Sorry, what? I replied to a post of yours. How is this a proper or rational response?
Hundreds of thousands of people without problems and a whole bunch with.
I'm sure you have some research behind that claim? Well, let's just pretend that you actually do for the moment. There are hundreds of millions running the software. If ~0.1% are having troubles, it'll be a big number, but still a minute fraction of the user base.
What I said is really True Gospel, no matter what the fanbois whine about.
"True Gospel"? WTF? And I do hope the moronic "fanboi" remark was rhetorical.
What you said was with Apple, you always have to wait for version x.3. So, let's just think about that for a moment. That means that no one should be running Mountain Lion or iOS 6, because neither have hit x.3. Now, if what you said is true, then you'd expect a majority of users to be having nothing but troubles. Do you think that's even remotely the case?
Yes, there will be bugs, and yes, some people will be hit hard by them. But if it's something that is going to hit such a small percentage of users, is it really "True Gospel"? Sounds more like, "sometimes it's true, but 99.9% of the time it's bullshit". I don't think that's how most people use the word "gospel".
Apple has been pretty bad about software / firmware upgrades for years. 10.0.0 - now exactly how useful was that, remember? 10.6.0 (which was supposed to fix things - glitches galore. 10.7.0 - a mess, 10.8 - still pretty iffy for a lot of people.
Hey, I use OS X (and iOS) daily - I like it. I'm just happy to let the bleeding edge get all white and pasty and act as beta testers. Of course, this isn't exactly restricted to Apple - Google, Microsoft, Oracle (well, they never actually get it together), HP (um, ditto) and everybody else has issues.
So, your Apple rule isn't just an Apple rule after all. But more to the point, it's a silly rule. I can see it being applicable to some people (such as yourself), but by no means is it a "True Gospel" rule for everyone to follow. And it's absurd and offensive to call people "fanbois" because they don't have any problems, or that they need to "get a life" because they point this out to you.
Just don't get all of your panties twisted about.
What are you talking about? You're the one making silly claims of FUD.
It's a tool. Not an altar.
Wait, didn't you just call it "True Gospel"? You're accusing others of being "religious" about it, when you're the only one who has been using religious terminology? You're all over the board here!
It's quite odd to me that you think saying, "most people aren't having any significant problems with the software" makes one a... no-life fanboi, getting his (apparently gay, given your choice of spelling for "fanboy") panties in a twist, at an alter. Or something.
Well, Apple HAS been very badly behaved lately. If nothing else, the fact that we have had to wait until this week to install 6.x because we've been waiting for a jailbreak is incredibly wrong, there should be no such concept as a jailbreak because there should be no such concept as a device that the user cannot install his choice of software.
That's the worst you could come up with? I'd have to say, that's a bit dramatic. Everyone knows full well that Apple locks the OS down. And everyone who knows about jailbreaking knows that the new phones and new OS's are often have no public jailbreak available.
And even sillier still, is that Apple had nothing to do with the wait for the public release of the jailbreak. The hackers themselves held off on the release, not Apple. A move which is strange to me anyway, the logic is supposed to be to not let people jailbreak their phones to prevent Apple from not letting people jailbreak their phones? It's dubious at best.
But I digress.
It's MY phone, not Apple's phone.
Correct. And you knew how it functions before you bought it, so I can't see how Apple has done anything wrong. They never lied or misled you on how it works.
Sure, they're nowhere close to as evil as M$, but they ARE evil.
I can't even remotely agree with you. "Evil" evokes significant harm to people, or at the very least, some exceptional level of criminality. Apple just tries to make great products. They can't make something great for everyone, so maybe you just don't like what they make? Is it "evil" for a company to make a product that doesn't work the way you'd like it to? When there is no shortage of alternatives? When it harms no one, and is not misrepresented in any way?
You seem to have a fairly low bar for what qualifies as "evil".
And what's truly infuriating about that is that they are the ONLY ones making a good user interface for a computer. Linux got lost in the weeds first, with Gnome and Unity, then M$ upped the unusability game with Windoze 8. Apple had to get into it a bit with removing scroll bar arrows and making all window edges growable, but overall Mac OS is by far the best OS out there, nothing else is even close as far as useability. And iOS is quite nice as well, once it's jailbroken.
Fairly reasonable (I agree with some of it, disagree with other parts, and not necessarily all the ones you might think). I do think you are exaggerating things more than a bit, and confusing opinion with fact.
We've talked about this from several angles, so that's a hard question to answer simplistically. We all like cool new stuff that works.:D
Awesome!
I'd just get back to my example of Apple deliberately breaking autorotate for legacy apps running on iOS 6. I definitely do not prefer that kind of change. I think it was a good example of what I was talking about, and not "drivel" at all. You're welcome to write a refutation of that point.
The claim that they just quite simply broke it, deliberately, for no benefit whatsoever is not something that I can believe without some evidence.
With Apple, there are all sorts of things that look like that, but turn out to have some reason that is not so capricious or malevolent at all. I'll give another example. Mountain Lion requires 64-bit Macs, and there are a handful of 64-bit models it can't run on due to graphics cards requirements.
The explanation for the 64-bit requirement should be straightforward: to simplify development. The graphics card requirement though? Some people have concluded that was because Apple just wanted to force people to buy new Macs. But the reason is as a result of the 64-bit requirement. The 64-bit kernel means 64-bit kexts. The older Intel iGPUs don't have 64-bit drivers.
I'd wager your example is more along those lines than that they just want to make things hard for developers.
The view controller auto rotation on ios sucks. Just plain sucks. It was bad before ios6, and ios6 made it even worse.
I've nothing to add either way to this.
And if having to work with a crappy api is not enough, your app will be rejected if the ui doesn't rotate the way apple wants it. What apple wants you won't find out until about a week from the date of submission. Then you can try to hack it, one week at a time.
However this seems to be contradicted by all the apps on the App Store. I don't mean to say it's something every developer gets right on the first try or anything like that, just that I doubt every developer goes through repeated submissions for something like this.
