IOS 4.3 Now Available For Download

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

IOS 4.3 Now Available For Download

Posted by samzenpus on Wednesday March 9, 2011 @11:23AM from the get-it-while-it's-hot dept.

tekgoblin writes "Apple has just released iOS 4.3 for download from iTunes. The update from Apple includes enhancements to Apple Airplay, Safari, iPad side switch, and the Personal hotspot feature for the iPhone 4. I personally welcome the feature to make the 'mute button' on the iPad back into the screen orientation lock."

346 comments

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

Feature... by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-09 11:26 · Score: 0

I personally welcome the feature to make the 'mute button' on the iPad back into the screen orientation lock.
lol
1. Re:Feature... by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-09 11:28 · Score: 0
  
  somebody failed engrish
The Apple Way by Sponge+Bath · 2011-03-09 11:36 · Score: 2, Funny

You are not fit to use Apple products because your desires run counter to the "Apple Way". Only the most cretinous of slack jawed yokels would suggest Apple's change to a mute button is anything but insanely great magically different genius.
"I personally welcome the feature to make the 'mute button' on the iPad back into the screen orientation lock."
Oops, never mind. Welcome back into the fold.
1. Re:The Apple Way by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-09 11:39 · Score: 5, Funny
  
  My Android phone can be modified so I can have any button run any feature I want. I'll show you once I'm allowed to update it....
2. Re:The Apple Way by bonch · 2011-03-09 11:41 · Score: 1
  
  I know you're being facetious, but what exactly is the basis for the premise that people who disagree with the way Apple does something are insulted and ridiculed? Even Apple fans constantly bitch about what Apple does. In fact, this change is due to customer demand, which means a lot of Apple fans made their voices known.
3. Re:The Apple Way by MobileTatsu-NJG · 2011-03-09 12:00 · Score: 2
  
  I know you're being facetious, but what exactly is the basis for the premise that people who disagree with the way Apple does something are insulted and ridiculed?
  Popularity-fueled-caricature.
  
  --
  
  "I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)
4. Re:The Apple Way by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-09 12:02 · Score: 0
  
  You know, it was not that long ago that MS would storm the office where I was to insure that they were not usinglegally licensed MS software in a way that was counter to what they wanted. The reason they were able to do that is because of the BSA threat of terrorism. If MS had to use force to audit the computers, and if one item were found out of compliance, the firm would be crippled. So it was cheaper to pay the protection fee. This and many internet firms were soon bankrupt. Not because of a bad business plan, they had plenty of customers, but because the proprietary and piecewise software model which was prevalent for about 25 years, under MS, does not work. Buying stuff from multiple companies, with the company at the center unwilling to support anything, and keeping up with all those licenses, just wastes company resources that should be focused on the core business, which in most cases is not keeping up licensees.
  The nice thing is that I can buy an Apple and do a lot with it. I know many will say that Apples can't be upgraded, but they can and I do. The connectivity is awesome, which allows external connectivity. When I upgrade a machine, I am not told that I am a thief. Most Apple products can be bought cheaply and will run on multiple machines. That way I can have multiple macs or iStuff, and I do not have to worry about licenses. I can worry about getting work done. Now, the same is true with any *nix, but that involves a whole other set of issues. Not bad, just existing.
  Then there are the issues with other devices. Google can evidently kill any program on an Android device without the user approval. This is very, very, bad as it gives Google control that no third party should have of a device that I own. Sure, one can theoretically disable that ability if I pay enough for the android device, but we can get freedom from Apple the same way.
  The thing is that "The Apple Way" FUD is exactly the same as what MS uses to keep people off *nix, and what Google is using to attract users to the equally scary Android world. The mute button thing was a minor inconvenience which did not keep anyone from doing anything, and proves that users really do not have anything to fear. Apple listens to customers, because the end user is the customer. On Android the end user is not the customer, the telco is.
5. Re:The Apple Way by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-09 12:05 · Score: 1
  
  Might be relevant to Digg, not Slashdot. People here don't need to be "officially allowed" to modify their Android or iPhone.
  ...or that's how it used to be. People change, even /. readers.
6. Re:The Apple Way by pitchpipe · 2011-03-09 12:07 · Score: 1
  
  Even Apple fans constantly bitch about what Apple does
  Of course this is done with only the purest of Apple thoughts in their head, and even these Apple fans are walking a thin line.
  Seriously: why anyone becomes a fanboy for a corporation is something I'll never fathom.
  
  --
  Look where all this talking got us, baby.
7. Re:The Apple Way by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-09 12:34 · Score: 0
  
  I'm almost convinced it's a mental defect. You see the same thing with game studios and publishers. Perhaps it's the religious gene, predisposing people to love/hate corporations they affiliate with.
8. Re:The Apple Way by justin12345 · 2011-03-09 12:57 · Score: 1
  
  Seriously: why anyone becomes a fanboy for a corporation is something I'll never fathom.
  Sometimes they own the company's stock. My uncle is a big Apple fan partially because made him significantly more money then he ever spent on their products (and he has a lot of Macs).
  
  --
  Cool art gallery, if you're into that sort of thing.
9. Re:The Apple Way by Moofie · 2011-03-09 13:50 · Score: 1
  
  Same reason many people assume that anyone who disagrees with them is stupid and evil. Humans are clannish and xenophobic.
  
  --
  Why yes, I AM a rocket scientist!
10. Re:The Apple Way by Rebelgecko · 2011-03-09 17:59 · Score: 2
  
  I think he's referring to companies like Motorola shipping Android devices with locked bootloaders, which makes it a bit harder to do custom ROMS and stuff like that.
  
  --
  CATS/Diebold '08- All your vote are belong to us!
11. Re:The Apple Way by halowolf · 2011-03-09 18:49 · Score: 1
  
  As someone that uses their iPad as an eReader, changing the iPad screen orientation lock was very VERY annoying. I knew it was coming back, however it would of been nice for the Apple "do you have a clue" department to of made the button configurable in the first place rather than letting the lawyers make the programming decisions.
12. Re:The Apple Way by bemymonkey · 2011-03-09 19:01 · Score: 1
  
  IMO, the mental defect is not knowing that you're behaving like a fanboy. The ones that are unaware of their blatant fanboyism are usually the worst and most annoying...
13. Re:The Apple Way by iamhassi · 2011-03-09 19:12 · Score: 1
  
  Why is it that when someone likes something they are automatically labelled a fanboy? It use to mean someone that supported a product without listening to reason, but the term has degraded to the point that I'm now a fanboy of pizza apparently. I like the iPhone but I know it has some flaws, guess I'm a fanboy.
  
  --
  my karma will be here long after I'm gone
14. Re:The Apple Way by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-09 20:16 · Score: 0
  
  I'm not a native English speaker, and I would like to ask if the usage of the word "of" is correct here:
  "however it would of been nice for the Apple "do you have a clue" department to of made the button configurable"
15. Re:The Apple Way by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-09 21:19 · Score: 1
  
  Some native English speakers hear people use the contractions "would've", "could've", and "should've" and assume that the "ve" which is short for the word "have" is actually the word "of".
  Middle school English classes are supposed to correct this behavior but so many people slip through the cracks.
16. Re:The Apple Way by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-09 21:45 · Score: 0
  
  +1 in favor of the screen orientation lock. The volume buttons are there for a reason... to adjust the volume...
17. Re:The Apple Way by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-09 22:03 · Score: 0
  
  Example time. Let's take Motorola's Droid X. Locked bootloader. Can't replace the bootloader, recovery, or kernel. But if you jailbreak it, you can fully modify the OS (that is, userspace stuff).
  In effect, it's the same situation as on the iPhone. Actually... it might be a bit better, since you can still load your own kernel modules.
  90% of modders don't give a shit about anything but the OS however... so the difference between unlocked Android and iPhone is practically identical for them.
18. Re:The Apple Way by forgotten_my_nick · 2011-03-09 22:43 · Score: 1
  
  I find people who own apple devices appear to be much more rational. 99% of the time they just use it as a device and don't give a toss about anything else.
  The problem is that some get defensive because you get continual irrational attacks against you just because you bought something.
19. Re:The Apple Way by GooberToo · 2011-03-10 01:49 · Score: 1
  
  "fanboy" is another way of saying zealot. Liking something is not the same thing as zealotry. They are worlds apart.
20. Re:The Apple Way by tehcyder · 2011-03-10 03:52 · Score: 1
  
  Might be relevant to Digg, not Slashdot. People here don't need to be "officially allowed" to modify their Android or iPhone.
  ...or that's how it used to be. People change, even /. readers.
  Personally, if I have a piece of consumer electronics in which I'm not particularly interested I expect it just to work. I have no interest in hacking my toaster to make it start quicker. Ditto for mobile phones.
  
  --
  To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
21. Re:The Apple Way by AmiMoJo · 2011-03-10 04:24 · Score: 1
  
  Volume up/down for cursor forwards/backwards. Best soft keyboard evar.
  
  --
  const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
  SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
22. Re:The Apple Way by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-10 04:42 · Score: 0
  
  Personally, if I have a piece of consumer electronics in which I'm not particularly interested I expect it to just work. I have no interest in hacking my PC to make it start quicker.
  There's actually more argument for hacking a phone than a PC based on hours-spent for personal use.
23. Re:The Apple Way by CheerfulMacFanboy · 2011-03-11 09:54 · Score: 1
  
  "fanboy" is another way of saying zealot. Liking something is not the same thing as zealotry. They are worlds apart.
  Zealots are people who attack people of the same faith because they "don't believe enough" - and I've only ever seen that with hateboys amongst each other.
  
  --
  Fandroids hate facts.
Manufacturer updates by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-09 11:40 · Score: 0

So remind us again - how are those manufacturers coming with those Android 2.3 updates to their phones, boys?!
1. Re:Manufacturer updates by lactose99 · 2011-03-09 12:04 · Score: 1
  
  Don't know about you, but I got my 2.3 OTA update last week :)
  Then again, I bought the phone straight from Google
  
  --
  Fully licensed blockchain psychiatrist
2. Re:Manufacturer updates by mikkelm · 2011-03-09 12:04 · Score: 1
  
  Got mine last week, thanks.
3. Re:Manufacturer updates by Drakino · 2011-03-09 12:23 · Score: 1
  
  But 2.3 was "released" in December, so even buying direct from Google meant a 2-3 month wait on a phone barley a year old. iPhone 3GS owners (a phone nearly 2 years old now) got 4.3 the exact same day as everyone else.
  To be fair (and before others point it out), Apple didn't release 4.3 for the Verizon iPhone yet. While the custom 4.2.6 build it shipped with has some of the 4.3 features, it doesn't have them all. So even Apple isn't perfect with getting updates out the door for all devices at once.
4. Re:Manufacturer updates by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-09 12:39 · Score: 0
  
  And how long was 4.3 delayed internally to deploy across phone variants?
  Google could have simply waited 3 months, screwing the Nexus S buyers in the process, and you wouldn't have an argument.
5. Re:Manufacturer updates by Drakino · 2011-03-09 12:55 · Score: 1
  
  Fair counterpoint Mr. AC, though having followed the development cycle of 4.3, it didn't delay the release by months. Apple does have the advantage of controlling the hardware and software side, and since the hardware is overall pretty similar between all iOS devices, it's easy to make a release work across them all.
  Similarly, Apple, and Microsoft have no issues releasing OS updates across the board. They set up their release procedures to ensure 10.6.7 or Windows 7 SP1 will launch at the same time for everyone. Google just simply hasn't put in the effort needed to unify updates across their own supported devices, much less the devices 3rd parties make using their OS. It is possible, but Google just doesn't do it.
  I can't in good faith go buy an Android device and expect it to be running the newest and latest OS, including any security fixes the updates might bring. The Google supported G1 was abandoned at 1.6, the Nexus One isn't getting timely updates even being a fully official Google device, and 3rd party routes are way worse. Until Google improves their track record here, Android remains a hackers toy in my eye. Google wants Android to be seen as a professional OS and ecosystem, but until they smooth out these processes, I can't see it as such.
6. Re:Manufacturer updates by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-09 13:05 · Score: 0
  
  Well to be fair, 2.3 was a larger architectural upgrade than SP1, and the iOS 4.3 update has nothing on it. But you're right, if Google had simply devoted more attention to the N1, they could have cut that time to weeks.
7. Re:Manufacturer updates by macs4all · 2011-03-09 22:27 · Score: 1
  
  But 2.3 was "released" in December, so even buying direct from Google meant a 2-3 month wait on a phone barley a year old. iPhone 3GS owners (a phone nearly 2 years old now) got 4.3 the exact same day as everyone else.
  To be fair (and before others point it out), Apple didn't release 4.3 for the Verizon iPhone yet. While the custom 4.2.6 build it shipped with has some of the 4.3 features, it doesn't have them all. So even Apple isn't perfect with getting updates out the door for all devices at once.
  I am purely speculating, but don'tcha think that Verizon has an "approval" process of its own, and perhaps, just perhaps, that might not take EXACTLY the same time as AT&T's process?
Xcode no longer free by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-09 11:42 · Score: 5, Interesting

The bigger news today is that Apple has decided that developing for iOS or the Mac, without even submitting anything to their respective app stores, is now no longer free. Developers registered in the $99 iOS or Mac developer program get it as part of their subscription, but all others have to pay $4.99 now.
While $4.99 is chump change, it just seems like an odd thing to do and comes across as greedy. Seriously, they aren't going to make any significant amount of money from this, so why bother? I can't imagine what they were thinking. All it does is serve as yet another roadblock, albeit low-priced, to getting into the walled garden. I imagine a lot of young, aspiring developers will see this and look elsewhere instead. Maybe that's a good thing?
1. Re:Xcode no longer free by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-09 11:47 · Score: 0
  
  That's funny, I just downloaded it for free (and anonymously) from their developer site.
2. Re:Xcode no longer free by InsertWittyNameHere · 2011-03-09 11:59 · Score: 1
  
  Doesn't make sense... Will the next version of iTunes, IE, firefox, Ubuntu, etc cost $4.99?
3. Re:Xcode no longer free by hsmith · 2011-03-09 12:03 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  Yet, Apple disallows developers from charging for updates.
4. Re:Xcode no longer free by ZankerH · 2011-03-09 12:11 · Score: 2
  
  Jesus christ, it's just an IDE. You can still develop Mac apps with vim and gcc.
5. Re:Xcode no longer free by praxis · 2011-03-09 12:20 · Score: 1
  
  Regardless of the amount, we're not talking about buying development software here, but for a yearly fee to install software you write on a device you own (are marketed as buying).
6. Re:Xcode no longer free by dakameleon · 2011-03-09 12:33 · Score: 1
  
  Link?
  
  --
  Man who leaps off cliff jumps to conclusion.
7. Re:Xcode no longer free by dakameleon · 2011-03-09 12:36 · Score: 1
  
  Apple doesn't allow charging for updates (yet), but that doesn't stop developers from working around it. Tweetie 1.0 was succeeded by a different version as 2.0, for which the user would need to pay $2 again.
  Of course, PC users are used to paying for updated versions, right?
  
  --
  Man who leaps off cliff jumps to conclusion.
8. Re:Xcode no longer free by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-09 12:37 · Score: 0
  
  Yeah, imagine if Ford, GE, Maytag, Black & Decker, and all those other manufacturers started charging a fee for you to install software you write on a device you own!
  What, you mean you can't do that, even for a fee? Stallman must be furious! When should we expect to witness the full wrath of a dozen or two angry neckbeards calling out the manufacturers of anything with a processor chip? I'm a busy guy, I need to schedule this stuff.
9. Re:Xcode no longer free by deniable · 2011-03-09 12:39 · Score: 1
  
  Actually, they're doing both. $99 for the year and $4.99 for the SDK.
10. Re:Xcode no longer free by deniable · 2011-03-09 12:41 · Score: 1
  
  For comparison, Visual Studio Express costs $0.
11. Re:Xcode no longer free by DeAngeloLampkin · 2011-03-09 12:43 · Score: 1
  
  While the price is nominal, the gesture is kind of ridiculous. Between the need to pay to create apps and now pay to have the IDE, Apple seems to take an increasingly hostile attitude towards developers. But then, I guess they have the market position to do so.
  
