Slashdot Mirror

I hadn't heard of this but I sure as hell am interested. Do you know if it runs without plug-ins?

http://techcrunch.com/2010/04/01/google-html5-quake/

Seems like just HTML5 and JavaScript.

Steve Jobs? Is that you posting anonymously?

Give me a break. 1/3 Of Android phones are already accounting for 96% of mobile web traffic, which makes Android the leader over the iPhone for Web Traffic http://techcrunch.com/2010/04/27/admob-report-11-devices-account-for-96-percent-of-android-traffic-motorola-droid-takes-the-lead/. The Market Place has more than 50,000 apps already, up from merely 10,000 a month ago.

Motorola/Verizon sold more Droid's in the first 74 days than the iPhone did in the first 74 days of its existence http://www.mobilecrunch.com/2010/03/16/flurry-more-droid-devices-than-iphones-sold-in-first-74-days-on-the-market/.

What was that you were saying about Android momentum? And let's not even try bringing Nokia into this battlefield...since they are still pushing Symbian(^3) which just shows they don't have the innovation mojo to even compete anymore.

The Playboy app does not show nudity.

http://techcrunch.com/2009/12/10/playboy-iphone/

I guess this guy doesn't know that studies have shown that Windows users are the most gullible? I don't think the vector here is targeted at iPads, but rather the Windows users that have iPads. iPads were probably chosen just because it's the latest 'thing' and likely to be a success, while still being new enough that knowledge of it's update process wouldn't be common.

http://techcrunch.com/2009/12/10/microsoft-users-gullible-advertising/

It's one out of dozens of Android phones, each model with it's own features and price ranges.

Steve Jobs has been quaking like a motherfucker (and not in the fun way) if the reports of his Google tantrums are true...

In the smart phone market, companies like HTC and Motorola may see increased profits due to increased sales of Android phones, but each and every one of them would similarly trade places with Apple in a heartbeat if they could. If Android is bound to knock Apple off its perch, it's going to take many, many years.

So, do explain why you'd think that anyone in Apple's position would be "quaking"?

Personally, if I was going for the smartphone perch, I'd go after RIM...who is actually sitting on the perch with about 42% of the market. Apple? A healthy #2 with 25%. Google is up and coming at 9%, more than doubling their market share from Nov. '09 to Feb. '10. Out of RIM, Apple, Microsoft (looks like they had the lunch that Google ate), Google, and Palm, only RIM and Google gained in that time frame. Hastily searched source: http://techcrunch.com/2010/04/05/comscore-android-market-share-continues-to-gain-on-the-iphone/

Personally, I think the iPhone has peaked. Most of the people who wanted one have one by now. Consumer phones are also remarkably fad-prone, just ask Motorola. Watch out for Apple entering their "New this year, a *PINK* iPhone" phase. Also, if you want to talk about global phone sales, the top 5 are Nokia, Samsung, LG, Sony, and Motorola. Looks like #6 is HTC ( http://www.informationweek.com/news/mobility/business/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=222600489 )

Well, I just looked at the numbers. Between 11/2009 and 2/2010 iPhone market share is flat as Kansas. Android market share on the other hand has more than doubled in that period. Hmmm... zero gains vs. more than double gains... yeah if Jobs isn't shaking then he's dumber than I thought.

There are so many social networking sites and applications that it is almost impossible to keep up with all of them on top of regular e-mail. People even hire assistants to help them manage their virtual social networking. In the past we've had Gimp(now Pidgin) and Trillian to help us out by giving us a universal instant messenger. Does anyone use Digsby, or others like it? we can now access twitter, facebook, etc. We even have phone applications to help us manage our social networking on the go. So whatever sites and clients you decide to use for social networking should usually dictate which universal solution you choose. Check out Nomee (there are others like it): http://techcrunch.com/2009/04/01/nomee-is-an-all-in-one-social-networking-aggregator-and-rss-feed/ Here is a project proposal for managing social networking sites (what do you think): http://diso-project.org/ - Christine Malczanek

As a final point, there is no pre-approval for apps. I don't know where you heard that but you were mislead.

Is Apple a good enough source for you?

It took an FCC letter of inquiry to get this little bit of information about Apple's App Store approval process. Every single app is reviewed by at least two staffers before it is allowed to go into the App Store. Google Voice is specifically mentioned, and that particular app has been "under review" by Apple for about six months now. Google resorted to a web app to allow iPhone users to access it.