And maybe they do. Either way, it's not enough of a problem that it supports the OP's claim. Unless it's really horrible. Which, again, would be suspicious given all the apps on the App Store. I just can't buy that every, or even most, apps go through such rigamarole as you seem to imply. That would put such a burden on Apple's resources as to make it a no brainer to just address that part of UIKit itself.
But many of the free apps are riddled with holes, spyware, and have zero privacy controls...
FUD.
NB: The TL;DR goes at the bottom
android has better privacy controls than iOS. every android app must declare permissions for the services it can use BEFORE it is installed. i've been an android user since the G1 and i've never had a problem.
No, it's much, much worse. On Android, you are correct that it lists the permissions in the App description, and that the Play Store shows the scariest ones to you before you even install the app. But with Android, it's all or nothing. You can't pick and choose which permissions to grant or deny, even ones that have nothing to do with the core functionality of the app (how many games are given permission to read your phone number, and to open a network connection (hmm... why would they want *those* to features together?!) even if it has no online component whatsoever?)
On iOS, the worrisome permissions (contacts, location, etc.) are prompted for when they are initiated by the app, and you must actively grant permission before the app can use that feature. This is vastly superior to the way Android does it. This is because Google doesn't really take privacy seriously the way Apple does. Their business model is centered on using customer data. That's why they bought Android in the first place.
the reports that pop up every month reporting "spyware found on google play store" are from "researchers" scanning the store and recording the permissions requested by certain apps that technically do not require that permission to operate. e.g., a flashlight app that requests internet access.
False. Those reports are just some of the reports, and when they are presented, they are in the context not of "these apps are malware", but that "Android has a problem with user privacy policies", which is exactly what I pointed out above. On iOS, an app can't get away with fast and loose privacy requests the way they can on Android.
there's no evidence that the apps are actually spyware, they are just suspicious.
And it's better yet to minimize suspicious activity as much as possible, is it not? On this particular matter, Apple is doing it right, and Google is doing it very, very wrong. This has been an ongoing issue for years now, and I have high hopes that Google will address this with Key Lime Pie.
the only reason you don't see such reports on iOS is because iOS apps aren't required to declare permissions, so there's no easy way to tell what the heck they are going to do.
Other than the prompt that iOS pops up asking you at the time of action whether you wish to allow that specific permission or not!
In short, iOS is designed in such a way as to foster user confidence. I have no fear of downloading any app from the App Store, because I know if it's going to do something I might not want, I will receive a prompt. On Android, the only apps I can fully trust are those that don't even ask for the permissions in the first place, because I have no way of knowing when and how those permissions are being used. The level of trust on iOS is across the board, and on Android you have to measure it on a case-by-case basis, and can't even run the app first to get a basis on which to help your judgement!
How is it "backwards" to pay people for your use of their products? Do you work for free? Because if you don't, it sounds to me like you are part of the "problem", and are making those that use the fruits of your labor "go backwards".
Of course, given your adamance against paying for things, maybe you really do work for free. In which case, please accept my humblest apologies and condolences.
When people use a dollar sign on either an American site (like Slashdot), unless context suggests otherwise, it will be taken to mean US dollars.
And the rest of your points are silly. It's a cable designed for the phone. It's not terribly important whether it is patented or not. What's important is does it do its job well? There's no other cable that comes close to lightning. Micro USB is quite inferior, except in two ways (neither of which have anything to do with its functionality), price and use by other manufacturers. The price doesn't bother me (it's not like I have to buy one every week or something), and the lack of support by other manufacturers (i.e., Samsung, Motorola, etc.) is a knock against those products (in my book), than against Apple. It's a feature that helps the iPhone and iPads stand out in an all to commoditized marketplace.
I find myself wishing my Nexus devices used it, and never once wished my iOS devices didn't. There's even an adaptor if, for some reason, you want to use micro USB on your lightning devices.
1$ for every little app doesn't really bother me about the iphone. What bothers me is the proprietary cable (30$oem),
You mean, $19. And it is an active cable with chips to talk to the device so it can alter the functionality of the pins, allowing for an impressive array of features and a future-proof design.
proprietary airplay, airprint, all that...
Which has wide third-party support, so it's not like "proprietary" means anything here, other than that it belongs to Apple.
I like the phone, but I agree they are falling behind.
In some ways, yes.
Next phone I get is not likely to be apple.
If those "some ways" are important to you, then (like you said) there are other phones.
Walled garden is a double-edged sword,
Indeed, but like all double-edged swords, it cuts both ways...
and now the pastures seem greener on the other side..
And to me, the way it slices is that the pastures seem greener to me on the iOS side of things. I think Android is great, but (for me), iOS is better. And I see iOS 7 becoming better still.
iOS 7 and Key Lime Pie will move both platforms forward. iOS 6 and Jellybean are already great OS's. I doubt that either Apple or Google is going to mess up their next OS update this year enough to topple the other (or do so well as to take a huge lead over the other). It could happen (and would definitely be interesting), but it's nothing I'd bet on.
And that's what's great about it. Two worthy choices, something out there for everyone.
my friends pay money for every little thing I download for free with my android phone. sucks to be them
Here's the thing you fail to understand. It's great to be them. They have a phone that they love, and have apps available to them, which they are willing to pay for. For every paid app they download (aside from games, naturally), there's not shortage of free apps that do the same thing.
See, you don't get it. They don't buy things because they have to, they buy them because they want to. There are a lot of great free apps on the App Store as well, and your friends certainly download many of them as well.
So, does that mean "it sucks to be you" then? Of course not! It's great to be you as well. You have a phone that you love, and have apps available to you, for free!
How is either bad, wrong, or sucks? Idiot fanboys (like you, and those that modded you up (and likely, me down)) make the world a poorer place. Why not be happy that people have the choice and freedom to buy what they want, instead of pissing all over them for liking something you don't?
I just don't get it. It's like some of you guys prefer to walk around pissed off all day. And for no good reason! Because somebody else bought an app? Really?
Um, what is this drivel? The 4S isn't "yesterday's customers". Apple sells it today, and will keep selling it tomorrow, and for many tomorrows to come. Nobody's telling you to buy a 5, not even Apple. I have a 4S, and it works better today than it did when I bought it well over a year ago.
