The difference is that you can develop for Android on Linux, Windows, and Mac OS X, so chances that computer user already has a developer machine for Android are way higher than in case of iOS.
Devs make more money on the iStore because consumers feel safer with the apps on that market, and it's because the acceptance process is so tough.
I doubt that's the reason. I don't know about iOS, but I've been a hobbyist shareware developer for Mac OS for about 15 years now, and my experience is that Apple customers generally are more willing to pay for software and on average have more money to spend than users of other platforms. That has always been the case, and it's not very surprising either since Apple products have always been a bit more pricey than others in the first place and are essentially dispensible first-world luxury goods.
Long ago most technical folk switched to buying Mac laptops, so most of them can in fact use the computer they already have...
You keep repeating this like a mantra over and over, but that doesn't make it true. Recent Mac laptops are in fact not very desirable to people who know something about technology and want to do daily work with them for a variety of reasons such as too high price, too slow, not sufficiently upgradeable, problems with battery replacement and no spare battery possible, glossy screen (a big No No), and pretty bad keyboards.
You're confusing Mac developers with "tech folk" in general, but the two groups only overlap to a very small degree.
You're still wrong -- it's selective apprehension, because Macs are quite visible. Just about on any conference except a Mac developer conference most people will have a run off the mill laptop.
Among the tech savvy, Thinkpads are also quite popular, but the same caveat as above applies, of course.
Not everybody who sells applications wants to make buckloads of money, there used to be hobbyists like me who invest their spare time to bring affordable, high-quality applications to people. To many of us, the shareware fee was not a means to get rich, but needed as a small incentive (and justification, e.g. to the wife...) to keep maintaining and developing the app. My main shareware app for OS X is better than most of the competition and available for $15 since the past decade -- however, you won't find it in the App store. Many thousands of great applications and a whole culture is dying with the App stores and people don't even realize how much they are loosing in terms of cash, as they are being ripped off by developers who only want fast cash and certainly aren't interested in long-term maintenance or a sustainable business model.
Moreover, when you're adding up costs, you should add up all the costs: The $650 Mac Mini and $500 will only be usable with the latest OS for about 5 years as reasonable developer machines and the certificates are needed every year. So the minimum cost for iOS development is USD 330 per year, which is 27.5$ a month. That's certainly not much for a real startup, but way too much for many shareware authors.
Add to this the hassle of going through review processes and requirements -- as if bundling, documenting, packaging and distribution weren't already enough of a pain in the ass without an app store --, the need for rewriting your app on every platform because companies more or less force you to use their proprietary toolchains, and forthcoming costs for app stores on other platforms, plus the risk of being sued by a patent troll at any time. Suddenly creating nice apps in your spare time or as a half-time job looks more like a pain than the fun it used to be. And don't be surprised if you're getting ripped off by people who want some fast return for their investment.
at the end of the day there has to be something a step beyond just knowledge for the sake of knowledge.
History has proven over and over that there is not a single piece of "knowledge for the sake of knowledge" that hasn't turned out useful in one way or another later. Some people are too shortsighted and impatient.
To the skeptics of foundational research: Please take a look at the state of knowledge 300 years ago and try to find an example of genuine knowledge of that time that has no useful applications today. I don't claim it's impossible to find examples, but I'd submit that it's fairly hard. A typical example: Complex numbers were ridiculed in the beginning; now they are part of the standard science curriculum.
Isn't it the case that anything could have unforeseen consequences? Related to this, if that avoiding unforeseen consequences were a requirement, how would you show that something does not have any unforeseen consequences?
I -am- a proponent of free speech, and I even defend our right to say something that offends, or even to be offensive.
Not really, because in the next sentence you say:
at the same time, I do think there should be tools in law for people to protect themselves from complete assholes who are just deliberately harassing them.
