s played back to haunt the 80s. NT is a similar effort to salvage VMS as a tool against Unix. It will be interesting to see who will continue to back Microsoft as it pretends Vista isn't just another embarrassing placeholder while it touts "Seven" as its real product, perpetually two years out.

SCO, Linux, and Microsoft in the History of OS: 1990s
SCO, Linux, and Microsoft in the History of OS: 1980s
SCO, Linux, and Microsoft in the History of OS: 1970s

Ah the irony, a computer museum filled with old M$ OS. Bill Gates once boasted that he would keep a copy of gnu/linux for his computer museum but would eliminate it otherwise. Yet nothing is more useless than an old copy of Windoze. They can be fun, but they are tied to a particular set of hardware and software that's all rotting away. Emulation is interesting but difficult thanks to all the built in traps. Still, it's nice someone is keeping these things around.

Roughly Drafted has a set of articles detailing the OS wars that would complement the physical collection. If you are looking for a trip down memory lane, here it is:

• 1980-1985: 8-bit Platforms
• SCO, Linux, and Microsoft in the History of OS: 1980s
• 1990-1995: The Race to Deliver The Next New Platform

They are all well written, entertaining and accurate.

Ah the irony, a computer museum filled with old M$ OS. Bill Gates once boasted that he would keep a copy of gnu/linux for his computer museum but would eliminate it otherwise. Yet nothing is more useless than an old copy of Windoze. They can be fun, but they are tied to a particular set of hardware and software that's all rotting away. Emulation is interesting but difficult thanks to all the built in traps. Still, it's nice someone is keeping these things around.

Roughly Drafted has a set of articles detailing the OS wars that would complement the physical collection. If you are looking for a trip down memory lane, here it is:

• 1980-1985: 8-bit Platforms
• SCO, Linux, and Microsoft in the History of OS: 1980s
• 1990-1995: The Race to Deliver The Next New Platform

They are all well written, entertaining and accurate.

Ah the irony, a computer museum filled with old M$ OS. Bill Gates once boasted that he would keep a copy of gnu/linux for his computer museum but would eliminate it otherwise. Yet nothing is more useless than an old copy of Windoze. They can be fun, but they are tied to a particular set of hardware and software that's all rotting away. Emulation is interesting but difficult thanks to all the built in traps. Still, it's nice someone is keeping these things around.

Roughly Drafted has a set of articles detailing the OS wars that would complement the physical collection. If you are looking for a trip down memory lane, here it is:

• 1980-1985: 8-bit Platforms
• SCO, Linux, and Microsoft in the History of OS: 1980s
• 1990-1995: The Race to Deliver The Next New Platform

They are all well written, entertaining and accurate.

AT&T wants to do this because AT&T sells the navigation software that does work with the GPS that is enabled in the device mentioned in the article. See below.

Basically, this is a complete non-story. Some Blackberry fanboi got all upset because the iPhone is better than the Blackberry (in cost even) but could not think of any way to get back at the bad, evil Apple other than misrepresenting the actions of AT&T.

Vista is a very good operating system from Microsoft.

The iPhone is only expensive if you compare its full cost with the subsidy illusion of another phone. Hardware costs nothing compared to service plans. If you compare the full cost over two years, the iPhone with its cheaper service plan is one of the least expensive smartphones you can buy. The more expensive 8GB iPhone with 2 years of service is $2056.

a TYTN is $800 more
a Sony Ericsson K850i is also nearly $800 more
a Nokia N95 is over $800 more
an LG Prada KE850 is $700 more
a RIM BlackBerry Pearl is over $300 more
a new Palm Treo is nearly $400 more
a "$99" Motorola Q is over $200 more

That isn't taking into account that the iPhone will have resale value as a WiFi browser and iPod after two years, while all those other phones will be pretty worthless. It also doesn't note that iPhone competitors all have:

half the battery runtime of the iPhone.
a clunker design that's commonly twice as thick as the iPhone.
less than half the iPhone's screen resolution.

The iPhone is "locked" to AT&T unless you activate it and attach your iPhone SIM card to another provider. So it's as locked as any other phone. The RAZR, LG Chocolate, Treo and every other phone was exclusive to a provider at launch, and all of them were $500 phones. Who cried foul then? Oh right, nobody did, because it isn't Apple users who are the shrill fanboys, its people like you who love to publish false information.

As for "Proprietary," the definition of that word is owned by a proprietor. Or in other words, for sale. Your OpenMOKO hardware is similarly proprietary to the company building it, it just didn't bother to finish its own software, expecting the "community" to write it for them. So you can own the software collectively and have nobody to blame when it doesn't work but yourselves, but you're still buying proprietary hardware, and it costs just as much. The service just costs more. That makes you a rube, and a pawn, and a simpleton.