You are right about one thing. Apple does drop support when they feel it's worth it. PPC, Classic, 32-bit hardware... But here's the deal with that: 1. the old stuff doesn't magically stop working. 2. by dropping legacy support, the new stuff works much better than it otherwise would.
MS's adherence to legacy has brought about all sorts of annoyances (including security issues) throughout the years. That's one of MS's strengths, though, supporting things for years and years. Apple's quickness to disregard legacy to make things better is one of their strengths. I prefer the latter, because it provides, for me, a much better experience. Perhaps you prefer the former?
There are hundreds of millions of people without any problems whatsoever, and hundreds, maybe even a few thousand, who are having problems. After all, if what you said were true (and not just the standard Slashdot drivel), you'd see not just a sensational headline and story, but an outcry from the users.
Don't worry yourself about it, though. Trolling Apple here will get you points.
There may be many worthy reasons to move from an iPhone to a Nexus 4, but battery life isn't one of them, and neither is heat.
However, you may be on to something with the SIII. After all, if holding off on upgrades to the newest OS version is something that's important to you, going with a non-Nexus Android device will provide that functionality far beyond expectations.:D
You forgot buying the Mac on which to run Xcode, for those 90% of households that have something other than a Mac.
And 10% do, which is a much larger number than even need to compile iOS software. I'm not saying they fully overlap, but this helps put things into perspective.
And, like I said, if that's a problem, then Android is there for them.
And for those few people who do have those needs? What's wrong with paying $99/year?
Imagine buying a 3-year developer license and getting the device free. That's Android's value proposition.
And it's a great value. Just quit acting like it's universally appealing (or anything more than a very small niche), and we've got nothing to argue about.
what's wrong with them buying an Android device
That depends on to what extent Apple succeeds in suing Android out of existence.
Apple has no intention to do that, and even if they did, it cannot happen. You sound like Chicken Little.
Because they aren't selling (i.e., people don't want them). But you're right, strike "netbook" from my post, nothing important about it changes.
How is this bad?
Ultimately, I want people to take time to consider whether iOS is right for them and will continue to be right for them over the years that they plan to own a device.
How do you think this conversion is supposed to go?
You: "Please, before buying an iOS device, consider if you will end up needing to buy a Mac and subscribe to Apple's iOS developer program for $99/year in order to keep using it the way you want to!"
Them: "What? Will Angry Birds and email and Safari stop working? Will the phone or SMS break? Instagram? Facebook, Twitter, Pinterest? Maps? (ok, haha)"
And this is the crux of the matter. If you think this is something that people are running into, you'd expect iOS ADC memberships to skyrocket (or new iOS sales to plummet). You correctly point out a Mac is required to develop for iOS. If Macs are out there in the tens of millions, and iOS devices in the hundreds of millions, then clearly most people aren't compiling software for their iOS devices. And that's even assuming the absurd notion that all Mac users are programmers.
Somehow, you claim that iOS users have to buy Macs, yet iOS outnumbers the Mac by a huge amount. How can that make any sense? Is everyone sharing Macs or something?
If what you keep worrying about is true, then why does Apple sell more and more iOS devices over time, not fewer? Where are all the people who bought an iPad or iPhone, found they had to pay Apple $99/year and buy a Mac, and now need to switch over to Android to do what they want? Clearly, if this was an actual widespread problem, you'd not expect iOS usage to keep growing, would you? Doesn't that seem a bit odd?
It does affect some people, and they do exactly what you seem to think is impossible: they buy an Android device. Problem solved!
Otherwise, people are more likely to suddenly run into one of the things that iOS can't do and get stuck until they've saved up for a brand new device.
Then they bought the wrong thing, and will need to spend money to correct that mistake. It happens all the time on all sorts of things, not just iPads. People buy the wrong TV, the wrong car, the wrong house, the wrong pants, the wrong mayonnaise, the wrong wallet, the wrong...
So, the question is, for how many people is iOS the wrong mobile OS? The evidence sure seems to imply it's the right OS for ever more people, not fewer.
Yes, there are restrictions. The question that matters is, do those restrictions bother enough people to matter? If what you say is true, that people have to pay Apple to use their devices in the ways they want to, then you'd expect most people would become paid developers as a standard course of action. Buy an iPhone, become a $99/year iOS ADC member would be as rote as buy a TV, buy a DVD player (well, as rote as that used to be at least).
But most people never do that. And I don't mean most as in just >50%, I mean most as in >99%. To me, that looks like very strong evidence against the bulk of your iOS-related posts.
And for those few people who do have those needs? What's wrong with paying $99/year? It's not like it's some horrible thing. If they prefer iOS over Android enough to find that worthwhile, what's the harm?
And if not, if they either don't like iOS, or simply don't want to (or can't) pay $99/year (and again, very few people even get to the point where it's something they'll ever, ever need to consider), what's wrong with them buying an Android device (or a PC, or a netbook, or whatever best fits their needs)?
Nothing!
iOS exists. It serves hundreds of millions of people's needs very well. It doesn't suit you. Fair enough. No one is going to tell you you have to want iOS, or that you have to buy iOS. Hate it all you want. Talk online about how you hate it all you want. I just simply ask that you stop pretending like your preferences represent anything other than the most minute fraction of the market.
And for that minute fraction, options exist! From Apple and from outside Apple!! Everyone has options to fit their needs and preferences!!!
Indeed. If the article were, "Samsung now the Top PC Vendor, for Some Values of PC," and talked about how sales of the highly popular Galaxy phones & tablets were turning Samsung into the top PC Vendor, all you'd hear would be orgasmic groaning from basements all across America as millions of neckbeards creamed their jeans at the prospect of the Google-Rola-Droid-Sung collective being top PC vendor.
Absolutely, though it's only fair to point out that iPhone outsells Galaxy by a large margin, so that headline wouldn't count if it included Apple's products.
And that's what makes some Android fans so mad, that Apple products are actually popular. That people have the audacity to have different preferences from them!
But since a large number of these same cunts hate Apple for no sensible fucking reason other than "They won't do business the way I think they should," the news of Apple's success as a PC vendor inspires fits of apoplectic, cheetos-stained, mountain-dew-scented nerdrage.
