Slashdot Mirror
iBook Store Features Leave Indie Publishers Behind
jfruhlinger writes "Apple has introduced some new features to its iBooks store in order to make illustrations and fixed layouts possible — something particularly important for children's books. But at the moment, it seems these features are only available for big publishers, not indies. This is not dissimilar from the controversy that brewed over indie labels' access to iTunes LP."
Apple has screwed over independent artists and publishers for too long.
Mp3.com was doing fine until Itunes came along and sided with the RIAA ruining the thriving independent market. It seems they are at it again, siding with big businesses over artists, writers, and consumers.
Apple comes and pisses on the little people, yet again !
So much for publishing my kids books for i-anything. Looks like Kindle, Nook, etc. will be the ones who get my content...
I know it's cool to be anti Apple on slashdot these days, but does the hatred have to include loss of logic?
Apple doesn't publish music or books, so in the case of iTunes LP, or the latest iBooks features, they need to work them out fully first. They do this by working with a few big companies, giving them access to rough beta copies of tools and tech specs. By working togther on a few items, Apple can identify and fix issues in a tool or spec before it's widely released. If they just threw out unfinished tools and specs, people would whine about the problems, and also increase Apple's support burden. With a slow and steady rollout, they can do it right, and ensure the mass publishing market has tools or specs that work without requiring direct hand holding via Apple support.
Looks like won't be on iBooks any time soon. Thank God for Kindle :-)
My web domain.
[Apple] is only providing information on how to create fixed layout ebooks for it's store to a select group of publishers and ebook producers."
And a week from now when that information finds its way to the internet the headline will be "All Authors Able to Publish Fixed-Width iBooks"
Its the only explanation.
While inspiring, I just have a tough time really assembling behind your battle cry.
Before Apple, big labels and publishers have been working to screw over independants and/or exploit them in any means possible, so I find it hard to really find "Boycotting Apple" as the solution to the actual problem. Apple is just riding the bandwagon, tagging along, trying to get a piece of the pie.
I would much rather have more people go independant (as the music trend seems to be, more and more bands are leaving the big labels, or starting their own labels, or indie labels supporting other indie bands). It's not so much that people need to boycott certain publishers, its that the artists, authors, musicians, etc etc - they need to stop feeding the publishers with content to sell. Starve them out on content, not sales. Because consumers are idiots, there will always be people willing to buy the shiniest product, or spending for the sake of spending. There is no real way to cause a boycott that way. But once the Indie market thrives because thats where the best content is, with the best delivery system - thats when we'll see real progress.
I will usually hear a song from a band I like on the radio. Whether or not they are on iTunes doesn't make a huge difference to me, I won't like them less because I can't get their tracks through that ONE distribution method. Best Alternative? Have a website, where they handle their own song/download/transactions - as some bands have started doing, or even better, if they offer the CD for free knowing it'll drive Concert sales. There's so many ways to deliver content around iTunes its baffling that it has as much sway as it does.
You suggest Apple are jsut trying to get their house in order, finalizing tools and specs. If that were the case, once Apple were confident in their tech specs, surely they'd allow users of other operating systems to create apps for iOS?
Or perhaps they're going to roll that out in a "slow and steady" manner? I for one won't be holding my breath.
Apple accepts book from anyone who can generate ePub. Is the same true of the Kindle? It would be nice for Apple to also release details on the format enhancement but if they are exactly as open as any other company, and then merely add some other capability on top of that Apple restricts - why is Apple evil when they help out indies as much as any other company?
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
According to posts yesterday, this link leads to a virus in PDF. Don't click it.
Independent music artists association. Independent writers association.
And get into the game.
If your 5 year old is able to use an iPhone proficiently, then he/she probably should be reading something more complicated than a children's book anyway.
Have you been reading Slashdot lately? It's nothing but screeching monkeys and poo flinging at the merest mention of Apple.
