It is a good suggestion, but allow me to point you in the direction of my other replies in this thread. Perhaps that will shed some light on the situation.
I guess it comes down to the definition of the word "subtle". For me, complete loss of picture for a few hundred milliseconds (which makes it appear as if the movie/game is "stuttering") is a subtle but noticable effect. Same goes for full-screen blinks. I can't tell what the problem is, but I am assuming the data in the stream gets so corrupted that the TV decides to skip it all together. I am no expert in HDMI signal protocols, but as it is a DRM protected stream, I am sure both devices are doing continuous checks with hashes, checksums, or whatever. And if the checks fail, I am sure the protocol has specifications for corrective action - either shutting down the signal completely, skipping frames, etc.
Haha... not quite. I work with OLAP cubes in the ERP workspace.
With an analog signal, your claims would be sane. There's a whole continuum of picture quality using analog signals.
However, HDMI is digital. With digital, there is no subtle degradation. There's nothing subtle about not getting any picture.
Allow me to copy a reply from a post to another/.er (who was more polite than you btw - I really don't understand what you need the bad vibes for?)
If its a DRM protected source, the TV will sometimes stop showing the picture, and throw me an error about the content DRM being broken. Can't remember the exact message... something like "HDCP failure: check source".
If the source is not content protected, or if the signal noise is not heavy, the picture will sometimes freeze for half a second, making it look like I am watching the movie on a PC that has trouble decoding the picture. On rare occasions the picture may "blink" with an all white color for a split second, then resume the playback.
Picture never stops completely. It is always just for half a second or less. But if that happens every 3-4 minutes while you're watching a movie, it becomes a pain. And if I rearrange the cables and ensure the HDMI cable is not anywhere near the external power adapters, the problem disappears. It's a cheap cable, and I have no idea if an expensive shielded cable would be better. But moving it away from the adapters has been sufficient, so I haven't bothered getting a new one. My new TV also seems less sensitive than the old one (I switched from an old Samsung Series 7 to a new Series 8 C).
And I thought audiophiles were annoying.
Yeah. I hear you. And the whiners at/. who spread their negative karma without so much as considering whether the guy at the other end MIGHT be an intelligent human being, but just start ranting and accusing you of being employed at Best Buy, are even worse. Don't you just hate it when that happens???
If its a DRM protected source, the TV will sometimes stop showing the picture, and throw me an error about the content DRM being broken. Can't remember the exact message... something like "HDCP failure: check source".
If the source is not content protected, or if the signal noise is not heavy, the picture will sometimes freeze for half a second, making it look like I am watching the movie on a PC that has trouble decoding the picture. On rare occasions the picture may "blink" with an all white color for a split second, then resume the playback.
- Jesper
While there might be a "scam" it is only half a scam.
The protocols used in HDMI data transfer have mechanisms that handles loss of data or minor errors in the stream. So yes - a cheap cable will seem to work even if there is semi-severe interference and signal degradation. The damage sound and image will be auto-corrected in the receiving end, and the user will be none the wiser. Same goes for common network protocols uses in LAN and WLAN. If a packet is lost underway, or its integrity check reveals data corruption, the packet will be resend again. If the protocol is lossy, the receiving client will simply skip the data and move on with life.
While selling a high quality shielded HDMI cable for 99,- GBP might feel like a "scam", don't let yourself be fooled into buying the cheap cables. There IS a difference in quality, and for high-quality signals it does matter. Especially if the cable-mess behind your PS3 / X-Box / DVD player / Amplifier is filtered around external power adapters. I can visually see if my own HDMI cable is passing too close to the power adapter of my SqueezeBox when the signal is Full HD. The difference is subtle - but definitely present!
The scam is not the fact that there are different cables. The scam is the high prices being asked for the quality cables.
Powerpoint doesn't work? Its your fault. Didn't embed that YouTube video correctly? Its your fault. Your laptop can't talk to the projector? Its your fault. The Projector doesn't work? Its your fault. If you aren't professional enough to have your research paper backed up on a thumbdrive, a second laptop for your group presentation, or even/gasp!/ a paper copy, ITS YOUR OWN DAMN FAULT.