Joe Hewitt, author of the iPhone's most popular app of all time - the Facebook app - quit developement for the iPhone altogether last november specifically because of Apple's App Store approval process.

Seriously, what planet have you been living on for the last couple years?

My understanding is that the several large Facebook game companies are making a lot of money off of micropayments for virtual goods.

See, for example: this article and more recently this one.

It clearly is working for Zynga to the tune of hundreds of millions of dollars. And yes, I think it's stupid, but that doesn't mean people don't shell out money for it.

http://techcrunch.com/2009/06/17/amazon-associates-to-pull-out-of-north-carolina-due-to-unconstitutional-tax-collection-scheme/

Why do people keep citing Apple TV as an example of failed Apple product? I know it hasn't been a runaway success like iPod and iPhone but Apple TV is estimated to have sold 8 million units since its launch in March 2007. Compare that to a "successful" product like Kindle which have sold an estimated 3 million units since its launch in November 2007. What am I missing?

Not only is there plenty of competition in the smartphone market, but RIM is still the undisputed leader in the US by about 16 percent. Google more than doubled its small installed base (from 2.5% to 5.2%) between September and December. The analysis firm comScore has a press release covering third-quarter 2009 cell phone growth patterns.

Worldwide, Symbian kicks everyone's ass at 47% for the year of 2009 (as a platform), but Nokia "only" sold 39% in the third quarter (as a hardware solution.

The handset data vs. platform data is interesting, especially considering that by listing handset manufacturers Apple news sites completely avoid mentioning Google and Android. Some of the HTC, Samsung, and "others" would be listed as Windows Mobile and some would be Android or Maemo/Meego, obviously.

Despite all the hype about the iPhone, it's still only a quarter of the US market and 16% of the worldwide market from the latest data I could find.

Well sopssa, what you said technically true, except there was two leaks that the ipad would be released in March or April. Maybe you just weren't paying attention?

But I'm sure you'll be happy with google's or MS' tablet.

As for the sales drop off. While there is huge drop-off in sales, they're still selling 24,000 per day, 168,000 per week. That is quite respectable in that at that rate they will still have sold nearly 9 million units in a year. In any case, this "sales drop off" is a tune we've heard before from Apple haters about the iphone and we see how right they were.

I'm no fashionista, and I certainly won't be buying an ipad because 'm perfectly happy with my laptop, but the irrational Apple hatred from people like you on this board is a drag.

Apple - Well-designed and clever products.

You do know that the Zynga model is pushing scams on your customers right? It's abusing the naive and defenceless in society. Nothing wrong with micropayments, but Zynga is unadulterated evil ... is your sig just for show and are you a sociopath?

http://techcrunch.com/2009/11/06/zynga-scamville-mark-pinkus-faceboo/

And such people have the same questions with Macs - it's just most of the time you won't hear about it, because fewer people have them. When was the last time you heard anyone complaining about their Amiga?

Years ago. But then most people I know have Macs, not Amigas. You might find that odd given overall market share. But my friends are mostly in creative industries, both the arts and also app developers. So your PROJECTED anecdote of why it's only my Windows PC owning friends that forever need help is wrong.

Apple fan tactic #2: conflate the Ipod (Apple's sole market leader) with other Apple products (usually the Iphone or now the Ipad).

When talking about people loving Apple, ALL products are relevant. I mentioned those two because being mobile device families one sees people using them all the time when they are out and about.

If I was a jackass like you, I'd probably say you want to avoid talking about the iPod (note the capitalisation) because... blah... blah... blah...

Ipods are market leader. Iphones most certainly are not; Apple have a market share in the mobile market comparable or less than that of their share in the computer market.

Then Apple will be very pleased that they now have >= 14% of the PC market share, according to your estimation.

http://techcrunch.com/2010/02/23/smartphone-iphone-sales-2009-gartner/

I can't comment on the pedophilia claims, and Sanger is definitely not a disinterested party, but on the other hand, there are plenty of people who would love to see the Wikicabal get slapped for various nefarious and high-handed administrative acts over the years. (Deletionism, notability, citation-required spam, funneling articles toward Wikia, etc.)

http://techcrunch.com/2010/04/05/comscore-android-market-share-continues-to-gain-on-the-iphone/

"But the most interesting story is the rapid rise of Android, whose share grew 5.2%. Apple’s share has remained stable, with a .1% drop."

