To say they don't make much from the App store is to completely ignore the fact that it's their main marketing tool now for all iDevices. Every advert is about what you can do with app X or Y with very little focus on the hardware.
And that's exactly the point. People seem to think Apple limit the iPhone to the App Store for native apps in order to make money from each app sold, but that's not the reason. The reason is to make the iPhone a more appealing platform to consumers and developers.
All this nonsense about how Apple will now do this for the Mac is based on this flawed assumption. They may (and probably will) do something in 10.7 that simplifies things for the user, but they absolutely will not lock down the Mac like the iPhone unless that would make the Mac more compelling, and it's very clear that right now it would not.
Apple doesn't want to control its users, it wants to control the quality of its products, and it's both difficult to fault them for that (let alone call them "evil" like so many do here on slashdot!), or to argue that it hasn't worked out well for them.
Can you point to any actual reason to worry about your bank information being vulnerable from an iPhone? There was that exploit a while back that affected jailbroken iPhones that had a default ssh password (which didn't compromise bank info anyway). But that's *not* caused by any of these security updates. In fact, the users had to go quite a bit out of their way to make themselves vulnerable in the first place.
How can they talk about how Apple Products don't suffer from viruses or other Malware when they are patching record numbers!
How? Well, first, they've never said this. But they have said any such problem is way less than on Windows, which it is. And the iPhone/iPad? Aside from that exploit a while back that affected jailbroken iPhones with a default ssh password, what malware is there for iOS?
None?
Hmm... Perhaps that's how they can say the things they actually do say.
So Apple does not want you to have freedom or respects your privacy.
They don't want you to have freedom? How so? They control one aspect of their phone. I guess Sony and Microsoft don't want me to have freedom? Or my local grocer doesn't, either, right?
Or maybe you don't want Apple to have the freedom to control the quality of their products, or me the freedom to choose a superior product?
As for not respecting your privacy, they:
1. Tell you what they are doing, unlike other sites and services. 2. Let you opt out (not only from iAds, using oo.apple.com, but also in the phone itself, by either turning Location Services off entirely, or on an app-by-app basis, as each app must first ask before it can access your location). 3. Updating iOS to show you exactly when your location is being accessed, and give you a list of apps that accessed it in the past 24 hours, as well as the ability to revoke permission to any app you wish.
It looks to me like they are actually respecting our privacy, while still providing services which can make use of it. It's a lot like the DRM that used to be on music from the iTunes Store. Sure, it was DRM and that's potentially bad, but in order to get music in the first place, they had to have DRM, which they implemented in a way that was pretty much invisible to the user, and respected their ownership of the music as best as possible, while still being DRMed. In a similar fashion, Location Services allows for a lot of the promise of such a service, like being able to map your route or obtain local information, while doing what they can to keep it from tracking their users in a personal and trouble manner.
This privacy policy looks pretty much like it's in reference to the fact that the iPhone (and to a lesser extent, Mac OS X/Safari, using geolocation with IP addresses) can report where you are.
So, for example, when you look up your location with the Maps app on the iPhone, Apple, by definition, has to transmit your location to Google. They are just disclosing this explicitly instead of just assuming the pop-up dialog box, as well as just the fact that this has to happen to show your location on a map to begin with, is enough to clue you in.
And, of course, iOS will tell other apps (all must request this, even Apple's own apps) where you are, if they ask. These, the built in Maps app, and iAds, are almost certainly what this is about. It would be strange for Jobs to make such a big deal about privacy and add features to iOS 4 to make sure you know when you're being tracked, just to blatantly spy on you otherwise.
Or maybe not, I don't know. But it's far more rational than thinking that Apple is going to spy on you, and hand your location over to whoever asks/pays (such as the FBI, like the troll above claimed). Hell, the fact that they state the information won't be personally identifiable pretty much negates any value the data would be to an organization like the FBI in the first place.
The funny thing is, it looks like Apple is trying to be completely honest about their privacy policy (unlike how online services tend to be, with all the blundering by Facebook, for example, or the statements from people like Scott McNealy and Eric Schmidt about privacy, etc.), and the honesty is biting them in the ass, whereas instead if they just kept their mouth shut, they could do much worse (i.e., what the tinfoilers here are imagining) and nobody would ever know.
Android is Linux in the sense that it is built on the Linux kernel. It is not the familiar operating system that pedants call GNU/Linux, though. The differences are deeper than the windowing system -- pretty much everything other than the kernel is completely different from any other Linux-based OS.
That's why I worded it the way I did. I am assuming a POSIX layer underneath which can run (even if it doesn't include) all the standard GNU or BSD tools. Perhaps that assumption is wrong.
Similarly, your claim that "iOS is OS X" is misleading.