  -DeAngelo
  SheenNation - hassle free Sheen sharing ! (no login and infinite voting)
  Braincano
  
  --
  If you get a moment, check out my blog Braincano
12. Re:Xcode no longer free by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-09 12:55 · Score: 0
  
  Do you even realize what VS Ultimate includes? Who it's targeted at (not individuals)? Comparing Xcode to it disingenuous in the extreme. That's like comparing AutoCAD to... Blender.
  No wonder you always get marked troll.
13. Re:Xcode no longer free by 1729 · 2011-03-09 12:55 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  Jesus christ, it's just an IDE. You can still develop Mac apps with vim and gcc.
  Without XCode? Getting a working toolchain on OS X without first installing XCode (which includes gcc and binutils) is non-trivial.
14. Re:Xcode no longer free by Drakino · 2011-03-09 12:58 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  $99 a year is if you want to release apps via the App Store and have access to beta versions of the OS, along with professional developer support. The $99 includes XCode 4.
  $4.99 is an accounting charge due to financial reforms passed after the Enron mess. XCode 3.x comes free with every Mac, and 4.x will come free with Lion, as it's cost is built into the overall cost of the OS.
15. Re:Xcode no longer free by Drakino · 2011-03-09 13:01 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  And XCode 3.x is still free with any new Mac (required to run XCode anyhow). XCode 4 will return to free status when Lion ships. The $4.99 is simply an accounting fee due to Sarbanes–Oxley Act of 2002. Enough new features and functionality were added to XCode 4 to qualify it as a proper upgrade, and Apple hasn't been counting revenue from new Macs and OS X as "subscription" revenue needed to allow it to be released for free.
16. Re:Xcode no longer free by deniable · 2011-03-09 13:03 · Score: 1
  
  Looking at the new versions of iTunes, they now talk about Free updates, so I'd guess they've got hooks in the system for paid update.
17. Re:Xcode no longer free by DeAngeloLampkin · 2011-03-09 13:10 · Score: 0
  
  Developing an iOS based application without XCode is borderline impossible. It's more than "just an IDE". It does a lot of the organization of the various libraries and frameworks you interact with, as well as packaging of code.
  So is it possible to develop iOS (or Mac or whatever) apps with just iOS? I suppose. Actually, I'd love to find a demo online of someone doing this. Regardless, even if you COULD get it to work, it'd be a massive, massive pain in the budunkadunk.
  -DeAngelo
  SheenNation - hassle free sharing Sheen! (no login and infinite voting)
  Braincano
  
  --
  If you get a moment, check out my blog Braincano
18. Re:Xcode no longer free by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-09 13:15 · Score: 0
  
  But it gets you to put in a credit card number for iTunes. The well is then primed to spend more.
19. Re:Xcode no longer free by 99BottlesOfBeerInMyF · 2011-03-09 13:19 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  The bigger news today is that Apple has decided that developing for iOS or the Mac, without even submitting anything to their respective app stores, is now no longer free.
  
  Umm, charging $5 for the latest version of the dev tools is not equivalent to charging all developers for the Mac platform. You can use the older version of Xcode for free or you can use dozens of other tool kits from other vendors and pay Apple nothing.
  
  While $4.99 is chump change, it just seems like an odd thing to do and comes across as greedy.
  It is the result of US accounting law. They can't give it away for free and claim it as part of the cost of OS X as they have been since there are too many new features in it to pass muster. So they charge a minimal fee until the next OS X release then claim it is also rolled into the price of that OS for new users.
  
  Seriously, they aren't going to make any significant amount of money from this, so why bother?
  
  I think I just answered this.
  
  I imagine a lot of young, aspiring developers will see this and look elsewhere instead. Maybe that's a good thing?
  I suppose it's possible, or they'll use Eclipse or the older version of Xcode or any number of other toolkits.
20. Re:Xcode no longer free by Microlith · 2011-03-09 13:21 · Score: 1
  
  It makes me wonder:
  * Will it be included with 10.7? If not, then
  * How long until the price goes up and
  * Is Apple going to attempt to control how software is installed on OS X?
  It's moves like this that made me reduce OS X to a minimal 32GB partition on my Macbook and install Ubuntu 10.04 LTS, and make me avoid iOS products like the plague.
21. Re:Xcode no longer free by indiechild · 2011-03-09 13:33 · Score: 1
  
  What's funny is that your ignorant and factually incorrect comment was modded up (you can still download Xcode 4 for free if you sign up for a free Apple developer account).
  Only on Slashdot.
22. Re:Xcode no longer free by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-09 13:49 · Score: 0
  
  ah,
  now it makes sense why they push more of the stuff through the store(which is tied to a CC or gift card?), they will be able to make each one have a unique ID(s) in it so to tell who compiles what
23. Re:Xcode no longer free by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-09 13:57 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  While I agree and lament the fact that Slashdot often favors "sensational" and completely incorrect posts and stories, your accusation here is without merit. Xcode is not free with a free developer account. It requires the $99 Mac or iOS developer program subscription, or can be purchased for $4.99 from the Mac app store, as previously stated.
  I have a free developer account, and this is what http://developer.apple.com/xcode/ tells me when I try to download it:
  
  Hi [my name],
  You must be an iOS or Mac Developer Program member to download Xcode 4 or you can purchase Xcode 4 from the Mac App Store.
  View Xcode 4 on the Mac App Store
  Learn about Apple Developer Programs
  It seems that your post is the one that's ignorant and factually incorrect.
24. Re:Xcode no longer free by The+End+Of+Days · 2011-03-09 14:03 · Score: 1
  
  If you want your interaction with Apple to be minimal, why do you actually care? Are you just chasing a reason to be upset, or am I missing something profound?
25. Re:Xcode no longer free by furball · 2011-03-09 14:10 · Score: 1
  
  This isn't true. I do not have registration in the $99 iOS or Mac developer program subscription and was able to download Xcode 4 for free today at 5pm EST.
26. Re:Xcode no longer free by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-09 14:19 · Score: 1
  
  Umm, charging $5 for the latest version of the dev tools is not equivalent to charging all developers for the Mac platform. You can use the older version of Xcode for free or you can use dozens of other tool kits from other vendors and pay Apple nothing.
  For the Mac platform, that's true - you can download Xcode 3 and get along just fine with it. For now. The real question is, is this a temporary thing until Xcode 4 is once again free with Lion, or will it remain a paid download from now on? And will Xcode 3 remain available until Lion is out? Apple has a history of making old Xcode versions disappear from their site as soon as new ones are out. It'll be interesting to see, for sure.
  And of course anyone wanting to get started with iOS development on the simulator, using 4.3 features, must pay up. Of course it's no problem for anyone who's serious about selling on the app store (and will pay the $99 anyway), but for the hobbyist who tinkers in their free time, and doesn't yet know if they'll come up with something worthy of selling, this is now a minor roadblock.
  I'm curious what these dozens of other tool kits are, though. Since Carbon was officially declared obsolete (and along with it CodeWarrior), Xcode has been pretty much it for any serious Mac, and now iOS development. Yes, there are other languages and other IDEs like Eclipse, but you're not going to get a serious, native Mac application out of them. Not without a ton of headaches. And for iOS, forget it.
  
  While $4.99 is chump change, it just seems like an odd thing to do and comes across as greedy.
  It is the result of US accounting law. They can't give it away for free and claim it as part of the cost of OS X as they have been since there are too many new features in it to pass muster. So they charge a minimal fee until the next OS X release then claim it is also rolled into the price of that OS for new users.
  Is it? I know they've used this excuse in the past - iPod touch updates, the first 802.11n update, Facetime for Macs... But the choices of when to apply that rule/excuse and how much to charge both seem quite arbitrary. Why have major iTunes and Safari updates been free? If this Xcode update required Apple to charge money, why not those? And why $4.99 if it's just a token amount for accounting purposes? Why not $0.99? The whole thing seems odd, and in typical Apple fashion, they're being tight-lipped about it. As someone else mentioned above, in the absence of a real explanation it comes across as somewhat hostile toward developers.
  Again, not that $4.99 is a big deal to pay. It's pocket change. But the whole thing is just weird.
27. Re:Xcode no longer free by Hashi+Lebwohl · 2011-03-09 14:19 · Score: 1
  
  Well, that is strange. I have a free developer account, admittedly from a couple of years ago, but still current - and I had no problems downloading. I don't doubt that your experience is different - it would be interesting to know why.
  
  --
  I'm in to sadism, bestiality and necrophilia. Am I flogging a dead horse?
28. Re:Xcode no longer free by Desler · 2011-03-09 14:21 · Score: 2
  
  Yes, it will be free in Lion. The charging is due to Sarbanes-Oaxley. But hey, don't bother letting facts get in the way of a rant.
29. Re:Xcode no longer free by tepples · 2011-03-09 14:33 · Score: 1
  
  Apple seems to take an increasingly hostile attitude towards developers.
  
  Apple's attitude is still far less hostile than Nintendo's, as far as I can tell.
30. Re:Xcode no longer free by FictionPimp · 2011-03-09 14:33 · Score: 1
  
  I'm still confused, apple can't choose to develop a new product and release it for free without getting in legal trouble?
31. Re:Xcode no longer free by mug+funky · 2011-03-09 14:36 · Score: 1
  
  not in particular.
  i'm pretty sure that decision is entirely up to the developer of the actual software, rather than the OS it runs on.
32. Re:Xcode no longer free by mug+funky · 2011-03-09 14:38 · Score: 1
  
  fuck are you talking about?
33. Re:Xcode no longer free by Karlt1 · 2011-03-09 14:42 · Score: 1
  
  The bigger news today is that Apple has decided that developing for iOS or the Mac, without even submitting anything to their respective app stores, is now no longer free. Developers registered in the $99 iOS or Mac developer program get it as part of their subscription, but all others have to pay $4.99 now.
  Or you know, you could like, register for a free Apple developer account here for free:
  http://developer.apple.com/programs/register/
  And download XCode......
  Or did not that big "Free" word by the register button not clue you in?
34. Re:Xcode no longer free by larry+bagina · 2011-03-09 14:42 · Score: 1
  
  As I understand how *they* understand it, they would need to restate prior quarter/prior year earnings so $5 of every snow leopard CD would be moved to this quarter. Otherwise, they might be trying to pull a fast one on investors.
  
  --
  Do you even lift?
  These aren't the 'roids you're looking for.
35. Re:Xcode no longer free by Just+Some+Guy · 2011-03-09 15:00 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  The $4.99 is simply an accounting fee due to Sarbanes–Oxley Act of 2002.
  And that's simply a lie. Google gives away almost all of their services, Microsoft gives away versions of Visual Studio, Red Hat gives away darn near everything, but Apple has to charge for a completely optional download that a tiny percentage of users will want to use? Nope, I don't buy it for a second. Either Apple has the most incompetent accountants in the technology sector, or they're charging because they want to for whatever reason.
  
  --
  Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
36. Re:Xcode no longer free by indiechild · 2011-03-09 15:02 · Score: 1
  
  My apologies, I've been reading other forums and it seems you're correct.
  I have a free developer account registered from a few years ago so I'll see if I can download it tonight when I can get on a Mac with Snow Leopard. There seems to be some conflicting stories -- maybe people who previously registered for free are able to download Xcode 4?
37. Re:Xcode no longer free by ibmjones · 2011-03-09 15:15 · Score: 1
  
  I imagine a lot of young, aspiring developers will see this and look elsewhere instead.
  
  If they already spent 500-5000 on a Mac, why would 5 more dollars be an issue?
38. Re:Xcode no longer free by BitZtream · 2011-03-09 15:26 · Score: 1
  
  I've been paying upto $2500 for a decent dev environment for years, and I'd fucking be HAPPY to pay it again if XCode was like VisualStudio.
  Sorry if you don't like paying for other peoples work, in that case you can cobble together GCC and the related crap to get it working.
  Me? I'll be happy that XCode 4 finally doesn't require 18 windows and I can have everything in 1.
  There are no free IDEs that don't suck ass, if you think there are, its only cause you've never used one that doesn't suck ass.
  
  --
  Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
39. Re:Xcode no longer free by UnknowingFool · 2011-03-09 15:30 · Score: 1
  
  Technically to get Xcode 4.0 is $4.99. You can still install Xcode 3.X for free and it works still.
  
  I imagine a lot of young, aspiring developers will see this and look elsewhere instead. Maybe that's a good thing?
  If developers see $4.99 as a roadblock, they have more serious problems that coding for Apple. The cheapest PC you can get is $300 and that's in the budget arena. The cheapest Mac is like $699. Any developer who feels $5 is stopping them from earning a living really doesn't have the bigger picture in mind.
  
  --
  Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
40. Re:Xcode no longer free by UnknowingFool · 2011-03-09 15:34 · Score: 1
  
  And you can use Visual Studio Express for all kinds of development? I do believe it was designed for hobbyists and students to learn MS frameworks and lacks major components a professional would need. Not that you can't get by but technically I think in your license with MS you agree not to use it for commercial development or something like that.
  
  --
  Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
41. Re:Xcode no longer free by Microlith · 2011-03-09 15:42 · Score: 2
  
  The charging is due to Sarbanes-Oaxley[sic]
  I see this all the time yet Apple is the only one to act like this. Why doesn't Google get into hot water over Android, or Intel over all the open source stuff it does?
  Or maybe the SOX excuse is made up by people trying (but otherwise unable) to explain Apple's charges?
42. Re:Xcode no longer free by Drakino · 2011-03-09 15:46 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  It's not a lie, it's due to that act, and how Apple runs their books. Yes, all the companies you mentioned give things away for free, and so does Apple, depending on what it is. XCode is classified as part of the OS, a paid component that Apple either sells as a standalone disc for upgrades, or part of the price of a new Mac. If Microsoft claimed Visual Studio was part of Windows and distributed it with every version of Windows 7, then they would have to deal with how to account for a "free" upgrade from VS 2008 to VS2010. They could either claim VS 2010 is simply a bugfix release (not likely to hold up in courts if they were ever challenged on it), or defer the revenue recognition of Windows 7 over a period of time that covers when VS2010 was released. OS X is not a deferred revenue product for Apple, so they already recognized the income before XCode 4 came out. Accounting wise, they can't say that XCode 4 dev time (salary money, etc) was a cost component of the currently released version of OS X.
  If you listen to financial reports from pretty much any major company, they report revenue in GAAP and non GAAP terms. GAAP tends to have all the "subscription" and deferred revenue crap, while non GAAP represents exactly what came in that precise quarter. If you want to read more on the details, refer to these Wikipedia articles:
  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/US_GAAP
  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revenue_recognition
  Beyond understanding the basics, there are tons of articles out there that talk about how SOX impacted revenue recognition.
43. Re:Xcode no longer free by Microlith · 2011-03-09 15:47 · Score: 1
  
  If you want your interaction with Apple to be minimal, why do you actually care?
  I care because Apple does have huge influence in the mobile market. I also care because I used to like Apple a lot, then they decided that the mobile space (and your device) was the private property of Apple, Inc.
44. Re:Xcode no longer free by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-09 15:48 · Score: 0
  
  Sign up for the free dev account at developer.apple.com
  Download Xcode.
  Done.
  As someone said below it's an accounting thing if you get it via the app store.
45. Re:Xcode no longer free by Drakino · 2011-03-09 15:50 · Score: 1
  
  The issue is that XCode isn't a new product. XCode 4 is an upgrade to XCode 3, and revenue for XCode 3 was already recognized on Apple's books under Snow Leopard. Apple has always bundled dev tools with the OS, so they can't just randomly change that practice in the middle of a quarter. They would have needed to unbundle XCode from OS X prior to version 4, then moved forward with releasing XCode 4 for free.
  Accounting is a messy situation for businesses that are public companies. Shareholders have a right to have accurate reports, and can be sue happy if they think there is a discrepancy that might impact their precious share value.
46. Re:Xcode no longer free by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-09 16:05 · Score: 0
  
  If developers see $4.99 as a roadblock, they have more serious problems that coding for Apple. The cheapest PC you can get is $300 and that's in the budget arena. The cheapest Mac is like $699. Any developer who feels $5 is stopping them from earning a living really doesn't have the bigger picture in mind.
  I think the OP is talking about the newbie/hobbyist developer. Someone who already has a Mac, is interested in developing something, possibly learning to program for the first time. A $5 barrier isn't much, but it is a barrier.
47. Re:Xcode no longer free by pyite · 2011-03-09 16:18 · Score: 1
  
  I see this all the time yet Apple is the only one to act like this. Why doesn't Google get into hot water over Android, or Intel over all the open source stuff it does?
  Because Google doesn't sell a product for which giving away free stuff for can be claimed as a significant upgrade without a price tag?
  I'm tired of people complaining about this. If Apple didn't do it, and someone latched on to it as a reason for them to suffer sanctions for improperly disclosing revenue, then everyone would be saying that Apple is a fraud because they clearly have unethical accounting procedures.
  Speaking as a member of the developer program, big deal. Either pay the $99 for the year or pay the one time $4.99. Chances are, you'll get XCode 4 for "free" with Mac OS 10.7.
  Speaking as a shareholder, this is just one more example (in a line of many, many others), why SOX hurts the US economy and stunts ingenuity and growth of US companies.
  