You are 100% correct in that the xbox doesn't have the same amount of power as a dual core processor. It has three cores, each of which can run 2 threads at a time.
Since this is Slashdot, could we keep a decent level of seriousness here?
The interesting thing about a microprocessor is not its clock frequency or number of cores. It is the amount of numbers/math it can crunch in a predetermined piece of time.
I bet the odd triple-core PowerPC chip from 2004 used in the X-Box has absolutely no chance against a modern Intel dual-core chip with half the clock speed.
And now that you think about it, you know I am right;-)
These days asking for "a dual core" is equivalent to saying "I want a system with 2005 or newer technology." Not unreasonable I don't think
But that is not the point here. They are not just asking for "dual core". They are asking for a Core 2 Duo or better, meaning Intel x86/x64 Conroe architecture or better. Not a low power dual core ARM processor, not a dual core Atom, but a full-blown CISC monster with loads of multi-level internal caching, advanced pipelining, and a ton of features common to advanced CPU's like Virtualization, Execute Disable Bits, SSE3, MMX, 3DNOW, and so on and forth.
These are not small chips. So they're expensive. And power-hungry.
Oh, and they where introduced in 2006 by the way... announced in Q1 and physically released during the summer.
My surprise comes primarily from the fact that the potential for using this technology is huge, but tying it to powerful "real" full-blown PCs will reduce its potential.
It could be used to analyze behavioral patterns in public spaces (say, by identifying threatening behavior), as a safe/sterile method of interacting with medical equipment, as a way of communicating with people who have severe disabilities... I could fill my house with 10 of these things and let them analyze the physical movements of my children when they run around the house, and create models that determine if they are gaining the motor skills appropriate for their age. I could install one in my car, and have it monitor my behavior during long drives, and notifying me if I am not paying adequate attention to the road ahead of me.
The possibilities are endless. But not if a beefy, full-blown PC has to be connected to each one. A low-power ARM or Atom device is a much more interesting platform to use for these tasks. If I put 10 of them in my house, I don't want a rack full of servers to go along with them. I want small wall-mounted computers that use minimal power and can be hidden away behind stuff. Same goes for using it in my car, in hospitals, in public offices, etc. etc.
Kinect is probably this decades most underrated technological advancement in Human-Computer interaction. Sticking it with heavy hardware will limit its potential.
- Jesper
A FedEx driver screws up a delivery. A manager/supervisor at the local FedEx office takes it upon himself to actually be helpful and sympathetic to the situation. He uses his free time to deliver the package, and probably has to jump through spinning hoops to handle the details of the delivery in his computer system (a fact you kindly point out yourself). Likely he will also have to answer to his superiors about the way he bypassed established procedures in order to help you out.
And you are giving him a hard time about it by complaining about his actions to the corporate complaints office???
As was determined in the Psystar vs Apple case, you can not just define a market as you please. Back then Psystar tried to claim Apple was a monopoly on OS X compatible hardware. The judge quickly threw that claim out as the market is personal computers. Similarly you can not just claim Apple has a monopoly on iOS software distribution, the market is mobile software and Apple does not have a monopoly on that.
Well they do in fact have a monopoly on delivering any software what-so-ever to any iOS device. In addition they have a very powerful position in the portable device market - powerful enough to attract the interest of government officials at the antitrust offices around the world.
And why not?
Just as we should not accept Microsoft being the only supplier of software for Windows, or Oracle being the only supplier of Java applications/tools, Apple should not be allowed to be the only supplier of iOS software.
With their current business model, they have a de-facto monopoly on a very important distribution channel that moves billions of dollars.
No, the market is not "mobile software". The market is mobile software for the devices used by the readers of the tabloid newspaper in question. Devices purchased and governed by more laws than Apples arbitrary rules.
Your other point about discrimination, as far as I'm aware Apple applies the same rules to everyone. If Apple let some developers flout the rules and not others then that would be discrimination, but simply having rules is not discrimination.
