Seriously, I've always wanted to have the equivalent of Maxwell Smart's shoe phone... with this attached to my shoe I could nearly have been there if only they had made it rotary.
Are sure you actually want this? The thing is, the isolation of these services serves a useful purpose. They all carry their own social context and rules.
Email - probably not urgent, but get back to me in 24 - 48 hours please. Might have useful attachments, etc, handy for archiving stuff
IM - probably not urgent but handy if you can respond in real time for a quick chat
SMS - short and sweet, could be urgent or time sensitive, check it out as soon as you can, a one word response will quite possibly do. Don't count on it as an archive.
Having all these things merged would destroy some of the qualities that make them useful.
Wow, you invented the longest strawman paragraph to oppose the parent post and then virtually restated his/her point. Jobs locks down his products, doesn't want them to be used in ways he doesn't like. That's fine as long as he's a minor player. The important thing is then that he never become a major player because that will affect freedom. Ergo if you care about freedom, don't buy his products. This is what I do.
How quickly we forget. It wasn't long ago that IE had 95% market share, windows even higher and you pretty much didn't have any choice but to use it for certain tasks. The internet nearly lost that one and if MS hadn't screwed up with Vista and IE and if not for the law restricting their monopoly it might not have prevailed.
Yes it's nice to think you can just choose something else any time you feel like but there's no such law built into technology that makes that true. Once a certain player gains dominance and has enough control in an area (eg: Apple something like 80% of the portable music player market) then you rapidly find you just don't have choice any more (eg: some music just can't be bought any way other than through iTunes).
Since you're so into being honest you might acknowledge that in terms of contributions to WebKit now Google has overtaken Apple and has in fact been the leading contributor for more than a year. If anything I think we can say WebKit is one of the few examples where major competitors are working together productively on an open source product that everyone benefits from. If only there were more cases like it.
Hmm, maybe I should look into why Win7 is so slow to resume for me. It takes 10 - 15 seconds usually. The irony is that it only takes about that long to boot from scratch to get to the login screen. I have an Intel SSD which I had hoped would make this really fast but it sits there forever with a blank (completely black) screen before doing anything.
Mostly agree with everything you say. The comparison with iPad really just comes from consumer mindshare... they're in the market for a "small computer" and the lure of the iPad is strong regardless of what other pros and cons there are. That's what they are thinking about and will inevitably compare to.
One thing you didn't mention which perhaps could be key is "instant on". Despite the best efforts of Win7 my laptop still takes many seconds to light up after a resume - that's far too much if you're using it as a totally casual device ("let me google that... ") etc.
We'll see. I just hope Google realises that they *have* to differentiate it. They seem to have missed the mark with Google TV in my opinion, so it's not clear that they really have a good bearing on what the market will bear.
(And I have no idea why people modded you flamebait).
Minor correction: nothing is ever sanctioned by Apple. They will block anything they feel like blocking for whatever reasons they feel like. Your apps enter their controlled and locked down ecosystem at the whim and pleasure of Apple's fancy.
Absolutely, I'm in the same camp. But I'd bet that for the vast majority of people who want keyboards it's hard to beat a netbook unless this thing is competitive in some other major way (maybe battery life?).
"Whoops, lost my internet. Oh, it's back again... let me re-open my session..."
Don't forget, Google has been investing heavily in HTML5 with features like offline storage and other capabilities for apps to run offline. I doubt this tablet is going to be unusable the minute the cloud goes away.
I'm really hoping that this thing is super cheap. That's the only way I can really justify something that has so little capability. Some of my primary use cases - handling photos, video, etc. are just not well suited for non-native applications right now. So this would really truly be a limited device. However if the price was right - and I'm talking max $150, preferably $99 - I could really go for it. As in, I'd have them all over the house, just for convenience. But if this thing costs $300 or more then it's in iPad territory and there's just zero reason to buy it over an iPad.
In truth, this is a strength, not a weakness of Android - this is the "many eyes" of open source in action. No doubt the important fixes among these will be addressed pretty quickly.
The problem, however, is with the carriers who keep insisting on pushing custom firmware on their devices. With many devices never receiving any updates at all they are wide open - how long until we have massive malware issues because of this?