  --
  "Nature doesn't care how smart you are. You can still be wrong." - Richard Feynman
48. Re:Xcode no longer free by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-09 16:31 · Score: 0
  
  Or you know, you could like, register for a free Apple developer account here for free:
  http://developer.apple.com/programs/register/
  And download XCode......
  Or did not that big "Free" word by the register button not clue you in?
  Please actually try this and report back. My experience, both with an existing free account and a new one created at that link, is that there is no Xcode 4 download to be found. Instead, Apple redirects you to one of their paid $99/year programs, or the $4.99 app store purchase. There's also a link off to the side to download Xcode 3, still for free.
  Based on other comments, it appears that a few free developers may be getting actual Xcode 4 downloads for free, in which case Apple's site is somehow inconsistent. But it sure as heck isn't giving me a free download.
49. Re:Xcode no longer free by agrif · 2011-03-09 16:36 · Score: 1
  
  While I'd readily agree that XCode is basically the best thing ever for coding in Objective C, I do take issue with your last comment.
  I love working in Emacs, thank you very much. Just because you don't doesn't mean nobody else does. Given that OSX comes with many common Emacs keystrokes automatically enabled, I'm sure I'm not alone.
50. Re:Xcode no longer free by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-09 16:36 · Score: 0
  
  Five bucks is hostile? You must really hate the guy at the hot dog stand.
51. Re:Xcode no longer free by adisakp · 2011-03-09 16:51 · Score: 1
  
  Jesus christ, it's just an IDE. You can still develop Mac apps with vim and gcc.
  Without XCode? Getting a working toolchain on OS X without first installing XCode (which includes gcc and binutils) is non-trivial.
  Are you sure Apple XCode uses GCC? They claim to be using the Apple LLVM Compiler 2.0: Apple LLVM is fast. It compiles code twice as quickly as GCC, yet produces applications that also run faster.
52. Re:Xcode no longer free by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-09 16:53 · Score: 1
  
  Apple can certainly claim Xcode is part of the OS. It isn't. Neither is the toolchain. It isn't for any operating system I'm currently aware of.
53. Re:Xcode no longer free by Sandcastle · 2011-03-09 17:08 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  How much is a new version of Internet Explorer?
  
  --
  The fact that a fish swims in water does not make it an expert in fluid dynamics. GogglesPisano (199483)
54. Re:Xcode no longer free by UnknowingFool · 2011-03-09 17:09 · Score: 1
  
  I think the OP is talking about the newbie/hobbyist developer. Someone who already has a Mac, is interested in developing something, possibly learning to program for the first time. A $5 barrier isn't much, but it is a barrier.
  Again, the newest and just released version of Xcode is $4.99. If they have a Mac they can still install Xcode 3.2 for free if they think $5 is a barrier.
  
  --
  Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
55. Re:Xcode no longer free by smash · 2011-03-09 17:11 · Score: 1
  
  XCode ships with OS X.
  
  --
  I run: Windows, OS X, Linux, FreeBSD. Just because you have a hammer, doesn't mean everything is a nail.
56. Re:Xcode no longer free by smash · 2011-03-09 17:13 · Score: 1
  
  Do you know who uses Xcode for apple / ios development (i.e., who it is targeted at)?
  
  --
  I run: Windows, OS X, Linux, FreeBSD. Just because you have a hammer, doesn't mean everything is a nail.
57. Re:Xcode no longer free by smash · 2011-03-09 17:17 · Score: 1
  
  Me? I'll be happy that XCode 4 finally doesn't require 18 windows and I can have everything in 1.
  This is exactly what they have done in xcode 4.
  
  --
  I run: Windows, OS X, Linux, FreeBSD. Just because you have a hammer, doesn't mean everything is a nail.
58. Re:Xcode no longer free by frinkster · 2011-03-09 17:18 · Score: 3, Informative
  
  Jesus christ, it's just an IDE. You can still develop Mac apps with vim and gcc.
  Without XCode? Getting a working toolchain on OS X without first installing XCode (which includes gcc and binutils) is non-trivial.
  Apple released an updated version of XCode 3 today (3.2.6). Looking at the release notes, it includes the latest build tools as well as the updated SDK for developing iOS 4.3 apps. It also includes some updates/changes to the XCode 3 IDE.
  Apple is charging the $5 for the fancy new IDE only. You still get everything else with the free download.
59. Re:Xcode no longer free by mjwx · 2011-03-09 17:31 · Score: 1
  
  Jesus christ, it's just an IDE
  An IDE that Apple and it's fanboys made a big noise about being free, unlike another monopolistic competitor which is said not to offer a version of it's IDE for free.
  
  The problem isn't that they're charging, it's that they are charging when they promised not to. It's a bait and switch. However this isn't the first time Apple have "altered the deal" and if you've locked your self in all you can do is "prey they do not alter it any further". It wont be the last time they do it either.
  
  If MS started charging just $0.05 for Telnet the same people defending Apple would be up in arms. It's the level of sheer hypocrisy that annoys me.
  
  --
  Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
60. Re:Xcode no longer free by mjwx · 2011-03-09 17:35 · Score: 1
  
  It is the result of US accounting law. They can't give it away for free and claim it as part of the cost of OS X as they have been since there are too many new features in it to pass muster.
  So it's a tax dodge.
  
  Well that just makes it all better. Especially in a nation where the national debt is spiralling out of control.
  
  MS still have no problem offering a free version of Visual Studio. Does MS have a tax issue with Paint?
  
  It's a bad excuse and you know it. Besides, you did not address the issue of Apple going back on its word, that Xcode was free and how many people parroted that. Unless this is one of those "we have always been at war with Eurasia" moments.
  
  --
  Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
61. Re:Xcode no longer free by 1729 · 2011-03-09 17:46 · Score: 1
  
  They've used gcc until now. I think on iOS, they were using an LLVM backend with a gcc frontend. They've clearly been trying to move away from gcc and they've been developing the clang front-end, but I didn't realize that they had a functional non-gcc toolchain.
62. Re:Xcode no longer free by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-09 17:51 · Score: 0
  
  Small teams of developers, ten at the most. Good fucking luck managing 50+ programmers using Xcode.
63. Re:Xcode no longer free by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-09 17:58 · Score: 0
  
  He's referring to how weird it is that, in an age when half the objects you own contain a microcomputer that you can't easily program, people are upset about a media-consumption tablet.
64. Re:Xcode no longer free by Rebelgecko · 2011-03-09 18:05 · Score: 2
  
  That link does say that you can download Xcode 3 + iOS SDK. However, this article is about Xcode 4.
  
  --
  CATS/Diebold '08- All your vote are belong to us!
65. Re:Xcode no longer free by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-09 18:27 · Score: 0
  
  I've heard this story before (about a trillion times), and frankly, I think it's complete BS.
  There are _plenty_ of companies releasing their products and then adding more features later. Besides, is the DA really going to come down on Apple for adding features to XCode? Really? Finally, Apple has a whole legal department. What the heck is their job if not to figure out how to get around stupid stuff like this? Ridiculous.
  They just want your five bucks.
  (Also, I could be wrong, but I thought it was California accounting law specifically rather than federal law.)
66. Re:Xcode no longer free by Miseph · 2011-03-09 18:58 · Score: 1
  
  And in your estimation, how is third-party development on Nintendo faring these days?
  I'm pretty well convinced that scene has turned to liquid shit as they've taken to abusing the devs harder than MS and Sony combined.
  As a confirmed non-Mac user and anti-fan of everything Apple, I am completely unbothered by the idea that Apple is becoming hostile to developers in emulation of Nintendo's rapidly failing business strategy.
  
  --
  Try not to take me more seriously than I take myself.
67. Re:Xcode no longer free by c_jonescc · 2011-03-09 19:08 · Score: 1
  
  Maybe they had a lot of people downloading the SDK and not doing anything, leading to bandwidth costs?
  Or maybe this is an extra hurdle for the jailbreaking for free apps set, in some way?
  
  I really have no good idea, just brainstorming.
  But, as someone that has toyed with the idea of buying a mac to develop an iphone app, I don't see $5 as something that would make me consider another market outlet.
  
  --
  Getting diabetes AND salmonella would be a bad weekend.
68. Re:Xcode no longer free by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-09 20:02 · Score: 0
  
  I have a working toolchain ON the iphone, via Cydia und igcc package
69. Re:Xcode no longer free by deniable · 2011-03-09 20:38 · Score: 1
  
  Can you show me the upgrade test as written into SOX? How about free upgrades to iTunes? Why aren't they in jail for that little bit of financial malfeasance?
70. Re:Xcode no longer free by deniable · 2011-03-09 20:39 · Score: 1
  
  Better, what about iTunes?
71. Re:Xcode no longer free by deniable · 2011-03-09 20:40 · Score: 1
  
  Incorrect, you can do commercial development with VS Express. It's just not very good. I was countering the guy who quoted the price for the most expensive version of VS. $5 v. $11,000 is huge. 5 against 0, not so much.
72. Re:Xcode no longer free by deniable · 2011-03-09 20:50 · Score: 1
  
  Only when he starts charging extra for mustard.
73. Re:Xcode no longer free by petman · 2011-03-09 21:13 · Score: 1
  
  You people have some weird laws.
  
  --
  Dropbox drops it like it's hot.
74. Re:Xcode no longer free by georgesdev · 2011-03-09 21:14 · Score: 1
  
  Let me just add that I was a Mac developer in 1984. At the time Apple asked developers to buy a Lisa computer to do code development for the Mac. Around 15 000 $ ...
75. Re:Xcode no longer free by petman · 2011-03-09 21:33 · Score: 1
  
  "prey they do not alter it any further"
  It's one thing to make a typo, it's another to highlight the typo in quotes.
  
  The right word's pray, BTW.
  
  --
  Dropbox drops it like it's hot.
76. Re:Xcode no longer free by petman · 2011-03-09 21:40 · Score: 1
  
  Damn, you people are really weird. I can't for the life of me imagine why anyone would get blamed for giving away stuff for free.
  
  --
  Dropbox drops it like it's hot.
77. Re:Xcode no longer free by profplump · 2011-03-09 21:46 · Score: 1
  
  iTunes is distributed for free; there is no revenue recognized. It's also not bundled with their OS -- it's available for OSes that Apple doesn't even sell.
  You can argue that they shouldn't bother accounting XCode as part of the OS. Or that they're misunderstanding SarbOX. But their behavior is internally consistent.
78. Re:Xcode no longer free by forgotten_my_nick · 2011-03-09 21:52 · Score: 1
  
  I wouldn't compare XCode with Visual Express. Just because both are free doesn't mean they are the same.
  How about comparing XCode to MSDN?
79. Re:Xcode no longer free by macs4all · 2011-03-09 22:38 · Score: 1
  
  I'm still confused, apple can't choose to develop a new product and release it for free without getting in legal trouble?
  You are not confused. What you stated is correct: Thanks to Enron's shennanigans, the Sarbanes-Oxley Act made CERTAIN "freebies" ILLEGAL. And not just a little illegal. REALLY illegal.
  
  So, you can blame Enron and their accounting firm for this mess. Leave Apple out of it. They are no more able to avoid this than they are able to avoid charging sales tax in the U.S.
  
  Or do you think Apple (or any other company) actually ENJOYS being the UNPAID collection agent for Federal and State governments?
  
  This is much the same: Legal requirement. Not Apple's fault. Anyone else would have to do the same thing.
80. Re:Xcode no longer free by macs4all · 2011-03-09 22:45 · Score: 1
  
  You people have some weird laws.
  They weren't like this until a TRULY greedy corporation (Enron) committed SO much fraud in the commodities (energy) market in the U.S. that it nearly BANKRUPTED several states, causing its CEO to go to prison for 150 years, IIRC.
81. Re:Xcode no longer free by macs4all · 2011-03-09 22:47 · Score: 1
  
  Small teams of developers, ten at the most. Good fucking luck managing 50+ programmers using Xcode.
  So, how do projects like OS X get developed, if not in XCode?
82. Re:Xcode no longer free by macs4all · 2011-03-09 22:51 · Score: 1
  
  They've used gcc until now. I think on iOS, they were using an LLVM backend with a gcc frontend. They've clearly been trying to move away from gcc and they've been developing the clang front-end, but I didn't realize that they had a functional non-gcc toolchain.
  IIRC, they said that XCode 4 would be using clang.
83. Re:Xcode no longer free by Vectormatic · 2011-03-09 23:18 · Score: 1
  
  $4.99 is an accounting charge due to financial reforms passed after the Enron mess. XCode 3.x comes free with every Mac, and 4.x will come free with Lion, as it's cost is built into the overall cost of the OS.
  i dont understand this, there is plenty of software which is given updates for free (firefox, eclipse, netbeans, openoffice yadda yadda...), even enough from OS vendors (Internet explorer, security essentials, visual studio express). Why the hell does apple HAVE to charge money for an update to a free product?
  
  --
  People, what a bunch of bastards
84. Re:Xcode no longer free by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-10 00:08 · Score: 0
  
  It is the result of US accounting law. They can't give it away for free and claim it as part of the cost of OS X as they have been since there are too many new features in it to pass muster. So they charge a minimal fee until the next OS X release then claim it is also rolled into the price of that OS for new users.
  That's just Apple's lie that you've accepted hook, line and sinker. They can give away whatever they want, as long as they can assume that it will have some positive effect on business later. A nice development environment that attracts developers, which in turn produce applications that make MacOS a more attractive platform for end customers most certainly counts. Are they charging for access to their website?
85. Re:Xcode no longer free by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-10 00:24 · Score: 0
  
  "It is the result of US accounting law. They can't give it away for free and claim it as part of the cost of OS X as they have been since there are too many new features in it to pass muster. So they charge a minimal fee until the next OS X release then claim it is also rolled into the price of that OS for new users."
  Oh that's okay then, if I'm paying to help Apple with a tax dodge it's suddenly a whole lot better.
  There was me thinking they just wanted more money from me, instead it turns out they in fact want more money from me and the government.
  Only in the world of Apple could a company get away with getting their customers to pay for them to get away with a tax dodge and still have it's fanboys rationalise that as acceptable.
86. Re:Xcode no longer free by tepples · 2011-03-10 01:05 · Score: 1
  
  I'm pretty well convinced [the third-party Wii and DS development] scene has turned to liquid shit as [Nintendo has] taken to abusing the devs harder than MS and Sony combined.
  You're right that Microsoft's policy is comparable to Apple's: $99 per year to run your own programs on your own hardware, plus a 30% cut of sales. But have you a citation for Sony's organizational requirements to join the PlayStation developer program? I haven't been able to dig up anything on Sony's site, but here's Nintendo's: your business needs a dedicated office and experience on some other platform.
87. Re:Xcode no longer free by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-10 01:51 · Score: 0
  
  How much does visual studio cost again?
88. Re:Xcode no longer free by UnknowingFool · 2011-03-10 02:00 · Score: 1
  
  True but a professional version of Visual Studio is not 0. I don't know what it is but I think it is considerably more than $5. There are several versions but I think it's in the hundreds of dollars for a pro version. Of course there are volume discounts and packages so that the per license price is lower.
  
  --
  Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
89. Re:Xcode no longer free by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-10 02:43 · Score: 0
  
  While the price is nominal, the gesture is kind of ridiculous. Between the need to pay to create apps and now pay to have the IDE, Apple seems to take an increasingly hostile attitude towards developers. But then, I guess they have the market position to do so.
  Oh good grief. Xcode is $5 through the Mac App Store. That's the price of a Starbucks latte. Or you get it free with an $99 Apple Developer account. Or wait three months and you'll get it free with MacOS 10.7 Lion.
  By comparison, Microsoft's cheapest MSDN subscription is $700, and the most expensive is over $10k. Visual Studio upgrades cost over $500.
  Apple's price tag for MacOS and iOS development is utterly trivial. And you have a warped idea of what the word "hostile" means.
90. Re:Xcode no longer free by larry+bagina · 2011-03-10 03:20 · Score: 1
  
  Xcode 4 includes gcc (4.2ish, pre GPL3), llvm-gcc, and clang. clang is the default compiler for new projects, but you can switch between them in the project settings.
  
  --
  Do you even lift?
  These aren't the 'roids you're looking for.
91. Re:Xcode no longer free by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-10 03:44 · Score: 0
  
  It is the result of US accounting law. They can't give it away for free and claim it as part of the cost of OS X as they have been since there are too many new features in it to pass muster. So they charge a minimal fee until the next OS X release then claim it is also rolled into the price of that OS for new users.
  Oh, are you an accountant for Apple? I'd like to know where the source of your expertise comes from.
92. Re:Xcode no longer free by tehcyder · 2011-03-10 04:19 · Score: 1
  
  $4.99 is an accounting charge due to financial reforms passed after the Enron mess.
  Then no doubt you can provide a link to the relevant legislation requiring this charge? 'Cus no-one else seems to have heard of it.
  
  --
  To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
93. Re:Xcode no longer free by tehcyder · 2011-03-10 04:31 · Score: 1
  
  That does not make sense. When you buy a Mac with OSX on it, Apple correctly account for the cost of the machine and software as revenue on the day it was sold. If you bought a year long anti-virus subscription or something, technically this would have to be deferred over the life of the product.
  But if in one year's time Apple upgrade the text editor or something, and didn't charge for it, there would be no additional income to defer. Is it the case that Apple have also been deferring as R&D the development costs of such upgrades? Because that seems highly dubious to me.
  
  --
  To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
94. Re:Xcode no longer free by tehcyder · 2011-03-10 04:38 · Score: 1
  
  It is the result of US accounting law. They can't give it away for free and claim it as part of the cost of OS X
  So why don't they give it away for free and not claim it as part of the cost of OS X?
  
  --
  To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
95. Re:Xcode no longer free by tehcyder · 2011-03-10 04:43 · Score: 1
  
  Because Google doesn't sell a product for which giving away free stuff for can be claimed as a significant upgrade without a price tag?
  Where does Sarbannes-Oaxley say that significant upgrades can't be free? I'd like to see some direct references rather than regurgitated Apple PR releases.
  