I wish that was true. But the Danish tabloid is specifically taking this action because they feel they are discriminated. Larger publishing companies have been allowed to distribute the exact same content that they have been denied. Several English newspapers and the dedicated Playboy app are good examples.
And even if Apple wasn't discriminating, and even if they didn't have a monopoly on delivering software to iOS devices, they must still conduct their business in a fair manner that is compatible with fair markets laws and consumer protection laws.
OMG - LOL - thats probably my first Troll rating right there:-D
Clearly I should have used words like "fuck" and "shit" more, like the original poster, to stay clear of the troll rating... instead of writing about such horrible concepts as "western culture" and "liberal freedoms"...
I seriously doubt this incident would affect sales of the iPad in Denmark (or other Scandinavian countries in the future). But I sure bet the tabloid's sales will go up the roof... You can't beat human nature and Steve knows it better than anybody.
Doubtful. Their readers are not big on expensive technology gadgets. I don't think this will change a lot for them.
Their real agenda is actually getting their app in the appstore.
That's the worst analogy I've ever seen. It doesn't even mention cars. But seriously, did you just compare Apple rejecting an Application for sale on their online store to a civil rights violation? What the fuck were you thinking?
Yes. Obviously Apple is discriminating naked people in their Appstore. Surely you must see that!
Now as much as I don't like Apple, I must say that Apple is free to enter and to not enter into contracts as they please.
Ah, but you are wrong about that. Fortunately.:-)
In civilized countries there are rules to govern trade and business. In the US and the EU, businesses fortunately have to follow rules set forth by society - rules designed to ensure and enforce out liberal freedoms, free trade, fair markets.
As such, Apple is NOT free to "enter and not enter into contracts as they please" because they are not allowed to discriminate other businesses, engage in unfair trade practices, discriminate ethnic minorities, etc. They also must adhere to consumer protection laws, and other national regulation.
Most people think that is a good thing. It makes the real world function even in spite of the mind-numbing consolidation and accumulation of corporate power thats been going on for the last decade.:-)
If he doesn't like that then he can make his own phone and his own app store, or take his business to Apple's competitors, such as Android.
As other have pointed out, this case is not similar to a retailer refusing to sell a specific publication - because Apple essentially has monopoly in the App store.
Your view would only be correct if Apple allowed 3rd party Appstores on the iOS platform - which they don't. Apples business model gives them an unprecedented level of control with the distribution channel, and because of that they may (fortunately) be forced to play nice. Antitrust laws and consumer protection laws are there for a reason. This is a good example.
What exactly is the tabloid suing for? Apple's policies are very well known, and I cannot believe he didn't know what the outcome would be before he submitted his app. Sounds like someone just wants come money and free publicity.
Haha. I LOL'ed at that statement. Shows a little about the way some people think of lawsuits:-)
There are no laws for "punitive damages" in Denmark from which the tabloid (Ekstra Bladet) can win any money. Not a dime.
The only way the tabloid stands to get money, is by being allowed to sell their app to their readers.
Yes. Really.:-)
Free publicity? Sure, any media/newspaper loves that, but they wouldn't have gotten that if it wasn't for Apples lame and discriminatory way of handling their app approvals.
And Apples policies are certainly not "well known". Other large newspapers, and even Playboy, publish naked women through the appstore every day.
As you may well be aware of, Apples app-approval process is often criticized for seeming random, arbitrarily and without explanation. This is just another example in a very long list of similar cases.
It's Apple's fucking market, not anyone else's. These guys are welcome to use an alternate delivery system or put their rag out for any other device. This is horseshit.
Ah, but owning a market place does not give you absolute power to do with it as you please.
In civilized countries there are rules to govern trade and business. I don't know which African Banana republic you live in, but in the US and the EU, businesses fortunately have to follow rules set forth by society - rules designed to ensure and enforce out liberal freedoms, free trade, fair markets.
As such, Apple is NOT free to discriminate other businesses, engage in unfair trade practices, discriminate ethnic minorities, etc. They also must adhere to consumer protection laws, and other national regulation.