Overly harsh, but on the mark. I like Android, but the vocal among their fans really look absurd when they talk about Apple. Double-standards abound on Android, apparently. "Fandroids" put Apple "fanboys" to shame in their advanced levels of absurdity.
All tablets that I'm aware of have actual keyboards. They are on the screen
Good luck touch-typing on any of them. But as you pointed out, at least most tablets (apart from Kindle Fire) support external keyboards.
You could just say, "you're right".
all the things people use to preclude the iPad from being a PC are "self-serving bullshit"
If someone complained about the required annual poll tax to Apple just to be able to use software that he or a real-life friend wrote on a device that he owns, would this complaint be considered "self-serving oxdung"?
It was his term, I just pointed out it applies to him. I wouldn't normally call people that. But yes, that's self-deluding <pick your animal>shit. Because you don't have to pay Apple an "annual poll tax" (neither literally, nor figuratively) to use iOS devices.
You are so caught up on something that affects <1% of users, there's something wrong with you. I understand that it's something you care about personally, and that's wholly valid. I won't argue with that at all, your preferences and needs are yours to decide. But quit acting like most anyone else actually cares. You are not the center of the Universe.
Also, it would help if you actually called things what they are instead of engaging in hyperbole all the time. Calling the (completely unnecessary for most people) developer subscription a "poll tax" is a sign that calling it what it really is just won't make your point well enough and would only serve to make you look silly.
So we should include phones and game consoles as well. Got it.
They are all computers. PC's are generally defined by their roles and usage. Gaming consoles only replace a very small subset of PC roles (primarily gaming, and to some extent, streaming media, most anything else (really, just web browsing) is exceedingly sub-par).
While all three are computers, can all three fill the roles of a PC (not workstation, not server, but PC)? Gaming consoles quite simply can't. Some, but not all, not even most. Phones can technically do most anything you'd do on a PC, but only at the high end is it even reasonably capable enough (iPhone, Galaxy, Nexus), and even then, the screen size is too limiting to really replace a PC for extended periods of time.
But tablets can. Not only can they, but they do. For a large number of users, the iPad is becoming more and more their primary PC, with their regular PC augmenting it, and not the other way around. This number will only increase (and if Apple falters with iOS, substitute Nexus for iPad).
Now, as a workstation (what most Slashdotters get hung up on), iPads, Android tablets, none of them are reasonable replacements for all that many roles. But for web browsing, media consumption, email, video chatting, apps and games? iPads can hold their own, and are often more enjoyable to use than than the standard PC.
Whether you want to call an iPad a PC or not, the topic is at least debatable, and far more reasonable than it is for consoles or even phones. I think we're definitely at a point today where it makes sense to, at the very least, consider both markets, the "total PC market with iPad" and "total PC market without iPad" when considering the lay of the land. I'd add the Nexus 10 to the mix, but it has not sold sufficient numbers yet to make a difference. Same goes for Surface. Once (and if) they do, all three deserve to be part of at least some of the analysis.
No, of course not. I draw the line at having an actual keyboard (which makes my daughter's HTC Desire Z phone more of a PC than a typical tablet is). TFA is just self-serving bullshit. And shame on TFS for publicizing the rubbish.
"Self-serving bullshit" is when you engage in childish, "I'll make up some silly rule and pretend like it's valid, though only because it helps me in some way".
All tablets that I'm aware of have actual keyboards. They are on the screen, and they are, optionally, wired or wireless external keyboards, compatible with full-fledged desktop keyboards. And I'll wager a large number of people reading this (and agreeing with you) have PCs that don't have a keyboard connected to them.
Wait, what was that? Keyboards are optional on PCs as well? But I thought... Didn't you just say... Oh no! How can that be!!!
It can be because all the things people use to preclude the iPad from being a PC are "self-serving bullshit".
Tomato / Tomato. The pro is a great tablet because it does so much more than any other tablet *and* a great laptop because it's portable and well built.
It does more, poorly and at great compromise. And it's more portable by being too small and unusable on your lap (ironic, for something you just called a "great laptop"!).
With the Type Cover, it's thicker than my MacBook Pro! How is a 5 hour battery life, heavy, thick, non-LTE optional, horrendously expensive, gimped storage space tablet supposed to be a "great tablet"? Because it runs Windows? MS has been singing that song for over a decade now, and it turns out, no one wants Windows on their tablet!
And there have also been UMPCs, and netbooks, and no one wants those either! This thing doesn't even have an 11" display, and it's somehow a "great laptop"?! Almost any ultrabook is a better laptop (and those aren't generally regarded as "great laptops"), and often cheaper!
Surface Pro is compromised in all the wrong ways in order to make a device that has all the wrong features. It might sound like a good idea, but it's not. It's a dud.
Except the Surface Pro addresses a very narrow market that wants "more tablet than laptop", but not laptop enough for an ultrabook, and not tablet enough for an iPad or even so ring like an ASUS Transformer.
I, like many here, gave the Surface some interest, but realized I'd rather have a good tablet (an iPad, like most here), and not a gimped Windows. So I had hopes for the Surface Pro. But it looks like having a Surface Pro would mean constantly being annoyed that I'm not using an iPad or a proper notebook, depending on the task at hand.
"Worst of both worlds" sums it up perfectly. "No compromises" my ass!
That's not true. Even if you can't run all your existing apps, many developers could, over time, release ARM binaries. I'd expect many of the standard nerd apps would flock to ARM (Firefox, Chrome, Foobar2000, most any actively run open source app, like VLC).
And regardless, it'd be significantly more relevant than not supporting it, right? Like is the case with Windows RT.
Except the MacBook Air isn't a tablet. That's the point here. In the Surface Pro, you have a crappy tablet (I.e., laptop level heat) and a crappy laptop (tablet form factor, limited specs, floppy hinge that isn't, you know, actually lap friendly).
Slashdot Mirror
I'm glad to hear you are gainfully employed, and (I'm guessing) enjoy your job. I only ask you don't begrudge others for doing the same.
Oh get a life, dude.
Sorry, what? I replied to a post of yours. How is this a proper or rational response?
Hundreds of thousands of people without problems and a whole bunch with.