These tools already exist just about everywhere in the world and surely also in Australia. The problem is that your post does not distinguish between criminal and civil law. Harassment, libel and insults should not fall under criminal law, they should be a matter of civil law. Anybody who feels insulted can file a law suite and if he wins the case the costs are covered by the other party. That's at least what I consider reasonable. I believe that in many countries these are covered by both law systems, but that's a mistake. Harassing someone ought not be a crime even if it results in suicide. People commit suicide for all kinds of reasons, for example when they are sacked or when they are left by their partner, neither of which is a crime either. Moreover, what one person feels as harassment is a mild annoyance to another person and the standards for what constitutes a crime ought to be more objective. Car analogy: If somebody steals your car, whether it has been stolen or not does not depend on your personal feelings about it.
That's of course only my personal opinion, perhaps you disagree. But don't tell me that you're a proponent of free speech as long as you think insulting someone should fall under criminal law.
It sucks, though, as it will invariably be overtaken by some dudes in a faster-than-light space yacht who make fun of the ancient crew. At least that's what my sci-fi reading experience tells me.:-)
Maybe you're imagining moral equivalency where none exists in order to make yourself feel superior to those around you?
No, don't worry, I'm too old for that.
I've just posted my reply under the wrong OP and it therefore became quite misleading. I didn't want to draw any parallels and have no idea what "moral equivalency" could mean. My point was just that freedom of speech is also limited in the US nowadays -- not for members of the Westboro Baptist Church, but quite likely for Muslims or people with Arab sounding names. If these people burn American flags in the US and chant death to Americans, they can get into a lot of trouble. Perhaps you disagree with that assessment, and I'm fine with that. Anyway, the Westboro Baptist Church really has nothing to do with that.
I've got some sad news for you. If you burn the US flag and chant death to America within the US today, chances are pretty high that you're going to get arrested and/or abducted, possibly tortured, and charged with terrorism.
I don't think any of them will help you with your career, though - unless you plan to kill someone with an axe and are looking for advise for or against it.
The company is US-based. No matter how renowned the makers of this software are, under the Patriot Act they can be forced to secretely put backdoors into their apps and never tell anyone. For this reason alone the encryption is worthless, and possibly even dangerous for companies outside the USA that have to guard trade secrets.
You and the other poster are comparing apples with bananas.
If intentional flaws indeed have been inserted into communications technology, then certainly for complementing lawful interception with means for unlawful interception rather than as a substitute. You need to take into account that many government agencies are explicitly allowed (by the laws of their country) to spy on foreign residents in foreign countries, and only under rare circumstances will these be able to ask local authorities for help and judicial permission.
I believe these kinds of flaws are intentional. Just think about the early cell phone encryption standards, who were completely insecure despite having been designed by teams who should have known better.
Governments and government-near task forces and interest groups have no incentive to make communication devices for the general population secure.
But the US can still nuke anyone from the orbit, so the money was not well-spent in the first place.
We should rather care about the quality of our drinking water. With current safety standards, any Russian spy could put chemicals in it that cause homsexuality, and I guess we all know what consequences that would have.
You can feed false information to the software that reads the characteristics of a graphics card just as you can fake an MAC address. I fail to see a substantial difference.
One of the last things I've ever bought from Sony were their ultra-expensive MDR-NC500D digital noise canceling headphones. I can't speak for other noice canceling headphones, but can definitely not recommend the ones by Sony. Don't get fooled by the advertisements, the actual noise canceling is pretty weak, does not have any effect on car noise, and is only noticable when you listen to music. (You can't use them just for canceling outside noise.) Moreover, they need power all the time in order to work at all. In my opinion, they are definitely not worth the money.
Slashdot Mirror
With a decent Linux distro on it, this certainly becomes more interesting. Now give it a non-glare screen and longer battery life and I'll buy it. :-)
The difference is that you can develop for Android on Linux, Windows, and Mac OS X, so chances that computer user already has a developer machine for Android are way higher than in case of iOS.
Devs make more money on the iStore because consumers feel safer with the apps on that market, and it's because the acceptance process is so tough.