Not at all. If I said, "is Mac OS X", I would be misleading (and outright wrong). But before it was called iPhone OS, it was called OS X (as opposed to Mac OS X). iOS is a variation of OS X. It's essentially Mac OS X, with UIKit replacing AppKit, different bundled apps, a different security mechanism, and the omission of some frameworks which make little sense on a handheld, as well as the addition of some that do (there are more differences, but that's a fairly good overview). There's been a lot of cross-pollination between iOS and Mac OS X, with things like QuickTime X, CoreLocation and CoreAnimation going from iOS to Mac OS X, and OpenCL and GCD making their way to iOS.
The difference between iOS and Mac OS X, for example, is much less than the difference between Windows NT 3.0 and Windows 95.
but clearly if you buy an iPhone you are not getting a handheld Mac.
Which is why I didn't say Mac OS X. I realize that distinction is somewhat subtle, and if I say "OS X", people may think I mean "Mac OS X". Perhaps I should be more clear (it's a fine line between being clear and an overabundance of parenthetical statements and a patronizing tone).
OS X is capable of unrestricted multitasking, for example, whereas multitasking in iOS is very limited even with the new features in the latest version.
iOS (or iPhone OS, or OS X, whichever name/version we're talking about) has had the exact same multitasking capabilities as the desktop Mac OS X. The difference is the security model prevented background UIKit apps (with the exception of a handful of built-in apps).
If that seems like I'm splitting hairs, it's probably because you're assuming I'm saying something I'm not. I'm talking about the OS as a whole, not the interface (which is only part of the OS). The interfaces on Mac OS X and iOS are very different. The overall OSs, though, are exceptionally similar, differing in far less than, for example, Windows Mobile and Windows XP, or even Android and a standard Linux distro.
Just as windows mobile was catching up being coupled with Sense UI and the like, they go and join the worthless herd of App-based feature-less mobile OS'es.
"Worthless herd"? iPhone and, to a lesser extent, Android, are where it's at. The old-style Windows Mobile is about as appealing today as a tape-playing Walkman.
The thing is, as far as mobile OS'es go, windows mobile has been ahead, being an open platform and close to an actual OS.
"Ahead"? Ahead of Palm, technologically, and ahead of Apple and Google in terms of timeline where they entered the market. But that's pretty much it. As for being "close to an actual OS", iOS is OS X. Android is Linux with (essentially) a custom windowing system. Windows Mobile is much further from Windows than either iOS or Android are to their respective desktop counterparts.
7 becomes worthless
I agree. It can't outclass iPhone or out-geek Android. In a word, worthless.
and 6.5 will go on and on being used and modded by power users for years to come
I didn't realize "power users" meant "a dwindling niche of users stuck in the past". I'll remember that for the next Amiga or Newton story on Slashdot. They abound with "power users" extraordinaire!
because it's the last of the useful mobile OS'es. Long live task manager.:P
and heading towards what most people dislike about the iPhone (single marketplace)
I don't think "most people dislike" this, Nerdfest. I realize it's a fairly common sentiment here on Slashdot, but most people have different priorities.
Maybe their doing what Linus Torvalds did with Git, in reversing every decision that CVS made
The thing is, Microsoft just isn't that talented. I don't mean they don't have talented employees, but that the way the company works, talent just doesn't enter into it. What they do, what they've always done, is copy what others have done, and unlike Apple who, when they copy they make things better (that's what "good artists copy, great artists steal" means), MS copies poorly. The first few iterations are atrocious. But eventually they copy things so thoroughly that, what the hell, it's good enough, right?
Technologically, MS has always been behind the curve. Macs, Amigas, OS/2. All made Windows (and DOS!) look pathetic. But price and hardware support, along with some horrible, but effective, business tactics won out.
And it looks like MS is trying the same here, but without the ability to engage in the same old business tactics, and without the sort of market where price and hardware support is as important as it was during the PC era. So, like you said, I just don't see how this will work out well for them. They can't out-class iPhone, or out-geek Android, and they can't tie their monopoly to it.
I guess we'll just have to wait and see. MS has a way of sticking around with technically inferior offerings. It's like a gambler with enough money to keep doubling down. You don't have to win right away, you just have to win somewhere along the line. MS doesn't have the burden of caring about whether their products are good, they just want them to sell, and they have the money and the will to stick around until they do. They'll keep "reinventing" their products (WinCE to Windows Mobile to Windows Phone 7, with Zune and Kin thrown in for good measure) until something sticks.
How do you feel about that Apple logo (or two) on your keyboard? How about the upper left corner of your screen?
Mac keyboards don't have Apple keys anymore. And the one on the screen is the icon you click on, just like the Windows button. The physical button on Windows phones doesn't benefit by having a Windows icon in the way the button on Windows 7 does. Think about how tacky it would be were the home button to have an Apple logo on it.
Actually suggesting that someone put the phone in Airplane mode is crazy
You're right, bur your conclusion is wrong. There's no reason for 99+% of people to even think about doing this. The suggestion was "if you're extremely worried about this", not "this is a big problem, people should be doing this".