I'll stick to my Nexus One, which handles this scenario just fine and - surprise! - doesn't kill battery while doing so

Yeah right. If I google for "nexus one battery life" I get a page full of sorry stories about how bad the battery life is on a Nexus One. The very first link from TechCrunch says: "But I’ve found battery life to be woefully brief, even by iPhone standards".

And the second one says: "I am experiencing poor battery performance with this phone. Nothing close to what is advertised. Please don't humour me with battery saving tips, tried them all. Still no joy. I have to charge my phone twice a day". I've not bothered looking any further.

So I refuse to believe your flim flam as evidence points to the contrary.

Yeah, I'd be willing to bet the investors had a big part in turning this down, too. (Actually, they probably had to; VC firms usually demand a say in these sorts of decisions.)

A bunch of major VCs bought in to Foursquare about a week or two ago at prices that value the company at $80 million on paper. Given those valuations at the buy-in, an $100m exit is simply not enough for the VCs to get the sort of return on their investment they have in mind.

• Assuming this story is correct. As described in IEEE Spectrum, Intrinsity is an unique company that produces technology capable of significantly boosting the performance of many ARM processors. Considering the ubiquity of ARM, this technology could've potentially benefited a large range of consumers; but, apparently, that benefit will, now, only fall on those purchasing Apple products.
• Apple's suit against HTC: This is an obvious ploy to impede if not completely halt the ascent of Android. Apple sues HTC for infringing on its questionable soft patents while refusing to pay Nokia for the use of its hard patents.
• E-book Price Increase: This is an instance of Apple using its virtual monolopy in the mind share if not the market share of mobile devices to hurt the consumer. Perhaps, previous e-book prices were artificially low; I won't argue that point. The fact remains that Apple's entry into the e-book business has resulted in higher prices for the consumer -- with one concrete instance being the 43% increase in NY Times subscriptions.
• Banning of Google Voice App: In additional to a multitude of other features, Google Voice allow users to make free domestic VOIP calls; so, the adverse affect to consumers of this rejection should be obvious. Furthermore, this isn't an isolated instance: Apple has a history of rejecting apps that compete against its products or those of its business partners.

• Assuming this story is correct. As described in IEEE Spectrum, Intrinsity is an unique company that produces technology capable of significantly boosting the performance of many ARM processors. Considering the ubiquity of ARM, this technology could've potentially benefited a large range of consumers; but, apparently, that benefit will, now, only fall on those purchasing Apple products.
• Apple's suit against HTC: This is an obvious ploy to impede if not completely halt the ascent of Android. Apple sues HTC for infringing on its questionable soft patents while refusing to pay Nokia for the use of its hard patents.
• E-book Price Increase: This is an instance of Apple using its virtual monolopy in the mind share if not the market share of mobile devices to hurt the consumer. Perhaps, previous e-book prices were artificially low; I won't argue that point. The fact remains that Apple's entry into the e-book business has resulted in higher prices for the consumer -- with one concrete instance being the 43% increase in NY Times subscriptions.
• Banning of Google Voice App: In additional to a multitude of other features, Google Voice allow users to make free domestic VOIP calls; so, the adverse affect to consumers of this rejection should be obvious. Furthermore, this isn't an isolated instance: Apple has a history of rejecting apps that compete against its products or those of its business partners.

• Assuming this story is correct. As described in IEEE Spectrum, Intrinsity is an unique company that produces technology capable of significantly boosting the performance of many ARM processors. Considering the ubiquity of ARM, this technology could've potentially benefited a large range of consumers; but, apparently, that benefit will, now, only fall on those purchasing Apple products.
• Apple's suit against HTC: This is an obvious ploy to impede if not completely halt the ascent of Android. Apple sues HTC for infringing on its questionable soft patents while refusing to pay Nokia for the use of its hard patents.
• E-book Price Increase: This is an instance of Apple using its virtual monolopy in the mind share if not the market share of mobile devices to hurt the consumer. Perhaps, previous e-book prices were artificially low; I won't argue that point. The fact remains that Apple's entry into the e-book business has resulted in higher prices for the consumer -- with one concrete instance being the 43% increase in NY Times subscriptions.
• Banning of Google Voice App: In additional to a multitude of other features, Google Voice allow users to make free domestic VOIP calls; so, the adverse affect to consumers of this rejection should be obvious. Furthermore, this isn't an isolated instance: Apple has a history of rejecting apps that compete against its products or those of its business partners.