"Expensive to maintain" because the battery is integrated? Well, if you plan to use your iPhone for more than a couple years before selling it and getting a new one, yes, you will have to pay for a new battery. My Sonicare toothbrush costs more to replace the battery than the iPhone. There are also third party iPod batteries that cost less than $15, with the DIY kit. Imagine that they'll be available in two years after 15 million iPhones are sold? Again, you are presenting false information because you are bitter about a successful product. You may as well boot Windows.

The iPhone is getting attention because it delivers a much better platform and 80% of the features on any phone in its 1.0 release. It's only going to get more features and improved upon. Apple has a history of updating its software for the Mac and the iPod. Years old devices are kept up to date with updates. No other phone maker does anything approaching this, and any updates that are released are too hard for most users to install. Windows Mobile works like ass, and Palm had been rotting for half a decade. OS X offers the maturity of Symbian or Linux with a consistent, polished interface they will never have.

Even if you hate Apple, its iPhone will make whatever you get end up buying a better phone through competition. That can't be said of Microsoft, which has held back the progress of technology for 20 years. Who else is leading mobile devices? A bunch of stupid followers. If you can't handle reading about a company that can bother to challenge the status quo, maybe you need to reevaluate why. There's nothing insightful about being a whiny bitch with nothing to say.

iPhone cost comparison
iPhone contract security, hardware, sales, FUD comparisons
iPhone camera and viewing comparisons

The iPhone is only expensive if you compare its full cost with the subsidy illusion of another phone. Hardware costs nothing compared to service plans. If you compare the full cost over two years, the iPhone with its cheaper service plan is one of the least expensive smartphones you can buy. The more expensive 8GB iPhone with 2 years of service is $2056.

a TYTN is $800 more
a Sony Ericsson K850i is also nearly $800 more
a Nokia N95 is over $800 more
an LG Prada KE850 is $700 more
a RIM BlackBerry Pearl is over $300 more
a new Palm Treo is nearly $400 more
a "$99" Motorola Q is over $200 more

That isn't taking into account that the iPhone will have resale value as a WiFi browser and iPod after two years, while all those other phones will be pretty worthless. It also doesn't note that iPhone competitors all have:

half the battery runtime of the iPhone.
a clunker design that's commonly twice as thick as the iPhone.
less than half the iPhone's screen resolution.

The iPhone is "locked" to AT&T unless you activate it and attach your iPhone SIM card to another provider. So it's as locked as any other phone. The RAZR, LG Chocolate, Treo and every other phone was exclusive to a provider at launch, and all of them were $500 phones. Who cried foul then? Oh right, nobody did, because it isn't Apple users who are the shrill fanboys, its people like you who love to publish false information.

As for "Proprietary," the definition of that word is owned by a proprietor. Or in other words, for sale. Your OpenMOKO hardware is similarly proprietary to the company building it, it just didn't bother to finish its own software, expecting the "community" to write it for them. So you can own the software collectively and have nobody to blame when it doesn't work but yourselves, but you're still buying proprietary hardware, and it costs just as much. The service just costs more. That makes you a rube, and a pawn, and a simpleton.

"Expensive to maintain" because the battery is integrated? Well, if you plan to use your iPhone for more than a couple years before selling it and getting a new one, yes, you will have to pay for a new battery. My Sonicare toothbrush costs more to replace the battery than the iPhone. There are also third party iPod batteries that cost less than $15, with the DIY kit. Imagine that they'll be available in two years after 15 million iPhones are sold? Again, you are presenting false information because you are bitter about a successful product. You may as well boot Windows.

The iPhone is getting attention because it delivers a much better platform and 80% of the features on any phone in its 1.0 release. It's only going to get more features and improved upon. Apple has a history of updating its software for the Mac and the iPod. Years old devices are kept up to date with updates. No other phone maker does anything approaching this, and any updates that are released are too hard for most users to install. Windows Mobile works like ass, and Palm had been rotting for half a decade. OS X offers the maturity of Symbian or Linux with a consistent, polished interface they will never have.