I'm sure you have some research behind that claim? Well, let's just pretend that you actually do for the moment. There are hundreds of millions running the software. If ~0.1% are having troubles, it'll be a big number, but still a minute fraction of the user base.
What I said is really True Gospel, no matter what the fanbois whine about.
"True Gospel"? WTF? And I do hope the moronic "fanboi" remark was rhetorical.
What you said was with Apple, you always have to wait for version x.3. So, let's just think about that for a moment. That means that no one should be running Mountain Lion or iOS 6, because neither have hit x.3. Now, if what you said is true, then you'd expect a majority of users to be having nothing but troubles. Do you think that's even remotely the case?
Yes, there will be bugs, and yes, some people will be hit hard by them. But if it's something that is going to hit such a small percentage of users, is it really "True Gospel"? Sounds more like, "sometimes it's true, but 99.9% of the time it's bullshit". I don't think that's how most people use the word "gospel".
Apple has been pretty bad about software / firmware upgrades for years. 10.0.0 - now exactly how useful was that, remember? 10.6.0 (which was supposed to fix things - glitches galore. 10.7.0 - a mess, 10.8 - still pretty iffy for a lot of people.
Hey, I use OS X (and iOS) daily - I like it. I'm just happy to let the bleeding edge get all white and pasty and act as beta testers. Of course, this isn't exactly restricted to Apple - Google, Microsoft, Oracle (well, they never actually get it together), HP (um, ditto) and everybody else has issues.
So, your Apple rule isn't just an Apple rule after all. But more to the point, it's a silly rule. I can see it being applicable to some people (such as yourself), but by no means is it a "True Gospel" rule for everyone to follow. And it's absurd and offensive to call people "fanbois" because they don't have any problems, or that they need to "get a life" because they point this out to you.
Just don't get all of your panties twisted about.
What are you talking about? You're the one making silly claims of FUD.
It's a tool. Not an altar.
Wait, didn't you just call it "True Gospel"? You're accusing others of being "religious" about it, when you're the only one who has been using religious terminology? You're all over the board here!
It's quite odd to me that you think saying, "most people aren't having any significant problems with the software" makes one a... no-life fanboi, getting his (apparently gay, given your choice of spelling for "fanboy") panties in a twist, at an alter. Or something.
Or maybe you just aren't all that coherent today.
Well, Apple HAS been very badly behaved lately. If nothing else, the fact that we have had to wait until this week to install 6.x because we've been waiting for a jailbreak is incredibly wrong, there should be no such concept as a jailbreak because there should be no such concept as a device that the user cannot install his choice of software.
That's the worst you could come up with? I'd have to say, that's a bit dramatic. Everyone knows full well that Apple locks the OS down. And everyone who knows about jailbreaking knows that the new phones and new OS's are often have no public jailbreak available.
And even sillier still, is that Apple had nothing to do with the wait for the public release of the jailbreak. The hackers themselves held off on the release, not Apple. A move which is strange to me anyway, the logic is supposed to be to not let people jailbreak their phones to prevent Apple from not letting people jailbreak their phones? It's dubious at best.
But I digress.
It's MY phone, not Apple's phone.
Correct. And you knew how it functions before you bought it, so I can't see how Apple has done anything wrong. They never lied or misled you on how it works.
Sure, they're nowhere close to as evil as M$, but they ARE evil.
I can't even remotely agree with you. "Evil" evokes significant harm to people, or at the very least, some exceptional level of criminality. Apple just tries to make great products. They can't make something great for everyone, so maybe you just don't like what they make? Is it "evil" for a company to make a product that doesn't work the way you'd like it to? When there is no shortage of alternatives? When it harms no one, and is not misrepresented in any way?
You seem to have a fairly low bar for what qualifies as "evil".
And what's truly infuriating about that is that they are the ONLY ones making a good user interface for a computer. Linux got lost in the weeds first, with Gnome and Unity, then M$ upped the unusability game with Windoze 8. Apple had to get into it a bit with removing scroll bar arrows and making all window edges growable, but overall Mac OS is by far the best OS out there, nothing else is even close as far as useability. And iOS is quite nice as well, once it's jailbroken.
Fairly reasonable (I agree with some of it, disagree with other parts, and not necessarily all the ones you might think). I do think you are exaggerating things more than a bit, and confusing opinion with fact.
We've talked about this from several angles, so that's a hard question to answer simplistically. We all like cool new stuff that works. :D
Awesome!
I'd just get back to my example of Apple deliberately breaking autorotate for legacy apps running on iOS 6. I definitely do not prefer that kind of change. I think it was a good example of what I was talking about, and not "drivel" at all. You're welcome to write a refutation of that point.
The claim that they just quite simply broke it, deliberately, for no benefit whatsoever is not something that I can believe without some evidence.
With Apple, there are all sorts of things that look like that, but turn out to have some reason that is not so capricious or malevolent at all. I'll give another example. Mountain Lion requires 64-bit Macs, and there are a handful of 64-bit models it can't run on due to graphics cards requirements.
The explanation for the 64-bit requirement should be straightforward: to simplify development. The graphics card requirement though? Some people have concluded that was because Apple just wanted to force people to buy new Macs. But the reason is as a result of the 64-bit requirement. The 64-bit kernel means 64-bit kexts. The older Intel iGPUs don't have 64-bit drivers.
I'd wager your example is more along those lines than that they just want to make things hard for developers.
The view controller auto rotation on ios sucks. Just plain sucks. It was bad before ios6, and ios6 made it even worse.
I've nothing to add either way to this.
And if having to work with a crappy api is not enough, your app will be rejected if the ui doesn't rotate the way apple wants it. What apple wants you won't find out until about a week from the date of submission. Then you can try to hack it, one week at a time.
However this seems to be contradicted by all the apps on the App Store. I don't mean to say it's something every developer gets right on the first try or anything like that, just that I doubt every developer goes through repeated submissions for something like this.
And maybe they do. Either way, it's not enough of a problem that it supports the OP's claim. Unless it's really horrible. Which, again, would be suspicious given all the apps on the App Store. I just can't buy that every, or even most, apps go through such rigamarole as you seem to imply. That would put such a burden on Apple's resources as to make it a no brainer to just address that part of UIKit itself.