People seem to hate Apple nowadays the way they used to hate Microsoft. Heck, half of the things people are saying isn't factually correct -- it's just what they believe. I still see people claiming you can't play MP3s on an iPod.
I think in many cases, logic has gone completely out the window when Apple is the topic.
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
What's the virus?
If libertarians are so opposed to effective government, why don't they all move to Somalia?
surely they'd allow users of other operating systems to create apps for iOS?
They do. You can generate iPhone apps from Flash. That tool can be run on Mac or Windows.
Now what you are suggesting is Apple is beholden to make the development tools THEY write for Windows. Why should that be the case? Microsoft doesn't produce Visual Studio for the Mac!
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
You mean, other than the millions of customers they have now and the new ones they get every week?
Why, practically nobody.
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
Apple is not run for the benefit of their customers, but for the shareholders, executives and their friends.
So they're like 95% of all the corporations out there then?
If libertarians are so opposed to effective government, why don't they all move to Somalia?
That works if and only if Apple tells everyone that's what they're doing. While it may be likely based on past experience, you cannot safely assume a company will do anything in particular.
Innovation often doesn't come from the big guys. Experience so far with the App Store has certainly shown that. There's no good reason for Apple to only look at large publishing operations for input.
I knew all along that the "i" in Apple products stood not for iNdie but for iDiots.
I still see people claiming you can't play MP3s on an iPod.
Don't think for a second that Apple wouldn't do that if MP3 wasn't ubiquitous already. And also don't think for a second that Apple wouldn't be tickled pink to see MP3 die entirely to make room for .m4a to take over.
"does the hatred have to include loss of logic?"
Its usually hard hate if you let logic get in the way.
Like most mob trends, the anti-apple movement has some valid points down below all the posturing and silliness, but most of what you see online fails to convey them.
-Lod
This just in, companies seek to sell their own products.
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
"People seem to hate Apple nowadays the way they used to hate Microsoft"
Come on, every anti-Apple story has a legion of screeching fanboys coming on to defend the company (though not directly, it's usually couched in phrases like "ohh, you're just hating out of hatred"). There's faulty thinking on both sides.
Well, this speaks volumes about Steve Jobs' reading habits. Obviously, he just looks at the pictures and only "reads" titles from the larger publishing houses (like the Oprah book club).
Political incorrectness.
Progressivism: Parasites helping parasites to help themselves - to other people's stuff.
You mean to tell me that people are still stupid enough to buy from "digital stores"? Seriously, how many times do these people have to get ripped off? Didn't the Kindle-1984 incident teach them anything? How about the Wal*mart music server situation? I know, I know... blatant consumerism is in, and everyone has to have "the shineys", or they are uncool. Still, think about ten or twenty years from now. Will those publishers still grace you with the ability to access the content you paid for?
We live in a world where game publishers can't be bothered to even update products that are a few years old to work on multicore CPUs (or allow someone else to do it)... and yet you believe that these companies will stick around, support you and give you access to your books/music/whatever in a few years?
Yo, Dawg ... I hear you like to hate, so I installed some hate so you can hate while you're hating. :-P
On that, we agree. =)
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
Apple accepts book from anyone who can generate ePub.
Which brings us back to the question of the article: For a book composed mostly of full-page illustrations, what's the best way to format that as an EPUB?
YOUTUBE: About two years ago YouTube redesigned their trove system to make it almost impossible for small acts to be found. Try it. You are pretty much stuck with the mainstream stuff they sort to the top in each category. You pretty much have to accidentally find indie acts on youtube.
BARS AND CAFES: As a cafe owner can attest that BMI and ASCAP make it almost impossible to play indie acts. The fees are just too high for small businesses. Even i you make bands sign papers stating they are unsigned acts playing only there own music, BMI and ASCAP still go after you. The first six months we were open we had live music 1-2 nights a week. The minute we posted notices on MySpace we had BMI and ASCAP twisting our arms to buy a annual license. License fees that were far too high to make it even remotely sensible from a business perspective. I would happily support local bands but the system is rigged.