  --
  To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
96. Re:Xcode no longer free by tehcyder · 2011-03-10 04:45 · Score: 1
  
  As I understand how *they* understand it, they would need to restate prior quarter/prior year earnings so $5 of every snow leopard CD would be moved to this quarter. Otherwise, they might be trying to pull a fast one on investors.
  Why? the cost of the original OSX software doesn't have to be deferred over y number of years. Surely sales of OSX, Windows 7 or whatever are just reported on the date they occurred, same as buying a TV?
  
  --
  To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
97. Re:Xcode no longer free by praxis · 2011-03-10 06:08 · Score: 1
  
  Wait, one can install software one writes on one's phone without paying Apple or jailbreaking one's phone?
98. Re:Xcode no longer free by 1729 · 2011-03-10 06:14 · Score: 1
  
  I have a working toolchain ON the iphone, via Cydia und igcc package
  That's pretty cool! I haven't jailbroken my iPhone, and probably won't, but having a compiler on the phone is pretty slick. Mostly useless (at least for me), but cool. My last phone (Nokia E71) had a real python interpreter/shell, but I only used it for the novelty.
99. Re:Xcode no longer free by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-10 10:22 · Score: 0
  
  What about Safari? It's bundled with the OS, and yet major revisions have come out that were free to all. How's that consistent with Xcode?
100. Re:Xcode no longer free by node+3 · 2011-03-10 17:11 · Score: 1
  
  Xcode is still free. You just don't get the newer version free. This is for regulatory compliance.
101. Re:Xcode no longer free by CheerfulMacFanboy · 2011-03-11 11:24 · Score: 1
  
  http://developer.apple.com/xcode/ - who could have guessed.
  
  --
  Fandroids hate facts.
102. Re:Xcode no longer free by CheerfulMacFanboy · 2011-03-11 15:17 · Score: 1
  
  Because Google doesn't sell a product for which giving away free stuff for can be claimed as a significant upgrade without a price tag?
  Where does Sarbannes-Oaxley say that significant upgrades can't be free? I'd like to see some direct references rather than regurgitated Apple PR releases.
  Nowhere - that's one reason why Apple does that for some things. Sarbanes-Oxley does however say however say that your accounting has to follow this http://faculty.business.utsa.edu/jboone/ACC4073_S2006/Cases/TechMall/SOP%2097-2.pdf to the letter - read it through carefully and tell us where Apple went wrong in assuming that for the cases where they ask a tiny amount for an update of an not pre-announced feature this is the safer accounting practice.
  
  --
  Fandroids hate facts.
103. Re:Xcode no longer free by exomondo · 2011-03-16 11:59 · Score: 1
  
  First of all, I'd hardly call $5 for a complete development suite "greedy." For comparison, Visual Studio Ultimate costs $11,899.
  Comparing VS Ultimate to XCode is apples and oranges, XCode doesn't have the scope that VS Ultimate does (have a look at the differences in features, just check out the product pages if you don't know).
  If you want to develop for WP7 you get the *free* Windows Phone edition of VS with the WP7 SDK.
  If you want to develop in .Net you get one of the *free* VS Express Edition packages.
  
  Just comparing XCode to the highest version of VS is either ignorant or intentionally misleading.
104. Re:Xcode no longer free by exomondo · 2011-03-16 12:03 · Score: 1
  
  He's referring to how weird it is that, in an age when half the objects you own contain a microcomputer that you can't easily program, people are upset about a media-consumption tablet.
  It's only 'weird' if you're ignorant enough to have missed the blindingly obvious answer which is because a media-consumption tablet is designed to have custom written apps run on it, whereas devices with embedded microcomputers are not. If you're putting a general purpose computing device in the same category as an appliance with an embedded microcomputer then you really are pretty daft.
105. Re:Xcode no longer free by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-16 12:16 · Score: 0
  
  Leave Apple out of it.
  Leave Apple alone! LEAVE 'EM ALONE!
106. Re:Xcode no longer free by exomondo · 2011-03-16 13:09 · Score: 1
  
  True but a professional version of Visual Studio is not 0. I don't know what it is but I think it is considerably more than $5.
  *A* 'professional version' or *THE* 'professional version'? The express and WP7 versions are professional versions.
  
  If you want to develop for Windows (using EE versions) or WP7 (using the Phone version) then you can do it for free using those versions provided by Microsoft, if you want other features then you do have to pay for them.
107. Re:Xcode no longer free by exomondo · 2011-03-16 13:10 · Score: 1
  
  So, how do projects like OS X get developed, if not in XCode?
  So you've solved the 'chicken and the egg' problem then have you?
and XCODE is out for $4.95 ... yeah five bucks by Shivetya · 2011-03-09 11:45 · Score: 1

so if you don't like the current crop of apps just try out your hand with one of your own.
Which of course I keep telling myself I will do, one day, really.

--
* Winners compare their achievements to their goals, losers compare theirs to that of others.
1. Re:and XCODE is out for $4.95 ... yeah five bucks by TrancePhreak · 2011-03-09 12:22 · Score: 1
  
  That's.... weird. I can download XCode for free from the developer website. It would seem they are just selling the OSX version. Yet the one that I download from the developer site includes iOS & OSX. So confusing.
  
  --
  
  -]Phreak Out[-
2. Re:and XCODE is out for $4.95 ... yeah five bucks by Anubis350 · 2011-03-09 12:28 · Score: 1
  
  The one you download from the dev site is either: A) A full copy of 4 because you have a currently paid dev account (in which case it's not free) -or- B) Xcode 3
  
  --
  "goodbye and hello, as always" ~Prince Corwin, from Zelazny's Amber series
3. Re:and XCODE is out for $4.95 ... yeah five bucks by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-09 12:30 · Score: 0
  
  If you're a member of the Mac or iOS developer programs, you can still get Xcode for free. But they now charge plebeians US$5 for the developer tools. Either way, this is the first time Apple has ever charged for their developer tools since MPW.
4. Re:and XCODE is out for $4.95 ... yeah five bucks by larry+bagina · 2011-03-09 12:46 · Score: 1, Informative
  
  If you sign up for a free (as in $0) developer account, you can download Xcode 4 for free (as in $0) from the developer website.
  
  --
  Do you even lift?
  These aren't the 'roids you're looking for.
5. Re:and XCODE is out for $4.95 ... yeah five bucks by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-09 12:52 · Score: 0
  
  The $5 Mac App Store version includes the iOS SDK and development tools as well. I have no idea why they are now charging $5 for it, other than that they can.
  If you've already paid to be in the Mac or iOS developer programs then you can download it from the dev center website for free, as was always the case.
6. Re:and XCODE is out for $4.95 ... yeah five bucks by mmclure · 2011-03-09 12:53 · Score: 1
  
  Nope. You don't get free XCode 4 unless you're paying $100 a year for either a Mac or iOS Developer. The newest version of XCode you can get for free with a free developer account is XCode 3.
7. Re:and XCODE is out for $4.95 ... yeah five bucks by indiechild · 2011-03-09 13:32 · Score: 1
  
  You're wrong. You can get Xcode 4 for free if you sign up for a free developer account and download it from Apple's Developer site.
  Why they're selling it for $5 on the Mac App Store is beyond me.
8. Re:and XCODE is out for $4.95 ... yeah five bucks by Wordplay · 2011-03-09 13:46 · Score: 1
  
  While this visit to the Argument Clinic is entertaining, you really can't download it gratis if you're just part of the Apple Developer Program. You need to specifically be subscribed into either Mac or iOS dev programs (i.e. the $99/yr subs). Either that, or the website is flat-out lying to me when I log in with my Apple ID and go to http://developer.apple.com/xcode/ . For me, that page tells me I'm not eligible, upsells me to the paid programs, and refers me to the App Store otherwise.
  If you saw other behavior, perhaps there was a glitch while they switched over, it's different for outside the US, or some other variance.
9. Re:and XCODE is out for $4.95 ... yeah five bucks by The+End+Of+Days · 2011-03-09 14:04 · Score: 0
  
  No, you're just doing it wrong. I would tell you the steps, but instead you should consider figuring it out the intelligence test that allows you to develop.
10. Re:and XCODE is out for $4.95 ... yeah five bucks by Kalriath · 2011-03-09 14:41 · Score: 2
  
  And according to Apple, you are wrong:
  
  If you are not a member of either the Mac or iOS Developer Program, you may purchase Xcode 4 from the Mac App Store for $4.99. If you are registered as an Apple Developer, you can download Xcode 3 for free at http://developer.apple.com/xcode.
  
  --
  For a site about things like basic rights, Slashdot users sure do like to censor "dissent".
11. Re:and XCODE is out for $4.95 ... yeah five bucks by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-09 15:25 · Score: 0
  
  How are you doing it? When I tried (with my free account) I got this:
  Hi ,
  You must be an iOS or Mac Developer Program member to download Xcode 4 or you can purchase Xcode 4 from the Mac App Store.
12. Re:and XCODE is out for $4.95 ... yeah five bucks by indiechild · 2011-03-09 20:53 · Score: 1
  
  My apologies to mmclure, I was wrong -- I just tried it at home and I only get the link to download Xcode 3, not 4.
  That'll teach me to shoot my mouth off like a baboon.
iOS not IOS by SimmyD · 2011-03-09 11:47 · Score: 5, Informative

Title had me confused with Cisco's IOS. Can we use proper names next time (iOS)?
1. Re:iOS not IOS by MobileTatsu-NJG · 2011-03-09 11:53 · Score: 5, Funny
  
  Title had me confused with Cisco's IOS. Can we use proper names next time (iOS)?
  How many people live with you in your cave?
  
  --
  
  "I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)
2. Re:iOS not IOS by SimmyD · 2011-03-09 11:59 · Score: 1
  
  Haha just me, a lonely cisco engineer. Thanks for enquiring though :)
3. Re:iOS not IOS by sconeu · 2011-03-09 12:00 · Score: 1
  
  Considering that Cisco IOS is somewhere in version 12, this would be a rather *bad* "upgrade".
  
  --
  General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
4. Re:iOS not IOS by SimmyD · 2011-03-09 12:06 · Score: 1
  
  Actually 15.1 now which gave me a slight heart attack >_
5. Re:iOS not IOS by sconeu · 2011-03-09 12:39 · Score: 1
  
  Oh. Packet Tracer uses 12.something.
  
  --
  General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
6. Re:iOS not IOS by deniable · 2011-03-09 12:42 · Score: 4, Funny
  
  About 80% of the Internet.
7. Re:iOS not IOS by gratuitous_arp · 2011-03-09 12:45 · Score: 1
  
  Agreed. At first it was just confusing, gets a bit annoying as it happens more and more. Oh well.
8. Re:iOS not IOS by deniable · 2011-03-09 12:47 · Score: 1
  
  So do a lot of the Catalysts we're buying.
9. Re:iOS not IOS by Aqualung812 · 2011-03-09 13:24 · Score: 0
  
  Thank you, wish I had mod points.
  
  --
  Grammer Nazis - I mod you "troll" unless you actually add something on-topic. Yes, I know I have mispellings in my sig.
10. Re:iOS not IOS by ivan_w · 2011-03-09 14:04 · Score: 1
  
  Or maybe you referring to IBM's i OS (aka OS/400)
11. Re:iOS not IOS by smash · 2011-03-09 17:20 · Score: 1
  
  ios 15 is mostly licensing related. on new hardware you get unified ios 15 and a single image to enter license keys into. no more different images for advanced ip services, etc.
  
  --
  I run: Windows, OS X, Linux, FreeBSD. Just because you have a hammer, doesn't mean everything is a nail.
12. Re:iOS not IOS by mjwx · 2011-03-09 17:42 · Score: 1
  
  Title had me confused with Cisco's IOS. Can we use proper names next time (iOS)?
  How many people live with you in your cave?
  It's not a cave, it's a Network Operations Centre.
  
  --
  Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
13. Re:iOS not IOS by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-09 17:50 · Score: 0
  
  try ver 15
14. Re:iOS not IOS by deniable · 2011-03-09 20:32 · Score: 1
  
  I ran into a guy with issues connecting his iDevice to a Cisco wireless AP. He was told he needed an IOS update. He then figured out it was for the Cisco, not the Apple, then figured out it couldn't be done with iTunes and called an engineer. All sorted out in the end. I'm just glad it was an ex boss.
15. Re:iOS not IOS by deniable · 2011-03-09 20:44 · Score: 1
  
  A couple of months back, we got a new 3560 switch. It's running 12, not 15. It's not a big deal, but they're still shipping 12.
16. Re:iOS not IOS by profplump · 2011-03-09 21:53 · Score: 1
  
  Officially Cisco calls it "Cisco IOS" and Apple just says "iOS". But I agree, it's worth getting the capitalization correct. And both companies could pick better names -- putting the letters "OS" into your OS name is both redundant and non-unique in many contexts.
17. Re:iOS not IOS by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-09 23:55 · Score: 0
  
  About 80% of the Internet.
  Or atleast 90% of slashdot...
18. Re:iOS not IOS by smash · 2011-03-10 00:01 · Score: 1
  
  Sorry by "new hardware" i mean new models. Not new as in just shipped. New 2900 routers come with the monolithic IOS 15 for example, but i just got my hands on a couple of "new" 2811s (last mont) with the non-modular IOS 15. The last few I got (a few months back, also) shipped with IOS 12.blah
  
  --
  I run: Windows, OS X, Linux, FreeBSD. Just because you have a hammer, doesn't mean everything is a nail.
19. Re:iOS not IOS by MobileTatsu-NJG · 2011-03-10 07:24 · Score: 1
  
  Was it sealed for a year?
  
  --
  
  "I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)
20. Re:iOS not IOS by CheerfulMacFanboy · 2011-03-11 16:00 · Score: 1
  
  There are two companies making [iI]OS - one makes overpriced hardware and buggy software, the other is Apple.
  
  --
  Fandroids hate facts.
Why I ultimately got an iPhone 4 by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-09 11:50 · Score: 3, Insightful

I didn't want to be dependent on AT&T and Samsung to push out an Android update and I didn't want to have to root my phone on day one.
I choose an iPhone 4 because for all it's suck Apple is in control of OS updates not AT&T.
1. Re:Why I ultimately got an iPhone 4 by Malc · 2011-03-09 12:52 · Score: 1
  
  Yeah, my gf has an Android based from Samsung. I don't think it's had an OS upgrade from them. At least Apple keep pushing the updates to current and older phones without expecting you to buy a newer model. Also, Samsung's software (Keyes or something like that) is absolutely horrible to use (yes, worse than iTunes), and Windows only (we have a Mac at home). It's enough to put me off Samsung/Android.
2. Re:Why I ultimately got an iPhone 4 by Kalriath · 2011-03-09 14:34 · Score: 1
  
  Yeah, my gf has an Android based from Samsung. I don't think it's had an OS upgrade from them. At least Apple keep pushing the updates to current and older phones without expecting you to buy a newer model.
  Original iPhone and iPhone 3G owners would disagree with you, and they're only 3 years old.
  
  --
  For a site about things like basic rights, Slashdot users sure do like to censor "dissent".
3. Re:Why I ultimately got an iPhone 4 by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-09 14:41 · Score: 0
  
  See if ANY android phone makes it 2 years.
4. Re:Why I ultimately got an iPhone 4 by Karlt1 · 2011-03-09 14:55 · Score: 2
  
  Original iPhone and iPhone 3G owners would disagree with you, and they're only 3 years old.
  As opposed to some six month old Android devices still shipping with old OS's that will never get upgraded......
5. Re:Why I ultimately got an iPhone 4 by iamhassi · 2011-03-09 19:21 · Score: 1
  
  Every year on a cellphone is like 4 on a desktop, so a 3 yr old phone is like a 12 yr old desktop. I'm shocked my two yr old 3GS runs as many apps as it does, if I had a two yr old Droid I'd be SOL
  
  --
  my karma will be here long after I'm gone
6. Re:Why I ultimately got an iPhone 4 by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-09 23:14 · Score: 0
  
  Also, Samsung's software (Keyes or something like that) is absolutely horrible to use (yes, worse than iTunes), and Windows only (we have a Mac at home). It's enough to put me off Samsung/Android.
  What do you need it for? my android phone (HTC desire) has only been connected with a computer to charge via USB. All contacts/calendar/mail info is instantly synched through my google account, OS updates (yes, it does happen!) are done OTA.
  An iphone is basically a gimped idevice which NEEDS a fully functioning computer to be really usefull (hell, you cant even set an mp3 ringtone without itunes), an android phone is (more or less) a fully functional linux computer, even if you dont have root by default.
  Not to be pedantic, but honestly, what do you need it for? (honestly, i dont know)
7. Re:Why I ultimately got an iPhone 4 by tehcyder · 2011-03-10 04:05 · Score: 1
  
  Also, Samsung's software (Keyes or something like that) is absolutely horrible to use (yes, worse than iTunes)
  
  That is impossible, even edlin.exe wasn't as bad as iTunes.
  
  --
  To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
8. Re:Why I ultimately got an iPhone 4 by tehcyder · 2011-03-10 04:11 · Score: 1
  
  I've got a cheap android phone with 1.5 on (which seems to have been released in May 2009 and so is getting on for 2 years old) and it runs all apps from the Market that I've ever tried.
  