Suggesting that someone turn their phone off every night so that they don't get charged exorbitant fees for some unknown, and certainly unneeded function
So far, you're the only person suggesting this. But you're right, it is a stupid suggestion.
Because Apple "Just Works". For varying values of "Just Works".
There is no other tech company on the planet whose products are both as powerful, as easy to use, and reliably work as Apple. So, yeah, "just works" is a valid description.
If you looked at the rear panel image, you'd have seen that there is also a miniDisplayPort connector.
I don't see how your reply here has anything to do with what I wrote.
HDMI is clearly a play for the living room, but without updated FrontRow software, it doesn't replace the AppleTV (just makes it a better option for folks who don't want more than an iTunesStore device)
The mini is still straddling the living room, entry level Mac and SOHO server "markets", without really making a strong play for any of them.
Actually, the more I think about it, the less convinced I am that it's anything more than simply a replacement for the mini-DVI port and not part of a larger picture. Even if they were to revamp Front Row, it doesn't seem very Apple-like to have a device in the living room where a keyboard and mouse are so fundamental. I think this is more about, "people like to hook minis up to their TV, so here's a HDMI port", similar to how they have an option to forgo the optical drive for a second hard disk for people who like to use the mini as a little server.
No, it's not. It's electrically compatible, but it's *not* DVI, and specific to the topic at hand, HDMI is more limited with regards to supported resolutions.
Power supply built in is great. Smaller size is great. Better graphics is very nice. You're such a lame anti-Apple troll that you put down all the things about the new mini that are better than the old one. The only real disappointment with the update is the increased price.
HDMI sucks as a PC display connector. It's only really good for connecting to a TV. It's interesting that the HDMI port on the mini supports higher-than-1080p resolution (1080p being the reason HDMI is so awful for desktop use). Apple has always supported HDMI on their TV-centric device, the AppleTV. It's notable that they decided to add it to the mini. Makes you wonder if it's part of a larger living-room play, or just a replacement for the old mini-DVI port (just like that replaced the DVI port before it).
Three identical articles! And two opinions that match yours! Oh my, Apple is doomed!
2 million, 2 months, fastest to $1 billion, top selling tablet, etc., etc. You can quote all the bullshit articles you want, but you can't negate the simple fact that the iPad is off to a stellar start. You can't take the position that with a start like this, the iPad is going to fall flat and expect to be taken seriously. If it is going fail, there are no signs of it. In fact, all signs point to the opposite conclusion.
I'll repeat that: there are no signs at all that the iPad will fail. Just because you don't like it, that doesn't mean...
Fuck, I just realized, nobody can be that stupid. I've been trolled. I need to learn to pay better attention next time.
Dood, seriously lay of the crack, the iPad has sold well but it hasn't sold as well as you lead on.
I'm quoting actual numbers. 2 million in less than 2 months. How is that not good?
Apple sold more iPads in the last two months than Xbox 360s and PS3s combined. How is that not good?
More than Wiis sold in that time. How is that not good?
iPad reached $1 billion in sales faster than any other consumer product in the history of ever. How is that not good?
The Wii kicks the shit out of iPhone sales alone (somewhere in the vicinity of 20million units)
53 million Wiis. Apple has sold approximately twice as many iOS devices. In less time. How is that not good?
But somehow you've concocted a version of reality where something like that is not a runaway success. Given how much better you expect Android and webOS tablets to do, I can't *wait* to see how amazing Dell and HP do second half of 2010!
You have two stories of people who didn't like the iPad. I have two million stories of people who did. How can you come to the conclusion that your stories trump mine?
There is absolutely no way a $500 tech product will sell two million units in the first two months, then sizzle out. I don't think you understand the scope here. That's more than the total number of Wiis sold in that timeframe, and more than the combined total of Xbox 360s and PS3s. iPad was the fastest consumer product in the history of ever to reach $1 billion in sales.
Shit like that ain't failure. The fact that you didn't like the iPad can't possibly outweigh this. "Fanboys" and "tech hounds" can't have made this happen. There's absolutely no way to spin this as a failure. At least, not while being able to simultaneously affirm one's sanity.
these sales figures are passed on the media which means they are absolutely doctored in the favor of whichever company is buying the most adspace
Two million in less than two months. How do you doctor that?
The problem, like I've been saying over and over again is your interpretation of how your personal experience applies to the population as a whole. Now you're trying to say that because you don't like the iPad, there's no way Apple sold two million in less than two months? That it must be a lie?
You keep coming up with excuses why you don't think the iPad is doing well, but all the handwaving in the world won't change the fact that Apple has sold over two million in less than two months. The fact that you didn't buy one is not sufficient to generate an entire theory about how the iPad is not doing well. You just aren't that important.
It's an ebook reader, and Amazon sells far fewer than a million per month. I mean far, far fewer, as in, a small fraction of that number. They only sold something between 2 and 3 million for the entire year of 2009. And I don't think I'm going out on a limb here when I say that Amazon will probably sell fewer this year than last year.