"God fights on the side with the best artillery." - Napoleon, Marshal of France - speaking truth to power
Wow logic on Slashdot. My head just exploded. The other thing few have noticed or they failed to read the article is this doesn't shut out the indies they simply don't have access to this feature yet. I thought based on the summary it was a move to shut out indies from self publishing but there has been no real change. The feature is just an enhancement not a required feature.
Apple has been going full-on evil lately with a vision for the future that makes even MS's most dominating days pale. They want to control every device you own, and the appliance model is what they like. Devices designed for consumption, not production. You get to pay for everything and can buy it only through the Apple owned store. They will make devices designed to have a short life with features like non-replaceable batteries so that you are always spending money on the newest, trendiest, toy. They get to be the arbiters of what is acceptable and what is not on your devices, in their one and only store.
That is a pretty scary vision of the future, in particular for the generally very openness loving crowd on Slashdot. At least MS just seemed to want to be your operating system, they didn't seem to want total control of your device and what you could buy.
So I am not surprised Apple gets a lot of hatred here. If they don't want that, maybe they shouldn't have such a closed, "The Apple was is the ONLY way," ecosystem. Now if you like that that's fine. I'm not telling you what you should or shouldn't want. It is perfectly ok to say "I like their system, I want my stuff locked down and controlled, because that also implies protected, I am willing to deal with higher prices and less choice in trade for what I feel to be a better overall experience." However understand that many people do not feel that way, in particular many who inhabit Slashdot. So there's gonna be a lot of Apple hate here so long as that is going on.
In fact, the only reason Apple ever got much love on Slashdot was because they were an underdog. Apple has always had a pretty controlling vision of computers, though not near as much as the present. However they were the little guy, fighting against the behemoth that was MS and Slashdot loves underdogs. Now they are massive and their strategy is well known so they've lost any love from /. they might have had.
yes, a vast majority of which are *not* devoted apple fans like the vocal minority you will find posting online about their strange obsession with a corporate entity. the winds of "trendy" are a changing, my son, and so goes the lion's share of Apple's sales.
ePub would suck indeed if you could not add images - but you can.
It's just a question of letting the reader flow the text in relation to the images, what is in question is being able to have a totally fixed layout, to say that THIS text is HERE on the page in relation to THIS image. It's actually a bad idea for most things because it eliminates a number of ways a reader can improve reading on the device, but some things (like childrens books) it's a must.
Note this does not stop people from publishing fixed layout books as apps, for instance right now on the popular list is an iPad app that's a pop-up book (which would probably stay an app due to the need for animation).
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Have you been reading Slashdot lately? It's nothing but screeching monkeys and poo flinging at the merest mention of anything.
FTFY ;)
Seriously, though, over the past week I've seen mini-flamewars over Apple, MS, Julian Assange, Opera, planes, cars, and motorcycles, and that's by no means an exhaustive list. All of them contained plenty of the very same type of fact-free posturing you're complaining of here.
I think a large part of of this, err, low discourse is due to the fact that many of TFAs these days are flamebait in and of themselves, designed by editors to drive traffic rather than information, and this one is no exception. IMO, any headline of the form "Is $contraversial_claim_that_would_get_our_asses_sued_off_if_we_didn't_frame_it_as_a_question ?" is tabloid journalism at best and outright misrepresentation at worst.
I visit /. for the same reasons now as when I first discovered it, namely, to see mathematicians discuss math, engineers engineering, rocket scientists rocket science, and so on. Sadly, the S/N ratio does seem to be shrinking, and odds are that if you really care about something, you'll have to put up with the occasional factless, emotionally charged "poo-flinging" (as you so correctly put it).
On behalf of the internet, I apologize. :)
Fuck "trendy" ... I'll stick with "works".