What I hope is that this drives some consumer backlash which forces the carriers to stop the nonsense with customizing the core of android and instead just put their skins on the topmost UI layer. They should realize quick smart that they are not and should never be in the OS business and that updates need to come out within weeks of releases from Google, not years or never.
Yeah, I was kind of shocked by that. I disable Flash by default everywhere but so far have let PDF plugins stay because I need them for a lot of things and hey, it's a freakin document format! Now I find out that Reader is linked to both executable Javascript AND Flash. And anybody sending me a simple PDF document could be exploiting holes in any of those. What a nightmare.
This reminds me of a quandry that I've always wondered about. You say that both contracts are worthless, but isn't this situation like the GPL? By default you have no right to copy the page down onto your computer and read it. Only some kind of contract or terms of use allows you to do that. So if the "contract" is invalid then aren't you actually guilty of copyright infringement just by looking at the page?
For fuck's sake, I claim calling something like this "evil" is indicative of either crackpot hyperbole or directly of some sort of mental disorder. Evil? Really?
Yes, absolutely. Jobs is basically engineering a situation whereby he totally controls people's computing lives against their own interests and he does it in order to increase his personal wealth and power. I see this as evil.
Partly because they have an excellent Google Voice web app (which Apple has no ability or desire to block), and partly because it works as a propaganda tool against iOS
Hmm, who's ascribing things to avarice now?
Do you have any idea how much it costs to go for that 30% cut? They have to run an extremely high-volume service.
Oh the poor darlings. Hosting a web server, it's a terrible burden, I mean, almost nobody manages to do that.
Those stores exist primarily to add value to the hardware they selll, and looking at their quarterly report from Monday, it's delusional to say it isn't working.
You can't draw that conclusion because people don't have a choice about where they buy things. And btw, I certainly don't claim this isn't successful. I claim it is evil.
. Apple clearly believes that a certain level of consistency provides for a better user experience than a bunch of little hacks to the UI
No, they don't "clearly believe this". They deny highly useful apps (such as tethering) that absolutely nobody could claim are not useful. They do it purely for business reasons. Claiming this is in the user's interests is, to use your expression "Bullshit".
Google voice was banned forever for no other reason than Apple didn't want to let Google in.
Their policy explicitly states that apps that "duplicate" (aka "compete with") built in functions will not be allowed.
Apple's policies are all about control, lockdown, and ensuring that nothing gets on a device without 30% going to Apple. They have nothing to do with the user experience, as evidenced by the fact that so many apps that enhance the user experience are banned with no reference to their quality or usefulness.
My theory is that they are trying to scare the bejesus out of Microsoft and even Mozilla into doing more frequent releases themselves. The main thing holding back Google's entire strategy is that browsers aren't good enough yet. They want to take over the whole business market by moving it into the cloud using Google Apps. But they can't because browsers suck. So they make Chrome - a browser that doesn't suck. It's been helpful but what they really need is to influence the other browsers, and one way to do that is to dispel the mythology that we should expect major improvements to our browsers just once every few years or so. One way to do that is to embarrass everyone else by showing that it's perfectly possible to release a new stable version every month or two if you do it right.
We'll see the truth of this when they reach 10 or so. Once they realize that new versions of Chrome aren't generating any news any more because they are just incrementing from 16 to 17 and the whole world says "meh" even though they rewrote half the freakin browser I'd bet good money we'll get some kind of "Chrome 2.0" rebranding.
what problems would a locked down Mac App Store solve
It solves two huge problems - the problem that Apple is not getting a 30% cut of all software sold for the Mac like it is for iOS, and the problem that Apple can't disadvantage competitors by keeping them out of its premier store for its own platform.
I'm surprised they can hook into power from the car.
That's essentially stealing fuel from the owner of the car. It's one thing to do warrantless tracking and spying on a person, it's quite another to start stealing their property. I would think anybody who had their fuel stolen like this should be able to sue.
Then again, even just carrying the device around imposes some more weight on the car which will use more fuel. So perhaps this might be an interesting legal recourse - spy on me all you want, but don't steal my fuel man!
Slashdot Mirror
So resign.
Nobody said freedom had to be convenient.
A rotary dial?
Seriously, I've always wanted to have the equivalent of Maxwell Smart's shoe phone ... with this attached to my shoe I could nearly have been there if only they had made it rotary.