But many of the free apps are riddled with holes, spyware, and have zero privacy controls...
FUD.
NB: The TL;DR goes at the bottom
android has better privacy controls than iOS. every android app must declare permissions for the services it can use BEFORE it is installed. i've been an android user since the G1 and i've never had a problem.
No, it's much, much worse. On Android, you are correct that it lists the permissions in the App description, and that the Play Store shows the scariest ones to you before you even install the app. But with Android, it's all or nothing. You can't pick and choose which permissions to grant or deny, even ones that have nothing to do with the core functionality of the app (how many games are given permission to read your phone number, and to open a network connection (hmm... why would they want *those* to features together?!) even if it has no online component whatsoever?)
On iOS, the worrisome permissions (contacts, location, etc.) are prompted for when they are initiated by the app, and you must actively grant permission before the app can use that feature. This is vastly superior to the way Android does it. This is because Google doesn't really take privacy seriously the way Apple does. Their business model is centered on using customer data. That's why they bought Android in the first place.
the reports that pop up every month reporting "spyware found on google play store" are from "researchers" scanning the store and recording the permissions requested by certain apps that technically do not require that permission to operate. e.g., a flashlight app that requests internet access.
False. Those reports are just some of the reports, and when they are presented, they are in the context not of "these apps are malware", but that "Android has a problem with user privacy policies", which is exactly what I pointed out above. On iOS, an app can't get away with fast and loose privacy requests the way they can on Android.
there's no evidence that the apps are actually spyware, they are just suspicious.
And it's better yet to minimize suspicious activity as much as possible, is it not? On this particular matter, Apple is doing it right, and Google is doing it very, very wrong. This has been an ongoing issue for years now, and I have high hopes that Google will address this with Key Lime Pie.
the only reason you don't see such reports on iOS is because iOS apps aren't required to declare permissions, so there's no easy way to tell what the heck they are going to do.
Other than the prompt that iOS pops up asking you at the time of action whether you wish to allow that specific permission or not!
In short, iOS is designed in such a way as to foster user confidence. I have no fear of downloading any app from the App Store, because I know if it's going to do something I might not want, I will receive a prompt. On Android, the only apps I can fully trust are those that don't even ask for the permissions in the first place, because I have no way of knowing when and how those permissions are being used. The level of trust on iOS is across the board, and on Android you have to measure it on a case-by-case basis, and can't even run the app first to get a basis on which to help your judgement!
How is it "backwards" to pay people for your use of their products? Do you work for free? Because if you don't, it sounds to me like you are part of the "problem", and are making those that use the fruits of your labor "go backwards".
Of course, given your adamance against paying for things, maybe you really do work for free. In which case, please accept my humblest apologies and condolences.
When people use a dollar sign on either an American site (like Slashdot), unless context suggests otherwise, it will be taken to mean US dollars.
And the rest of your points are silly. It's a cable designed for the phone. It's not terribly important whether it is patented or not. What's important is does it do its job well? There's no other cable that comes close to lightning. Micro USB is quite inferior, except in two ways (neither of which have anything to do with its functionality), price and use by other manufacturers. The price doesn't bother me (it's not like I have to buy one every week or something), and the lack of support by other manufacturers (i.e., Samsung, Motorola, etc.) is a knock against those products (in my book), than against Apple. It's a feature that helps the iPhone and iPads stand out in an all to commoditized marketplace.
I find myself wishing my Nexus devices used it, and never once wished my iOS devices didn't. There's even an adaptor if, for some reason, you want to use micro USB on your lightning devices.
1$ for every little app doesn't really bother me about the iphone. What bothers me is the proprietary cable (30$oem),
You mean, $19. And it is an active cable with chips to talk to the device so it can alter the functionality of the pins, allowing for an impressive array of features and a future-proof design.
proprietary airplay, airprint, all that...
Which has wide third-party support, so it's not like "proprietary" means anything here, other than that it belongs to Apple.
I like the phone, but I agree they are falling behind.
In some ways, yes.
Next phone I get is not likely to be apple.
If those "some ways" are important to you, then (like you said) there are other phones.
Walled garden is a double-edged sword,
Indeed, but like all double-edged swords, it cuts both ways...
and now the pastures seem greener on the other side..
And to me, the way it slices is that the pastures seem greener to me on the iOS side of things. I think Android is great, but (for me), iOS is better. And I see iOS 7 becoming better still.
iOS 7 and Key Lime Pie will move both platforms forward. iOS 6 and Jellybean are already great OS's. I doubt that either Apple or Google is going to mess up their next OS update this year enough to topple the other (or do so well as to take a huge lead over the other). It could happen (and would definitely be interesting), but it's nothing I'd bet on.
And that's what's great about it. Two worthy choices, something out there for everyone.
my friends pay money for every little thing I download for free with my android phone. sucks to be them
Here's the thing you fail to understand. It's great to be them. They have a phone that they love, and have apps available to them, which they are willing to pay for. For every paid app they download (aside from games, naturally), there's not shortage of free apps that do the same thing.
See, you don't get it. They don't buy things because they have to, they buy them because they want to. There are a lot of great free apps on the App Store as well, and your friends certainly download many of them as well.
So, does that mean "it sucks to be you" then? Of course not! It's great to be you as well. You have a phone that you love, and have apps available to you, for free!
How is either bad, wrong, or sucks? Idiot fanboys (like you, and those that modded you up (and likely, me down)) make the world a poorer place. Why not be happy that people have the choice and freedom to buy what they want, instead of pissing all over them for liking something you don't?
I just don't get it. It's like some of you guys prefer to walk around pissed off all day. And for no good reason! Because somebody else bought an app? Really?
Um, what is this drivel? The 4S isn't "yesterday's customers". Apple sells it today, and will keep selling it tomorrow, and for many tomorrows to come. Nobody's telling you to buy a 5, not even Apple. I have a 4S, and it works better today than it did when I bought it well over a year ago.
You are right about one thing. Apple does drop support when they feel it's worth it. PPC, Classic, 32-bit hardware... But here's the deal with that: 1. the old stuff doesn't magically stop working. 2. by dropping legacy support, the new stuff works much better than it otherwise would.