Read my sig mate, it sums up Apple in nutshell
I did, mate, and it doesn't sum up Apple, it sums up your failure to understand Apple. You think people are idiots who only buy Apple products because they saw them on the TV. Your proof of this is that you didn't buy one, after being convinced, by the TV, that you should buy one.
What you're missing is that the iPad (and presumably other Apple products) aren't for you. Not that they aren't for most everyone else. People love them some iPods and iPhones. Now they are sending some of that love over to iPad. And all the numbers back that up.
But you know better. Somehow only you can see the numbers for what they are. They are... um... all a mirage! People don't really like iPads, because you don't like iPads. They are just under the spell of the TV, and they will come to their senses and the iPad will fall to the wayside. Yeah, that's it! You've cracked the code! The alternative, well, the alternative is just too hard to bear. The alternative is that people like something you don't like. And, by god, that can't be true, that mustn't be true.
Yeah, two million in less than two months, but there's an ad from Australia that has the iPad at the bottom of the page, oh my!
Curious, though, I didn't see any other tablets more prominently displayed. BTW, the iPad presently outsells the Xbox 360 (based on the numbers on nexgenwars.com). Yes, that's right. Since the launch of the iPad, Apple has sold more iPads than MS has sold Xbox 360s. In fact, more than MS sold Xbox 360s and Sony sold PS3s, combined.
It wont "die" because the fan base is there to support it but it wont "overcome" whats out there,
What are you talking about? There's nothing "out there" for it to overcome!
nor will it be able to compete with the hurricane or streak when they come out.
It's amusing that you think Dell or HP will out-engineer Apple, and do so with such aplomb that when their johnny-come-lately tablets arrive, they will overtake the iPad so decisively that it's the iPad that won't be able to compete. And your evidence for this? You went into an Apple Store to buy an iPad, but then didn't!
Are you really honestly suggesting that this Winter, the Streak and Hurricane will top the iPad on the Christmas Wish-list tally? Or are you simply saying that they will top the iPad on your list? Because you seem to be confusing the former for the latter.
The iPad is just a large iPod the same way a swimming pool is just a large bathtub. You do have a point about the price compared to a laptop though. Why buy a laptop when you've already got an iPad, right? For a lot of people, an iPad + a desktop is a better choice than just a laptop, or even worse, a laptop + a desktop. iPad is 10x more portable than a notebook.
As for demand dying out, I wouldn't hold my breath. The fact that you think it's going to happen is amusing. People aren't the idiots you seem to think they are. They are buying iPads because (surprise, surprise) they want iPads. You're right that hype will get them into the store (it got you into one, didn't it?), but once in the store hype alone will not sell an iPad. After all, you didn't buy one, right?
And why is that? Is it because you are special, and can see through all the hype? Or is it because your needs and wants are not universal, and there are plenty (millions, in just two months) for whom the iPad does fill their needs and wants? Nah, couldn't be. Surely it's the scenario in which you are special...
The fact that you can't even be honest for half a second about the price is telling. It shows that you are overcompensating for what you know to be a weakly founded opinion. The $500 iPad is not crippled at all. You pay more for more storage, and/or for 3G (and AGPS which utilizes 3G). Nothing more, nothing less. There are no iPads that are even within 15% of $1,000.
In spite of your protests to the contrary, the iPad's hardware is very compelling. If it's so awful, then surely you can point to an example of better hardware. Take your time, I'll just wait right over here...
Slashdot Mirror
To say they don't make much from the App store is to completely ignore the fact that it's their main marketing tool now for all iDevices. Every advert is about what you can do with app X or Y with very little focus on the hardware.
And that's exactly the point. People seem to think Apple limit the iPhone to the App Store for native apps in order to make money from each app sold, but that's not the reason. The reason is to make the iPhone a more appealing platform to consumers and developers.
All this nonsense about how Apple will now do this for the Mac is based on this flawed assumption. They may (and probably will) do something in 10.7 that simplifies things for the user, but they absolutely will not lock down the Mac like the iPhone unless that would make the Mac more compelling, and it's very clear that right now it would not.
Apple doesn't want to control its users, it wants to control the quality of its products, and it's both difficult to fault them for that (let alone call them "evil" like so many do here on slashdot!), or to argue that it hasn't worked out well for them.
Ooh, scary innuendo!
Can you point to any actual reason to worry about your bank information being vulnerable from an iPhone? There was that exploit a while back that affected jailbroken iPhones that had a default ssh password (which didn't compromise bank info anyway). But that's *not* caused by any of these security updates. In fact, the users had to go quite a bit out of their way to make themselves vulnerable in the first place.
How can they talk about how Apple Products don't suffer from viruses or other Malware when they are patching record numbers!
How? Well, first, they've never said this. But they have said any such problem is way less than on Windows, which it is. And the iPhone/iPad? Aside from that exploit a while back that affected jailbroken iPhones with a default ssh password, what malware is there for iOS?