Do you really think most people buy Apple stuff because its "trendy", or do you think they might be "trendy" because they do what the users want it to?
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
All those new customers are merely hipster posers who hang out at Starbucks, have handle bar mustaches and ride penny farthing bikes.They couldn't program in assembly on a TMS9900 if you set their feet on fire and had a ring of naked women throwing pickles at them. In other words, total losers who make more money then they know what to do with. If they had any sense, they woulda' donated to Firefly fandom so that it wouldn't have been canceled.
I drank what? -- Socrates
I'm not sure I could either, to be honest. :-P
However, if anybody has anything to support an invocation of Rule 34, then I'd be interested. For, um, academic purposes.
I for one welcome our new naked, pickle-throwing overlords.
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
firstly the long tail means for "small" artist, a better way to make themselves heard, and a chance at celebrity however small. Wthout it you are condemned to obscurity or nearly. Secondly more importantly that can mean in certain case the difference between having to have a job beside music to pay rent, or live off music, have more time to be creative, the same way people live off their job (not rich, but enough to live as us the common mortal). And thirdly, for US the public, it gives us globally much betetr chance to hear other music that the "promoter" RIAA might not give a chance to because their marketing say them they won't recoup their cost.
It is a win for the artist, a win for the public, and even a win for the RIAA in case the artist don't want to promote itself, so that can see whoever is "catching up", even if they can't propose them a "bad contract" and remove the skin from the artist, they will have to propose a better one, but OTOH they know in advance what they buy. It is a win for everybody really.
C. Sagan : A demon haunted world:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0345409469/
visit randi.org
100% in fact – it's the duty of the corporation to do their absolute best to make money for their investors.
http://www.apple.com/itunes/lp-and-extras/
I would expect the same in a few months for any iBooks thing.
If that were the case, once Apple were confident in their tech specs, surely they'd allow users of other operating systems to create apps for iOS?
There's no "allow" here, as in Apple acting as the bully keeping you out of its tree fort. Apple would have to significantly increase its development investment in the iOS development tool chain to maintain and QA ports for other desktop platforms. That's money directly diverted from enhancements to the toolchain and to iOS itself. The return on that investment is doubtful at best, and the lost opportunity cost is damning. Personally, I can't foresee any market for this that would justify the ongoing costs.
Haha, this is the absolute perfect example of misinformation about apple. Who cares about the fact that m4a is actually the MPEG standard designed to succeed the MPEG standard ac3, which itself was designed to take over from the MPEG standard mp3.
No, instead we need to have a good bash at apple for trying to get "their" standard through over all others.
Your own post starts:
Apple has been going full-on evil lately with a vision for the future that makes even MS's most dominating days pale
In the face of such epic chicken-little style hype, why would responses not be agressive? Why do you get to be agressive and not expect agressive counter-argument in return?
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
50/50 I reckon.
Not surprised, just wondering why both sides seem to be made up of people incapable of having a civil discussion.
As for the moderation -- friend of a friend status means I see it rated as "+5 Troll" -- you're a highly rated troll. So there's that, at least. :)
I have two year old family members who are able to use parts of the iPhone just fine.
And "children's book" is a pretty broad category, going up almost to the teens...
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
There is also social responsibility. For instance, being in a position to promote the arts also means allowing for more than just specific artists - this is especially true, as a single entity acquires greater and greater control over a market segment. The closer they are to a monopoly, the more duty they have to serve the broader interests. The corporation doesn't live in a separate bubble apart from society, it is an integral participant.
... Wikipedia (yes, I know, I know) From the criticism of the EPUB format: "One criticism of EPUB is that, while good for text-centric books, it may be unsuitable for publications which require precise layout or specialized formatting, such as a comic book"[1] Comparing this with what the article says that Apple is doing, it sounds like they are trying to deal with this problem. I'm probably wrong, but that's my first impression. Let's just hope that they decide to submit the proposal for an update back to the standards committee.
