What's "fanboy" about understanding a handful of slashdot nerds circlejerking about "ownership" regarding iOS is not even *remotely* relevant to 99.99+% of the population?
It's you who are the fanboys. "Ownership!" +5 Fanboy!
What open standards, sure Apple wants HTML5, but they've also patented part of the specification and aren't releasing those patents as is required by the W3C.
Bullshit. Apple has not patented part of HTML5. Apple is not MPEG-LA. They cannot release those patents, but those patents are a red herring anyway. Apple almost universally supports open standards. HTML5 is just one example of many.
They're suing their competition into oblivion with patent claims that are more ridiculous than SCO's were.
Bullshit. There isn't a single example of Apple doing this. On the other hand, Apple, unlike SCO, has actually invented quite a lot over the years, and protects their inventions.
I don't mean to say your opinion is invalid. On the contrary, it's your opinion to have. Just that it's completely clueless when talking about the market in general.
No, the iPhone outsells any particular Android handset. Now, had you said, "flavors of the season Android phone", you'd possibly be onto something. However, that ignores some context, including that the iPhone alone has outsold all Android devices combined, to date. And iOS on the whole still outsells Android on the whole. This is especially true in markets which aren't so artificially affected like the handset market.
Although hanging around here, one could *almost* be forgiven for getting the wrong impression re: Android vs iOS.
People wouldn't be loud about Apple patching security holes if those same holes weren't necessary for jailbreaks. I suspect people wouldn't say a thing if there were other, legitimate means of getting the same level of access.
By "people", you do understand you really mean "small subset of nerds", right? *People* just simply aren't giving a shit about this. That's why there's such disparity between comments on Slashdot and Apple's success in the market.
You (as someone that jailbreaks) are as much Apple's enemy as any potential malware vendor, however.
Bullshit. Not a single jailbreaking end-user is "Apple's enemy". *Maybe* the handful of people writing the jailbreaks are, but even that's dubious.
This is the problem I pointed out to you in another post. Slashdotters are notoriously irrational about these types of things. There's nothing wrong with disliking Apple or how they manage their products, but the way many of you here respond to Apple, it's less reasonable than the so-called "fanboys" many of you call anyone who doesn't share your opinions.
The iPhone 3G (the actual product name) is no longer for sale (and hasn't been for a year now). That makes 3 sufficiently distinct iPhones. But even if you consider *every* model of iPhone, that's still significantly less fragmented than Android is counting only currently sold models.
Acting like there's any sort of similarity with regards to fragmentation is laughable.
like all those Blackberry and some Android devices? Sure, not like I own one of those either.
I love it when people conveniently forget the other guilty parties when engaging in AppleHate(tm)
Apple is the biggest pusher of every concept that's ever been criticized on Slashdot. They're simply the easiest example, so stop whining.
No, the problem is Slashdot goes full retard with regards to Apple. "Steve Jobs wants to control you", "if you jailbreak, you live in fear or going to jail", "iPad is just a toy, and will fail", "Android is beating iOS", "*Apple* has a secret kill switch that you must fear" (although so does Google, and unlike Apple, Google has actually *used* theirs, man times!), "Apple is anti-consumer" (reality: The consumer is Apple's customer, and the consumer is Google's product), "Apple is going to turn you in for piracy if you use iCloud".
No, the problem isn't that Apple is the "biggest pusher of every concept that's ever been criticized on Slashdot" (like, open source software? Open standards?), nor is the problem that "they're simply the easiest example". The problem is that Slashdot nerds are extremely simplistic. If you do *one thing* they don't like, you're evil, no appeal go directly to the 'we hate you' category.
I thought they were there to run software on as part of your appraisal as to whether to buy one or not.
Correct. That is one of the things they are there for.
If you are an artist it makes sense to run software relating to your art.
But it absolutely *does not* mean using it to make your art. He most certainly wasn't just "testing the software".
I don't know whether he has any plans to upgrade his existing Apple setup or not, but going into the shop to have a play is the point isn't it? They don't make you sign anything relating to what you can and can't run, and it doesn't seem as though anything improper was done here - no fraud, impersonation, malicious code designed to do harm.
The fraud was leaving software operating without permission in order to do something Apple most certainly does not want customer to do, which is spy on other customers.
If the people going into the shop didn't realise computer watches you in America as well as Soviet Russia, then they learnt something. No crime I can see.