Are sure you actually want this? The thing is, the isolation of these services serves a useful purpose. They all carry their own social context and rules.
Email - probably not urgent, but get back to me in 24 - 48 hours please. Might have useful attachments, etc, handy for archiving stuff
IM - probably not urgent but handy if you can respond in real time for a quick chat
SMS - short and sweet, could be urgent or time sensitive, check it out as soon as you can, a one word response will quite possibly do. Don't count on it as an archive.
Having all these things merged would destroy some of the qualities that make them useful.
Wow, you invented the longest strawman paragraph to oppose the parent post and then virtually restated his/her point. Jobs locks down his products, doesn't want them to be used in ways he doesn't like. That's fine as long as he's a minor player. The important thing is then that he never become a major player because that will affect freedom. Ergo if you care about freedom, don't buy his products. This is what I do.
They're the largest webmail provider
Umm, no, unless the stats have changed dramatically they're no where near the largest webmail provider by number of accounts.
We can choose something different just as quickly
How quickly we forget. It wasn't long ago that IE had 95% market share, windows even higher and you pretty much didn't have any choice but to use it for certain tasks. The internet nearly lost that one and if MS hadn't screwed up with Vista and IE and if not for the law restricting their monopoly it might not have prevailed.
Yes it's nice to think you can just choose something else any time you feel like but there's no such law built into technology that makes that true. Once a certain player gains dominance and has enough control in an area (eg: Apple something like 80% of the portable music player market) then you rapidly find you just don't have choice any more (eg: some music just can't be bought any way other than through iTunes).
Since you're so into being honest you might acknowledge that in terms of contributions to WebKit now Google has overtaken Apple and has in fact been the leading contributor for more than a year. If anything I think we can say WebKit is one of the few examples where major competitors are working together productively on an open source product that everyone benefits from. If only there were more cases like it.
Hmm, maybe I should look into why Win7 is so slow to resume for me. It takes 10 - 15 seconds usually. The irony is that it only takes about that long to boot from scratch to get to the login screen. I have an Intel SSD which I had hoped would make this really fast but it sits there forever with a blank (completely black) screen before doing anything.
Mostly agree with everything you say. The comparison with iPad really just comes from consumer mindshare ... they're in the market for a "small computer" and the lure of the iPad is strong regardless of what other pros and cons there are. That's what they are thinking about and will inevitably compare to.
One thing you didn't mention which perhaps could be key is "instant on". Despite the best efforts of Win7 my laptop still takes many seconds to light up after a resume - that's far too much if you're using it as a totally casual device ("let me google that ... ") etc.
We'll see. I just hope Google realises that they *have* to differentiate it. They seem to have missed the mark with Google TV in my opinion, so it's not clear that they really have a good bearing on what the market will bear.
(And I have no idea why people modded you flamebait).
is also sanctioned by Apple
Minor correction: nothing is ever sanctioned by Apple. They will block anything they feel like blocking for whatever reasons they feel like. Your apps enter their controlled and locked down ecosystem at the whim and pleasure of Apple's fancy.
Absolutely, I'm in the same camp. But I'd bet that for the vast majority of people who want keyboards it's hard to beat a netbook unless this thing is competitive in some other major way (maybe battery life?).
"Whoops, lost my internet. Oh, it's back again... let me re-open my session..."
Don't forget, Google has been investing heavily in HTML5 with features like offline storage and other capabilities for apps to run offline. I doubt this tablet is going to be unusable the minute the cloud goes away.
I'm really hoping that this thing is super cheap. That's the only way I can really justify something that has so little capability. Some of my primary use cases - handling photos, video, etc. are just not well suited for non-native applications right now. So this would really truly be a limited device. However if the price was right - and I'm talking max $150, preferably $99 - I could really go for it. As in, I'd have them all over the house, just for convenience. But if this thing costs $300 or more then it's in iPad territory and there's just zero reason to buy it over an iPad.
In truth, this is a strength, not a weakness of Android - this is the "many eyes" of open source in action. No doubt the important fixes among these will be addressed pretty quickly.
The problem, however, is with the carriers who keep insisting on pushing custom firmware on their devices. With many devices never receiving any updates at all they are wide open - how long until we have massive malware issues because of this?