I doubt that's the reason. I don't know about iOS, but I've been a hobbyist shareware developer for Mac OS for about 15 years now, and my experience is that Apple customers generally are more willing to pay for software and on average have more money to spend than users of other platforms. That has always been the case, and it's not very surprising either since Apple products have always been a bit more pricey than others in the first place and are essentially dispensible first-world luxury goods.
Long ago most technical folk switched to buying Mac laptops, so most of them can in fact use the computer they already have...
You keep repeating this like a mantra over and over, but that doesn't make it true. Recent Mac laptops are in fact not very desirable to people who know something about technology and want to do daily work with them for a variety of reasons such as too high price, too slow, not sufficiently upgradeable, problems with battery replacement and no spare battery possible, glossy screen (a big No No), and pretty bad keyboards.
You're confusing Mac developers with "tech folk" in general, but the two groups only overlap to a very small degree.
You're still wrong -- it's selective apprehension, because Macs are quite visible. Just about on any conference except a Mac developer conference most people will have a run off the mill laptop.
Among the tech savvy, Thinkpads are also quite popular, but the same caveat as above applies, of course.
What happened to the Shareware idea?
Not everybody who sells applications wants to make buckloads of money, there used to be hobbyists like me who invest their spare time to bring affordable, high-quality applications to people. To many of us, the shareware fee was not a means to get rich, but needed as a small incentive (and justification, e.g. to the wife...) to keep maintaining and developing the app. My main shareware app for OS X is better than most of the competition and available for $15 since the past decade -- however, you won't find it in the App store. Many thousands of great applications and a whole culture is dying with the App stores and people don't even realize how much they are loosing in terms of cash, as they are being ripped off by developers who only want fast cash and certainly aren't interested in long-term maintenance or a sustainable business model.
Moreover, when you're adding up costs, you should add up all the costs: The $650 Mac Mini and $500 will only be usable with the latest OS for about 5 years as reasonable developer machines and the certificates are needed every year. So the minimum cost for iOS development is USD 330 per year, which is 27.5$ a month. That's certainly not much for a real startup, but way too much for many shareware authors.
Add to this the hassle of going through review processes and requirements -- as if bundling, documenting, packaging and distribution weren't already enough of a pain in the ass without an app store --, the need for rewriting your app on every platform because companies more or less force you to use their proprietary toolchains, and forthcoming costs for app stores on other platforms, plus the risk of being sued by a patent troll at any time. Suddenly creating nice apps in your spare time or as a half-time job looks more like a pain than the fun it used to be. And don't be surprised if you're getting ripped off by people who want some fast return for their investment.
I do.
at the end of the day there has to be something a step beyond just knowledge for the sake of knowledge.
History has proven over and over that there is not a single piece of "knowledge for the sake of knowledge" that hasn't turned out useful in one way or another later. Some people are too shortsighted and impatient.
To the skeptics of foundational research: Please take a look at the state of knowledge 300 years ago and try to find an example of genuine knowledge of that time that has no useful applications today. I don't claim it's impossible to find examples, but I'd submit that it's fairly hard. A typical example: Complex numbers were ridiculed in the beginning; now they are part of the standard science curriculum.
Isn't it the case that anything could have unforeseen consequences? Related to this, if that avoiding unforeseen consequences were a requirement, how would you show that something does not have any unforeseen consequences?
I -am- a proponent of free speech, and I even defend our right to say something that offends, or even to be offensive.
Not really, because in the next sentence you say:
at the same time, I do think there should be tools in law for people to protect themselves from complete assholes who are just deliberately harassing them.
These tools already exist just about everywhere in the world and surely also in Australia. The problem is that your post does not distinguish between criminal and civil law. Harassment, libel and insults should not fall under criminal law, they should be a matter of civil law. Anybody who feels insulted can file a law suite and if he wins the case the costs are covered by the other party. That's at least what I consider reasonable. I believe that in many countries these are covered by both law systems, but that's a mistake. Harassing someone ought not be a crime even if it results in suicide. People commit suicide for all kinds of reasons, for example when they are sacked or when they are left by their partner, neither of which is a crime either. Moreover, what one person feels as harassment is a mild annoyance to another person and the standards for what constitutes a crime ought to be more objective. Car analogy: If somebody steals your car, whether it has been stolen or not does not depend on your personal feelings about it.
