Because Verizon would have fucked the iPhone up so badly that nobody would want to buy it. Bluetooth would have been locked down and there would be no way to get any data off your phone.
Do you remember what things were like with these carriers back when the iPhone came out? It took serious clout to get a carrier to not fuck with your phone. Apple traded exclusivity and basically free marketing for the ability to have the iPhone work the way they wanted, including things like visual voicemail. And as a result they had to limit some of the features of the phones. Its the kind of tradeoff that they should not have had to make, but that's the way things were in the mobile market.
They are paying for it now, its unfortunate that the exclusive contract is for such a long time period, but that was the trade off that had to be made to get the iPhone out the door in this country. If they had not made that compromise the iPhone might not have been as successful as it is.
I'm guessing it has a lot to do with where you live and AT&T. I understand why apple ended up in this agreement with AT&T since at the time, Verizon was willing to completely fuck up any phone it could get its hands on. But I think at this point it is hurting Apple a lot more than helping.
Where I am at, the only difference I have noticed (moving from verizon to AT&T) is that I can no longer get reception in the underground garage at my work, but then I live in an area where AT&T has pretty good coverage. In other parts of the country it clearly does not.
Of course, without the deal Apple had with AT&T the iPhone might never have become the success that it is now.
Thank you for this perfect example of an technical person who does not understand what design means.
Design does not mean that it runs on old hardware or that it has this obscure feature or that. Design is about human interaction and the way the user and the software interface. It has nothing at all to do with what OS or applications run on what hardware.
Re:Rational decision by school administration?
on
Ontario School Bans Wi-Fi
·
· Score: 4, Informative
Indeed there is, in fact I believe there are 2 of them. Mind you they only protect against a few varieties of HPV (with some overlap between the two I believe) but the ones covered include the ones that have the greatest chance of causing cervical cancer.
These vaccines have only been tested on women (no reason to believe they don't work on men, but last I checked that was off label) and your insurance generally wont cover the vaccine if you are over a certain age.
Sure, no reason to give the vaccine to 2 year olds, but kids get sexually active fairly early in life and cervical cancer is pretty bad, so why not vaccinate. I know if I had daughters I would have them vaccinated.
lets say you want to give every classroom in a school a computer. You can either run cable to every classroom and set up multiple drops so the computer can be in different places, or you can blanket the entire school in a wifi network.
Now sure, some schools had wires in place from before wifi was common, but if you were trying to retrofit an old school wifi would probably look pretty appealing.
While I agree with you completely, one of the reasons quality sex education is important is because of peer pressure. You can do a good job raising and educating your kids but when they hit that rebellious age (and most do at some point) they will be open to peer pressure and wouldn't it be nice if you didn't have to count on their friends having had decent parents?
Certainly, some kids manage just fine based on only their own education and parenting, but really, every little bit helps.
Maybe I'm poor, or maybe I just prefer to spend my disposable income on other things. I have purchased motorcycles for less than the cost of his watch.
Some of them did. The one I got from apple for instance. But I'm not sure that any of them are of a slide on type. The one I got is basically a bumper with a back, it stretches onto your phone, apparently this issue is with cases that the phone actually slides into.
Do you have a source for that 2012 contract bit? I have never been able to find a concrete bit of data on how long the exclusive deal between Apple and AT&T is.
I agree with you that Apple will be the one to announce any change and not verizon, though I wouldnt be surprised if the info gets leaked ahead of time. That said, you wouldn't know a real leak from the constant rumors unless someone looses an iPhone at a bar that has Verizon in the top bar instead of AT&T
Is it really worth it to buy an unlocked phone though? As it is you get a big discount on a new phone in exchange for your contract. I am not aware of any provider that gives you a monthly discount in exchange for not taking advantage of that discount. If you know of one I would be very interested.
I think that is what would have to change because as it is, having no contract isn't that much of an advantage, assuming you know you will want to have a phone for the next 2 years and getting a deep discount on a new phone is very attractive.