Please read up on "real world", and "western culture" on Gooogle or wikipedia before you visit us.
Why? Because I know several tablet owners and smartphone owners, and not a single one of them would "exchange" their PC with these new gadgets. The mobile devices are more like supplementing their PC's, making private streaming and multimedia editing (among many other things) all the more relevant on a true PC.
I really can't see this as the end of the PC era in any capacity. All these new devices do is make people more used to having the power of computing accessible at all time. If anything PC usage will increase because users want more power to fill data and content onto their mobile devices.
Example: When my dad god a smartphone with 24/7 access to picasa, youtube and facebook, he also started using his PC for photo and video editing.
Another example: When my girlfriend got an iPad she started cataloging our personal photo and video collection and adding quite advanced metadata to the content.
A third example: When I got a tablet I started structuring much of our personal information in real word documents, scanned PDF files and spreadsheets so it was all easier to take with me on-the-go. And obviously the scanning and document processing capabilities of the PC is lightyears ahead of any mobile device.
So it's really quite simple: More power in more devices means more needs for the true powerhouse of the bunch: the PC!
Slashdot Mirror
It is a good suggestion, but allow me to point you in the direction of my other replies in this thread. Perhaps that will shed some light on the situation.
:-)
I guess it comes down to the definition of the word "subtle". For me, complete loss of picture for a few hundred milliseconds (which makes it appear as if the movie/game is "stuttering") is a subtle but noticable effect. Same goes for full-screen blinks. I can't tell what the problem is, but I am assuming the data in the stream gets so corrupted that the TV decides to skip it all together. I am no expert in HDMI signal protocols, but as it is a DRM protected stream, I am sure both devices are doing continuous checks with hashes, checksums, or whatever. And if the checks fail, I am sure the protocol has specifications for corrective action - either shutting down the signal completely, skipping frames, etc.
- Jesper
You work at Best Buy, don't you?
Haha ... not quite. I work with OLAP cubes in the ERP workspace.
With an analog signal, your claims would be sane. There's a whole continuum of picture quality using analog signals. However, HDMI is digital. With digital, there is no subtle degradation. There's nothing subtle about not getting any picture.
Allow me to copy a reply from a post to another /.er (who was more polite than you btw - I really don't understand what you need the bad vibes for?)
... something like "HDCP failure: check source".
If its a DRM protected source, the TV will sometimes stop showing the picture, and throw me an error about the content DRM being broken. Can't remember the exact message
If the source is not content protected, or if the signal noise is not heavy, the picture will sometimes freeze for half a second, making it look like I am watching the movie on a PC that has trouble decoding the picture. On rare occasions the picture may "blink" with an all white color for a split second, then resume the playback.
Picture never stops completely. It is always just for half a second or less. But if that happens every 3-4 minutes while you're watching a movie, it becomes a pain. And if I rearrange the cables and ensure the HDMI cable is not anywhere near the external power adapters, the problem disappears. It's a cheap cable, and I have no idea if an expensive shielded cable would be better. But moving it away from the adapters has been sufficient, so I haven't bothered getting a new one. My new TV also seems less sensitive than the old one (I switched from an old Samsung Series 7 to a new Series 8 C).
And I thought audiophiles were annoying.
Yeah. I hear you. And the whiners at /. who spread their negative karma without so much as considering whether the guy at the other end MIGHT be an intelligent human being, but just start ranting and accusing you of being employed at Best Buy, are even worse. Don't you just hate it when that happens???
- Jesper
What kind of artifacts do you see?
No "artifacts" really.
... something like "HDCP failure: check source".
If its a DRM protected source, the TV will sometimes stop showing the picture, and throw me an error about the content DRM being broken. Can't remember the exact message
If the source is not content protected, or if the signal noise is not heavy, the picture will sometimes freeze for half a second, making it look like I am watching the movie on a PC that has trouble decoding the picture. On rare occasions the picture may "blink" with an all white color for a split second, then resume the playback.
- Jesper
While there might be a "scam" it is only half a scam.