MS's adherence to legacy has brought about all sorts of annoyances (including security issues) throughout the years. That's one of MS's strengths, though, supporting things for years and years. Apple's quickness to disregard legacy to make things better is one of their strengths. I prefer the latter, because it provides, for me, a much better experience. Perhaps you prefer the former?
You must be new here.
Troll much?
There are hundreds of millions of people without any problems whatsoever, and hundreds, maybe even a few thousand, who are having problems. After all, if what you said were true (and not just the standard Slashdot drivel), you'd see not just a sensational headline and story, but an outcry from the users.
Don't worry yourself about it, though. Trolling Apple here will get you points.
There may be many worthy reasons to move from an iPhone to a Nexus 4, but battery life isn't one of them, and neither is heat.
However, you may be on to something with the SIII. After all, if holding off on upgrades to the newest OS version is something that's important to you, going with a non-Nexus Android device will provide that functionality far beyond expectations. :D
Buy an iPhone, become a $99/year iOS ADC member
You forgot buying the Mac on which to run Xcode, for those 90% of households that have something other than a Mac.
And 10% do, which is a much larger number than even need to compile iOS software. I'm not saying they fully overlap, but this helps put things into perspective.
And, like I said, if that's a problem, then Android is there for them.
And for those few people who do have those needs? What's wrong with paying $99/year?
Imagine buying a 3-year developer license and getting the device free. That's Android's value proposition.
And it's a great value. Just quit acting like it's universally appealing (or anything more than a very small niche), and we've got nothing to argue about.
what's wrong with them buying an Android device
That depends on to what extent Apple succeeds in suing Android out of existence.
Apple has no intention to do that, and even if they did, it cannot happen. You sound like Chicken Little.
or a PC, or a netbook
That'd be fine if manufacturers hadn't stopped making 10" laptops at the end of last year. I imagine that the supply of working used netbooks will dwindle.
Because they aren't selling (i.e., people don't want them). But you're right, strike "netbook" from my post, nothing important about it changes.
How is this bad?
Ultimately, I want people to take time to consider whether iOS is right for them and will continue to be right for them over the years that they plan to own a device.
How do you think this conversion is supposed to go?
You: "Please, before buying an iOS device, consider if you will end up needing to buy a Mac and subscribe to Apple's iOS developer program for $99/year in order to keep using it the way you want to!"
Them: "What? Will Angry Birds and email and Safari stop working? Will the phone or SMS break? Instagram? Facebook, Twitter, Pinterest? Maps? (ok, haha)"
And this is the crux of the matter. If you think this is something that people are running into, you'd expect iOS ADC memberships to skyrocket (or new iOS sales to plummet). You correctly point out a Mac is required to develop for iOS. If Macs are out there in the tens of millions, and iOS devices in the hundreds of millions, then clearly most people aren't compiling software for their iOS devices. And that's even assuming the absurd notion that all Mac users are programmers.
Somehow, you claim that iOS users have to buy Macs, yet iOS outnumbers the Mac by a huge amount. How can that make any sense? Is everyone sharing Macs or something?
If what you keep worrying about is true, then why does Apple sell more and more iOS devices over time, not fewer? Where are all the people who bought an iPad or iPhone, found they had to pay Apple $99/year and buy a Mac, and now need to switch over to Android to do what they want? Clearly, if this was an actual widespread problem, you'd not expect iOS usage to keep growing, would you? Doesn't that seem a bit odd?
It does affect some people, and they do exactly what you seem to think is impossible: they buy an Android device. Problem solved!
Otherwise, people are more likely to suddenly run into one of the things that iOS can't do and get stuck until they've saved up for a brand new device.
Then they bought the wrong thing, and will need to spend money to correct that mistake. It happens all the time on all sorts of things, not just iPads. People buy the wrong TV, the wrong car, the wrong house, the wrong pants, the wrong mayonnaise, the wrong wallet, the wrong...
So, the question is, for how many people is iOS the wrong mobile OS? The evidence sure seems to imply it's the right OS for ever more people, not fewer.
Strange, right?
Thank you.
Yes, there are restrictions. The question that matters is, do those restrictions bother enough people to matter? If what you say is true, that people have to pay Apple to use their devices in the ways they want to, then you'd expect most people would become paid developers as a standard course of action. Buy an iPhone, become a $99/year iOS ADC member would be as rote as buy a TV, buy a DVD player (well, as rote as that used to be at least).
But most people never do that. And I don't mean most as in just >50%, I mean most as in >99%. To me, that looks like very strong evidence against the bulk of your iOS-related posts.
And for those few people who do have those needs? What's wrong with paying $99/year? It's not like it's some horrible thing. If they prefer iOS over Android enough to find that worthwhile, what's the harm?
And if not, if they either don't like iOS, or simply don't want to (or can't) pay $99/year (and again, very few people even get to the point where it's something they'll ever, ever need to consider), what's wrong with them buying an Android device (or a PC, or a netbook, or whatever best fits their needs)?
Nothing!
iOS exists. It serves hundreds of millions of people's needs very well. It doesn't suit you. Fair enough. No one is going to tell you you have to want iOS, or that you have to buy iOS. Hate it all you want. Talk online about how you hate it all you want. I just simply ask that you stop pretending like your preferences represent anything other than the most minute fraction of the market.
And for that minute fraction, options exist! From Apple and from outside Apple!! Everyone has options to fit their needs and preferences!!!
How is this bad?
Indeed. If the article were, "Samsung now the Top PC Vendor, for Some Values of PC," and talked about how sales of the highly popular Galaxy phones & tablets were turning Samsung into the top PC Vendor, all you'd hear would be orgasmic groaning from basements all across America as millions of neckbeards creamed their jeans at the prospect of the Google-Rola-Droid-Sung collective being top PC vendor.
Absolutely, though it's only fair to point out that iPhone outsells Galaxy by a large margin, so that headline wouldn't count if it included Apple's products.
And that's what makes some Android fans so mad, that Apple products are actually popular. That people have the audacity to have different preferences from them!