BTW, I'm referring to shady link-baiting stories like these:
http://blogs.zdnet.com/BTL/?p=32470
http://gizmodo.com/5505682/how-adobe-and-google-are-making-sure-flash-will-never-die
http://www.fool.com/investing/high-growth/2010/03/30/is-this-googles-sneak-attack-on-apple.aspx
http://techcrunch.com/2010/03/30/chrome-os-flash/
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/03/30/google_integrates_flash_with_chrome/
http://news.cnet.com/8301-30685_3-20001429-264.html

If the company doesn't want unfavorable things posted about it by its employees on such sites, and doing so using company resources, then the solution is to block all access to said sites from the company network. With the previously mentioned "authorized" access by the PR department maintaining the "official" site for the company on these networks.

Not that I recommend it in the day and age of PR 2.0. I once wrote this comment about it: http://techcrunch.com/2010/03/12/myspaces-mid-level-management-structure-is-crumbling/#comment-967971

Don't know the nitty gritty of the deal but I do know Facebook is working with Omniture beyond providing tools for FB App marketers. -- Their soon going to start aggregating data between Facebook and Omniture's 2o7.net network.

Not necessarily a surprise. My CEO is buddies with the guys at Omniture. He came in a few weeks ago talking about it.... and how we could make money with them too. =) It's all about money folks. Every, Single, Thing.

I think Microsoft probably follows Commodore's Jack Tramiel policy: "Business is war," and in war anything is acceptable. Therefore they would view Google's leaving China as a victory, even if it means going-to-bed with the Chinese Socialist government.

Just like Google thinks that business is war too, then. They weren't going anywhere in China and decided it was too much trouble staying there. Remember that Google pretty much stopped gaining market share from Baidu. They did the next best thing - make it a PR campaign and try to gain love in western countries. Why do you think they're only bitching at China in English blogs and are now blaming Bing for staying in China? It's all PR.

http://techcrunch.com/2008/08/28/mozilla-extends-lucrative-deal-with-google-for-3-years/

One control-freak company wants to sell cheaper books, while another control-freak company wants to sell more expensive books?
I know which weevil/weasel I will go with.

and while this is just one side of the argument, but anyone who thinks Apple's deal with the publishers will work out better for the authors should read this:
http://techcrunch.com/2010/02/07/its-nsfw-because-the-word-fuck-is-in-the-url/

I'm waiting for Apple to take things to their logical conclusion and allow authors direct access to the market. They've already done this for programmers with the app-store and there are a few (too few) self published artists on the iTunes store. Now they need to do the same for video and books. The tools have become so powerful and cheap that talent can self-finance or crowd-fund through sites like Kickstarter and the bottleneck left now is in the publisher/distributer cartels.

One control-freak company wants to sell cheaper books, while another control-freak company wants to sell more expensive books?
I know which weevil/weasel I will go with.

and while this is just one side of the argument, but anyone who thinks Apple's deal with the publishers will work out better for the authors should read this:
http://techcrunch.com/2010/02/07/its-nsfw-because-the-word-fuck-is-in-the-url/

Get this off the front page or correct it, it's out of context and was probably sparked by viacom or one of its fanboys.

in context:
http://techcrunch.com/2010/03/18/viacom-may-be-misrepresenting-youtube-founders-call-to-steal-it/

Trent Reznor once encouraged fans at a concert to steal music, "Steal it. Steal away. Steal and steal and steal some more, and give it to all your friends.. and keep on stealin."
But that's out of context! Here's the context:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TJ5iHaV0dP4

Maybe it's Viacom that's being evil?

SUBJECT: Re:http://www.filecabi.net/

Jul 29, 2005 1:05 AM, Steve Chen wrote:

steal it!

Jul 29, 2005 1 :25 AM, Chad Hurley wrote:

hmm, steal the movies?

Jul 29, 2005 1 :33 AM, Steve Chen wrote:

haha ya.

or something.

just something to watch out for. check out their alexa ranking.
-s

Jul 29, 2005 7:45 AM, Chad Hurley wrote:

hmm, i know they are getting a lot of traffic... but it's because they are a stupidvideos.com-type of site. they might make enough money to pay hosing bills, but sites like this and big-boys.com will never go public. I would really like to build something more valuable and more useful. actually build something that people will talk about and changes the way people use video on the internet.