That's some seriously messed up logic. You may as well say, "if people walking into dark alleys don't realize that's where you get mugged, they learnt something. No crime I can see."
The software he ran amounts to wiretapping. It is not generally legal to wiretap someone else's computer. This guy wiretapped Apple's computer. That's a crime, and at the very least makes sense to investigate.
I think the better question is how did this guy install software which accesses peripheral hardware (the webcam) without admin rights? I thought OSX was supposed to be so secure...
Secure from running software? This program didn't do anything it wasn't supposed to be able to do from a software security standpoint.
Then why doesn't Apple lock down their computers so nothing can be installed on them.
Because Apple *wants* people to be able to do pretty much anything they want on the display Macs. If you are having trouble with some software, you can bring it in and run it. However, they don't want you leaving anything permanently running.
I understand that this guy crossed a line but it should be between him and Apple.
What's Apple supposed to do alone? They contacted the pertinent authorities.
Well, people say that about a lot of things. It's definitely a creative work, and aside from personal preferences, there really isn't much reason to say it's not art.
On the other hand, I certainly don't see any computer fraud, or criminal elevation of privileges, or anything that the Secret Service should be concerned about.
Computer crime. This was using computers unauthorized.
And the reason Apple would take this to the authorities is pretty clear. They don't want people to be worried that if they look at some of their computers, they are going to end up on some artist's web site.
Almost EVERYTHING that iCloud is offering is already in Android and has been for some time.
I asked what they are copying. I'm sure you can make an actual list. "Copying" doesn't simply mean "also doing". Otherwise, Google has been copying Apple for quite some time now. For example, Google is copying iTools, if your criteria for the term is so loose.
Vaporware? Hardly
The difference between in test and released are completely two different sides of a coin.
They certainly are, and neither is on the "vaporware" side. Testing can be, but with Apple, it almost never is. They almost always release things that they've announced. That's not a proper characteristic for something labeled as vaporware.
Also they did call it a "cloud" which is water vapor, thus vapor-ware.
Droll.
don't act like a fanboy yourself then
No really I just get tired of all the fanboys in general.
Apple fans are the worst right now. No matter what Apple markets people will buy it.
That's the fanboy in you talking. No one buys Apple products via force or necessity. They buy them because they *want* them. Calling them fanboys for buying what they want is fucking insane.
Introducing the Apple iTurd, simply the best shit ever.
Fanboyism.
If you don't have an iTurd you don't have shit
Fanboyism.
CrapTime with the new iTurd, you cannot shit without it
Fanboyism.
Doesn't matter people would talk about the great Apple's turds.
Fanboyism.
None of these things are real. They are just silly "ooh, Apple users are so stupid!" fanboy remarks. Look at Ping. It's definitely not "shit", but it's not very compelling. Where are all the fanboys?
This whole, "Steve could shit on a plate and Apple fanboys would line up for it" is idiotic. Pretending like it's a valid argument is *actual* fanboyism.
You need at least one iOS machine to obtain an iCloud membership; that syncs up all your goodies to your Mac and PC and whatever else, but you must own at least one iOS device.
That's not quite true.
And if that does become true, you don't have to keep using iOS to continue using iCloud.
But, I can't stand iTunes...even on my Macbook Pro. I'm pretty anal about my file naming, and folder/directory naming. I also have music on my NAS, and it's a pain to access via iTunes...
iTunes will use referenced music just fine.
I can't use newer iDevices without iTunes...
Yes you can. Well, technically you need iTunes right now to activate it (although Apple will do that for you in the store if you'd like), but starting this fall, you can use an iOS device 100% without ever using iTunes.
My android contacts sync to my online contacts since I first got my G1
So did my iPhone, ever since before you got your G1.
and I can manage my files/apps as I see fit
As can I, on my iPhone.
with options from many vendors.
As can I, on my iPhone. The only notable limitation is my apps have to come from Apple's App Store. This isn't something that bothers me, nor does it bother most people. If it bothers you (and a very small group of others), then it's fantastic that Android is an option.
No one is telling you to buy an iPhone, want an iPhone, like iTunes, like the App Store, etc. But you've made a lot of mischaracterizations about iTunes and iOS, as well as seeming to confuse your very valid opinion with the market as a whole.
Except you've clearly missed the point entirely. Android wouldn't be anywhere near as successful as it is today if it wasn't open source.
Nonsense. Not a single person or company gives a shit. The end user doesn't know or care. The handset makers don't care, the carriers don't care.