None?
Hmm... Perhaps that's how they can say the things they actually do say.
So Apple does not want you to have freedom or respects your privacy.
They don't want you to have freedom? How so? They control one aspect of their phone. I guess Sony and Microsoft don't want me to have freedom? Or my local grocer doesn't, either, right?
Or maybe you don't want Apple to have the freedom to control the quality of their products, or me the freedom to choose a superior product?
As for not respecting your privacy, they:
1. Tell you what they are doing, unlike other sites and services.
2. Let you opt out (not only from iAds, using oo.apple.com, but also in the phone itself, by either turning Location Services off entirely, or on an app-by-app basis, as each app must first ask before it can access your location).
3. Updating iOS to show you exactly when your location is being accessed, and give you a list of apps that accessed it in the past 24 hours, as well as the ability to revoke permission to any app you wish.
It looks to me like they are actually respecting our privacy, while still providing services which can make use of it. It's a lot like the DRM that used to be on music from the iTunes Store. Sure, it was DRM and that's potentially bad, but in order to get music in the first place, they had to have DRM, which they implemented in a way that was pretty much invisible to the user, and respected their ownership of the music as best as possible, while still being DRMed. In a similar fashion, Location Services allows for a lot of the promise of such a service, like being able to map your route or obtain local information, while doing what they can to keep it from tracking their users in a personal and trouble manner.
And you know this because...?
This privacy policy looks pretty much like it's in reference to the fact that the iPhone (and to a lesser extent, Mac OS X/Safari, using geolocation with IP addresses) can report where you are.
So, for example, when you look up your location with the Maps app on the iPhone, Apple, by definition, has to transmit your location to Google. They are just disclosing this explicitly instead of just assuming the pop-up dialog box, as well as just the fact that this has to happen to show your location on a map to begin with, is enough to clue you in.
And, of course, iOS will tell other apps (all must request this, even Apple's own apps) where you are, if they ask. These, the built in Maps app, and iAds, are almost certainly what this is about. It would be strange for Jobs to make such a big deal about privacy and add features to iOS 4 to make sure you know when you're being tracked, just to blatantly spy on you otherwise.
Or maybe not, I don't know. But it's far more rational than thinking that Apple is going to spy on you, and hand your location over to whoever asks/pays (such as the FBI, like the troll above claimed). Hell, the fact that they state the information won't be personally identifiable pretty much negates any value the data would be to an organization like the FBI in the first place.
The funny thing is, it looks like Apple is trying to be completely honest about their privacy policy (unlike how online services tend to be, with all the blundering by Facebook, for example, or the statements from people like Scott McNealy and Eric Schmidt about privacy, etc.), and the honesty is biting them in the ass, whereas instead if they just kept their mouth shut, they could do much worse (i.e., what the tinfoilers here are imagining) and nobody would ever know.
Android is Linux in the sense that it is built on the Linux kernel. It is not the familiar operating system that pedants call GNU/Linux, though. The differences are deeper than the windowing system -- pretty much everything other than the kernel is completely different from any other Linux-based OS.
That's why I worded it the way I did. I am assuming a POSIX layer underneath which can run (even if it doesn't include) all the standard GNU or BSD tools. Perhaps that assumption is wrong.
Similarly, your claim that "iOS is OS X" is misleading.
Not at all. If I said, "is Mac OS X", I would be misleading (and outright wrong). But before it was called iPhone OS, it was called OS X (as opposed to Mac OS X). iOS is a variation of OS X. It's essentially Mac OS X, with UIKit replacing AppKit, different bundled apps, a different security mechanism, and the omission of some frameworks which make little sense on a handheld, as well as the addition of some that do (there are more differences, but that's a fairly good overview). There's been a lot of cross-pollination between iOS and Mac OS X, with things like QuickTime X, CoreLocation and CoreAnimation going from iOS to Mac OS X, and OpenCL and GCD making their way to iOS.
The difference between iOS and Mac OS X, for example, is much less than the difference between Windows NT 3.0 and Windows 95.
but clearly if you buy an iPhone you are not getting a handheld Mac.
Which is why I didn't say Mac OS X. I realize that distinction is somewhat subtle, and if I say "OS X", people may think I mean "Mac OS X". Perhaps I should be more clear (it's a fine line between being clear and an overabundance of parenthetical statements and a patronizing tone).
OS X is capable of unrestricted multitasking, for example, whereas multitasking in iOS is very limited even with the new features in the latest version.
iOS (or iPhone OS, or OS X, whichever name/version we're talking about) has had the exact same multitasking capabilities as the desktop Mac OS X. The difference is the security model prevented background UIKit apps (with the exception of a handful of built-in apps).