Jul 29 2005 6:51 AM, Steve Chen wrote:

right, i understand those goals but, at the same time, we have to keep in mind that we need to attract traffic. how much traffic will we get from the personal videos? remember, the only reason why our traffic surged was due to a video of this type. i'm not really disagreeing with you but i also think we shouldn't be so high & mighty and think we're better than these guys. viral videos will tend to be THOSE type of videos.
-s

Jul 29 2005 6:56 AM, Steve Chen Wrote:

another thing. still a fundamental difference between us and most of those other sites. we do have a community and it's ALL user generated content.

-s

To me, when taken in context that sounds like a pretty reasonable half of a conversation. He does not advocate copyright infringement. He also states that they should not get all high and mighty against file sharers. He then sums up saying that they have a community who makes its own content which other sites do not.

All seems pretty reasonable to me.

Further - they cannot afford to do this sort of investigation on every single one of the millions of videos on Youtube.

http://techcrunch.com/2009/05/20/every-minute-just-about-a-days-worth-of-video-is-uploaded-to-youtube/

I imagine that they have only had the resources to investigate a sample of the alleged videos well after the fact.

From http://techcrunch.com/2010/03/05/shatner-shills-myouterspace-sci-fi/ it looks more like a collaboration/project recruitment system with a cute twist for professionals/semi-professionals/weird people with cameras and rubber suits?

http://techcrunch.com/2010/03/03/uh-oh-looks-like-the-nexus-one-has-glitchy-multi-touch-video/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+Techcrunch+(TechCrunch)

http://techcrunch.com/2010/03/03/uh-oh-looks-like-the-nexus-one-has-glitchy-multi-touch-video/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+Techcrunch+(TechCrunch)

There is an update:

http://techcrunch.com/2010/03/02/the-complaint-apples-patent-lawsuit-against-htc-is-all-about-android/

The details are here:
http://techcrunch.com/2010/03/02/the-complaint-apples-patent-lawsuit-against-htc-is-all-about-android/
and yes, “Object-Oriented Graphic System” is one of them along with “Touch Screen Device, Method, And Graphical User Interface For Determining Commands By Applying Heuristics”.

I hate this argument, even though it is technically correct. Yes, Google pays Mozilla somewhere around $50 million a year to make Google the default search engine. It also specifically doesn't list Bing, but does include Yahoo. Of course, you can easily add Bing if you want to, although I'm sure a lot of users don't bother.

Microsoft, on the other hand, uses their existing business relationships to force users to only use Bing. Verizon went and updated Verizon Blackberries to only allow searches on Bing. Some Verizon guy advises that you go directly to google.com to search, otherwise enjoy your Bing searches. I can't find anything that details what sort of money changed hands, but I can't imagine Verizon made this change for the LOLz.

And that, to me, is a huge difference. On the one hand, you have Google, who openly supports an open-source web browser that has always pushed open standards and higher performance into the browser market. On the other hand you have Microsoft making back-room deals with another giant company to force all of its users onto Bing. To directly equate these two types of actions seems dishonest to me.

This is probably a jab back at Governor Arnold's letter to them from a few months back. Note that they went out of their way to put a swearing jar in his mansion.

Actually studies that show that Mac users tend to be more educated than typical PC users:

http://news.cnet.com/2100-1040-943519.html

Mac users are also found to be less gullible than PC users:

http://techcrunch.com/2009/12/10/microsoft-users-gullible-advertising/

On that last link, I'm also happy to note that Linux users are not gullible..they are actually a even less gullible than the typical Mac user. Just because a Mac user likes a no-fuss system doesn't mean we aren't interested in what makes it tick or the specs it comes with. The weirdest outcome of one of these studies? 85% of Mac users also own a Windows PC (either via multi-boot or hardware purchase). They aren't shy about using either platform.

Its well known that Apple doesn't shove the biggest processors into their laptops (or iMacs) which isn't surprising. Most laptops don't have quad core processors yet either. Most of the Mac line IS laptop hardware so this isn't a surprise. In addition, for typical Mac users, it isn't always about having the latest and greatest. They want stability, good performance, and a PC that won't break down in 2 years. I agree that some of their hardware could get higher end graphics cards and processors sooner, but they make up for it with systems that are rock solid. There is a reason they always top the charts in customer satisfaction and reliability.

I was wondering how long it would take you to start quoting 'home built' costs. I already responded to that. I already consider it a non-issue. Apples prices are comparable to other Manufacturers with the same specs. No surprises here that they cost more than a home built PC.