THE HONOUR OF THE KNIGHTS - CC Licensed Sci-Fi Novel
There is also social responsibility.
Social responsibility is good PR, not a legal obligation.
I write sci-fi for metalheads
By that same token, the 100% pursuit of profits is also just a spin on how business behaves - there is no absolute obligation, only common interest between investors and the corporation. Perhaps you only want to invest in corporation whose PR says that they will turn every last dime of profit, no matter what the consequence; that is your prerogative. There are legal limits and social obligations that cannot be breached, even by a corporation. They fought to acquire the same rights as individuals, they are burdened by the same obligations.
They fought to acquire the same rights as individuals, they are burdened by the same obligations.
What obligations to corporations in the United States have beyond providing their shareholders with a profit? I ask about US corporations because Apple is one.
I write sci-fi for metalheads
I still see people claiming you can't play MP3s on an iPod.
This is untrue, but the fact that I cannot play my .ogg files on my iPod does not endear me to Apple.
Cue rockbox.
If Apple is consistent with their previous roll outs, they will release this to everyone later, once they have had a chance to debug the code and make it work the way a publisher would want. And it won't be because of the uproar here. Apple does not promise to roll out later since they are prohibited from making certain types of forward looking statements.
The US government have made it clear that we have no inalienable rights; any we do not defend vigorously will be taken.
Come on, every anti-Apple story has a legion of screeching fanboys coming on to defend the company (though not directly, it's usually couched in phrases like "ohh, you're just hating out of hatred"). There's faulty thinking on both sides.
Screeching fanboys or just people who are dubious after so much wolf-crying?
"I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)
Hooray! The problem is TWICE as bad... Hooray?
This might be true if Apple were standard compliant in regard to ePub, which they are not (example here, make sure you read Liz' blog all the way through, she rules!). So, they'd have to fix a few other things before we talk about the new iBooks 1.2 fixed layout specs or them throwing "out unfinished tools and specs" as you say. IOW, there's enough to whine about already (again, check Liz' blog for details!).
OTOH, lots of small publishers are eager to satisfy their clients, but cannot, since Apple chose to keep the new specs under an NDA. Thanks a bunch for that... . And you keep defending that, citing "Apple's support burden" *shakes head* Who are you, an Apple helpdesk guy?
I hope I didn't brain my damage.
Again : As market share approaches total dominance, it is the obligation of the monopoly to provide access to all elements of the niche they control.
If it cannot, or will not, then it must be split into competitive entities which are capable of serving the entire market, or allowing competition to muscle in and serve appropriately. So, from a profit-only perspective, the corporation becomes two or more corporations which, individually, are no longer serving their investor as well as they could have, because they didn't conform to the social obligations their influence dictated.
The problem with the profit-only model is that it condones economic circumstances like monopolies - eliminate the competition, control the market, limit who can participate - all acceptable behaviour under that ethic. This (in America) is ultimately a breach of the open market, which is supposed to be the guiding social force, isn't it? It is inherent that a company which climbs to such market dominance, has to either manage the multitude of facets dependent on that market, or break itself into less-profitable, competing pieces. Either way, at this level of market dominance, there is a social obligation defining its behaviour (you might argue that it is an economic obligation that forces this circumstance, but that can only be argued if you do not subscribe to a "profit-only" ethic - hence, it is primarily a social force).
The profit-only is fine for, say, a highly competitive market niche - a niche lacking a dominating player, but the obligations change as the competition decreases.
People always throw this quote out like it means something, but it doesn't.
Is it the duty for the corporation to do their absolute best to make money for their investors for the next quarter or for the next 10 years?
Do corporations have a duty to do what's best for the investors right now, even if it's going to hurt, or even destroy the market 5 years from now?
Apple's behavior sends a clear and transparent political message. They hate the little people and will use every mechanism they can to suppress the market and snub the little guy. They have contracts with Disney and relationships with the RIAA and MPAA.