Even if you hate Apple, its iPhone will make whatever you get end up buying a better phone through competition. That can't be said of Microsoft, which has held back the progress of technology for 20 years. Who else is leading mobile devices? A bunch of stupid followers. If you can't handle reading about a company that can bother to challenge the status quo, maybe you need to reevaluate why. There's nothing insightful about being a whiny bitch with nothing to say.

iPhone cost comparison
iPhone contract security, hardware, sales, FUD comparisons
iPhone camera and viewing comparisons

The iPhone is only expensive if you compare its full cost with the subsidy illusion of another phone. Hardware costs nothing compared to service plans. If you compare the full cost over two years, the iPhone with its cheaper service plan is one of the least expensive smartphones you can buy. The more expensive 8GB iPhone with 2 years of service is $2056.

a TYTN is $800 more
a Sony Ericsson K850i is also nearly $800 more
a Nokia N95 is over $800 more
an LG Prada KE850 is $700 more
a RIM BlackBerry Pearl is over $300 more
a new Palm Treo is nearly $400 more
a "$99" Motorola Q is over $200 more

That isn't taking into account that the iPhone will have resale value as a WiFi browser and iPod after two years, while all those other phones will be pretty worthless. It also doesn't note that iPhone competitors all have:

half the battery runtime of the iPhone.
a clunker design that's commonly twice as thick as the iPhone.
less than half the iPhone's screen resolution.

The iPhone is "locked" to AT&T unless you activate it and attach your iPhone SIM card to another provider. So it's as locked as any other phone. The RAZR, LG Chocolate, Treo and every other phone was exclusive to a provider at launch, and all of them were $500 phones. Who cried foul then? Oh right, nobody did, because it isn't Apple users who are the shrill fanboys, its people like you who love to publish false information.

As for "Proprietary," the definition of that word is owned by a proprietor. Or in other words, for sale. Your OpenMOKO hardware is similarly proprietary to the company building it, it just didn't bother to finish its own software, expecting the "community" to write it for them. So you can own the software collectively and have nobody to blame when it doesn't work but yourselves, but you're still buying proprietary hardware, and it costs just as much. The service just costs more. That makes you a rube, and a pawn, and a simpleton.

"Expensive to maintain" because the battery is integrated? Well, if you plan to use your iPhone for more than a couple years before selling it and getting a new one, yes, you will have to pay for a new battery. My Sonicare toothbrush costs more to replace the battery than the iPhone. There are also third party iPod batteries that cost less than $15, with the DIY kit. Imagine that they'll be available in two years after 15 million iPhones are sold? Again, you are presenting false information because you are bitter about a successful product. You may as well boot Windows.

The iPhone is getting attention because it delivers a much better platform and 80% of the features on any phone in its 1.0 release. It's only going to get more features and improved upon. Apple has a history of updating its software for the Mac and the iPod. Years old devices are kept up to date with updates. No other phone maker does anything approaching this, and any updates that are released are too hard for most users to install. Windows Mobile works like ass, and Palm had been rotting for half a decade. OS X offers the maturity of Symbian or Linux with a consistent, polished interface they will never have.

Even if you hate Apple, its iPhone will make whatever you get end up buying a better phone through competition. That can't be said of Microsoft, which has held back the progress of technology for 20 years. Who else is leading mobile devices? A bunch of stupid followers. If you can't handle reading about a company that can bother to challenge the status quo, maybe you need to reevaluate why. There's nothing insightful about being a whiny bitch with nothing to say.

iPhone cost comparison
iPhone contract security, hardware, sales, FUD comparisons
iPhone camera and viewing comparisons

Mostly for worse. MS has made contributions to lots of things, including WebDAV and (IIRC) inventing the basis of AJAX for Outlook Web Access.

However, most of what Microsoft has "contributed" comes from two poisoned buckets:

The Give: APIs, DRM systems, file formats and other ideas floated in order to prevent / erect barriers to competition.

The Take: FAT, NTFS, SMB, and other protocols and conventions that the world has standardized upon (or hopes to), all of which involve patent risk.

All companies exist to make money. However, other companies make great products, and increasingly, share their contributions to the community, simply because its in their best interests to participate in a market competing in implementations, not competing in formats.

If you compare shared contributions of other companies, MS doesn't look so sharing at all:

Apple - supports BSD and KHTML, opened its core OS and various projects.
Sun - opened its Solaris, Java, and SPARC.
IBM - supported Linux development.
Novell - supports SuSE development.

What has Microsoft ever shared? At a time when it owned the PC desktop 1987-1997, not only did it deliver products of very poor quality, but it really didn't share anything. It got paid for putting out software that was mostly developed by others. Little excellent work, huge profits, garbage for consumers.

Microsoft doesn't deserve respect, it needs to work on earning it.

-
Microsoft's Yellow Road to Cairo

If you don't like the idea of rentals, don't sign any contracts to obtain limited use of somebody else's stuff in exchange for money. They might default.