On the Steam topic - Why double the effort? Because there is money to be made? You do realize that they do make games for Mac? They are already successful in the PC market. Why stop there? I'd take a crack at the Mac if I had the funding as there is a LOT of potential revenue there. Steam obviously does have the capitol.

On point #5 - The iMac isn't user serviceable (well it is for a ./ user, but not the typical end user). 10 years ago, I would have been replacing my video card every year or two. I find as I get older, I simply don't care. I'll use this Mac for 2-4 years, and simply replace the Mac when I get tired of it, and donate this to some family member. One of the advantages of a long career in the IT industry. It does have some financial benefits ;)

I see your point on the display, but I have no use for a second display, nor do I have the desktop space. 27" is perfect for my needs but an iMac isn't for someone who wants dual monitors.

There are a couple of things that were important to me a few years ago:

a) Tear down and upgrade piece mail
b) more flexibility on display options
c) Purchase a faster desktop unit

None of these are important to me now, so the iMac is a good choice for me. If it wasn't, I'd probably just build a hackintosh and be done with it.

Postnote: If you're looking to get a Macbook Pro, hold out a bit..a hardware refresh is rumored to be in the pipe with I5 or I7 options.

http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/10/02/24/macbook_pros_in_tight_supply_new_models_could_broaden_gap_with_macbooks.html

A few minutes ago I went to news.google.com and ran into this story. There are over a dozen articles covering this issue so are just linked from the front of googles news page. Then I came to /. and noticed the same story. I find that a big amusing actually.

What makes this a bit more news worthy is two things. One is the social issue that seems to very clearly be that someone at Citibank does not like a gay themed web site. Two is who is the CEO and author of the blog in question.

One of the other articles I read has a pretty good description:

Now, in case you don't know Goldberg: he's an accomplished Internet entrepreneur, who had stints at the White House, AOL and T-Mobile under his belt before founding Jobster (and raising more than $50 million for the startup) and after that socialmedian (which he sold to Xing in December 2008).

For his latest startup fabulis, Goldberg has raised $625k in seed funding from the likes of Washington Post and Venture Partner at Mayfield Fund Allen Morgan, and essentially aims to become the leading social network and lifestyle website for homosexual men.

Here is the source article:

http://techcrunch.com/2010/02/25/does-citibank-suffer-from-homophobia-or-just-a-general-dislike-for-startups/

Developer-cheap, CPU-expensive web application technologies are fine until you have an unanticipated surge in user base, and your Ruby goes off the rails. It happened to Twitter.

Except that most people think that blue E is literally "the internet", while the other logos (besides Google's name) will be somewhat alien to them.

Perhaps this explains the timing of Google's massive advertising campaign for Chrome in the UK. Many busy London Underground stations have a massive advert for Chrome on the platform, they advertised on the entire front page of the UK's largest free newspaper, and have outdoor adverts. as well as banners on general websites (newspapers etc).

Was why I didn't use Buzz. Made sure it was disabled as soon as I could. I don't want some spheres of my life intersecting.

An example of what can go wrong, and generate big lawsuits in the process of failing.

I use my private Gmail account to email my boyfriend and my mother.

There's a BIG drop-off between them and my other "most frequent" contacts.

You know who my third most frequent contact is?

My abusive ex-husband.

Which is why it's SO EXCITING, Google, that you AUTOMATICALLY allowed all my most frequent contacts access to my Reader, including all the comments I've made on Reader items, usually shared with my boyfriend, who I had NO REASON to hide my current location or workplace from, and never did.

> I'm honestly curious about this part: "Also, even if they do make a product this time, does that really excuse killing the products of other companies via patents on things they haven't actually built or sold?" Like?

You should have followed a couple links from Grond's post:

http://techcrunch.com/2008/09/17/nathan-myhrvolds-patent-extortion-fund-is-reaping-hundreds-of-millions-of-dollars/

Anyhow, the correct term isn't "patent troll", it's NPE (Non-practicing Entity). And you will note that I didn't call them that. Nor did the article linked (it called them a "patent bully").

I don't care what we call them, frankly. I just don't like seeing people lock up ideas with patents and never let anyone use them. I don't like people patenting old ideas, doing fancy lawyering (but our idea is novel because it uses *four* knowledge bases... even though that's the only novel part and these things can easily be split or combined). I don't like reading Patently-O and seeing them give advice for how to prevent people from asking a court to make a patent bully go away by proving that they did not infringe, or how to get a patent even if the inventor doesn't want one.