I re-read the article. I'm not sure his animals actually died. The sentence is a little unclear.
It's good to know that they are required to rescue people, that does seem like the bare minimum, but I do wonder if there isnt a better way to handle this. I own a house in a town and I have no idea what its like on unincorporated land. Do these people not have to pay property tax? What about water and sewer? I have to pay these to my town and it seems like they must be paying something to someone.
Honestly I'm surprised that his homeowners insurance doesn't require him to have fire support and just include it in the bill as escrow for the town. I have enough trouble getting insurance because my house has cast iron drain pipes (common for my area) it seems like having insurance against fire they would require there to be some kind of fire fighting service available.
How do wilderness rescue bills get enforced? I have heard this about the bill a number of times but it seems like someone should be able to put the home owner into collections without too much trouble.
People don't pay their taxes all the time and when they are caught they are forced to pay, or get their wages garnished. It seems to me that the situation could be changed if anyone cared to change it.
But emergency rooms are still required to treat the grievously injured, insured or not. What if there had been a life on the line, someone trapped inside the building. Does some kid have to die because his dad was to cheep or too stupid to pay a fee?
I understand why this happened this way but I don't see why it couldnt be structured differently. If wilderness rescue can charge a lost hiker for finding them without that hiker having to pay a $75 fee ahead of time just in case they get lost, why cant the fire department charge someone who didn't pay the fee up front. Obviously the fee for putting out the fire should be a lot more than what the person would pay if they just paid in advance but it should be an option.
First off, calling iOS a "phone os" when its core is the same as that of Mac OS is showing that your not really thinking about the difference. The difference between the approaches has nothing to do with the core of the OS and everything to do with the displace and interface levels of the OS. That is where the difference is between iOS and Mac OS X and, in so much as OS X and Windows are similar, it is also the difference between iOS and Windows.
So given that the basic difference is in the UI layer I think its pretty obvious why iOS is better suited to tablets than windows. Windows was designed for mouse interaction and iOS was designed ground up for touch interaction. From a design standpoint, there really is no doubt which tactic is better for designing an OS for a touch based device.
Now that said, design isnt everything. Microsoft wanted full windows on their tablet so that they could leverage a large library of applications for the platform, even though those apps would not be easy to use with a touch interface. Apple managed to get the best of both worlds by releasing the iPhone first (the first phone that provided an easy way for people to build and, more importantly, market phone applications) and then was able to leverage those applications on the launch of the iPad. I suspect if the iPad had come first Apple would have faced an up hill battle trying to get developers and users on board at the same time.
Sadly, in this industry, sometimes just being practical is being revolutionary. Its amazing the degree to which people will throw themselves against the same obstacle over and over again without re-thinking their assumptions.
This thread is filled with examples of tablets with windows on them and none of them have been serious commercial successes. MS has tried time and time again to enter this market and they have failed every time. One would think by now that they would do the practical thing and consider the platform from the ground up, bu they didn't do that over the last 10 years.
Sorry, it was hard to pull that out of the poorly written screed I was replying to. A closer review shows that the previous comment I replied to was written by a complete jackass.
yea, no government had ever quartered troops in houses before without the consent of the owners, or declared a national religion or driven out people who preferred their own religion, or silenced people who said things they disagreed with.
people who could afford to found their own personal corporation would have double the voting power of those who could not afford it.
In fact, someone wealthy could found thousands of corporations just to get more votes. The could operate them out of s single rental space if an actual address was necessary and sublet out the space to all the corps by the square foot. They could move the corps from district to district between elections depending on what locations needed what particular push to go the way they wanted.
Small groups of wealthy people could coordinate to use such a system to get anyone they wanted elected.
Slashdot Mirror
Because Verizon would have fucked the iPhone up so badly that nobody would want to buy it. Bluetooth would have been locked down and there would be no way to get any data off your phone.