You might also be disappointed by defaults as they apply to any other contract:

loans
service and support agreements
marriage (divorce)

It's a disappointing world when partners can terminate a contract they no longer want to fulfill. The problem isn't DRM, that's just leverage in a specific kind of agreement. DRM is only as trustworthy as the entity offering it. If you don't trust anyone, you can't trust anyone.

So stock food inside a compound you own, not rent; better yet, grow your own food. Dig your own well and generate your own power. Then all you'll have to fear is the gov'ment coming for taxes. But you won't stuffer the anguish of losing your online movie rentals from a company you thought you could trust, nor are you likely to get married to someone who might leave you.

It is a lonely life however.

--
Universal vs Apple in the iTunes Store Contracts
When reports surfaced that Universal Music Group, the world's largest music label, refused to resign its existing deal with Apple's iTunes Store, there were private schadenfreude celebrations held in many closets.

How is Google shutting down a DRM business and leaving customers disenfranchised different than any other rental store closing down and leaving its customers all bummed that they have to return their stuff, get a refund, and go somewhere else to rent things?

The problem isn't DRM, it's intellectual property rentals. Any DRM that supports the idea of rental/limited use/subscription is going to disappoint. But we knew that already.

That's why Apple is selling lots of iTunes songs and Windows Media stores aren't. It's also why Universal wants to do its DRM-free trial independent of iTunes to see if it can divert any traffic into Microsoft's partners and gain concessions out of Apple. If it can breathe any life into the former PlaysForSure partners, it will then immediately suspend the DRM-free trial and hook up the world to Windows Media DRM, as it originally intended, and mainstream music will be fucked.

But we knew that already.

Universal vs Apple in the iTunes Store Contracts
When reports surfaced that Universal Music Group, the world's largest music label, refused to resign its existing deal with Apple's iTunes Store, there were private schadenfreude celebrations held in many closets.

Well the subject under discussion was Apple's mDNS, its UPNP implementation, and the security issues that resulted in Apple simply turning UPNP off.

You can give yourself points for knowing unrelated details about Microsoft's non-standard, security challenged architecture. The number of devices using UPNP as anything other than a way to play games over a router are really insignificant however.

The wikipedia article you linked to points out:

- UPnP uses HTTP over UDP (known as HTTPU and HTTPMU for unicast and multicast), even though this is not standardized and is specified only in an Internet-Draft that expired in 2001.

- UPnP does not have a lightweight authentication protocol, while the available security protocols are complex. As a result, many UPnP devices ship with UPnP turned off by default as a security measure.

That's the same reason Apple gave up on it and turned it off by default as well.

-
Ten Fake Apple Scandals: 10 - Apple's Mac and iPhone Security Crisis
Windows Enthusiasts weary of making excuses for Microsoft's security failures have discovered that the best defense is a good offense.

Ten Fake Apple Scandals: 9 - Troy Wolverton, Neil Cavuto, and the Apple Stock Scandal
Google for 'Apple Scandal' and the results are overwhelmingly related to options backdating. Those backdated options from 1997 - 2001 resulted in Apple taking an $84 million charge against operations, but continued to monopolize the headlines for months with the panic that Steve Jobs might go to jail and Apple might be delisted from the NASDAQ stock exchange.

Well the subject under discussion was Apple's mDNS, its UPNP implementation, and the security issues that resulted in Apple simply turning UPNP off.

You can give yourself points for knowing unrelated details about Microsoft's non-standard, security challenged architecture. The number of devices using UPNP as anything other than a way to play games over a router are really insignificant however.

The wikipedia article you linked to points out:

- UPnP uses HTTP over UDP (known as HTTPU and HTTPMU for unicast and multicast), even though this is not standardized and is specified only in an Internet-Draft that expired in 2001.

- UPnP does not have a lightweight authentication protocol, while the available security protocols are complex. As a result, many UPnP devices ship with UPnP turned off by default as a security measure.

That's the same reason Apple gave up on it and turned it off by default as well.

-
Ten Fake Apple Scandals: 10 - Apple's Mac and iPhone Security Crisis
Windows Enthusiasts weary of making excuses for Microsoft's security failures have discovered that the best defense is a good offense.

Ten Fake Apple Scandals: 9 - Troy Wolverton, Neil Cavuto, and the Apple Stock Scandal
Google for 'Apple Scandal' and the results are overwhelmingly related to options backdating. Those backdated options from 1997 - 2001 resulted in Apple taking an $84 million charge against operations, but continued to monopolize the headlines for months with the panic that Steve Jobs might go to jail and Apple might be delisted from the NASDAQ stock exchange.

For those confused by acronyms and internal names:

mDNS is Multicast DNS, an standard for resolving host names collaboratively on a local subnet using APIs similar to standard server/unicast DNS. It is half of what Apple calls Bonjour.