The protocols used in HDMI data transfer have mechanisms that handles loss of data or minor errors in the stream. So yes - a cheap cable will seem to work even if there is semi-severe interference and signal degradation. The damage sound and image will be auto-corrected in the receiving end, and the user will be none the wiser. Same goes for common network protocols uses in LAN and WLAN. If a packet is lost underway, or its integrity check reveals data corruption, the packet will be resend again. If the protocol is lossy, the receiving client will simply skip the data and move on with life.
While selling a high quality shielded HDMI cable for 99,- GBP might feel like a "scam", don't let yourself be fooled into buying the cheap cables. There IS a difference in quality, and for high-quality signals it does matter. Especially if the cable-mess behind your PS3 / X-Box / DVD player / Amplifier is filtered around external power adapters. I can visually see if my own HDMI cable is passing too close to the power adapter of my SqueezeBox when the signal is Full HD. The difference is subtle - but definitely present!
The scam is not the fact that there are different cables. The scam is the high prices being asked for the quality cables.
- Jesper
Powerpoint doesn't work? Its your fault. Didn't embed that YouTube video correctly? Its your fault. Your laptop can't talk to the projector? Its your fault. The Projector doesn't work? Its your fault. If you aren't professional enough to have your research paper backed up on a thumbdrive, a second laptop for your group presentation, or even /gasp!/ a paper copy, ITS YOUR OWN DAMN FAULT.
Hmmm... sounds an awful lot like you're quoting Guy Kawasaki's The Art of the Start without proper referencing ... ;-)
- Jesper
I hope that he purchased a license from Adobe for the right to publish PDF files!
Since PDF, also called ISO 32000-1:2008, is an Open Standard, and has been for many years, why would he need to purchase a license???
- Jesper
You are 100% correct in that the xbox doesn't have the same amount of power as a dual core processor. It has three cores, each of which can run 2 threads at a time.
Since this is Slashdot, could we keep a decent level of seriousness here?
;-)
The interesting thing about a microprocessor is not its clock frequency or number of cores. It is the amount of numbers/math it can crunch in a predetermined piece of time.
I bet the odd triple-core PowerPC chip from 2004 used in the X-Box has absolutely no chance against a modern Intel dual-core chip with half the clock speed.
And now that you think about it, you know I am right
- Jesper
These days asking for "a dual core" is equivalent to saying "I want a system with 2005 or newer technology." Not unreasonable I don't think
But that is not the point here. They are not just asking for "dual core". They are asking for a Core 2 Duo or better, meaning Intel x86/x64 Conroe architecture or better. Not a low power dual core ARM processor, not a dual core Atom, but a full-blown CISC monster with loads of multi-level internal caching, advanced pipelining, and a ton of features common to advanced CPU's like Virtualization, Execute Disable Bits, SSE3, MMX, 3DNOW, and so on and forth.
... announced in Q1 and physically released during the summer.
... I could fill my house with 10 of these things and let them analyze the physical movements of my children when they run around the house, and create models that determine if they are gaining the motor skills appropriate for their age. I could install one in my car, and have it monitor my behavior during long drives, and notifying me if I am not paying adequate attention to the road ahead of me.
These are not small chips. So they're expensive. And power-hungry.
Oh, and they where introduced in 2006 by the way
My surprise comes primarily from the fact that the potential for using this technology is huge, but tying it to powerful "real" full-blown PCs will reduce its potential.
It could be used to analyze behavioral patterns in public spaces (say, by identifying threatening behavior), as a safe/sterile method of interacting with medical equipment, as a way of communicating with people who have severe disabilities
The possibilities are endless. But not if a beefy, full-blown PC has to be connected to each one. A low-power ARM or Atom device is a much more interesting platform to use for these tasks. If I put 10 of them in my house, I don't want a rack full of servers to go along with them. I want small wall-mounted computers that use minimal power and can be hidden away behind stuff. Same goes for using it in my car, in hospitals, in public offices, etc. etc.
Kinect is probably this decades most underrated technological advancement in Human-Computer interaction. Sticking it with heavy hardware will limit its potential.
- Jesper
While you're way off base,
Can you clarify?