They did not let people upload and sell music without being with a big label when Itunes first launched. Remember that?
The biggest irony? The Turner Diaries aren't available on iBooks :(
I've still not read them, though I hear they are poorly written and deal with some kind of farfetched race war. Still, they seem like a part of pop culture, so I might as well.
Learn about Photography Basics.
Is it the duty for the corporation to do their absolute best to make money for their investors for the next quarter or for the next 10 years?
Are you honestly claiming apple is doing a bad job of either at the moment?
>>> The corporation doesn't live in a separate bubble apart from society...
Apple does, it's called the walled garden.
Either you put up and glee or STFUGTFO to be an obese-accountant-like-slow-imapc-guy without a turtleneck.
Steve Jobs: Society? Society if for Winblows Luzerz, we are the avant garde, several evolutionary leaps ahead of the rest of the humanity,
*snorts*
*farts*
*and smells the fart*
*profit*
And more's the better if it did - AAC is technically a better codec than mp3. Both have patent and licensing issues, but AAC is an open standard as designed from the start. Mp3 was grandfathered in and is more tightly patent controlled by a single company.
It would be better if AAC took over.
Note that Apple does not control or own AAC - it just uses it as its default format.
little from column A, little from column B. it's certainly not hard to image Apple's sales taking a substantial hit as fashion moves on to the next new thing
How do you know it's untrue? Have you looked back over recent Apple posts on slashdot? The wealth of disinformation and just plain wrong data that is touted as "fact" is staggering.
This is not just confined to information about Apple, but all of the "unpopular" entities on slashdot - Google, MS, Sony, Apple, Facebook etc. The genuine issues with these large companies (and they all have them) are drowned out by nonsense wailing, gnashing and frothing from people with an axe to grind and whose only desire is to astroturf.
On the point of .ogg, it would be nice if it was a standard supported format, but the market is just not there (ie, not enough demand). The solution would be to allow you to add third party codecs of your own to the iPod itself, since it seems crazy that you can extend iTunes this way (well, not crazy that you can do it - anything that Quicktime will play, iTunes will play), but you can end up in a situation where iTunes will play a track that you can't sync to your iPod. Any of the current devices running iOS should be ideal for codec extensions.
You know, its $0.50 for downmoding an anti apple comment in slashdot, it's $5 for writing a comment 1000+ words. node3 must be fucking millionaire, I've seen comments from him with 5007 words exactly, what a fucking joke.
/. iAstroturf team is not your average mturk drone, you can find them coordinating their shit on IRC if you know how to look.
The
Anon cause I don't want to enrage some people: but your team if falling appart, Mark
Making rough beta copies of tools and tech specs available on an equal basis to all publishers would work at least as well (Google tends to do this). And if support burden and focus was the concern, even better would be working with a small set of smaller publisher specialized in the areas most applicable to the new features. Choosing specifically to limit it to provide early access to large publishers is clearly designed to snub the small guys.
Have you been reading the same slashdot as I have?
It's being used as a platform for all kinds of Apple evangelism, any mention of Win Phone 7, Meego or *gasp* Android will launch a flurry of attacks against from Apple evangelists.
Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
Of course, the International Digital Publishing Forum -- the group behind EPUB -- is also working on that problem, in the open, without distributing closed standards to selected parties.
Apple's not trying to fix problems with EPUB; now that they've used the fact that EPUB was a widely accepted to standard with existing tools and support to build iBooks, they are trying to use their current market power to create a breach between their platform and the standard, so that its more expensive for publishers to support both iBooks and compliant EPUB platforms, hoping that their current market power will lead publishers to choose iBooks rather than standard EPUB.
What, the fact that I've seen people on Slashdot claim iPods can't play MP3? Not hardly. People make all sorts of misinformed statements about what you can and can't do with an iPod -- including that it won't play MP3s or that you have to buy your music from the iTunes music store.