  --
  To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
9. Re:Why I ultimately got an iPhone 4 by Kalriath · 2011-03-10 08:32 · Score: 1
  
  That doesn't make Apple's approach any better, it just makes them both suck.
  
  --
  For a site about things like basic rights, Slashdot users sure do like to censor "dissent".
10. Re:Why I ultimately got an iPhone 4 by Kalriath · 2011-03-10 08:34 · Score: 1
  
  When a phone costs as much as a desktop, two years is an unacceptably short lifetime. In fact, at the price, an iPhone should be maintained for at least the length of time that HP or Dell provide updates for their desktops. Every year on a phone may be like four on a desktop, but that should not be the case.
  
  --
  For a site about things like basic rights, Slashdot users sure do like to censor "dissent".
11. Re:Why I ultimately got an iPhone 4 by Karlt1 · 2011-03-10 18:20 · Score: 1
  
  That doesn't make Apple's approach any better, it just makes them both suck.
  So exactly how long should Apple update older devices?
  iPhone -- released in June 2007, ran the most current OS until around March 2010. (iOS 3.1)
  iPhone 3G -- released around June 2008, ran the most current OS until November(?) 2010
  iPhone 3GS -- released June 2009, as of now still runs the most current software.
12. Re:Why I ultimately got an iPhone 4 by Kalriath · 2011-03-13 10:47 · Score: 1
  
  Pentium 4, released 2000, still runs the most current OS.
  Pentium 4 costs less than iPhone.
  So, Apple should be supporting their devices for at least 6 years by my rough guesstimate (allowing for the fact that phones do in fact get treated a bit worse than computers).
  
  --
  For a site about things like basic rights, Slashdot users sure do like to censor "dissent".
13. Re:Why I ultimately got an iPhone 4 by Karlt1 · 2011-03-13 13:31 · Score: 1
  
  Here were the top cell phones in 2004....
  http://reviews.cnet.com/1710-5-0.html?year=2004&node=6454
  So do you think that Motorola and Samsung should be porting Android to these?
14. Re:Why I ultimately got an iPhone 4 by Kalriath · 2011-03-14 09:45 · Score: 1
  
  You're being disingenuous. The argument is around thousand dollar devices which are marketed as being essentially portable computers. Smart phones from that era possibly run a more modern smartphone OS, but it's unlikely. An original iPhone is still more than capable of running the latest OS, Apple is merely artificially restricting them to force you to upgrade.
  I, for one, do not welcome our planned obsolescence overlords.
  
  --
  For a site about things like basic rights, Slashdot users sure do like to censor "dissent".
15. Re:Why I ultimately got an iPhone 4 by Karlt1 · 2011-03-14 12:12 · Score: 1
  
  An original iPhone is still more than capable of running the latest OS, Apple is merely artificially restricting them to force you to upgrade.
  The original iPhone had 128MB of RAM compared to 512MB for the iPhone 4. The GPU was at least 50% slower and the processor was half as fast.
Interesting Timing by rock56501 · 2011-03-09 11:52 · Score: 4, Interesting

Seems a bit interesting that Apple releases iOS 4.3 and an update to Safari just hours before PWN2OWN kicks off at CanSecWest...
1. Re:Interesting Timing by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-09 12:14 · Score: 0
  
  Would you like some hat with your tin foil?
2. Re:Interesting Timing by Americano · 2011-03-09 12:39 · Score: 1
  
  Yeah, I bet Apple is totally rushing this out to avoid bad press from a conference that nobody in their target demographics has ever heard of.
3. Re:Interesting Timing by phantomcircuit · 2011-03-09 14:32 · Score: 1
  
  It makes the news around here..... (bay area)
4. Re:Interesting Timing by 0xygen · 2011-03-09 23:03 · Score: 1
  
  It's too late for the contest, the Apple images for Safari were already staged, so they got to exploit the old version.
  Apple took a risk by patching late and obviously misjudged the timing.
  http://www.pcpro.co.uk/news/security/365845/safari-first-to-fall-in-hacking-contest
5. Re:Interesting Timing by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-10 05:05 · Score: 0
  
  Didn't seem to help them, though. (Apparently they didn't patch the right exploits...)
6. Re:Interesting Timing by RyuuzakiTetsuya · 2011-03-10 05:47 · Score: 1
  
  The iPad2 comes out tomorrow, which has iOS 4.3
  The traditional thing for Apple to do is launch an iOS update right before the hardware refresh.
  This isn't suspect. Apple probably doesn't factor P2O into it's release schedules for iOS updates. Safari for desktop maybe, but not iOS.
  
  --
  Non impediti ratione cogitationus.
7. Re:Interesting Timing by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-12 04:27 · Score: 0
  
  There was all kinds on controversy over that. Didn't matter though, both versions still got pwned.
"Personal Not So Hot Spot" for the 3GS by ASDFnz · 2011-03-09 11:53 · Score: 1

Just downloaded the update and turned on the "Personal Hostpot" feature on the 3GS.
It only works through USB or Bluetooth.
1. Re:"Personal Not So Hot Spot" for the 3GS by CliffH · 2011-03-09 12:41 · Score: 1
  
  Uhm, no. Patently wrong. You must not have your WiFi turned on. Works on my system just fine through WiFi, my desktop system via WiFi, and my wife's Bluetooth-less HP laptop via WiFi just fine.
  
  --
  sigs are like a box of chocolates, they all suck remove the underscores to email me
2. Re:"Personal Not So Hot Spot" for the 3GS by CliffH · 2011-03-09 12:44 · Score: 1
  
  or I could have read "3GS" and kept my mouth shut :)
  
  --
  sigs are like a box of chocolates, they all suck remove the underscores to email me
3. Re:"Personal Not So Hot Spot" for the 3GS by BitZtream · 2011-03-09 14:31 · Score: 1
  
  Personal hotspot requires an iPhone 4, its documented, did you bother to read that part?
  
  --
  Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
4. Re:"Personal Not So Hot Spot" for the 3GS by SuiteSisterMary · 2011-03-10 01:57 · Score: 1
  
  I do believe you missing the point. For what technical reason can the iPhone 4 running iOS 4.3 allow a wifi connection inbound simultanious to a cellular data connection outbound, where an iPhone 3gs (or even an iPhone 3g) cannot?
  The answer, of course, is that there is zero technical reason why this cannot be done. Therefore, the only possible reason for it is that Apple deliberately chose to not allow this functionality in pre-iPhone 4 models. Why would they do that? Why, to encourage users to buy the iPhone 4.
  
  --
  Vintage computer games and RPG books available. Email me if you're interested.
5. Re:"Personal Not So Hot Spot" for the 3GS by splatter · 2011-03-10 03:06 · Score: 1
  
  Try MyWifi Works with 3.X & 4.X iOS on the 3gs
  HTH
  
  --
  "(I) have this unfortunate condition that causes me not to believe a single thing any politician says when a mic's on.
6. Re:"Personal Not So Hot Spot" for the 3GS by vakuona · 2011-03-10 10:36 · Score: 1
  
  The radio in the 3GS cannot do it. It's quite well known.
7. Re:"Personal Not So Hot Spot" for the 3GS by SuiteSisterMary · 2011-03-13 23:44 · Score: 1
  
  Right.
  
  --
  Vintage computer games and RPG books available. Email me if you're interested.
Oh Sweet! by Miseph · 2011-03-09 12:00 · Score: 0

Now I get to not install this on my not overpriced phone!
Awesome!

--
Try not to take me more seriously than I take myself.
Unwanted feature - the D word by recoiledsnake · 2011-03-09 12:07 · Score: 1, Interesting

A feature I wish it didn't come with... 30% of subscription revenues from "publishers" like Netflix, Amazon Kindle etc.
See http://voices.washingtonpost.com/fasterforward/2011/02/apple_30_percent_subscription_tax.html
An app was already pulled for not paying up: http://blog.readability.com/2011/02/an-open-letter-to-apple/
Ironically it's the same app's OSS code that Apple used to implement the Readability function in Safari...
http://downloadsquad.switched.com/2010/06/08/think-safari-reader-looks-familiar-thats-because-apple-used-op/
I guess no company is exempt from extreme corporate greed... sad to see other companies(especially little startups like Readability) get trampled on the way.
1. High margin sales of iDevices to iUsers
2. 30% of all app sales on all the iDevices by iUsers
3. 30% of all subscription revenue that all iUsers pay on all iDevices (will be implemented soon)
4. ???
5. Overtake oil baron Exxon Mobil as the world's largest publicly traded company with most market capitalization (well, gas prices are going up too.. will be interesting to see who wins this one)

--
This space for rent.
1. Re:Unwanted feature - the D word by Suki+I · 2011-03-09 12:34 · Score: 1
  
  Then I am way ahead with my iPhone 3G that is current with 4.2.1, sticking it to the 'korporazionz!' by not using any of the stuff you mention.
  
  --
  Home of The Suki Series
2. Re:Unwanted feature - the D word by scdeimos · 2011-03-09 13:52 · Score: 2
  
  I guess no company is exempt from extreme corporate greed... sad to see other companies(especially little startups like Readability) get trampled on the way.
  Apple takes 30% on all sales. Readability takes 30% on all sales. What's the difference again?
3. Re:Unwanted feature - the D word by The+End+Of+Days · 2011-03-09 13:54 · Score: 2
  
  Apple is massively successful, and as such, must be punished.
4. Re:Unwanted feature - the D word by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-09 14:24 · Score: 0
  
  What does any of this have to do with a phone firmware update?
5. Re:Unwanted feature - the D word by BitZtream · 2011-03-09 14:35 · Score: 2
  
  That 30% your bitching about BARELY covers the iTunes store operating expenses. Its not like they are making a killing on that 30%. It pays for hosting and bandwidth for paid and free apps.
  Get over yourself, running a business costs money.
  
  --
  Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
6. Re:Unwanted feature - the D word by recoiledsnake · 2011-03-09 14:59 · Score: 0
  
  The difference is that they've started charging for subscriptions too, not just apps. Unlike apps, Apple provides no server hosting, vetting etc. except for payment processing. Would you be okay with CC merchants charging 30%? Readability charges for providing a service.
  
  --
  This space for rent.
7. Re:Unwanted feature - the D word by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-09 15:05 · Score: 0
  
  That 30% your bitching about BARELY covers the iTunes store operating expenses. Its not like they are making a killing on that 30%. It pays for hosting and bandwidth for paid and free apps.
  Get over yourself, running a business costs money.
  They provide exactly jack shit for subscription content. What is it, RDF shilling or are you just iStupid? Is there a difference? You think Apple will host Netflix movies and Kindle ebooks? iNumbnut.
8. Re:Unwanted feature - the D word by recoiledsnake · 2011-03-09 15:12 · Score: 1
  
  What does any of this have to do with a phone firmware update?
  What does any of this have to do with a phone firmware update? :)
  Atleast his comment was more on topic.
  
  --
  This space for rent.
9. Re:Unwanted feature - the D word by recoiledsnake · 2011-03-09 15:30 · Score: 0
  
  Netflix, Kindle pay for hosting, not Apple.
  > It pays for hosting and bandwidth for paid and free apps.
  Oh yes, they're so hurting for money that people like you must shill for them being the middle man.
  How many people would buy the iDevices today if there were no devs or apps?
  http://www.blogcdn.com/www.engadget.com/media/2011/03/20110302-10093662--img4470.jpg
  
  --
  This space for rent.
10. Re:Unwanted feature - the D word by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-09 18:54 · Score: 0
  
  They made the device that created the market. Anyone, including Readability, could have, but did not.
11. Re:Unwanted feature - the D word by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-09 19:04 · Score: 0
  
  Hey tool,
  
  The iphone was successful BEFORE the apps. They changed the market and innovated. Anyone had opportunity to develop something along the lines of the iphone or the ipad, but nobody did, and second to market is last place.
  
  Why is the Kindle still so successful after the Nook and iPad have come out? First to market.
  
  They allow apps into the market place that THEY MADE? Should your shitty second rate store be allowed to have real estate in the mall for free, or should you have to be successful and innovative enough to afford rent?
  
  The simple fact that you reply to every single post disagreeing to you says a lot about your rational thinking ability here, fool.
12. Re:Unwanted feature - the D word by petman · 2011-03-09 19:45 · Score: 1
  
  The difference is that Apple doesn't allow the app publisher to pass on this extra cost to the customer. See, normally Readability takes 30% of sales and gives the other 70% to the authors/publishers. Now through the IAP, Apple wants to take a 30% cut, so Readability should have the option of charging the customers a little extra for using the iPhone app. However, Apple doesn't allow this. Apple requires purchases/subscription made via the IAP to be at equal or lower prices to those made through other channels.
  
  This is like a store chain opening a branch at a high-end shopping mall, but the mall not allowing the store to sell the merchandise at higher price to compensate for the higher rent.
  
  --
  Dropbox drops it like it's hot.
13. Re:Unwanted feature - the D word by jijacob · 2011-03-10 03:18 · Score: 1
  
  Or way behind since iOS 4 runs like crap on the iPhone 3G
14. Re:Unwanted feature - the D word by Suki+I · 2011-03-10 03:50 · Score: 1
  
  It is running better than what came with the 3G, which is a very low hurdle.
  
  --
  Home of The Suki Series
15. Re:Unwanted feature - the D word by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-10 05:10 · Score: 0
  
  How many people would still be struggling with Symbian and Windows Mobile and NO apps to speak of if Apple hadn't invented iDevices?
16. Re:Unwanted feature - the D word by node+3 · 2011-03-10 13:13 · Score: 1
  
  I like the new subscription rules. First off, it's far easier to use the same login and billing that I used to buy the app with, than it is to keep up with each and every subscription independently. Second, I can buy with the confidence that I am getting the best price, and not have to drop out of the app and load the site directly just in case there's a better deal elsewhere. Finally, I have go opt-in if I want to share my personal info with the publisher.
  These are *all* great for the consumer. Apple treats its customers very well, and that's why they are so successful. Normally Slashdot would be in favor of this sort of thing, especially the opt-in feature. But since this is Apple, we are supposed to make up any reason whatsoever to hate them, even if the thing we are complaining about helps us.
17. Re:Unwanted feature - the D word by recoiledsnake · 2011-03-10 16:38 · Score: 1
  
  The best price is 30% more than it would be otherwise. There are apps and businesses who can't just can't afford 30% and will pull out because this is a forced thing and not an opt-in for the app developers.
  I don't see how this is great for the customer.
  And because this is Apple, iFans will come out of the woodwork to do some absurd rationalizations about how it's good for the users and how it's not about filling the company coffers at any cost.
  
  --
  This space for rent.
18. Re:Unwanted feature - the D word by dimeglio · 2011-03-11 04:56 · Score: 1
  
  I can only suspect that haters need to justify why they didn't buy an Apple product. Personally, the iPhone 4 upgrade works great. The personal hot-spot seems to have a "sleep" feature when not in use. I presume it is to spare power.
  
  --
  Views expressed do not necessarily reflect those of the author.
19. Re:Unwanted feature - the D word by dimeglio · 2011-03-11 04:58 · Score: 1
  
  So go to another mall.
  
  --
  Views expressed do not necessarily reflect those of the author.
20. Re:Unwanted feature - the D word by CheerfulMacFanboy · 2011-03-11 07:31 · Score: 1
  
  Ironically it's the same app's OSS code that Apple used to implement the Readability function in Safari... http://downloadsquad.switched.com/2010/06/08/think-safari-reader-looks-familiar-thats-because-apple-used-op/
  I guess no company is exempt from extreme corporate greed... sad to see other companies(especially little startups like Readability) get trampled on the way.
  Ironically, readability can easily be had for free on the iPhone: http://hermgreider.posterous.com/use-readability-on-iphone-to-convert-web-page-0 - I guess you prefer readability.com's greed over Apple's greed that ultimately protects Apple's customers from rip-offs..
  
  --
  Fandroids hate facts.
21. Re:Unwanted feature - the D word by CheerfulMacFanboy · 2011-03-11 08:42 · Score: 1
  
  This is like a store chain opening a branch at a high-end shopping mall, but the mall not allowing the store to sell the merchandise at higher price to compensate for the higher rent.
  No, this is like a store chain opening a branch without paying rent at a high-end shopping mall, giving away a lamp for free and then selling oil for that lamp that you can get for free at other stores of the chain, and the high-end shopping mall saying: "If you want to rip off our customers, you'll pay us commission"
  I feel tempted to sell a 99 cent app that is nothing but an bookmarklet to readability.com
  
  --
  Fandroids hate facts.
22. Re:Unwanted feature - the D word by CheerfulMacFanboy · 2011-03-11 09:08 · Score: 1
  
  The best price is 30% more than it would be otherwise.
  And there we have Slashdotters actually defending ancient business models. Unlike paper subscriptions, there is almost no cost per unit, apart from actually managing payment - and that is taken care of by Apple. All while you can get many more subscribers to buy your stuff. The only thing you don't get is the data form your subscribers to sell to your actual customers, the advertisers.
  And you know what that means: if the publisher dinosaurs don't get their way, they will use Apple's IAS and still make more money than without the iDevices.
  BTW, I still don't see you whining about Amazons subscription rules on the Kindle - why is that?
  