Do you remember what things were like with these carriers back when the iPhone came out? It took serious clout to get a carrier to not fuck with your phone. Apple traded exclusivity and basically free marketing for the ability to have the iPhone work the way they wanted, including things like visual voicemail. And as a result they had to limit some of the features of the phones. Its the kind of tradeoff that they should not have had to make, but that's the way things were in the mobile market.
They are paying for it now, its unfortunate that the exclusive contract is for such a long time period, but that was the trade off that had to be made to get the iPhone out the door in this country. If they had not made that compromise the iPhone might not have been as successful as it is.
I'm guessing it has a lot to do with where you live and AT&T. I understand why apple ended up in this agreement with AT&T since at the time, Verizon was willing to completely fuck up any phone it could get its hands on. But I think at this point it is hurting Apple a lot more than helping.
Where I am at, the only difference I have noticed (moving from verizon to AT&T) is that I can no longer get reception in the underground garage at my work, but then I live in an area where AT&T has pretty good coverage. In other parts of the country it clearly does not.
Of course, without the deal Apple had with AT&T the iPhone might never have become the success that it is now.
Thank you for this perfect example of an technical person who does not understand what design means.
Design does not mean that it runs on old hardware or that it has this obscure feature or that. Design is about human interaction and the way the user and the software interface. It has nothing at all to do with what OS or applications run on what hardware.
Indeed there is, in fact I believe there are 2 of them. Mind you they only protect against a few varieties of HPV (with some overlap between the two I believe) but the ones covered include the ones that have the greatest chance of causing cervical cancer.
These vaccines have only been tested on women (no reason to believe they don't work on men, but last I checked that was off label) and your insurance generally wont cover the vaccine if you are over a certain age.
Sure, no reason to give the vaccine to 2 year olds, but kids get sexually active fairly early in life and cervical cancer is pretty bad, so why not vaccinate. I know if I had daughters I would have them vaccinated.
lets say you want to give every classroom in a school a computer. You can either run cable to every classroom and set up multiple drops so the computer can be in different places, or you can blanket the entire school in a wifi network.
Now sure, some schools had wires in place from before wifi was common, but if you were trying to retrofit an old school wifi would probably look pretty appealing.
There are plenty of things we should be immunizing children against, such as HPV, but we aren't because of politics.
While I agree with you completely, one of the reasons quality sex education is important is because of peer pressure. You can do a good job raising and educating your kids but when they hit that rebellious age (and most do at some point) they will be open to peer pressure and wouldn't it be nice if you didn't have to count on their friends having had decent parents?
Certainly, some kids manage just fine based on only their own education and parenting, but really, every little bit helps.
Sounds like New England alright.
Except the truck part. My truck has an engine block heater.
It does sound like an appealing feature and $300 is a lot closer to an amount I might spend on nice watch.
give the way you talked about it, I did kind of assume that it was a gift. If I were given one I'm sure I would wear it as well.
At least they are actually good watches.
Maybe I'm poor, or maybe I just prefer to spend my disposable income on other things. I have purchased motorcycles for less than the cost of his watch.
There are very few times when I wouldn't question the wisdom of owning, never mind wearing a $2500 watch.
Some of them did. The one I got from apple for instance. But I'm not sure that any of them are of a slide on type. The one I got is basically a bumper with a back, it stretches onto your phone, apparently this issue is with cases that the phone actually slides into.
I don't think that any of the cases they offered are slide on. And this potential problem apparently is only with those kinds of cases.
Ah, that explains it. That was shortly after the last time I bothered to try to hunt down that information.
After that point I just went out and bought a phone.
Do you have a source for that 2012 contract bit? I have never been able to find a concrete bit of data on how long the exclusive deal between Apple and AT&T is.
I agree with you that Apple will be the one to announce any change and not verizon, though I wouldnt be surprised if the info gets leaked ahead of time. That said, you wouldn't know a real leak from the constant rumors unless someone looses an iPhone at a bar that has Verizon in the top bar instead of AT&T
Is it really worth it to buy an unlocked phone though? As it is you get a big discount on a new phone in exchange for your contract. I am not aware of any provider that gives you a monthly discount in exchange for not taking advantage of that discount. If you know of one I would be very interested.