They want to customize it, but that can just as easily be done with a closed source platform.
Being open source is every reason why they chose it. If it was closed source, why would they bother?
Android 3.0 is closed source, and it's being used.
They'd bother because they don't have a proper "app phone" OS of their own. They'd just as gladly license Android without it being open source (like tablet makers are doing with Honeycomb). Their alternatives at the time were Windows Mobile 6, Android, or make their own OS.
What would they have to gain over Windows Mobile (for example)? When Android first appeared, it was a pretty immature platform, the likes of (what was then called) iPhone OS and even Symbian far outshone it, so why did they even give it the time of day? Because it was free for them to use and allowed them to concentrate more on the device and device features and less on writing an entire mobile OS (As many have tried and failed to do).
Free != open source. Honeycomb can be free (as I understand it, Motorola and Samsung pay Google for early access), but even the closed source Honeycomb OS could be offered for free, or even less than free (i.e., Google pays hardware makers to use it, like they've done with Android in the past, and presumably still do).
You're right, not many people who bought an Android phone knew or care that it was open source, but if it wasn't open source, then they never would have had the chance to buy it because it simply wouldn't have existed.
Android was a closed-source system that Google bought. If they had never open sourced it, the only real difference is fewer geeks would have cared. Nothing else about Android depended on it being open source. Handset makers still would have used it, carriers still would have carried it, and consumers still would have bought it. But geeks wouldn't have gone so fanboy over it like they did.
I would rather not be tied to a particular company store.
You're not. iCloud will accept music from anywhere, iTunes music is DRM-free, and iPods/iPhones/etc. can play music from any store that supports mp3 or aac (among other formats, but these basically cover the bases).
Most stuff that's wrapped in DRM and turned into the modern equivalent of a WinDOS application is pure data that doesn't really need such a dependency.
iTunes music isn't DRMd. It hasn't been for many years now.
This goes for Amazon too. Except they strive to have wider and more device support than Apple.
Which is of little import (and Amazon's music is DRM-free too).
If you're just talking about the app side of things (a rather narrow scope, but maybe that's to go along with a narrow mind), I'd point out that most people just simply don't give a shit. Your opinion is fine as it applies to you, but most people don't care, so your opinion is in no way pertinent to how things will turn out in the market as a whole.
You may as well claim RC cola will beat out Coke, because you don't like their business ethics. Good for you, your opinion is just fine and you're entitled to it, but don't mistake it for anything even remotely common.
"Apple rushed to market a delayed release of a copy of a competitors product".
Fixed that for you.
What is "iCloud" copying? It's a "cloud", but they aren't exactly copying anything here. They've had cloud services for a decade now.
Google is light years ahead of the vapor-ware known as iCloud.
Vaporware? Hardly. It's actually being tested right now. And parts of it are in use right now. "Vaporware" doesn't simply mean "unreleased", it means "more talk than substance", like, "oh, we're *totally* going to make this cool thing, trust us!".
For all we know iCloud will turn out as bad as Mobile Me , I mean.Mac , know I mean iTools .
Yeah, who knows. You can test it right now, though, if you'd like.
Look here comes the fan boys to mod me through the floor.
Don't act like a fanboy yourself then. The only actual, non-fanboy, type remark in your comment is that iCloud has yet to be released, so it's not certain how good it will actually be. The rest is just "I hate Apple, boohoo", like any sort of fanboy remark.
No, it's like someone coming up with a different way of getting the frying grease into their car. If you're into that sort of thing (and this is (supposed to be) "News for nerds, stuff that matters"), then this is interesting.
If you're not, no one is telling you to go out and do this, or like this, read the comments about it.
What's it to you? If someone likes something, what sort of psychological disorder does it take to put someone down for it? Nobody's telling *you* what to like.
Who cares if it's new? That's part of what I'm trying to convey. All that matters is it's something someone wants to do, it's fun, and they *can* do it.
What do you care if someone else likes something you don't like? What a sad, sad way to spend your time.
My initial post was this same sentiment, but in the reverse direction. Open source advocates tend to (at least on nerd forums like slashdot) get all overexcited and try to get everyone else to run their shit. You're the flip side of that coin, giving people crap for getting excited for their own things. What's it to you?
LOL. Linux runs the world now. Routers, NAS boxes, mobile phones, servers, supercomputers... all of these things.
Just because only us geeks run it on the desktop doesn't really mean squat.