  --
  Fandroids hate facts.
23. Re:Unwanted feature - the D word by HTH+NE1 · 2011-03-11 12:01 · Score: 1
  
  Welcome to Apple*Mart.
  Sent from my iPhone
  
  --
  Oh, say does that Star-Spangled Banner entwine / The myrtle of Venus with Bacchus's vine?
24. Re:Unwanted feature - the D word by node+3 · 2011-03-11 14:19 · Score: 1
  
  The best price is 30% more than it would be otherwise. There are apps and businesses who can't just can't afford 30% and will pull out because this is a forced thing and not an opt-in for the app developers.
  That makes no damned sense. You even contradict yourself, if I'm reading you right, that they will raise their prices to cover the cost, but then they can't afford to pay that extra cost?
  Those that can't afford it will raise rates, those that can won't. But clearly you have some examples in mind, and aren't just completely making shit up, right? Will Amazon, Hulu, Netflix, MLB... will any major service pull the plug? It makes no sense. There will be bitching and moaning, and there will be a few low-profile services that pull the plug, some to create buzz, others for actual financial reasons.
  
  I don't see how this is great for the customer.
  It's those anti-Apple blinders you are wearing. I already told you why it's great for the customer. It brings more options to me, easier, and with less privacy concerns. Win, win, win.
  
  And because this is Apple, iFans will come out of the woodwork to do some absurd rationalizations about how it's good for the users and how it's not about filling the company coffers at any cost.
  What's absurd about what I wrote? As far as "filling the company coffers", you arguing from ignorance here. Apple does not make much profit on their iTunes stores. Maybe down the road. But as long as it proves to be a great service, like the App Store has, and the other iTunes stores before it, I don't see why they shouldn't make money from it. That's how things work.
25. Re:Unwanted feature - the D word by node+3 · 2011-03-11 14:23 · Score: 1
  
  BTW, I still don't see you whining about Amazons subscription rules on the Kindle - why is that?
  Clearly it's because Amazon isn't eeeeeeevvvviiill.
  No, actually it's because if Apple succeeds, then somehow Android must fail, and we can't have that 'round here, can we?
  /sarcasm
26. Re:Unwanted feature - the D word by recoiledsnake · 2011-03-12 12:17 · Score: 1
  
  >That makes no damned sense. You even contradict yourself, if I'm reading you right, that they will raise their prices to cover the cost, but then they can't afford to pay that extra cost?
  >Those that can't afford it will raise rates, those that can won't. But clearly you have some examples in mind, and aren't just completely making shit up, right?
  Examples are Readability, Netflix and Kindle. Go look them up?
  Why should producers and/or users pay an extra 30%? Will you be okay with your ISP skimming 30% of your Netflix subscription fee?
  >It's those anti-Apple blinders you are wearing. I already told you why it's great for the customer. It brings more options to me, easier, and with less privacy concerns.
  How will one get more options? Is it opposite day today? Readability's app being rejected results in LESS options. If it's better for customers, they will prefer apps that use IAP. Why does Apple have to foce it?
  I don't see how a forced extra 30% is 'win win win'.
  >But as long as it proves to be a great service, like the App Store has, and the other iTunes stores before it, I don't see why they shouldn't make money from it. That's how things work.
  There is a difference between providing a service and forcing yourself as a middleman while providing no value.
  
  --
  This space for rent.
27. Re:Unwanted feature - the D word by recoiledsnake · 2011-03-12 12:18 · Score: 1
  
  And there we have Slashdotters actually defending ancient business models. Unlike paper subscriptions, there is almost no cost per unit, apart from actually managing payment - and that is taken care of by Apple. All while you can get many more subscribers to buy your stuff. The only thing you don't get is the data form your subscribers to sell to your actual customers, the advertisers.And you know what that means: if the publisher dinosaurs don't get their way, they will use Apple's IAS and still make more money than without the iDevices.
  That's true except in the case of Netflix, or Kindle.. or Readability... or......
  The new business model is the same as the old one... except for the 30% fee that must come out of users' or producers' or service providers' pocket.. all for what?
  And it's funny how hosting the Apps is a big deal and cost to Apple that it must charge for 30% for app downloads but now hosting and serving files comes at 'almost no cost'.
  
  BTW, I still don't see you whining about Amazons subscription rules on the Kindle - why is that?
  That's because of atleast 2 things:
  1) Amazon sells Kindle at a loss or close to zero profit so the user is getting a good deal on them. iDevices come with a 100%to 200% markup .
  2) Amazon pays for network access for Kindle, and they have to pay for downloads too. With the iDevices you're left to AT&T or Verizon's mercy.
  3) Pundits don't hail Kindle as replacements for PCs, if you believe the hype around, iDevices are replacing PCs, netbooks, Macbooks, Mac minis (on which there is no forced 30% toll.)
  So, are you okay with Comcast charging 30% to for access to Netflix? Or Apple doing the same for Macbook Air or Mac Mini?
  
  --
  This space for rent.
28. Re:Unwanted feature - the D word by recoiledsnake · 2011-03-12 12:20 · Score: 1
  
  I replied to your parent post.
  http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2030168&cid=35467582
  
  --
  This space for rent.
29. Re:Unwanted feature - the D word by CheerfulMacFanboy · 2011-03-12 13:08 · Score: 1
  
  And there we have Slashdotters actually defending ancient business models. Unlike paper subscriptions, there is almost no cost per unit, apart from actually managing payment - and that is taken care of by Apple. All while you can get many more subscribers to buy your stuff. The only thing you don't get is the data form your subscribers to sell to your actual customers, the advertisers.And you know what that means: if the publisher dinosaurs don't get their way, they will use Apple's IAS and still make more money than without the iDevices.
  That's true except in the case of Netflix, or Kindle.. or Readability... or......
  You sound like a broken record - another obsolete thingy. There's a pattern here. And Netflix doesn't seem to complain one bit about the 30% - IOW they are smarter than you - but then who isn't.
  
  BTW, I still don't see you whining about Amazons subscription rules on the Kindle - why is that?
  That's because of atleast 2 things: 1) Amazon sells Kindle at a loss or close to zero profit so the user is getting a good deal on them. iDevices come with a 100%to 200% markup . 2) Amazon pays for network access for Kindle, and they have to pay for downloads too. With the iDevices you're left to AT&T or Verizon's mercy. 3) Pundits don't hail Kindle as replacements for PCs, if you believe the hype around, iDevices are replacing PCs, netbooks, Macbooks, Mac minis (on which there is no forced 30% toll.)
  So, are you okay with Comcast charging 30% to for access to Netflix? Or Apple doing the same for Macbook Air or Mac Mini?
  IOW, 1) you make things up, 2) you live in a country with sucky networks, 3) You are nuts for believing pundits, 4) you are nuts.
  
  --
  Fandroids hate facts.
Jailbroke yet? by nurb432 · 2011-03-09 12:10 · Score: 1

Well, is it broke yet? Dont want to lose everything i have.

--
---- Booth was a patriot ----
Has anyone confirmed Personal Hotspot? by ptbarnett · 2011-03-09 12:15 · Score: 1

I know that the 4.3 betas allowed use of the Personal Hotspot on AT&T, but is the feature actually available on the released version?
I'd like to drop my Sprint MiFi card and replace it with an iPhone 4 hotspot. But, I don't want to switch away from the unlimited data plan (to the 4 GB limit), only to find that it doesn't work.
1. Re:Has anyone confirmed Personal Hotspot? by Drakino · 2011-03-09 12:26 · Score: 1
  
  It works. I installed 4.3 and have WiFi hotspot working off my AT&T phone with tethering. Even tethered my iPad to it, and it showed a linked icon instead of WiFi signal strength when it connected.
2. Re:Has anyone confirmed Personal Hotspot? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-09 12:28 · Score: 0
  
  You realize you will be paying AT&T additionally money (I think ~$15) for the service, right?
3. Re:Has anyone confirmed Personal Hotspot? by Drakino · 2011-03-09 12:45 · Score: 2
  
  Yep, AT&T charges $20 extra for tethering a month. The device will force you to sign up before enabling it, so no issues with being charged accidentally.
  Do I agree with tethering charges? Not really. But it makes it easier for me to do my job on the go, without worrying about jailbreaking my device and using another method that runs afoul of my contract with AT&T.
Time to jailbreak 3GS by kirkb · 2011-03-09 12:19 · Score: 3, Interesting

Usually, I'm quick to mod things (game consoles, etc), but for nearly two years I've stayed "legit" with my iPhone 3GS. I figured that as long as Apple gave me first-class features and updates, I'd stick with them.
I almost jailbroke when 4.2 came out because "find my phone" wasn't available (for free) on the 3GS, but luckily discovered a workaround to make it happen.
For 4.3, I was looking forward to the WiFi hotspot feature. But today, I discover that you only get this on the iPhone 4. The 3GS just keeps the same old USB and Bluetooth tethering, renamed to "personal hotspot".
I don't begrudge Apple for being unwilling/unable to add the coolest new features to the 3GS, but if the jailbreak community can take better care of me then I guess that's where I'll have to go.

--
Slashdot: come for the pedantry, stay for the condescension.
1. Re:Time to jailbreak 3GS by farnsworth · 2011-03-09 12:35 · Score: 1
  
  I don't begrudge Apple for being unwilling/unable to add the coolest new features to the 3GS, but if the jailbreak community can take better care of me then I guess that's where I'll have to go.
  I believe the radio in the 3gs is physically not capable of behaving like an access point. I could be wrong, but that's what I remember from the time that I had one.
  
  --
  There aint no pancake so thin it doesn't have two sides.
2. Re:Time to jailbreak 3GS by kirkb · 2011-03-09 12:38 · Score: 2
  
  http://intelliborn.com/mywi.html
  
  --
  Slashdot: come for the pedantry, stay for the condescension.
3. Re:Time to jailbreak 3GS by farnsworth · 2011-03-09 12:40 · Score: 1
  
  I believe the radio in the 3gs is physically not capable of behaving like an access point. I could be wrong, but that's what I remember from the time that I had one.
  
  http://intelliborn.com/mywi.html
  Yup, I was wrong. There was an earlier iPhone that did not have the right radio to do this. Thanks for the link.
  
  --
  There aint no pancake so thin it doesn't have two sides.
4. Re:Time to jailbreak 3GS by dakameleon · 2011-03-09 12:49 · Score: 2
  
  Welcome to planned obsolescence! Please take your number and join the queue for the new version in June.
  (I'm in the same position, but I've experimented with jailbreak - hadn't found truly compelling reasons for keeping it, but now I'm far more inclined)
  
  --
  Man who leaps off cliff jumps to conclusion.
5. Re:Time to jailbreak 3GS by Moofie · 2011-03-09 13:55 · Score: 1
  
  So the fact thatyou can't use new features added for free makes your phone obsolete.? If you say so....
  
  --
  Why yes, I AM a rocket scientist!
6. Re:Time to jailbreak 3GS by PipsqueakOnAP133 · 2011-03-09 14:15 · Score: 1
  
  I think the difference might actually be that myWi can only do WEP/Adhoc with any jailbroken iPhone.
  While Personal Hotspot might be WPA/infra on the iPhone 4.
  Somebody who actually has will have to confirm.
7. Re:Time to jailbreak 3GS by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-09 14:34 · Score: 0
  
  What planned obsolescence? His phone works as well today as they day he bought it. In fact, he just got a faster Safari in this update and "find my iphone" is now free. Now, he may not be happy that he didn't get some of the new features, but that doesn't make his phone any less functional today than it was yesterday (or obsolete at all).
8. Re:Time to jailbreak 3GS by Karlt1 · 2011-03-09 14:50 · Score: 4, Funny
  
  Welcome to planned obsolescence! Please take your number and join the queue for the new version in June.
  You should try an Android, I hear that Android users always get timely updates as soon as a new release is available from Google.....
9. Re:Time to jailbreak 3GS by dakameleon · 2011-03-09 15:34 · Score: 1
  
  It depends if you take the position that this is just a software feature which could have been enabled for the 3GS but wasn't; given the abilities of MyWi, I'm inclined to think that. That means that this was a deliberately excluded feature - and it's not as though the feature was coming for free to all and sundry.
  I'm not saying Apple should not have full control of what features are in software, but I guess this is the first instance where 3GS owners feel like distinctly second class citizens. It won't harm me, it doesn't take away any features I didn't have, but it does incline me towards jailbreaking and trying out MyWi, which should be something I can do with a device I've owned for nearly 2 years now.
  
  --
  Man who leaps off cliff jumps to conclusion.
10. Re:Time to jailbreak 3GS by ChunderDownunder · 2011-03-09 19:42 · Score: 1
  
  not that apple is worse than any other corp but new generations of disgruntled 'fanbois' seem to think this is a new phenomenon. Planned obsolence is nothing new when Apple continued to ship 68000 machines when 030 machines had been on the market some time - 20 years ago. No java 6 for ppc. No 10.7 for 32 bit etc.
  Upgrade cycles for software upgrades are nothing new - a mac fan friend used to time selling old stock on ebay with os releases - no need for an upgrade cd. Just trade up!
  Lifetime upgrades and infinite configurability is a phenomenon peculiar to non-profit foundations such as debian. :-)
11. Re:Time to jailbreak 3GS by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-10 02:31 · Score: 0
  
  Hi, can you describe the workaround for find my phone on 3gs?
12. Re:Time to jailbreak 3GS by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-10 02:33 · Score: 0
  
  Some do, some don't, it depends on the manufacturer of the phone and the carrier. HTC on most carriers is pretty quick to push updates, Samsung/T-Mobile really suck. Comparing Apple's closed ecosystem and single hardware platform to Google's "it's done, now test it on your phones before you push it out to everyone" attitude is comparing apples to oranges.
13. Re:Time to jailbreak 3GS by Karlt1 · 2011-03-10 02:46 · Score: 1
  
  Comparing Apple's closed ecosystem and single hardware platform to Google's "it's done, now test it on your phones before you push it out to everyone" attitude is comparing apples to oranges.
  You might have a good argument if it weren't for the fact that Microsoft is also able to push updates out to all manufacturers of Windows Phone 7 devices simultaneously.
  But according to stats, Android had a 27% market share last year mostly consisting of HTC, Samsung, and Motorola (25%) and "Other" (2%").
  You just said that Samsung is slow at pushing updates, Motorola is definitely slow, and HTC has to modify their Sense bloatware before pushing out an update.
  The only phones that get timely updates are the Nexus phones.
14. Re:Time to jailbreak 3GS by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-10 03:00 · Score: 0
  
  You also don't get the "hotspot" feature (at least with AT&T) unless you have the tethering plan.
15. Re:Time to jailbreak 3GS by CheerfulMacFanboy · 2011-03-12 12:38 · Score: 1
  
  http://www.tuaw.com/2011/02/03/mywi-ondemand-offers-major-connectivity-upgrades-for-iphone-as-h/
  
  The biggest complaint about the original MyWi was that it was a battery killer. I think that's understating the case. The app could kill batteries even while plugged into a power source.
  
  Not to mention the complaints all over the net that it doesn't work (at least not the WiFI part) and the insane price (but hey, jailbroken phone + insane price = you know what).
  
  --
  Fandroids hate facts.
Not for Verizon. by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-09 12:19 · Score: 0

I've tried.
iTunes podcast & university lectures by joshier · 2011-03-09 12:29 · Score: 0

I'm downloading the update primarily in hopes that they've fixed the iTunes store where you literally can't see the full titles of podcasts or iTunes U lectures. You use the search in iTunes and it finds many results, however you can't read any of them at all until you fully download it. Nightmare.
Text message sound? by crossmr · 2011-03-09 12:40 · Score: 2

Has this been removed in 4.3 finally? It was one of their most idiotic changes in 4.2. When text message tone is set to none, that means no sound. Not "still make a sound"
1. Re:Text message sound? by crossmr · 2011-03-09 13:34 · Score: 0
  
  and after the update, the answer to that is no.
  Fuck you apple. Fuck you very much.
2. Re:Text message sound? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-09 16:54 · Score: 0
  
  Really? I'm still on 4.1, so I didn't know about this, but it sounds asinine. I like my phone to make as little unplanned noise as possible. I presume you can still do what I do for regular calls - assign it to a "silent" custom ringtone.
  Oh, crap. I just looked in the New Text Message settings under Sounds. Custom ringtons don't appear to be listed there in 4.1. So that's probably still the case in 4.3, which means my solution wouldn't work. Well, there goes my incentive to upgrade.
  Does this happen for other people, too?
3. Re:Text message sound? by crossmr · 2011-03-09 19:56 · Score: 1
  
  Yes, there are threads about it all over the internet. There is no way to set it to a custom sound without jailbreaking it.
  but I have no interest in doing that, and my banking software actually stops working if I do anyway.
4. Re:Text message sound? by swb · 2011-03-10 02:58 · Score: 1
  
  Apple's lack of flexibility on the use of sounds on the iPhone is about the most irritating aspect of the "closed" nature of the iPhone to me. It mystifies me why any "ringtone" can't be used as a sound for any event that can have a sound associated with it; why they restrict mail, text, etc to a narrow set of sounds escapes me completely.
oh crap, just yesterday i upgraded to 4.2.1... by herojig · 2011-03-09 13:00 · Score: 1

oh crap, just yesterday i upgraded to 4.2.1 on my jailbroken 3G. Does anyone know if I have to wait until the boys at Dev-Team post a new tut on iClarified before I can upgrade again? I had so much fun (sic) the last time, I can't wait to do it again. thx...