I think that is what would have to change because as it is, having no contract isn't that much of an advantage, assuming you know you will want to have a phone for the next 2 years and getting a deep discount on a new phone is very attractive.
I re-read the article. I'm not sure his animals actually died. The sentence is a little unclear.
It's good to know that they are required to rescue people, that does seem like the bare minimum, but I do wonder if there isnt a better way to handle this. I own a house in a town and I have no idea what its like on unincorporated land. Do these people not have to pay property tax? What about water and sewer? I have to pay these to my town and it seems like they must be paying something to someone.
Honestly I'm surprised that his homeowners insurance doesn't require him to have fire support and just include it in the bill as escrow for the town. I have enough trouble getting insurance because my house has cast iron drain pipes (common for my area) it seems like having insurance against fire they would require there to be some kind of fire fighting service available.
How do wilderness rescue bills get enforced? I have heard this about the bill a number of times but it seems like someone should be able to put the home owner into collections without too much trouble.
People don't pay their taxes all the time and when they are caught they are forced to pay, or get their wages garnished. It seems to me that the situation could be changed if anyone cared to change it.
But emergency rooms are still required to treat the grievously injured, insured or not. What if there had been a life on the line, someone trapped inside the building. Does some kid have to die because his dad was to cheep or too stupid to pay a fee?
I understand why this happened this way but I don't see why it couldnt be structured differently. If wilderness rescue can charge a lost hiker for finding them without that hiker having to pay a $75 fee ahead of time just in case they get lost, why cant the fire department charge someone who didn't pay the fee up front. Obviously the fee for putting out the fire should be a lot more than what the person would pay if they just paid in advance but it should be an option.
I disagree.
First off, calling iOS a "phone os" when its core is the same as that of Mac OS is showing that your not really thinking about the difference. The difference between the approaches has nothing to do with the core of the OS and everything to do with the displace and interface levels of the OS. That is where the difference is between iOS and Mac OS X and, in so much as OS X and Windows are similar, it is also the difference between iOS and Windows.
So given that the basic difference is in the UI layer I think its pretty obvious why iOS is better suited to tablets than windows. Windows was designed for mouse interaction and iOS was designed ground up for touch interaction. From a design standpoint, there really is no doubt which tactic is better for designing an OS for a touch based device.
Now that said, design isnt everything. Microsoft wanted full windows on their tablet so that they could leverage a large library of applications for the platform, even though those apps would not be easy to use with a touch interface. Apple managed to get the best of both worlds by releasing the iPhone first (the first phone that provided an easy way for people to build and, more importantly, market phone applications) and then was able to leverage those applications on the launch of the iPad. I suspect if the iPad had come first Apple would have faced an up hill battle trying to get developers and users on board at the same time.
Sadly, in this industry, sometimes just being practical is being revolutionary. Its amazing the degree to which people will throw themselves against the same obstacle over and over again without re-thinking their assumptions.
This thread is filled with examples of tablets with windows on them and none of them have been serious commercial successes. MS has tried time and time again to enter this market and they have failed every time. One would think by now that they would do the practical thing and consider the platform from the ground up, bu they didn't do that over the last 10 years.
Sorry, it was hard to pull that out of the poorly written screed I was replying to. A closer review shows that the previous comment I replied to was written by a complete jackass.
yea, no government had ever quartered troops in houses before without the consent of the owners, or declared a national religion or driven out people who preferred their own religion, or silenced people who said things they disagreed with.
Unthinkable!
people who could afford to found their own personal corporation would have double the voting power of those who could not afford it.
In fact, someone wealthy could found thousands of corporations just to get more votes. The could operate them out of s single rental space if an actual address was necessary and sublet out the space to all the corps by the square foot. They could move the corps from district to district between elections depending on what locations needed what particular push to go the way they wanted.
Small groups of wealthy people could coordinate to use such a system to get anyone they wanted elected.