Who are you replying to?
In the post you are responding to, I wrote:
Perhaps, but open source doesn't have to be small-scale geeky DIY.
I never said it did. I said geekiness is where it excels (regardless of scale).
Again, I never said open source can't be successful on a large scale.
And to think Linux isn't geek-centric is delusional. No one runs Linux specifically, outside of a geek niche. Those routers? They are run by geek network admins. Those WiFi access points? People aren't buying them because they run Linux.
And "servers, supercomputers"? Um... geeks run those things.
As for mobile phones, Android *isn't* Linux. It doesn't even run a proper Linux kernel. This is an important distinction, but a side-issue. Regardless of what you specifically want to call it, no one buys Android because it's based on Linux, except for geeks.
I know this will come as a shock to you, but there are more iPhones (yes, just *iPhones*, this is excluding iPads and iPod touches) than all Android devices combined. There are over twice as many iOS devices as there are Android devices.
Open source never is successful because people care about open source specifically. Open source is only successful when it provides value to the consumer. Just because sometimes it does doesn't mean the world is all of a sudden pro-"open source". They are pro-"shit that works".
Android has found success thanks to being open source.
Not even 1% of Android buyers bought it for being open source.
If it wasn't open source, how many handset manufacturers do you think would have given it the time of day?
Pretty much all of the ones that did. Don't you realize that the majority of Android phones don't ship with the open source version of Android? They really don't care that it's open source. Why should they?
They chose Android because it's the best OS they available for them to use. Being open source, specifically, has nothing to do with that.
That's the problem with geeks, something I have to point out over and over again. You guys think that everyone else has the same concerns and preferences as you do. Trust me, no one (generally speaking) gives a shit about open source. This isn't meant to be dismissive of open source. It's meant to put it into perspective.
Slashdot Mirror
What's "fanboy" about understanding a handful of slashdot nerds circlejerking about "ownership" regarding iOS is not even *remotely* relevant to 99.99+% of the population?
It's you who are the fanboys. "Ownership!" +5 Fanboy!
Typical ignorant slashdotter:
What Open Software? OSX isn't open. Safari isn't open. iTunes sure isn't open. iOS is incredibly closed.
opensource.apple.com
What open standards, sure Apple wants HTML5, but they've also patented part of the specification and aren't releasing those patents as is required by the W3C.
Bullshit. Apple has not patented part of HTML5. Apple is not MPEG-LA. They cannot release those patents, but those patents are a red herring anyway. Apple almost universally supports open standards. HTML5 is just one example of many.
They're suing their competition into oblivion with patent claims that are more ridiculous than SCO's were.
Bullshit. There isn't a single example of Apple doing this. On the other hand, Apple, unlike SCO, has actually invented quite a lot over the years, and protects their inventions.
Yet another clueless post, +5 Insightful.
I don't mean to say your opinion is invalid. On the contrary, it's your opinion to have. Just that it's completely clueless when talking about the market in general.
No, the iPhone outsells any particular Android handset. Now, had you said, "flavors of the season Android phone", you'd possibly be onto something. However, that ignores some context, including that the iPhone alone has outsold all Android devices combined, to date. And iOS on the whole still outsells Android on the whole. This is especially true in markets which aren't so artificially affected like the handset market.
Although hanging around here, one could *almost* be forgiven for getting the wrong impression re: Android vs iOS.
People wouldn't be loud about Apple patching security holes if those same holes weren't necessary for jailbreaks. I suspect people wouldn't say a thing if there were other, legitimate means of getting the same level of access.
By "people", you do understand you really mean "small subset of nerds", right? *People* just simply aren't giving a shit about this. That's why there's such disparity between comments on Slashdot and Apple's success in the market.
You (as someone that jailbreaks) are as much Apple's enemy as any potential malware vendor, however.
Bullshit. Not a single jailbreaking end-user is "Apple's enemy". *Maybe* the handful of people writing the jailbreaks are, but even that's dubious.
This is the problem I pointed out to you in another post. Slashdotters are notoriously irrational about these types of things. There's nothing wrong with disliking Apple or how they manage their products, but the way many of you here respond to Apple, it's less reasonable than the so-called "fanboys" many of you call anyone who doesn't share your opinions.
The iPhone 3G (the actual product name) is no longer for sale (and hasn't been for a year now). That makes 3 sufficiently distinct iPhones. But even if you consider *every* model of iPhone, that's still significantly less fragmented than Android is counting only currently sold models.