Basically, I don't like most of what I see going on with the patent system. I don't like obvious or gibberish patents or the self-important people who think that they're geniuses for having them (even if other people thought of those ideas first and implemented them better). I don't like how software patents never give any source code, even though they're supposedly obligated to disclose the best known way to implement the invention.

There are so many problems with the system, I honestly wonder at times why we don't simply scrap it. Maybe there's a better way, but I haven't heard of one yet.

How in the world did you get +5 Insightful? And while making a claim for rationality at that! Let's break apart your comment, most of which is patently incorrect.

USB stick: You're kinda correct. Apple offers an adapter that provides USB. Source.

Office software: iWork (source) was announced and demonstrated at the keynote speech where they introduced the iPad and will be out on day one. Microsoft has indicated that they are considering the Office Suite for it (source). As others said, Omni Group is developing their software as well (source). The fact that you missed all of this doesn't speak well for your personal knowledge on the subject, since it's been covered quite a bit.

IDE: You're probably correct. Apple doesn't like interpreted code running on the iPhone (and presumably the iPad), so it'd be pretty hard to have an IDE that did anything useful. Then again, it wasn't exactly made for that sort of purpose (it's essentially a media consumption device, not a full-fledged media creation device). Also, IDEs are extremely niche. Not important to about 99% of the people buying it.

Flash and Java: You're right. Java I'm personally iffy on, but good riddance to Flash, I say. With YouTube already serving up h.264 videos with HTML5 and Hulu rumored to be prepping the same (source), I don't see this is an issue. And if you're a Flash application developer who doesn't want to learn Objective-C, Adobe put out a Flash-to-iPhone compiler months ago which should work with the iPad.

Price: $499 for the base iPad model, vs. $489 for the Kindle DX, which was about half the price the analysts were predicting, yet it does much more than the DX. Besides the obvious and numerous software advantages, the hardware is better (3.3GB vs. ~15.5GB usable space, better CPU, 3G only vs. 802.11a/b/g/n and 3G), with the DX's only redeeming factor being its eInk display (which is only useful for B&W text display). I fail to see how the iPad compares unfavorably in terms of price. I'd say it lands somewhere between "great bargain" and "perfectly reasonable".

Battery Life: The iPad gets 10 hours of actual use when watching video, which is the worst-case. It also gets "140-something" hours when just listening to music (source), and it can be in standby for about a month. That compares very well against a laptop, and decently against the DX, given the DX's different needs.

Connectivity: Seriously? It's got better connectivity than the Kindle and better than most laptops out there. 802.11a/b/g/n, EDGE, and 3G for the iPad. You're talking out of your ass if you say it lacks connectivity.

Usability: I don't know what you mean by "test editor", but if you mean a simulator for use on a dev machine, there is one, and it's already out for developers. As for usability in general, you're kidding, right? Even though there are always some that disagree, general consensus is that the iPhone is extremely usable (You've actually held one at some point, right? As a geek, it's worth handling and studying simply because of what it accomplishes).

Multitasking: You're kinda correct. The iPhone and iPad do multitasking, but it isn't available to third-parties, just first-party software (e.g. my mail gets checked and text messages get received while I'm playing games). Regardless, it's basically a straw man since push notifications meet the needs for most third party apps, while improved speed on

...and you've got all of your data again.

Yeah, right...

"Exactly. That's why I refuse to use a phone for anything but making calls"

Sure that's fine... for now, but in time you'll be looked on as the wierdo that doesn't have a smartphone, in the same manner that people think it's strange for someone not to own a cellphone now, or as I'm sure 60+ years ago it became strange to not have a phone in your house.

As technology advances you're pretty much forced by society to either adapt or be shunned. Phones that were $400 with contract and very basic internet access 5 years ago are less than $100 today with a full internet browser and voice search. Imagine what it will be like in just another 5 years?

You forgot the BarMax App that cost $999.99 and a few others in that stratosphere pricing range. That's what, $75 for Apple? ;)

The Apple developer program is $99 for individuals and $299 for enterprise per year. If you want to test apps on the hardware, you need to sign up for the program. I have never seen raw numbers for how the developer program is broken down relative to the apps approved for sale. Does Apple make more money off the developers than the app store?

AT&T now allowing iPhone VoIP calls over 3G

AT&T Greenlights VoIP For the iPhone