--
I think therefore I can't be ~TTNH
1. Re:oh crap, just yesterday i upgraded to 4.2.1... by mr100percent · 2011-03-09 13:47 · Score: 1
  
  Depends. There's a jailbreak out already, although its not as simple as Dev-Team's will be. The unlock is still forthcoming
Looks like... by mongoose(!no) · 2011-03-09 13:14 · Score: 1

I'm switching back to CodeWarrior.
1. Re:Looks like... by dwightk · 2011-03-09 15:09 · Score: 1
  
  That's smart. Apple charges $5 for new Xcode until Lion comes out so you are going to stop using Xcode3 and start using an IDE for entirely different processors?
  
  --
  Like anyone can even know that
2. Re:Looks like... by BitZtream · 2011-03-09 15:31 · Score: 1
  
  Good luck with that.
  CodeWarrior for OSX was discontinued in 2005 ... and even if they wanted to sell you a version, they sold their intel compiler tech to Nokia that same year.
  In short, anything you make with CodeWarrior for OS X is likely to never get used since its 6 years past obsolete.
  
  --
  Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
Not buying. Not following Apple on this one. by Qbertino · 2011-03-09 13:18 · Score: 2, Insightful

Apple did a tremendous job in the last decade in kicking some serious ass in the industry where ass-kicking was in dire need. Ever since Steve Jobs made the bold and very smart move to Unix I have allways been favourable to them. The fist iMac was the first PC ever not requiring a Monitor adjustment and setup - something most novices were not capable of. My first Mac was a later generation iBook G4 - the cheapest subnotebook available at the time. It played along perfectly with my otherwise entirely Linux driven setup. And its in regular use to this very day, chugging along on the last PPC version of Tiger. With Apache, Samba, the entire GNU Stack and yet some OSS goodies pre-installed and configured. There are a lot more positive things I could detail that they've done - like breaking the carrier grip on cellphones and the software they run or comming up with the best possible DRM compromise at the time and convincing the industry that that is the maximum possible.
The latest developments however don't get my approval at all. The iPad is the sweet looking end of a very ugly solid vertical distribution-and-access lock-in cortesy to apple. The device looks cool, no doubt, but it is factually a step backwards in technology as it effectively is not a turing complete computer anymore. I just talked to a guy at our local apple vendor about this: It apparently isn't possible to install your own software on this thing without having a 99$/year developer subscription with apple. If I have to do that, then this is in effect not a turing complete device and thus factually no computer anymore. It's a neat computer driven consumer device - but that's all.
What I'm wondering is how far Apple will be able to go with this until people notice that they are a new sort of old IBM and start switching to more open devices. If Apple continues building them neat enough, maybe never? Who knows.
I for one can say that I am not buying, unless Im paid insane or at least solid amounts of money for developing for the iPad. I might by yet another M*cBook, but as for these oh-so-neat 'Post-PC-Devices', as they are called, I'm going to test the waters with a far more open and thus truely turing complete solution. My new HTC Desire HD btw is an awesome such device. Definitely the iPhone killer. ... FYI: I'm writing this on a Mac.

--
We suffer more in our imagination than in reality. - Seneca
1. Re:Not buying. Not following Apple on this one. by indiechild · 2011-03-09 13:38 · Score: 1
  
  Then don't buy an iPad, sheesh. There will always be "pro" Macs where you can install whatever you want -- how else could you develop for iOS devices?
  It's true that computing is moving towards a more user-friendly and "walled" console-like experience. Geeks think that is evil and bad, the rest of the planet rightly thinks it's a great thing.
2. Re:Not buying. Not following Apple on this one. by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-09 14:40 · Score: 0
  
  Please look up "turing complete" because it doesn't mean what you think it means.
  iPad is a locked down consumer device, sure. But saying it's not "turing complete" makes you sound like an uninformed douche. You can jailbreak the sucker and make it do what ever the hell you want; it's not designed for that, Apple discourages it, Apple makes it as difficult as possible, etc, but it can be done.
3. Re:Not buying. Not following Apple on this one. by tepples · 2011-03-09 14:47 · Score: 1
  
  The fist iMac was the first PC ever not requiring a Monitor adjustment and setup
  Didn't you mean the 1984 Macintosh?
  
  something most novices were not capable of.
  If novices are capable of plugging a cable into a TV and a cable box, they're capable of plugging a cable into a monitor and a computer. Or am I misunderstanding what you mean by "monitor adjustment and setup"?
4. Re:Not buying. Not following Apple on this one. by swb · 2011-03-09 14:52 · Score: 1
  
  I think the biggest limitation with the iPad is relative to removable media. The 2nd generation device *still* only has 64GB flash -- WTF? I'm not a genius transcoder but most DVD-length movies run nearly 1.5 GB in SD and 4 in HD. With 20 gigs of music, apps and their data you're looking at room for only about 7-8 HD movies, and that's if you pack it totally full.
  That's OK for maybe a week's vacation, but it's not enough if you want to travel further or access a larger amount of data than will fit on the device. I REALLY wish there was at minimum an SD card slot.
  I sometimes wonder if they will add a lightpeak-type interface to it in the future, given that port's broad usefulness and Apple's support for it on new Macs. This might allow for better removable storage or other options.
5. Re:Not buying. Not following Apple on this one. by dudpixel · 2011-03-09 15:09 · Score: 1
  
  I agree with you about the rest of the planet thinking "appliances" are a better idea than "general purpose computers"...and to that end, I applaud the mac app store and any equivalents that may crop up in competitors (ubuntu had one before that but not as highly publicized)...
  However, I also love the ability on android to tick a button and allow external apps in. Herein lies the core issue.
  A device may be designed to protect the user etc, but at the end of the day, the user should be in charge.
  I cannot deny that Apple's approach is working well for them though. They seem to target a specific subset of the market and they are not concerned with people who dont fall in that subset (ie. me). Which side is the minority...remains to be seen...and again, I dont think Apple care about that either, so long as they are making tons of money.
  
  --
  This seemed like a reasonable sig at the time.
6. Re:Not buying. Not following Apple on this one. by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-09 15:14 · Score: 0
  
  I don't think you are familiar with the definition of a Turing complete device.
7. Re:Not buying. Not following Apple on this one. by countach · 2011-03-09 15:29 · Score: 1
  
  Sure its Turing complete. You can load up your own javascript web site, and java script is Turing complete.
  Gotcha!!
8. Re:Not buying. Not following Apple on this one. by Cimexus · 2011-03-09 16:03 · Score: 1
  
  I fully agree with everything you wrote. Where I differ is that I'm prepared to accept that certain devices in my life: my phone, my music player, my camera, my microwave, and yes, my web-browsing coffee-table-sitting tablet (iPad), are not 'computers' (in that you do not have full control or flexibility to run code of your choosing on them).
  The way I see it is that I have an actual computer (desktop or laptop, PC or Mac) for doing such things. And I will always want such a device. But I consider something like an iPad or an iPhone an appliance, not a computer. I honestly have no desire to install my own software and stuff. I just want it to make calls/browse the web/play some games/listen to some music. Same with things like game consoles etc: you can mod them but I can't be bothered doing so.
  OTOH, you disagree with this, and would prefer to see your phone and tablet as full computing devices. That is perfectly fine by me.
  What I don't understand are the zealots who will insist that such a thing is so evil: yes it's a locked down appliance but frankly, that's what I want, and I buy it in the full knowledge of its limitations. If you don't want that, don't buy it (e.g. you bought a HTC Desire instead). But don't judge me on the basis of my different choice - it's not that all iPhone/iPad users are idiots, we're just happy to leave the 'real computing work' to actual PCs and are content with an appliance for some purposes.
9. Re:Not buying. Not following Apple on this one. by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-09 16:05 · Score: 0
  
  It apparently isn't possible to install your own software on this thing without having a 99$/year developer subscription with apple. If I have to do that, then this is in effect not a turing complete device and thus factually no computer anymore
  Are you implying the iPad would suddenly become a computer if Apple dropped the $99/year developer subscription? The more I read about it, the more "magical" the iPad becomes. :)
  
  My new HTC Desire HD btw is an awesome such device. Definitely the iPhone killer.
  I think the only thing that may kill the iPhone at this point is Apple. Some of the iPhone competitors are certainly capable and nice but I just don't yet see enough innovation in them to kill the iPhone.
  
  FYI: I'm writing this on a Mac.
  Phew! For a minute there I was thinking your post was totally illegitimate. But since you're typing it on a Mac... ;)
10. Re:Not buying. Not following Apple on this one. by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-09 16:17 · Score: 0
  
  It's a neat consumer driven computer device
  That's exactly right and it just works
  No tweaking needed
11. Re:Not buying. Not following Apple on this one. by agrif · 2011-03-09 16:40 · Score: 2
  
  The device looks cool, no doubt, but it is factually a step backwards in technology as it effectively is not a turing complete computer anymore.
  I get what your trying to say, but this probably isn't the best way to say it. It's hard to argue something isn't Turing-complete when I can go and download a Turing machine app.
12. Re:Not buying. Not following Apple on this one. by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-09 16:48 · Score: 0
  
  You hear that sound? No, it's not sympathy. It's laughter in your direction.
13. Re:Not buying. Not following Apple on this one. by LodCrappo · 2011-03-09 16:55 · Score: 1
  
  "The fist iMac was the first PC ever not requiring a Monitor adjustment and setup - something most novices were not capable of"
  Firstly.. the fist iMac? Sounds even more painful that the bending over you get from the typical Apple product.
  And second, perhaps more seriously, monitor adjustment and setup? WTF is that? Color correction and crap like that? Novices (and an awful lot of experts) don't do that simply because they don't need to, not because of any particular difficulty found in the process.
  most people simply plug the screen into the CPU box thingy and get on with their day.
  I'm sure I disagree with a lot of other things you said, but quit reading after that line.
  
  --
  -Lod
14. Re:Not buying. Not following Apple on this one. by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-09 17:05 · Score: 0
  
  Don't buy Apple products if you don't like them.
  Problem solved.
15. Re:Not buying. Not following Apple on this one. by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-09 17:08 · Score: 0
  
  Cough. Html 5 applications? is email software? There's nothing to stop you from creating a javascript html5 program.
  You just wont have access to lower level code or to App store customers. Lot of businesses are writing front ends.
16. Re:Not buying. Not following Apple on this one. by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-09 17:13 · Score: 0
  
  If I have to do that, then this is in effect not a turing complete device and thus factually no computer anymore.
  (emphasis added)
  I do not think that phrase means what you think it means.
17. Re:Not buying. Not following Apple on this one. by naer_dinsul · 2011-03-10 01:40 · Score: 1
  
  If I have to do that, then this is in effect not a turing complete device and thus factually no computer anymore.
  Turing Complete: You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.
18. Re:Not buying. Not following Apple on this one. by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-10 03:27 · Score: 0
  
  "not a turing complete computer anymore"
  Those words don't mean what you think they mean. Please just stop.
19. Re:Not buying. Not following Apple on this one. by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-12 04:59 · Score: 0
  
  You do realize that as soon as you said "Turing complete" your point of view no longer apples to 99% of iPad buyers. That is why Apple makes profit regardless of the "techie experts" on slashdot.
Hot spot feature a rip off by jbplou · 2011-03-09 13:20 · Score: 1

The hot spot feature is such a rip off. I know the carriers forced it to be a system you pay extra for but why is that? With At&t they don't offer unlimited data plans any more so why am I limited on how I use my bandwidth they will charge me extra for the bandwidth why do I have to pay the carier for a software feature?
1. Re:Hot spot feature a rip off by crossmr · 2011-03-09 13:40 · Score: 1
  
  Interestingly there is a whole big world out there beyond AT&T. My carrier offers unlimited data plans.
2. Re:Hot spot feature a rip off by sqrt(2) · 2011-03-09 13:49 · Score: 1
  
  I'm sure you already know this, but there is a jailbreak hack that enables native tethering without having to pay AT&T any extra money. Jailbreak your iPhone, add the hackulous repo to Cydia, and then install tetherme. You'll be able to use tethering just like you had paid to enable it.
  
  --
  If you build it, nerds will come. Soylentnews.org
3. Re:Hot spot feature a rip off by jbplou · 2011-03-09 13:50 · Score: 1
  
  That still doesn't matter because the hot spot feature really is just software it doesn't really on the carrier. Verizon has the same charge for using a hot spot.
4. Re:Hot spot feature a rip off by crossmr · 2011-03-09 13:53 · Score: 1
  
  Who said I was with Verizon and who said I had to pay anything to get the personal hotspot?
  I guess it's easy to say features are a waste of time when you can't see past the end of your own nose.
5. Re:Hot spot feature a rip off by jbplou · 2011-03-09 14:04 · Score: 1
  
  Where I live Verizon and AT&T are the only two that provide very good service, additionally just because I find this one feature limiting does not nessarly mean I want to switch platforms or carriers.
6. Re:Hot spot feature a rip off by crossmr · 2011-03-09 14:13 · Score: 2
  
  I never said you did. You claimed the feature was rip-off, and yet, that's an issue with your carrier, not an issue with Apple.
  Not everyone has to pay to use it, it seems to only be American carriers who screw people so much.
  Apple has made plenty of other boneheaded decisions with recent updates, but this isn't something they control.
7. Re:Hot spot feature a rip off by MikeDataLink · 2011-03-09 14:43 · Score: 1
  
  I emailed Steve Jobs and asked him why we needed to pay for this. His reply... short and sweet:
  "Ask the carriers.
  Sent from my iPad."
  So now my attack of emails will go to AT&T.
  
  --
  Mike @ The Geek Pub. Let's Make Stuff!
8. Re:Hot spot feature a rip off by Cimexus · 2011-03-09 16:12 · Score: 1
  
  I agree that paying the carrier for a software feature is ridiculous. But it does appear to be a practice mostly limited to the US and a few other countries. In most places they don't (and can't) charge you for such a thing.
  Actually it sorta fits with the whole way the cellular industry works in the US though. It has always been way more carrier-controlled than any other market. To some extent that's a learned behaviour that has derived from the fact that the US has had various incompatible phone networks for most of its history (CDMA, TDMA, analog, GSM etc.). The result was that 'handsets tied to particular carriers/plans' became the norm in the US (because in most cases, it wouldn't work on other networks even if you tried), whereas in the rest of the world it's quite normal to buy a phone from a store completely independently of a carrier, then just whack your SIM card in it from your carrier of choice and off you go. The carrier doesn't even know or care what phone you're using. This was made possible of course by the fact that most other countries have been standardised on GSM since the start.
  Frankly to an outsider's perspective, it seems like the carriers have you by the balls in the US. I'd hate it. But there are benefits to such a system too I suppose ('free' phones paid off over compulsory 2 year contracts for instance: these don't work out any cheaper than the 'buy phone outright up front for $600 then pay provider for cheaper plan without included phone repayments' model over the contract period, but it does reduce the up front cost and potentially make things more affordable for some people).
9. Re:Hot spot feature a rip off by mjwx · 2011-03-09 18:19 · Score: 1
  
  The hot spot feature is such a rip off. I know the carriers forced it to be a system you pay extra for but why is that?
  When a carrier does something like that on Android, I buy direct from the phone manufacturer and skip all that value added nonsense.
  
  Oh, wait.
  
  --
  Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
10. Re:Hot spot feature a rip off by mjwx · 2011-03-09 18:29 · Score: 1
  
  I never said you did. You claimed the feature was rip-off, and yet, that's an issue with your carrier, not an issue with Apple. Not everyone has to pay to use it, it seems to only be American carriers who screw people so much.
  Apple has made plenty of other boneheaded decisions with recent updates, but this isn't something they control.
  Actually it is.
  
  Unlike Android, this is something the carriers have requested and Apple has expressly granted. It is controlled at the carrier level, not the handset level. Carriers still control the Iphone, the only thing they've really lost is the ability to brand the handset, which is pointless (a picture on the front of the phone). Worse yet, the control is built in by the manufacturer rather then added on by the carrier as an afterthought so even if I buy an unlocked Iphone from the Apple store in Australia, I still cant use tethering on AT&T in the states despite owning my phone outright.
  
  So the order of control goes like this:
  
  Iphone.
  Carrier > Manufacturer > End User
  Android
  Manufacturer > Carrier > End User
  
  Same crap, different order. Except if I buy outright from the manufacturer.
  