Acting like there's any sort of similarity with regards to fragmentation is laughable.
like all those Blackberry and some Android devices?
Sure, not like I own one of those either.
I love it when people conveniently forget the other guilty parties when engaging in AppleHate(tm)
Apple is the biggest pusher of every concept that's ever been criticized on Slashdot. They're simply the easiest example, so stop whining.
No, the problem is Slashdot goes full retard with regards to Apple. "Steve Jobs wants to control you", "if you jailbreak, you live in fear or going to jail", "iPad is just a toy, and will fail", "Android is beating iOS", "*Apple* has a secret kill switch that you must fear" (although so does Google, and unlike Apple, Google has actually *used* theirs, man times!), "Apple is anti-consumer" (reality: The consumer is Apple's customer, and the consumer is Google's product), "Apple is going to turn you in for piracy if you use iCloud".
No, the problem isn't that Apple is the "biggest pusher of every concept that's ever been criticized on Slashdot" (like, open source software? Open standards?), nor is the problem that "they're simply the easiest example". The problem is that Slashdot nerds are extremely simplistic. If you do *one thing* they don't like, you're evil, no appeal go directly to the 'we hate you' category.
I thought they were there to run software on as part of your appraisal as to whether to buy one or not.
Correct. That is one of the things they are there for.
If you are an artist it makes sense to run software relating to your art.
But it absolutely *does not* mean using it to make your art. He most certainly wasn't just "testing the software".
I don't know whether he has any plans to upgrade his existing Apple setup or not, but going into the shop to have a play is the point isn't it? They don't make you sign anything relating to what you can and can't run, and it doesn't seem as though anything improper was done here - no fraud, impersonation, malicious code designed to do harm.
The fraud was leaving software operating without permission in order to do something Apple most certainly does not want customer to do, which is spy on other customers.
If the people going into the shop didn't realise computer watches you in America as well as Soviet Russia, then they learnt something. No crime I can see.
That's some seriously messed up logic. You may as well say, "if people walking into dark alleys don't realize that's where you get mugged, they learnt something. No crime I can see."
The software he ran amounts to wiretapping. It is not generally legal to wiretap someone else's computer. This guy wiretapped Apple's computer. That's a crime, and at the very least makes sense to investigate.
I think the better question is how did this guy install software which accesses peripheral hardware (the webcam) without admin rights? I thought OSX was supposed to be so secure...
Secure from running software? This program didn't do anything it wasn't supposed to be able to do from a software security standpoint.
Then why doesn't Apple lock down their computers so nothing can be installed on them.
Because Apple *wants* people to be able to do pretty much anything they want on the display Macs. If you are having trouble with some software, you can bring it in and run it. However, they don't want you leaving anything permanently running.
I understand that this guy crossed a line but it should be between him and Apple.
What's Apple supposed to do alone? They contacted the pertinent authorities.
Apple store leaves computers open and accessible to anybody who walks in the door.
Correct. That doesn't mean they can do whatever they want with them.
Potential customers are either allowed to use them or theyre not.
Correct. But that's not a "do whatever you want" pass. Where do you get these silly notions?
I really don't see any art here.
Well, people say that about a lot of things. It's definitely a creative work, and aside from personal preferences, there really isn't much reason to say it's not art.
On the other hand, I certainly don't see any computer fraud, or criminal elevation of privileges, or anything that the Secret Service should be concerned about.
Computer crime. This was using computers unauthorized.
And the reason Apple would take this to the authorities is pretty clear. They don't want people to be worried that if they look at some of their computers, they are going to end up on some artist's web site.
but they aren't exactly copying anything here
Almost EVERYTHING that iCloud is offering is already in Android and has been for some time.
I asked what they are copying. I'm sure you can make an actual list. "Copying" doesn't simply mean "also doing". Otherwise, Google has been copying Apple for quite some time now. For example, Google is copying iTools, if your criteria for the term is so loose.
Vaporware? Hardly
The difference between in test and released are completely two different sides of a coin.
They certainly are, and neither is on the "vaporware" side. Testing can be, but with Apple, it almost never is. They almost always release things that they've announced. That's not a proper characteristic for something labeled as vaporware.
Also they did call it a "cloud" which is water vapor, thus vapor-ware.
Droll.
don't act like a fanboy yourself then
No really I just get tired of all the fanboys in general.