DNS-SD is DNS Service Discovery, which allows devices with shared services to advertise themselves on a local network.

Together, they provide much of the simple "just works" networking that AppleTalk delivered in 1986: devices discover each other and auto configure without any complex address settings and without needing a DHCP/DNS server. Implemented as extensions to DNS, these features now work over standard IP networks. Apple released the project as ZeroConfig, and named its own implementation Rendezvous, and then Bonjour after it got sued over the Rendezvous name. The specification is open under the IETF, and Apple offers its own implementation as open source, as well as a binary package for Windows. Avahi is another open source implementation.

The most obvious use of Bonjour is for finding printers on a network, but it works great for throwing any device on a network without configuration. For example, a WiFi security video camera can be turned on and will instantly show up in Safari as a Bonjour website, as well as its RSTP video feed being discovered by QuickTime.

UPNP is Universal Plug and Play, a complex protocol based on HTTP created by Microsoft as a way for local apps to get around NAT issues on home routers. It allows holes through the firewall, largely to support networked games.

Apple implements UPNP to be compatible with all the Linksys routers that support it. It has been a security dog and does not work well.

Apple is also working on Wide Area Bonjour, which allows a Bonjour-savvy client to register with an external DNS server, authenticate, and obtain DNS location discovery and naming information for services and devices behind a NAT layer.

That means you could list services you want to access while away from home (printer, file shares, security camera, iTunes) on an outside DNS server that supports DNS-SD, and then while away from home, you could sign into your own domain and access them without needing to set up any complex networking. Its personal dynamic DNS.

Apple's 802.11n AirPort Base station provides support for this global DNS-SD, but doesn't say anything about how to actually use it.

A Global Upgrade for Bonjour: AirPort, iPhone, Leopard, .Mac

even one of my favorite companies has resorted to similar tactics.

A single person saying things is nothing at all compared to what big dumb companies do through PR firms and other proxies. "Normal advertising" where supposedly "normal" companies like American Express, Home Depot etc, hire crackers to install push adserver viruses and trojans, is just the tip of the iceburg. Pretending to be popular support of a thing you are trying to sell (Zune) or badmouth (OSX) is bad enough. More disgusting efforts seek legislation that's bad for everyone:

• ATT targets Net Neutrality
• Microsoft targets antitrust trial
• Supporting political pets

The web is changing the way public opinion works. It's giving companies like Whole Foods a voice they never had before and it's taking away the power of broadcasters. The broadcasters seek to "harness" the internet and will use their money to keep as much of their power over public opinion as they can. It's a doomed effort because they can't hire enough PR people to do the job.

I can assure you that SF does indeed have crappy power. Despite being a city, and having been granted essentially free power from Hetch Hetchy Dam in Yosemite by an act of Congress, SF for some reason set up PG&E to deliver power, and until recently, maintain creaky old polluting power plants within the city limits.

PG&E also has a fire in one of its ancient substations regularly. A couple years ago, the power went off for more than 24 hours (!) over a large section of the City, including where I lived.

The power is not reliable. However, a data center should be aware of the problem and deal with it, since that's their only job. Its like finding out that the bank lost your money or that your doctor forgot to inform you that the test results were positive.

-

Ten Fake Apple Scandals: 2 - The iPhone's Anti-Competitive AT&T Contract

Ten Fake Apple Scandals: 1 - Phony Rage About iPhone Price and Profits

I can assure you that SF does indeed have crappy power. Despite being a city, and having been granted essentially free power from Hetch Hetchy Dam in Yosemite by an act of Congress, SF for some reason set up PG&E to deliver power, and until recently, maintain creaky old polluting power plants within the city limits.

PG&E also has a fire in one of its ancient substations regularly. A couple years ago, the power went off for more than 24 hours (!) over a large section of the City, including where I lived.

The power is not reliable. However, a data center should be aware of the problem and deal with it, since that's their only job. Its like finding out that the bank lost your money or that your doctor forgot to inform you that the test results were positive.

-

Ten Fake Apple Scandals: 2 - The iPhone's Anti-Competitive AT&T Contract

Ten Fake Apple Scandals: 1 - Phony Rage About iPhone Price and Profits

That article was wrong. You can look at the files yourself. It's Mach, BSD, and the Cocoa frameworks:

iPhone OS X Architecture: Cocoa Frameworks and Mobile Mac Apps
iPhone OS X Architecture: the BSD Unix Userland
iPhone OS X Architecture: Disk, Shell, and Password Security
iPhone OS X Architecture: the Mach Kernel and RAM