What I hope is that this drives some consumer backlash which forces the carriers to stop the nonsense with customizing the core of android and instead just put their skins on the topmost UI layer. They should realize quick smart that they are not and should never be in the OS business and that updates need to come out within weeks of releases from Google, not years or never.
Yeah, I was kind of shocked by that. I disable Flash by default everywhere but so far have let PDF plugins stay because I need them for a lot of things and hey, it's a freakin document format! Now I find out that Reader is linked to both executable Javascript AND Flash. And anybody sending me a simple PDF document could be exploiting holes in any of those. What a nightmare.
This reminds me of a quandry that I've always wondered about. You say that both contracts are worthless, but isn't this situation like the GPL? By default you have no right to copy the page down onto your computer and read it. Only some kind of contract or terms of use allows you to do that. So if the "contract" is invalid then aren't you actually guilty of copyright infringement just by looking at the page?
Hey, just because I'm paranoid doesn't mean that what I'm paranoid about isn't true ;-)
I find your sig amusing - advocating against censorship while defending a company that openly promotes it on their platforms.
For fuck's sake, I claim calling something like this "evil" is indicative of either crackpot hyperbole or directly of some sort of mental disorder. Evil? Really?
Yes, absolutely. Jobs is basically engineering a situation whereby he totally controls people's computing lives against their own interests and he does it in order to increase his personal wealth and power. I see this as evil.
Partly because they have an excellent Google Voice web app (which Apple has no ability or desire to block), and partly because it works as a propaganda tool against iOS
Hmm, who's ascribing things to avarice now?
Do you have any idea how much it costs to go for that 30% cut? They have to run an extremely high-volume service.
Oh the poor darlings. Hosting a web server, it's a terrible burden, I mean, almost nobody manages to do that.
Those stores exist primarily to add value to the hardware they selll, and looking at their quarterly report from Monday, it's delusional to say it isn't working.
You can't draw that conclusion because people don't have a choice about where they buy things. And btw, I certainly don't claim this isn't successful. I claim it is evil.
. Apple clearly believes that a certain level of consistency provides for a better user experience than a bunch of little hacks to the UI
No, they don't "clearly believe this". They deny highly useful apps (such as tethering) that absolutely nobody could claim are not useful. They do it purely for business reasons. Claiming this is in the user's interests is, to use your expression "Bullshit".
Google voice was banned forever for no other reason than Apple didn't want to let Google in.
Their policy explicitly states that apps that "duplicate" (aka "compete with") built in functions will not be allowed.
Apple's policies are all about control, lockdown, and ensuring that nothing gets on a device without 30% going to Apple. They have nothing to do with the user experience, as evidenced by the fact that so many apps that enhance the user experience are banned with no reference to their quality or usefulness.
What's the point of all these frequent releases?
My theory is that they are trying to scare the bejesus out of Microsoft and even Mozilla into doing more frequent releases themselves. The main thing holding back Google's entire strategy is that browsers aren't good enough yet. They want to take over the whole business market by moving it into the cloud using Google Apps. But they can't because browsers suck. So they make Chrome - a browser that doesn't suck. It's been helpful but what they really need is to influence the other browsers, and one way to do that is to dispel the mythology that we should expect major improvements to our browsers just once every few years or so. One way to do that is to embarrass everyone else by showing that it's perfectly possible to release a new stable version every month or two if you do it right.
We'll see the truth of this when they reach 10 or so. Once they realize that new versions of Chrome aren't generating any news any more because they are just incrementing from 16 to 17 and the whole world says "meh" even though they rewrote half the freakin browser I'd bet good money we'll get some kind of "Chrome 2.0" rebranding.
what problems would a locked down Mac App Store solve
It solves two huge problems - the problem that Apple is not getting a 30% cut of all software sold for the Mac like it is for iOS, and the problem that Apple can't disadvantage competitors by keeping them out of its premier store for its own platform.
I'm surprised they can hook into power from the car.
That's essentially stealing fuel from the owner of the car. It's one thing to do warrantless tracking and spying on a person, it's quite another to start stealing their property. I would think anybody who had their fuel stolen like this should be able to sue.
Then again, even just carrying the device around imposes some more weight on the car which will use more fuel. So perhaps this might be an interesting legal recourse - spy on me all you want, but don't steal my fuel man!