If that seems like I'm splitting hairs, it's probably because you're assuming I'm saying something I'm not. I'm talking about the OS as a whole, not the interface (which is only part of the OS). The interfaces on Mac OS X and iOS are very different. The overall OSs, though, are exceptionally similar, differing in far less than, for example, Windows Mobile and Windows XP, or even Android and a standard Linux distro.
I disagree that Microsoft has always been behind Apple.
I never said they were.
Not only did Apple copy from everyone else in features
I never said they didn't.
they literally copied NeXT and Mach into the OS
No. Mac OS X is Nextstep.
KHTML into the browser
WebKit is based on KHTML. But this is both a.) not what I mean by copying above and b.) exactly the sort of thing open source is meant for.
This is a great thing, I see nothing wrong with this
I never said there was. In fact, I stated quite the opposite. See below.
but it is wrong to exclude Apple from copying of playing catch-up.
It's even more wrong to think that's what I did.
Perhaps you missed this part of my post?
"unlike Apple who, when they copy they make things better (that's what "good artists copy, great artists steal" means)"
Just as windows mobile was catching up being coupled with Sense UI and the like, they go and join the worthless herd of App-based feature-less mobile OS'es.
"Worthless herd"? iPhone and, to a lesser extent, Android, are where it's at. The old-style Windows Mobile is about as appealing today as a tape-playing Walkman.
The thing is, as far as mobile OS'es go, windows mobile has been ahead, being an open platform and close to an actual OS.
"Ahead"? Ahead of Palm, technologically, and ahead of Apple and Google in terms of timeline where they entered the market. But that's pretty much it. As for being "close to an actual OS", iOS is OS X. Android is Linux with (essentially) a custom windowing system. Windows Mobile is much further from Windows than either iOS or Android are to their respective desktop counterparts.
7 becomes worthless
I agree. It can't outclass iPhone or out-geek Android. In a word, worthless.
and 6.5 will go on and on being used and modded by power users for years to come
I didn't realize "power users" meant "a dwindling niche of users stuck in the past". I'll remember that for the next Amiga or Newton story on Slashdot. They abound with "power users" extraordinaire!
because it's the last of the useful mobile OS'es. Long live task manager. :P
POWER USER!!!!
and heading towards what most people dislike about the iPhone (single marketplace)
I don't think "most people dislike" this, Nerdfest. I realize it's a fairly common sentiment here on Slashdot, but most people have different priorities.
Maybe their doing what Linus Torvalds did with Git, in reversing every decision that CVS made
The thing is, Microsoft just isn't that talented. I don't mean they don't have talented employees, but that the way the company works, talent just doesn't enter into it. What they do, what they've always done, is copy what others have done, and unlike Apple who, when they copy they make things better (that's what "good artists copy, great artists steal" means), MS copies poorly. The first few iterations are atrocious. But eventually they copy things so thoroughly that, what the hell, it's good enough, right?
Technologically, MS has always been behind the curve. Macs, Amigas, OS/2. All made Windows (and DOS!) look pathetic. But price and hardware support, along with some horrible, but effective, business tactics won out.
And it looks like MS is trying the same here, but without the ability to engage in the same old business tactics, and without the sort of market where price and hardware support is as important as it was during the PC era. So, like you said, I just don't see how this will work out well for them. They can't out-class iPhone, or out-geek Android, and they can't tie their monopoly to it.
I guess we'll just have to wait and see. MS has a way of sticking around with technically inferior offerings. It's like a gambler with enough money to keep doubling down. You don't have to win right away, you just have to win somewhere along the line. MS doesn't have the burden of caring about whether their products are good, they just want them to sell, and they have the money and the will to stick around until they do. They'll keep "reinventing" their products (WinCE to Windows Mobile to Windows Phone 7, with Zune and Kin thrown in for good measure) until something sticks.
How do you feel about that Apple logo (or two) on your keyboard? How about the upper left corner of your screen?
Mac keyboards don't have Apple keys anymore. And the one on the screen is the icon you click on, just like the Windows button. The physical button on Windows phones doesn't benefit by having a Windows icon in the way the button on Windows 7 does. Think about how tacky it would be were the home button to have an Apple logo on it.
Actually suggesting that someone put the phone in Airplane mode is crazy
You're right, bur your conclusion is wrong. There's no reason for 99+% of people to even think about doing this. The suggestion was "if you're extremely worried about this", not "this is a big problem, people should be doing this".
Suggesting that someone turn their phone off every night so that they don't get charged exorbitant fees for some unknown, and certainly unneeded function
So far, you're the only person suggesting this. But you're right, it is a stupid suggestion.
Because Apple "Just Works". For varying values of "Just Works".
There is no other tech company on the planet whose products are both as powerful, as easy to use, and reliably work as Apple. So, yeah, "just works" is a valid description.
If you looked at the rear panel image, you'd have seen that there is also a miniDisplayPort connector.
I don't see how your reply here has anything to do with what I wrote.