But since a large number of these same cunts hate Apple for no sensible fucking reason other than "They won't do business the way I think they should," the news of Apple's success as a PC vendor inspires fits of apoplectic, cheetos-stained, mountain-dew-scented nerdrage.
Overly harsh, but on the mark. I like Android, but the vocal among their fans really look absurd when they talk about Apple. Double-standards abound on Android, apparently. "Fandroids" put Apple "fanboys" to shame in their advanced levels of absurdity.
All tablets that I'm aware of have actual keyboards. They are on the screen
Good luck touch-typing on any of them. But as you pointed out, at least most tablets (apart from Kindle Fire) support external keyboards.
You could just say, "you're right".
all the things people use to preclude the iPad from being a PC are "self-serving bullshit"
If someone complained about the required annual poll tax to Apple just to be able to use software that he or a real-life friend wrote on a device that he owns, would this complaint be considered "self-serving oxdung"?
It was his term, I just pointed out it applies to him. I wouldn't normally call people that. But yes, that's self-deluding <pick your animal>shit. Because you don't have to pay Apple an "annual poll tax" (neither literally, nor figuratively) to use iOS devices.
You are so caught up on something that affects <1% of users, there's something wrong with you. I understand that it's something you care about personally, and that's wholly valid. I won't argue with that at all, your preferences and needs are yours to decide. But quit acting like most anyone else actually cares. You are not the center of the Universe.
Also, it would help if you actually called things what they are instead of engaging in hyperbole all the time. Calling the (completely unnecessary for most people) developer subscription a "poll tax" is a sign that calling it what it really is just won't make your point well enough and would only serve to make you look silly.
Linux: the "PC" OS that is rarely actually run on so-called (here on Slashdot at least) "real" PCs!
They need to rename it "the year of Linux on (everything but) the PC". :D
So we should include phones and game consoles as well. Got it.
They are all computers. PC's are generally defined by their roles and usage. Gaming consoles only replace a very small subset of PC roles (primarily gaming, and to some extent, streaming media, most anything else (really, just web browsing) is exceedingly sub-par).
While all three are computers, can all three fill the roles of a PC (not workstation, not server, but PC)? Gaming consoles quite simply can't. Some, but not all, not even most. Phones can technically do most anything you'd do on a PC, but only at the high end is it even reasonably capable enough (iPhone, Galaxy, Nexus), and even then, the screen size is too limiting to really replace a PC for extended periods of time.
But tablets can. Not only can they, but they do. For a large number of users, the iPad is becoming more and more their primary PC, with their regular PC augmenting it, and not the other way around. This number will only increase (and if Apple falters with iOS, substitute Nexus for iPad).
Now, as a workstation (what most Slashdotters get hung up on), iPads, Android tablets, none of them are reasonable replacements for all that many roles. But for web browsing, media consumption, email, video chatting, apps and games? iPads can hold their own, and are often more enjoyable to use than than the standard PC.
Whether you want to call an iPad a PC or not, the topic is at least debatable, and far more reasonable than it is for consoles or even phones. I think we're definitely at a point today where it makes sense to, at the very least, consider both markets, the "total PC market with iPad" and "total PC market without iPad" when considering the lay of the land. I'd add the Nexus 10 to the mix, but it has not sold sufficient numbers yet to make a difference. Same goes for Surface. Once (and if) they do, all three deserve to be part of at least some of the analysis.
Do tablets really count as a "PC"?
No, of course not. I draw the line at having an actual keyboard (which makes my daughter's HTC Desire Z phone more of a PC than a typical tablet is). TFA is just self-serving bullshit. And shame on TFS for publicizing the rubbish.
"Self-serving bullshit" is when you engage in childish, "I'll make up some silly rule and pretend like it's valid, though only because it helps me in some way".
All tablets that I'm aware of have actual keyboards. They are on the screen, and they are, optionally, wired or wireless external keyboards, compatible with full-fledged desktop keyboards. And I'll wager a large number of people reading this (and agreeing with you) have PCs that don't have a keyboard connected to them.
Wait, what was that? Keyboards are optional on PCs as well? But I thought... Didn't you just say... Oh no! How can that be!!!
It can be because all the things people use to preclude the iPad from being a PC are "self-serving bullshit".
Tomato / Tomato. The pro is a great tablet because it does so much more than any other tablet *and* a great laptop because it's portable and well built.
It does more, poorly and at great compromise. And it's more portable by being too small and unusable on your lap (ironic, for something you just called a "great laptop"!).
With the Type Cover, it's thicker than my MacBook Pro! How is a 5 hour battery life, heavy, thick, non-LTE optional, horrendously expensive, gimped storage space tablet supposed to be a "great tablet"? Because it runs Windows? MS has been singing that song for over a decade now, and it turns out, no one wants Windows on their tablet!
And there have also been UMPCs, and netbooks, and no one wants those either! This thing doesn't even have an 11" display, and it's somehow a "great laptop"?! Almost any ultrabook is a better laptop (and those aren't generally regarded as "great laptops"), and often cheaper!
Surface Pro is compromised in all the wrong ways in order to make a device that has all the wrong features. It might sound like a good idea, but it's not. It's a dud.
Except the Surface Pro addresses a very narrow market that wants "more tablet than laptop", but not laptop enough for an ultrabook, and not tablet enough for an iPad or even so ring like an ASUS Transformer.
I, like many here, gave the Surface some interest, but realized I'd rather have a good tablet (an iPad, like most here), and not a gimped Windows. So I had hopes for the Surface Pro. But it looks like having a Surface Pro would mean constantly being annoyed that I'm not using an iPad or a proper notebook, depending on the task at hand.
"Worst of both worlds" sums it up perfectly. "No compromises" my ass!
That's not true. Even if you can't run all your existing apps, many developers could, over time, release ARM binaries. I'd expect many of the standard nerd apps would flock to ARM (Firefox, Chrome, Foobar2000, most any actively run open source app, like VLC).
And regardless, it'd be significantly more relevant than not supporting it, right? Like is the case with Windows RT.
Except the MacBook Air isn't a tablet. That's the point here. In the Surface Pro, you have a crappy tablet (I.e., laptop level heat) and a crappy laptop (tablet form factor, limited specs, floppy hinge that isn't, you know, actually lap friendly).