Apple fans are the worst right now. No matter what Apple markets people will buy it.
That's the fanboy in you talking. No one buys Apple products via force or necessity. They buy them because they *want* them. Calling them fanboys for buying what they want is fucking insane.
Introducing the Apple iTurd, simply the best shit ever.
Fanboyism.
If you don't have an iTurd you don't have shit
Fanboyism.
CrapTime with the new iTurd, you cannot shit without it
Fanboyism.
Doesn't matter people would talk about the great Apple's turds.
Fanboyism.
None of these things are real. They are just silly "ooh, Apple users are so stupid!" fanboy remarks. Look at Ping. It's definitely not "shit", but it's not very compelling. Where are all the fanboys?
This whole, "Steve could shit on a plate and Apple fanboys would line up for it" is idiotic. Pretending like it's a valid argument is *actual* fanboyism.
You need at least one iOS machine to obtain an iCloud membership; that syncs up all your goodies to your Mac and PC and whatever else, but you must own at least one iOS device.
That's not quite true.
And if that does become true, you don't have to keep using iOS to continue using iCloud.
But, I can't stand iTunes...even on my Macbook Pro. I'm pretty anal about my file naming, and folder/directory naming. I also have music on my NAS, and it's a pain to access via iTunes...
iTunes will use referenced music just fine.
I can't use newer iDevices without iTunes...
Yes you can. Well, technically you need iTunes right now to activate it (although Apple will do that for you in the store if you'd like), but starting this fall, you can use an iOS device 100% without ever using iTunes.
My android contacts sync to my online contacts since I first got my G1
So did my iPhone, ever since before you got your G1.
and I can manage my files/apps as I see fit
As can I, on my iPhone.
with options from many vendors.
As can I, on my iPhone. The only notable limitation is my apps have to come from Apple's App Store. This isn't something that bothers me, nor does it bother most people. If it bothers you (and a very small group of others), then it's fantastic that Android is an option.
No one is telling you to buy an iPhone, want an iPhone, like iTunes, like the App Store, etc. But you've made a lot of mischaracterizations about iTunes and iOS, as well as seeming to confuse your very valid opinion with the market as a whole.
Except you've clearly missed the point entirely. Android wouldn't be anywhere near as successful as it is today if it wasn't open source.
Nonsense. Not a single person or company gives a shit. The end user doesn't know or care. The handset makers don't care, the carriers don't care.
They want to customize it, but that can just as easily be done with a closed source platform.
Being open source is every reason why they chose it. If it was closed source, why would they bother?
Android 3.0 is closed source, and it's being used.
They'd bother because they don't have a proper "app phone" OS of their own. They'd just as gladly license Android without it being open source (like tablet makers are doing with Honeycomb). Their alternatives at the time were Windows Mobile 6, Android, or make their own OS.
What would they have to gain over Windows Mobile (for example)? When Android first appeared, it was a pretty immature platform, the likes of (what was then called) iPhone OS and even Symbian far outshone it, so why did they even give it the time of day? Because it was free for them to use and allowed them to concentrate more on the device and device features and less on writing an entire mobile OS (As many have tried and failed to do).
Free != open source. Honeycomb can be free (as I understand it, Motorola and Samsung pay Google for early access), but even the closed source Honeycomb OS could be offered for free, or even less than free (i.e., Google pays hardware makers to use it, like they've done with Android in the past, and presumably still do).
You're right, not many people who bought an Android phone knew or care that it was open source, but if it wasn't open source, then they never would have had the chance to buy it because it simply wouldn't have existed.
Android was a closed-source system that Google bought. If they had never open sourced it, the only real difference is fewer geeks would have cared. Nothing else about Android depended on it being open source. Handset makers still would have used it, carriers still would have carried it, and consumers still would have bought it. But geeks wouldn't have gone so fanboy over it like they did.
I would rather not be tied to a particular company store.
You're not. iCloud will accept music from anywhere, iTunes music is DRM-free, and iPods/iPhones/etc. can play music from any store that supports mp3 or aac (among other formats, but these basically cover the bases).
Most stuff that's wrapped in DRM and turned into the modern equivalent of a WinDOS application is pure data that doesn't really need such a dependency.
iTunes music isn't DRMd. It hasn't been for many years now.
This goes for Amazon too. Except they strive to have wider and more device support than Apple.
Which is of little import (and Amazon's music is DRM-free too).