- Jesper
Why is the minimum req. a beefy dual core processor?
The X-box has nowhere near that amount of power - why keep this technology away from smaller and less power-hungry platforms?
So, I guess we know how Aperture Science started now. Interesting.
...
Now excuse me, I have to get back to testing
but if no one's browser can handle it, you'll be playing with yourself!
Ahemm, English is not my first language, but I believe you mean "by yourself" ...? ;-)
- Jesper
So let me get this straight ...
A FedEx driver screws up a delivery. A manager/supervisor at the local FedEx office takes it upon himself to actually be helpful and sympathetic to the situation. He uses his free time to deliver the package, and probably has to jump through spinning hoops to handle the details of the delivery in his computer system (a fact you kindly point out yourself). Likely he will also have to answer to his superiors about the way he bypassed established procedures in order to help you out.
And you are giving him a hard time about it by complaining about his actions to the corporate complaints office???
What am I missing here???
- Jesper
Cute...
:-)
It's actually a quote from a sci-fi series called Andromeda
- Jesper
As was determined in the Psystar vs Apple case, you can not just define a market as you please. Back then Psystar tried to claim Apple was a monopoly on OS X compatible hardware. The judge quickly threw that claim out as the market is personal computers. Similarly you can not just claim Apple has a monopoly on iOS software distribution, the market is mobile software and Apple does not have a monopoly on that.
Well they do in fact have a monopoly on delivering any software what-so-ever to any iOS device. In addition they have a very powerful position in the portable device market - powerful enough to attract the interest of government officials at the antitrust offices around the world.
And why not?
Just as we should not accept Microsoft being the only supplier of software for Windows, or Oracle being the only supplier of Java applications/tools, Apple should not be allowed to be the only supplier of iOS software.
With their current business model, they have a de-facto monopoly on a very important distribution channel that moves billions of dollars.
No, the market is not "mobile software". The market is mobile software for the devices used by the readers of the tabloid newspaper in question. Devices purchased and governed by more laws than Apples arbitrary rules.
Your other point about discrimination, as far as I'm aware Apple applies the same rules to everyone. If Apple let some developers flout the rules and not others then that would be discrimination, but simply having rules is not discrimination.
I wish that was true. But the Danish tabloid is specifically taking this action because they feel they are discriminated. Larger publishing companies have been allowed to distribute the exact same content that they have been denied. Several English newspapers and the dedicated Playboy app are good examples.
:-)
And even if Apple wasn't discriminating, and even if they didn't have a monopoly on delivering software to iOS devices, they must still conduct their business in a fair manner that is compatible with fair markets laws and consumer protection laws.
- Jesper
Why is parent modded "troll"???
I don't necessarily agree with 130905 but... disagree != troll ???
- Jesper
OMG - LOL - thats probably my first Troll rating right there :-D
:-)
Clearly I should have used words like "fuck" and "shit" more, like the original poster, to stay clear of the troll rating... instead of writing about such horrible concepts as "western culture" and "liberal freedoms"...
- Jesper
I seriously doubt this incident would affect sales of the iPad in Denmark (or other Scandinavian countries in the future). But I sure bet the tabloid's sales will go up the roof... You can't beat human nature and Steve knows it better than anybody.
Doubtful. Their readers are not big on expensive technology gadgets. I don't think this will change a lot for them.
Their real agenda is actually getting their app in the appstore.
- Jesper
Man, I'd be happy to contribute some bandwidth and cycles for a DDOS on this shit.
You're absolutely right. Apple deserves a good DDOS for their shitty behavior.
So glad you understand the importance of the issue at hand. We need more people like you to make society and fair competition prosper.
More power to ya' I say. More power to ya'!
- Jesper
That's the worst analogy I've ever seen. It doesn't even mention cars. But seriously, did you just compare Apple rejecting an Application for sale on their online store to a civil rights violation? What the fuck were you thinking?
Yes. Obviously Apple is discriminating naked people in their Appstore. Surely you must see that!
- Jesper
Now as much as I don't like Apple, I must say that Apple is free to enter and to not enter into contracts as they please.