HDMI is clearly a play for the living room, but without updated FrontRow software, it doesn't replace the AppleTV (just makes it a better option for folks who don't want more than an iTunesStore device)
The mini is still straddling the living room, entry level Mac and SOHO server "markets", without really making a strong play for any of them.
Actually, the more I think about it, the less convinced I am that it's anything more than simply a replacement for the mini-DVI port and not part of a larger picture. Even if they were to revamp Front Row, it doesn't seem very Apple-like to have a device in the living room where a keyboard and mouse are so fundamental. I think this is more about, "people like to hook minis up to their TV, so here's a HDMI port", similar to how they have an option to forgo the optical drive for a second hard disk for people who like to use the mini as a little server.
HDMI is just DVI + sound!
No, it's not. It's electrically compatible, but it's *not* DVI, and specific to the topic at hand, HDMI is more limited with regards to supported resolutions.
Huh what? That's nothing magical or mystical.
I'll take "adjectives I never used" for a hundred, Alex.
I've been connected to my Westinghouse 24" 1920x1200 LCD via HDMI for three years at native resolution...
Yup, as it turns out, not as interesting as I thought. 1920x1200 was the most common limit, not 1080p.
However, HDMI still sucks as a primary desktop connector, just not as bad as I thought.
Power supply built in is great. Smaller size is great. Better graphics is very nice. You're such a lame anti-Apple troll that you put down all the things about the new mini that are better than the old one. The only real disappointment with the update is the increased price.
HDMI sucks as a PC display connector. It's only really good for connecting to a TV. It's interesting that the HDMI port on the mini supports higher-than-1080p resolution (1080p being the reason HDMI is so awful for desktop use). Apple has always supported HDMI on their TV-centric device, the AppleTV. It's notable that they decided to add it to the mini. Makes you wonder if it's part of a larger living-room play, or just a replacement for the old mini-DVI port (just like that replaced the DVI port before it).
Not to mention a displayport monitor..
i seriously dont get why apple doesn just put DVI on there, especially for a BOYKMM system
Oh wait: Mini DisplayPort to DVI Adapter $29, there is why
What are you talking about? The Mac mini includes both VGA and DVI. It always has.
Buy it with a screen and a keyboard ant it will cost you more that a 27" iMac with a quad Core i7.
Only if by "more than", you mean "less than half of", sure.
http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/1599659/wall-street-journal-admits-ipad-sales-disappointing
http://www.itnewsafrica.com/?p=6709
http://www.thetechherald.com/article.php/201014/5463/First-day-iPad-sales-fall-short-of-revised-expectations
http://www.totaltele.com/view.aspx?ID=454448
Wow. Four stories about how Apple didn't sell as many iPads as some analysts (not Apple) predicted!
2 million, 2 months. Fastest ever to $1 billion. But some analysts were off by a week or so (in light of a supply shortage, no less), oh no!
keep reading ...
http://www.smartcompany.com.au/information-technology/20100604-the-ipad-can-t-match-the-laptop-yet-but-when-it-can-the-world-will-change-kohler.html
http://www.zdnet.com.au/why-the-apple-ipad-will-fail-in-australia-339302686.htm
http://www.itwire.com/it-industry-news/strategy/38566-five-reasons-the-ipad-will-fail-in-australia
http://delimiter.com.au/2010/04/27/five-reasons-the-ipad-will-fail-in-australia/
http://www.marketingmag.com.au/news/view/ipad-over-hyped-2165
Three identical articles! And two opinions that match yours! Oh my, Apple is doomed!
2 million, 2 months, fastest to $1 billion, top selling tablet, etc., etc. You can quote all the bullshit articles you want, but you can't negate the simple fact that the iPad is off to a stellar start. You can't take the position that with a start like this, the iPad is going to fall flat and expect to be taken seriously. If it is going fail, there are no signs of it. In fact, all signs point to the opposite conclusion.
I'll repeat that: there are no signs at all that the iPad will fail. Just because you don't like it, that doesn't mean...
Fuck, I just realized, nobody can be that stupid. I've been trolled. I need to learn to pay better attention next time.
/end thread
Dood, seriously lay of the crack, the iPad has sold well but it hasn't sold as well as you lead on.
I'm quoting actual numbers. 2 million in less than 2 months. How is that not good?
Apple sold more iPads in the last two months than Xbox 360s and PS3s combined. How is that not good?
More than Wiis sold in that time. How is that not good?
iPad reached $1 billion in sales faster than any other consumer product in the history of ever. How is that not good?
The Wii kicks the shit out of iPhone sales alone (somewhere in the vicinity of 20million units)
53 million Wiis. Apple has sold approximately twice as many iOS devices. In less time. How is that not good?
But somehow you've concocted a version of reality where something like that is not a runaway success. Given how much better you expect Android and webOS tablets to do, I can't *wait* to see how amazing Dell and HP do second half of 2010!
You have two stories of people who didn't like the iPad. I have two million stories of people who did. How can you come to the conclusion that your stories trump mine?