If you're just talking about the app side of things (a rather narrow scope, but maybe that's to go along with a narrow mind), I'd point out that most people just simply don't give a shit. Your opinion is fine as it applies to you, but most people don't care, so your opinion is in no way pertinent to how things will turn out in the market as a whole.
You may as well claim RC cola will beat out Coke, because you don't like their business ethics. Good for you, your opinion is just fine and you're entitled to it, but don't mistake it for anything even remotely common.
There is a nice service available from Ubuntu, as well. (And yes they offered that before Apple did.)
iTools and .Mac predated even the existence of Ubuntu itself, let alone Ubuntu One.
Google will do just fine, but you're wrong on the other count. iCloud does not require iOS.
"Apple rushed to market a delayed release of a copy of a competitors product".
Fixed that for you.
What is "iCloud" copying? It's a "cloud", but they aren't exactly copying anything here. They've had cloud services for a decade now.
Google is light years ahead of the vapor-ware known as iCloud .
Vaporware? Hardly. It's actually being tested right now. And parts of it are in use right now. "Vaporware" doesn't simply mean "unreleased", it means "more talk than substance", like, "oh, we're *totally* going to make this cool thing, trust us!".
For all we know iCloud will turn out as bad as Mobile Me , I mean .Mac , know I mean iTools .
Yeah, who knows. You can test it right now, though, if you'd like.
Look here comes the fan boys to mod me through the floor.
Don't act like a fanboy yourself then. The only actual, non-fanboy, type remark in your comment is that iCloud has yet to be released, so it's not certain how good it will actually be. The rest is just "I hate Apple, boohoo", like any sort of fanboy remark.
No, it's like someone coming up with a different way of getting the frying grease into their car. If you're into that sort of thing (and this is (supposed to be) "News for nerds, stuff that matters"), then this is interesting.
If you're not, no one is telling you to go out and do this, or like this, read the comments about it.
What's it to you? If someone likes something, what sort of psychological disorder does it take to put someone down for it? Nobody's telling *you* what to like.
Who cares if it's new? That's part of what I'm trying to convey. All that matters is it's something someone wants to do, it's fun, and they *can* do it.
What do you care if someone else likes something you don't like? What a sad, sad way to spend your time.
My initial post was this same sentiment, but in the reverse direction. Open source advocates tend to (at least on nerd forums like slashdot) get all overexcited and try to get everyone else to run their shit. You're the flip side of that coin, giving people crap for getting excited for their own things. What's it to you?
Linux. Geek Centric "project"
LOL. Linux runs the world now. Routers, NAS boxes, mobile phones, servers, supercomputers... all of these things.
Just because only us geeks run it on the desktop doesn't really mean squat.
Who are you replying to?
In the post you are responding to, I wrote:
Perhaps, but open source doesn't have to be small-scale geeky DIY.
I never said it did. I said geekiness is where it excels (regardless of scale).
Again, I never said open source can't be successful on a large scale.
And to think Linux isn't geek-centric is delusional. No one runs Linux specifically, outside of a geek niche. Those routers? They are run by geek network admins. Those WiFi access points? People aren't buying them because they run Linux.
And "servers, supercomputers"? Um... geeks run those things.
As for mobile phones, Android *isn't* Linux. It doesn't even run a proper Linux kernel. This is an important distinction, but a side-issue. Regardless of what you specifically want to call it, no one buys Android because it's based on Linux, except for geeks.
I know this will come as a shock to you, but there are more iPhones (yes, just *iPhones*, this is excluding iPads and iPod touches) than all Android devices combined. There are over twice as many iOS devices as there are Android devices.
Open source never is successful because people care about open source specifically. Open source is only successful when it provides value to the consumer. Just because sometimes it does doesn't mean the world is all of a sudden pro-"open source". They are pro-"shit that works".
Android has found success thanks to being open source.
Not even 1% of Android buyers bought it for being open source.
If it wasn't open source, how many handset manufacturers do you think would have given it the time of day?
Pretty much all of the ones that did. Don't you realize that the majority of Android phones don't ship with the open source version of Android? They really don't care that it's open source. Why should they?
They chose Android because it's the best OS they available for them to use. Being open source, specifically, has nothing to do with that.
That's the problem with geeks, something I have to point out over and over again. You guys think that everyone else has the same concerns and preferences as you do. Trust me, no one (generally speaking) gives a shit about open source. This isn't meant to be dismissive of open source. It's meant to put it into perspective.