Ah, but you are wrong about that. Fortunately. :-)
:-)
In civilized countries there are rules to govern trade and business. In the US and the EU, businesses fortunately have to follow rules set forth by society - rules designed to ensure and enforce out liberal freedoms, free trade, fair markets.
As such, Apple is NOT free to "enter and not enter into contracts as they please" because they are not allowed to discriminate other businesses, engage in unfair trade practices, discriminate ethnic minorities, etc. They also must adhere to consumer protection laws, and other national regulation.
Most people think that is a good thing. It makes the real world function even in spite of the mind-numbing consolidation and accumulation of corporate power thats been going on for the last decade.
If he doesn't like that then he can make his own phone and his own app store, or take his business to Apple's competitors, such as Android.
As other have pointed out, this case is not similar to a retailer refusing to sell a specific publication - because Apple essentially has monopoly in the App store.
:-)
Your view would only be correct if Apple allowed 3rd party Appstores on the iOS platform - which they don't. Apples business model gives them an unprecedented level of control with the distribution channel, and because of that they may (fortunately) be forced to play nice. Antitrust laws and consumer protection laws are there for a reason. This is a good example.
- Jesper
What exactly is the tabloid suing for? Apple's policies are very well known, and I cannot believe he didn't know what the outcome would be before he submitted his app. Sounds like someone just wants come money and free publicity.
Haha. I LOL'ed at that statement. Shows a little about the way some people think of lawsuits :-)
:-)
There are no laws for "punitive damages" in Denmark from which the tabloid (Ekstra Bladet) can win any money. Not a dime.
The only way the tabloid stands to get money, is by being allowed to sell their app to their readers.
Yes. Really.
Free publicity? Sure, any media/newspaper loves that, but they wouldn't have gotten that if it wasn't for Apples lame and discriminatory way of handling their app approvals.
And Apples policies are certainly not "well known". Other large newspapers, and even Playboy, publish naked women through the appstore every day.
As you may well be aware of, Apples app-approval process is often criticized for seeming random, arbitrarily and without explanation. This is just another example in a very long list of similar cases.
With any luck, Apple will learn as time goes by.
- Jesper
It's Apple's fucking market, not anyone else's. These guys are welcome to use an alternate delivery system or put their rag out for any other device. This is horseshit.
Ah, but owning a market place does not give you absolute power to do with it as you please.
:-)
In civilized countries there are rules to govern trade and business. I don't know which African Banana republic you live in, but in the US and the EU, businesses fortunately have to follow rules set forth by society - rules designed to ensure and enforce out liberal freedoms, free trade, fair markets.
As such, Apple is NOT free to discriminate other businesses, engage in unfair trade practices, discriminate ethnic minorities, etc. They also must adhere to consumer protection laws, and other national regulation.
Please read up on "real world", and "western culture" on Gooogle or wikipedia before you visit us.
Oh, and don't bring your horseshit with you.
- Jesper
The headline seems a bit melodramatic...
Why? Because I know several tablet owners and smartphone owners, and not a single one of them would "exchange" their PC with these new gadgets. The mobile devices are more like supplementing their PC's, making private streaming and multimedia editing (among many other things) all the more relevant on a true PC.
I really can't see this as the end of the PC era in any capacity. All these new devices do is make people more used to having the power of computing accessible at all time. If anything PC usage will increase because users want more power to fill data and content onto their mobile devices.
Example: When my dad god a smartphone with 24/7 access to picasa, youtube and facebook, he also started using his PC for photo and video editing.
Another example: When my girlfriend got an iPad she started cataloging our personal photo and video collection and adding quite advanced metadata to the content.
A third example: When I got a tablet I started structuring much of our personal information in real word documents, scanned PDF files and spreadsheets so it was all easier to take with me on-the-go. And obviously the scanning and document processing capabilities of the PC is lightyears ahead of any mobile device.
So it's really quite simple: More power in more devices means more needs for the true powerhouse of the bunch: the PC!
- Jesper
Its work-related, so of course it can be expensed!