There is absolutely no way a $500 tech product will sell two million units in the first two months, then sizzle out. I don't think you understand the scope here. That's more than the total number of Wiis sold in that timeframe, and more than the combined total of Xbox 360s and PS3s. iPad was the fastest consumer product in the history of ever to reach $1 billion in sales.
Shit like that ain't failure. The fact that you didn't like the iPad can't possibly outweigh this. "Fanboys" and "tech hounds" can't have made this happen. There's absolutely no way to spin this as a failure. At least, not while being able to simultaneously affirm one's sanity.
these sales figures are passed on the media which means they are absolutely doctored in the favor of whichever company is buying the most adspace
Two million in less than two months. How do you doctor that?
The problem, like I've been saying over and over again is your interpretation of how your personal experience applies to the population as a whole. Now you're trying to say that because you don't like the iPad, there's no way Apple sold two million in less than two months? That it must be a lie?
You keep coming up with excuses why you don't think the iPad is doing well, but all the handwaving in the world won't change the fact that Apple has sold over two million in less than two months. The fact that you didn't buy one is not sufficient to generate an entire theory about how the iPad is not doing well. You just aren't that important.
Dude! WTF do you think the KINDLE is!?
It's an ebook reader, and Amazon sells far fewer than a million per month. I mean far, far fewer, as in, a small fraction of that number. They only sold something between 2 and 3 million for the entire year of 2009. And I don't think I'm going out on a limb here when I say that Amazon will probably sell fewer this year than last year.
Read my sig mate, it sums up Apple in nutshell
I did, mate, and it doesn't sum up Apple, it sums up your failure to understand Apple. You think people are idiots who only buy Apple products because they saw them on the TV. Your proof of this is that you didn't buy one, after being convinced, by the TV, that you should buy one.
What you're missing is that the iPad (and presumably other Apple products) aren't for you. Not that they aren't for most everyone else. People love them some iPods and iPhones. Now they are sending some of that love over to iPad. And all the numbers back that up.
But you know better. Somehow only you can see the numbers for what they are. They are... um... all a mirage! People don't really like iPads, because you don't like iPads. They are just under the spell of the TV, and they will come to their senses and the iPad will fall to the wayside. Yeah, that's it! You've cracked the code! The alternative, well, the alternative is just too hard to bear. The alternative is that people like something you don't like. And, by god, that can't be true, that mustn't be true.
Yeah, two million in less than two months, but there's an ad from Australia that has the iPad at the bottom of the page, oh my!
Curious, though, I didn't see any other tablets more prominently displayed. BTW, the iPad presently outsells the Xbox 360 (based on the numbers on nexgenwars.com). Yes, that's right. Since the launch of the iPad, Apple has sold more iPads than MS has sold Xbox 360s. In fact, more than MS sold Xbox 360s and Sony sold PS3s, combined.
It wont "die" because the fan base is there to support it but it wont "overcome" whats out there,
What are you talking about? There's nothing "out there" for it to overcome!
nor will it be able to compete with the hurricane or streak when they come out.
It's amusing that you think Dell or HP will out-engineer Apple, and do so with such aplomb that when their johnny-come-lately tablets arrive, they will overtake the iPad so decisively that it's the iPad that won't be able to compete. And your evidence for this? You went into an Apple Store to buy an iPad, but then didn't!
Are you really honestly suggesting that this Winter, the Streak and Hurricane will top the iPad on the Christmas Wish-list tally? Or are you simply saying that they will top the iPad on your list? Because you seem to be confusing the former for the latter.
The iPad is just a large iPod the same way a swimming pool is just a large bathtub. You do have a point about the price compared to a laptop though. Why buy a laptop when you've already got an iPad, right? For a lot of people, an iPad + a desktop is a better choice than just a laptop, or even worse, a laptop + a desktop. iPad is 10x more portable than a notebook.
As for demand dying out, I wouldn't hold my breath. The fact that you think it's going to happen is amusing. People aren't the idiots you seem to think they are. They are buying iPads because (surprise, surprise) they want iPads. You're right that hype will get them into the store (it got you into one, didn't it?), but once in the store hype alone will not sell an iPad. After all, you didn't buy one, right?
And why is that? Is it because you are special, and can see through all the hype? Or is it because your needs and wants are not universal, and there are plenty (millions, in just two months) for whom the iPad does fill their needs and wants? Nah, couldn't be. Surely it's the scenario in which you are special...
The fact that you can't even be honest for half a second about the price is telling. It shows that you are overcompensating for what you know to be a weakly founded opinion. The $500 iPad is not crippled at all. You pay more for more storage, and/or for 3G (and AGPS which utilizes 3G). Nothing more, nothing less. There are no iPads that are even within 15% of $1,000.
In spite of your protests to the contrary, the iPad's hardware is very compelling. If it's so awful, then surely you can point to an example of better hardware. Take your time, I'll just wait right over here...