  Iphone
  Carrier > Manufacturer > End User
  Android
  Manufacturer > End User
  
  --
  Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
11. Re:Hot spot feature a rip off by crossmr · 2011-03-09 19:54 · Score: 0
  
  And yet through all that, it's still controlled by the carrier not Apple. If the carriers don't want it to be available, they'll just stop carrying the phone.
  Apple didn't decided to have AT&T charge $20 for the feature, AT&T did. Apple still needs those companies to sell their phone.
  Other countries, the feature is free and included.
Re:IOS 4.3 Now Available For Download by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-09 13:42 · Score: 0

I wish Slashdot had an ignore option for people like you. You post constantly, hijacking threads, and have yet to make a point that doesn't make you sound like a huge douchebag.
Airplay by mr100percent · 2011-03-09 13:44 · Score: 2

The improvements to Airplay are pretty underrated. You can now stream your entire iTunes library to your iPhone/iPad/iPod touch (if they're on the same LAN). That's kinda a big improvement, because so many people on /. whine how they can't fit their entire library on only 64GB of space. Videos too.
1. Re:Airplay by proxima · 2011-03-09 16:52 · Score: 1
  
  The improvements to Airplay are pretty underrated. You can now stream your entire iTunes library to your iPhone/iPad/iPod touch (if they're on the same LAN). That's kinda a big improvement, because so many people on /. whine how they can't fit their entire library on only 64GB of space. Videos too.
  Unless you have a first or second gen ipod touch, or iphone 3g or original. The second gen runs 4.2.1, but not 4.3. Unless they backport security fixes to the 4.2 line, iphone 3g and ipod touch 2nd gen are now out of support.
  
  --
  "The universe seems neither benign nor hostile, merely indifferent." --Carl Sagan
2. Re:Airplay by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-09 17:38 · Score: 1
  
  Well, those people should have bought a Nomad, really.
3. Re:Airplay by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-09 18:01 · Score: 0
  
  So what is the use case for this feature? If I am having my iPod/Pad/Phone on the same LAN as my MacBook, I am very likely having those devices at the same physical location. Why would I then not use my Macbook to consume my media on the couch especially since to control the media I probably need to use my MacBook?
  My music can most likely fit on the 64 Gb iPod which means this is more useful for movies and if I am at home i am more likely to use bigger screen to watch movies - Apple TV or laptop or I Mac.
4. Re:Airplay by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-09 19:41 · Score: 0
  
  I prefer the Air Video app. I can stream all my videos, from anywhere, not just on my own lan. Even over 3g.
5. Re:Airplay by splatter · 2011-03-10 03:12 · Score: 1
  
  I second this Air video is very nice because it will re-encode a bunch of different video types either on the fly or prior and then streams it to the device which has a limited amount of formats the quicktime player understands.
  I don't now how many dinners out have been saved by giving my 4 year old the iphone and cranking up a disney flick on airvideo when he gets antsy and toys or coloring isn't working & we are still trying to finish. One time he was one of four kids I counted in the restaurant, so we must be on to something.
  
  --
  "(I) have this unfortunate condition that causes me not to believe a single thing any politician says when a mic's on.
6. Re:Airplay by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-10 03:15 · Score: 0
  
  I tried this last night and I couldn't get it to work on my Ipad. Its a bit light on the details, the remote app now uses homeharing instead of shared librarys if you authorize to the same account. But when I tried it, it gave me homesharing access but it still acted as a remote. And the Ipod app didnt seem to do anything different with regards to home sharing. So I have yet to figure out how you can play locally from a homeshare.
7. Re:Airplay by Goldberg's+Pants · 2011-03-10 11:20 · Score: 1
  
  I bought an iPod Touch 4G last year. Wanted the camera. I had a 1g Touch which became obsolete before 4.x even shipped. Yes it was annoying, but I actually found it kinda nice, no longer giving a crap.
  Though it's nice that after 3 years of owning an iPod Touch I can FINALLY share my entire iTunes library when I'm at home. It's very slickly done too. (Even if not entirely obvious how to enable it.)
Nope, still free by Doches · 2011-03-09 13:59 · Score: 3, Informative

John Gruber made the same mistake earlier -- but you can still register for a free developer account and download Xcode without paying the $4.99.
1. Re:Nope, still free by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-09 14:39 · Score: 1
  
  Hi Test Account,
  You must be an iOS or Mac Developer Program member to download Xcode 4 or you can purchase Xcode 4 from the Mac App Store.
  View Xcode 4 on the Mac App Store
  Learn about Apple Developer Programs
  This is at http://developer.apple.com/xcode/ using a brand new developer account registered through Gruber's link. Tell me again, how do you download Xcode 4 for free?
2. Re:Nope, still free by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-09 15:49 · Score: 0
  
  Actually, you can't get it for free with the free developer account. You have to pay the $5 for it. While it would be nice to get for free (I use Xcode from time to time but mainly because I like the environment for bash scripting), $5 is a great deal for what you get from it (compare it to the cost of other developer environments).
3. Re:Nope, still free by Little_Professor · 2011-03-10 06:05 · Score: 2
  
  You can only get the latest version of Xcode 3 with the free developer account. For a 4.x version you need the $99 developer account or to pay $4.99 from the mac app store
My dis am bigger than yours by tepples · 2011-03-09 14:40 · Score: 1

Or Nintendo's IOS.
Not everyone can afford a Mac Pro by tepples · 2011-03-09 14:54 · Score: 1

There will always be "pro" Macs where you can install whatever you want
But students and hobbyists can't necessarily afford a Mac Pro or MacBook Pro. Instead, they buy an iMac or MacBook, or those already owning a PC that runs Windows or Linux might buy a Mac mini and a KVM switch.
And consider this: There will always be "pro" video game consoles for developers to use. But these are available only to established companies that have an office and experience developing for another platform.

It's true that computing is moving towards a more user-friendly and "walled" console-like experience. Geeks think that is evil and bad, the rest of the planet rightly thinks it's a great thing.
If a "walled" console-like experience becomes the norm for home computing, how would one go about earning enough experience to qualify for a devkit?
1. Re:Not everyone can afford a Mac Pro by farnsworth · 2011-03-09 15:50 · Score: 3, Informative
  
  But students and hobbyists can't necessarily afford a Mac Pro or MacBook Pro. Instead, they buy an iMac or MacBook, or those already owning a PC that runs Windows or Linux might buy a Mac mini and a KVM switch.
  Any reasonably modern Mac can run XCode. You don't need a Mac Pro to make iOS apps. You can do it on a $400 used Mac Mini. I've seen it done.
  
  If a "walled" console-like experience becomes the norm for home computing, how would one go about earning enough experience to qualify for a devkit?
  Anyone can make an iOS app for free with free tools that run on pretty much any Mac. You have to pay $99 to deploy it to actual physical phones. No one is going to be stopped from learning about making iOS apps because of this.
  
  You can have a $299 locked-down iPhone, or a $398 iPhone that you can do whatever the hell you want to. Or, you can get a $299 iPhone and jailbreak it and do whatever the hell you want to it -- no one cares either way.
  
  You know what the $99 is for? It's paying Apple to generate a cert for *you* so that every one else who has an iPhone can be cryptographically assured that they are not running malware or other crap. This is a good thing, and it's no different than having to pay for an ssl cert, or paying MS to sign your kernel drivers, etc etc. The price might be different, but the concept is the same. Users don't want to trust you. They want to trust their vendor. The $99 is almost completely besides the point.
  
  --
  There aint no pancake so thin it doesn't have two sides.
2. Re:Not everyone can afford a Mac Pro by tepples · 2011-03-10 01:01 · Score: 1
  
  Any reasonably modern Mac can run XCode. You don't need a Mac Pro to make iOS apps. You can do it on a $400 used Mac Mini. I've seen it done.
  Apple has begun to charge for XCode. Right now, it's a $4.99 charge allegedly for Sarbanes-Oxley compliance, but the United States federal income tax started out at 3% too. In addition, as I said in my last post, watch Apple stop manufacturing non-Pro Macs in favor of comparably sized iOS devices, and watch years-old used Macs not meet the system requirements to run new versions of XCode.
  
  Anyone can make an iOS app for free with free tools that run on pretty much any Mac. You have to pay $99 to deploy it to actual physical phones.
  How accurate is the simulator included with the iPhone SDK (or whatever Apple is calling it now)? Is it such that if a developer tests an application exclusively on the simulator, the developer can be fairly certain it will run on the device? I come from the NESdev community, and early NES emulators were so awful that most early homebrew games either freeze or fail spectacularly when run on an NES because they were tested only on emulators and rely on emulation defects.
  
  You know what the $99 is for?
  It's for ensuring a continuous revenue stream. If you find a defect in your application after your subscription has run out, you can't fix it. If it were for generating a cert, then it'd be more like Google, where Google charges $25 for what appears to be lifetime admission to the Android developer program. It also appears to be for keeping high school students out of developing.
3. Re:Not everyone can afford a Mac Pro by CheerfulMacFanboy · 2011-03-12 13:39 · Score: 1
  
  Any reasonably modern Mac can run XCode. You don't need a Mac Pro to make iOS apps. You can do it on a $400 used Mac Mini. I've seen it done.
  Apple has begun to charge for XCode. Right now, it's a $4.99 charge allegedly for Sarbanes-Oxley compliance, but the United States federal income tax started out at 3% too. In addition, as I said in my last post, watch Apple stop manufacturing non-Pro Macs in favor of comparably sized iOS devices, and watch years-old used Macs not meet the system requirements to run new versions of XCode.
  What part of "XCode 4 is free for members of the Mac and iOS developer program" did you not understand? As for your paranoia: buy a PC - please. No matter what OS, your paranoia can really thrive there.
  
  --
  Fandroids hate facts.
4. Re:Not everyone can afford a Mac Pro by tepples · 2011-03-12 14:56 · Score: 1
  
  What part of "XCode 4 is free for members of the Mac and iOS developer program" did you not understand?
  What part of "[The developer program fee] also appears to be for keeping high school students out of developing" did you not understand? I have a cousin who is a high school student and a programmer. He has so far stuck to PC and Android to avoid this entire-birthday-money-per-year certificate requirement.
5. Re:Not everyone can afford a Mac Pro by CheerfulMacFanboy · 2011-03-13 03:45 · Score: 1
  
  What part of "XCode 4 is free for members of the Mac and iOS developer program" did you not understand?
  What part of "[The developer program fee] also appears to be for keeping high school students out of developing" did you not understand? I have a cousin who is a high school student and a programmer. He has so far stuck to PC and Android to avoid this entire-birthday-money-per-year certificate requirement.
  What part of "XCode 3 is still free" did you not understand? Are you married to that cousin by chance?
  
  --
  Fandroids hate facts.
Composite Video Out Screen Mirroring for all apps by PinchDuck · 2011-03-09 15:21 · Score: 1

That's all I want. If The Steve grants me that, I'll unjailbreak my iPad and upgrade. What do you say, The Steve? Can I have composite video out screen mirroring for all apps? C'mon, buddy, my ][+ did it with an RF Modulator. I don't believe that you've somehow lost the technology between 1984 and now. If you have, though, call the other Steve. Woz will help you out.
Your humble supplicant (er, customer)
Pinchduck
Too bad Safari still crashes by TimTucker · 2011-03-09 16:39 · Score: 1

Put it on an ipad hoping that it would fix the crashing issues with Safari & the search in page feature... nope, still crashes!
Amazingly easy to reproduce, too... just open a page with a large amount of text (i.e. a 500KB faq from gamefaqs), enter text in the search bar, click find in page, safari crashes after a slight delay.
1. Re:Too bad Safari still crashes by Goldberg's+Pants · 2011-03-10 11:22 · Score: 1
  
  In almost eror iOS app, both official and third party, if you have a long amount of ANYTHING the app will crash. These file apps where you can chuck your porn^H^H^H^H pictures. Have too many, the app will sit there for a while, then crash. I have one and I have to load it twice, every time, to get it to work.
I'll just put this here: by initialE · 2011-03-09 16:39 · Score: 1

http://appldnld.apple.com/iPhone4/041-0328.20110311.Lkhy6/iPhone2,1_4.3_8F190_Restore.ipsw 3GS
http://appldnld.apple.com/iPhone4/041-0330.20110311.Cswe3/iPhone3,1_4.3_8F190_Restore.ipsw 4
http://appldnld.apple.com/iPhone4/061-8366.20110311.Fr45t/iPod3,1_4.3_8F190_Restore.ipsw ipod touch 3
http://appldnld.apple.com/iPhone4/061-9588.20110311.GtP7y/iPod4,1_4.3_8F190_Restore.ipsw ipod touch 4
http://appldnld.apple.com/iPhone4/041-0329.20110311.Cvfre/iPad1,1_4.3_8F190_Restore.ipsw ipad
http://appldnld.apple.com/AppleTV/061-9584.20110308.Cxdew/AppleTV2,1_4.3_8F191m_Restore.ipsw apple tv 2
kudos:
http://techie-buzz.com/mobile-news/ios-4-3-ipsw-direct-download-links.html

--
Starbucks, Harbuckle of Breath.
1. Re:I'll just put this here: by splatter · 2011-03-10 03:24 · Score: 1
  
  I'll see that and I'll just add by putting these here as well. Don't forget people every release means yet another attempt to stop jailbreaks. Don't upgrade without knowing what your getting & losing both phone wise and from itunes.
  http://appldnld.apple.com/iPhone4/061-9858.20101122.Er456/iPhone3,1_4.2.1_8C148_Restore.ipsw -iphone 4
  http://appldnld.apple.com/iPhone4/061-9895.20101122.Cdew2/iPhone2,1_4.2.1_8C148a_Restore.ipsw -3GS
  http://appldnld.apple.com/iPhone4/061-9853.20101122.Vfgt5/iPhone1,2_4.2.1_8C148_Restore.ipsw -3G
  http://appldnld.apple.com/iPad/061-9857.20101122.VGthy/iPad1,1_4.2.1_8C148_Restore.ipsw -Ipad
  http://appldnld.apple.com/iPhone4/061-9855.20101122.Lrft6/iPod2,1_4.2.1_8C148_Restore.ipsw -2g touch
  http://appldnld.apple.com/iPhone4/061-9860.20101122.Xsde3/iPod3,1_4.2.1_8C148_Restore.ipsw -3g touch
  http://appldnld.apple.com/iPhone4/061-9859.20101122.$erft/iPod4,1_4.2.1_8C148_Restore.ipsw -4g touch
  
  --
  "(I) have this unfortunate condition that causes me not to believe a single thing any politician says when a mic's on.
Is this linux friendly for 4g by Master+Moose · 2011-03-09 17:11 · Score: 1

I am a Ubuntu user. My son was gifted a 4g iphone for Christmas from family overseas. Can he use it. No. Because There is no way to currently get it to sync with anything other than itunes on Windows or Mac (Amorak et al, do not seem to work on 4g phones) I refuse to let him access itunes through wifi as I refuse to give apple any money.
If this latest update will allow my rythmbox to finally sync, then we will upgrade. Otherwise apple can jump

--
. . .gone when the morning comes
1. Re:Is this linux friendly for 4g by pushing-robot · 2011-03-09 18:08 · Score: 2
  
  Apple limits the freedoms of its users, and thus becomes a tyrant. You therefore limit the freedoms of your users, and thus become a hero.
  
  --
  How can I believe you when you tell me what I don't want to hear?
2. Re:Is this linux friendly for 4g by Goldberg's+Pants · 2011-03-10 11:23 · Score: 1
  
  BooHoo, use a real OS. You choose to go to the goth prom. Don't complain when the prom queen fucks someone at the real prom.
  In short, you want to use Linux, more power to you. You cannot have everything you want.
Re:IOS 4.3 Now Available For Download by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-09 19:02 · Score: 0

At least he is not making 50+ replies in every thread like you.
Kill the FUD by forgotten_my_nick · 2011-03-09 21:37 · Score: 1

> A feature I wish it didn't come with... 30% of subscription revenues from "publishers" like Netflix, Amazon Kindle etc.
** This is the fault of the publishers, not Apple. **
Here is what happens. When you sell an app on the iTunes store apple takes a cut of that sale for hosting/advertising. Every single app that you pay for on the app store has to do this.
The only time you do not have to pay anything is if you give your app away for free. The consumer gets an application for free to play with and the developer isn't penalised for releasing for free.
Now with the Publishing companies what they basically did was make their applications free in the iTunes store. So Apple didn't get any revenue from that.
Add to that when the consumer downloads it they find it isn't in fact free, but totally useless until you pay for a magazine (which is basically downloading high res scans of a magazine). I know this because I downloaded a few of them thinking this.
So they were circumventing the app stores rules while everyone else has to play by them.
If the publishers want to make a magazine for the iPad and don't want to pay the iTunes fees then they can just create a website and have the user connect to that through the browser.
Living in reality by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-09 22:16 · Score: 0

Who cares
Re:Unwanted feature [Score;5, Insightful] by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-09 22:31 · Score: 0

APPLE CAN SUCK A DICK
I see two caves... by alispguru · 2011-03-10 02:44 · Score: 1

One labeled "IOS" and one labeled "iOS".
The rest of the internet is outside, wondering what exactly goes on in those caves, and taking the occasional app or routing table that flies out.

--

To a Lisp hacker, XML is S-expressions in drag.
Way behind the times by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-10 03:06 · Score: 0

IOS is up to the 15.x train these days, silly!