That's of course only my personal opinion, perhaps you disagree. But don't tell me that you're a proponent of free speech as long as you think insulting someone should fall under criminal law.
Why? A generational ship is not a new concept.
It sucks, though, as it will invariably be overtaken by some dudes in a faster-than-light space yacht who make fun of the ancient crew. At least that's what my sci-fi reading experience tells me. :-)
Maybe you're imagining moral equivalency where none exists in order to make yourself feel superior to those around you?
No, don't worry, I'm too old for that.
I've just posted my reply under the wrong OP and it therefore became quite misleading. I didn't want to draw any parallels and have no idea what "moral equivalency" could mean. My point was just that freedom of speech is also limited in the US nowadays -- not for members of the Westboro Baptist Church, but quite likely for Muslims or people with Arab sounding names. If these people burn American flags in the US and chant death to Americans, they can get into a lot of trouble. Perhaps you disagree with that assessment, and I'm fine with that. Anyway, the Westboro Baptist Church really has nothing to do with that.
I've got some sad news for you. If you burn the US flag and chant death to America within the US today, chances are pretty high that you're going to get arrested and/or abducted, possibly tortured, and charged with terrorism.
Particularly the Idiot and Crime and Punishment.
I don't think any of them will help you with your career, though - unless you plan to kill someone with an axe and are looking for advise for or against it.
The company is US-based. No matter how renowned the makers of this software are, under the Patriot Act they can be forced to secretely put backdoors into their apps and never tell anyone. For this reason alone the encryption is worthless, and possibly even dangerous for companies outside the USA that have to guard trade secrets.
You and the other poster are comparing apples with bananas.
If intentional flaws indeed have been inserted into communications technology, then certainly for complementing lawful interception with means for unlawful interception rather than as a substitute. You need to take into account that many government agencies are explicitly allowed (by the laws of their country) to spy on foreign residents in foreign countries, and only under rare circumstances will these be able to ask local authorities for help and judicial permission.
Idiot.
I believe these kinds of flaws are intentional. Just think about the early cell phone encryption standards, who were completely insecure despite having been designed by teams who should have known better.
Governments and government-near task forces and interest groups have no incentive to make communication devices for the general population secure.
That's how it sounds for me. (Sorry for bringing up Godwin's Law so early.)
The next logical step is, of course, to exterminate all overweight people. Or, just don't give them a job, which is about the same in the US.
But the US can still nuke anyone from the orbit, so the money was not well-spent in the first place.
We should rather care about the quality of our drinking water. With current safety standards, any Russian spy could put chemicals in it that cause homsexuality, and I guess we all know what consequences that would have.
You can feed false information to the software that reads the characteristics of a graphics card just as you can fake an MAC address. I fail to see a substantial difference.
What's your favorite programming language (so far) and why?
Feel free to include assembler languages and please take it as a purely subjective personal question, no need for us to start a flamewar....
One of the last things I've ever bought from Sony were their ultra-expensive MDR-NC500D digital noise canceling headphones. I can't speak for other noice canceling headphones, but can definitely not recommend the ones by Sony. Don't get fooled by the advertisements, the actual noise canceling is pretty weak, does not have any effect on car noise, and is only noticable when you listen to music. (You can't use them just for canceling outside noise.) Moreover, they need power all the time in order to work at all. In my opinion, they are definitely not worth the money.
The Jerk must be fed ... with pizza and Coca-Cola.
It must be kept cool and in the shade during summer days and kept warm and cosy during the harsh storms of the winter.
Always keep the Jerk dry and away from women.
Do not talk with the Jerk unless about jerky things.
The Jerk needs better and faster machines than the others, whom we do not want to mention here.
That is the way to keep the Jerk ... to increase your wealth and wisdom.
An asshat who takes advantage of people still deserves the protection of law [snip].
FTFY. I know this is hard to get into some people's brains but everybody is under the protection of law, including people who break it.