First of all, I don't think endearing you to Apple is important. It may not endear them to you, but you're not their market.
You know, the overwhelming majority of people don't know WTF ogg-vorbis is. So, why would Apple build in support? To keep happy the 0.5% of the population who cares?
And, quite frankly, the only time I ever even hear about ogg is when someone is whining that some device doesn't support it. For me, ogg is like GNU Hurd -- nobody really cares except those indignant that nobody else is using it.
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
Just like the borg-gates - we need the facist apple or facist jobs icon.
Apple - like so many times before - are going to micromanage themselves into a small market share.
What a frackin' joke.
/me sips his coffee and ponders a new sig...
If they did make it available to everyone right away, people would still be bitching. The complaint would be that Apple is trying to hijack the open ePUB standard with their extensions for fixed layout.
The right way to do this is to implement their proposed system, test it on a few books, fix problems found, and end up with a format that works well for this. Only after it is stable and they have had a chance to see what other ePUB stakeholders think should they open it to everyone.
This is how most progress on standards comes about.
If it were so, they'd be just as "trendy" around the world rather than merely where they spend the most in marketing. That is not the case.
No problem is insoluble in all conceivable circumstances.
Shock horror, they sell stuff in the markets where they advertise, and don't sell stuff where they don't!
There are a few exceptions to this - namely when the iPhone came out, and people were buying them in the US and selling them overseas for a large markup, and again when the iPad was launched, into markets that Apple wasn't targeting specifically with marketing. Other than that, they advertise in markets where they sell products.
Apple's idea of social responsibility is to put that fraud Algore on their board.
Mod Me Up. You'll make a grown man cry.
I don't buy Apple gear because I care about their notion of "social responsibility". To be honest, I don't recognize the notion of social responsibility. Instead, I treat society the way society treats the individual: I damn well take what I want.
I write sci-fi for metalheads
Again : As market share approaches total dominance, it is the obligation of the monopoly to provide access to all elements of the niche they control.
Prove it.
I write sci-fi for metalheads
I have a book ("Chasing the Runner's High") that's available from a number of venues, one being the iBookstore. The iBookstore has the crappiest presentation of any online bookstore, bar none. You have to use your device to access it - you can't browse on your computer. And you can barely find a book if you know it's there - browsing, even on the iPhone/Pad, is almost useless. Sure you can write a seperate app for your book, but who wants to do that? And even if you do, it gets lost in the mess that's the iTunes app store. Apple might be a player in eReaders, but eBook shoppers go to places that provide a better interface to actually buy books.
*laugh* Dude, you're currently moderated as "insightful and troll". That rocks!
I think that pretty much sums up how polarized things are wrt Apple these days. :-P
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
Disprove it.
I don't have to. You made the claim concerning the social obligations of American corporations; the burden of proof is on your shoulders.
I write sci-fi for metalheads
How do you know it's untrue?
You misread my post. The idea that you cannot play mp3s on an iPod is untrue.
This is untrue
What, the fact that I've seen people on Slashdot claim iPods can't play MP3?
You misread my post as well. It is untrue that you cannot play an mp3 on an iPod.
You know, the overwhelming majority of people don't know WTF ogg-vorbis is. So, why would Apple build in support? To keep happy the 0.5% of the population who cares?
Software freedom is important whether you care about it or not.
Fixed that for you.
Fandroids hate facts.
seesee www.partinchina.com
Welcome to the /. moderation system. It may not be perfect but it's better then most other systems.
And I too appreciate the irony.
Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
Latest Android 2.2os tablet pc MX822: CPU:Freescale iMX515 ARM Cortex.A8 kernel, CPU Speed 800M DDR:512MB DDR2 OS:Android2.2 OS Storage:Built-in 4GB Nand Flash speaker:Built-in double horn network:devices wireless WiFi,support IEEE 802.11b/ On line shop: www.android-tablet-pc-wholesale.com