NIH is a good thing sometimes. After all if it weren't for NIH we'd have one OS, one browser, etc. What good is that? jQuery would not exist because prototype came first. You should be grateful that people take their own attempts at a problem. We benefit tremendously from it.
Yeah because they don't want to be forced into paying money to MS *and* Apple. There is no need to fight MS because MS uses it for blackmail basically and in effect gives the money back when they give into selling WP7 phones where as Apple won't give them anything because their interest is in protecting their property.
I think that's BS. Not all releases fit the idea that regions with many more languages get theirs last (like this one) and if you do do English, Spanish and French you cover a lot of the world there. Throw in German and that's even more. So why not do those at once? And it's not like they take into consideration local variations of the languages. Spanish people have complained about getting Mexican spanish in their games and the UK frequently gets US english in software so they're not even doing a great job of it.
Personally I think they do it to minimise risk. If the game tanks in the US other regions won't get it or will get a smaller shipment. That in theory makes sense but they also make it likely it will sell less in those regions by doing that because people will either import it or not buy it because everyone in the US says it sucks when in reality maybe they wouldn't think that if they just bought it without being too biased from other sources.
Exactly. I'm sure this helps draw attention when people claim its Apple but even if Apple were to completely clean up everything within its own factories and its suppliers you still have dozens if not hundreds of other companies doing the same thing.
There were already ways for indie people to sell their music including through iTunes. People keep talking about the indie musician but no one is interested in buying their music and going by what people pirate they rather have the pop trash than the indie music.
Having yet another channel will of course help but it certainly won't revolutionize things for indie developers.
Until it's pulled because it's deemed to be of no value. Spotify is already accessible on any desktop and on Android and iOS and for files I keep I rather rely on getting music from more independent companies like Amazon who want to sell to everyone where as it's more likely Google will give feature preference to Android and I may not always have an Android phone.
Why do I need Google Music when Amazon works with every device, has no DRM and is accessible in other countries. Between that and Spotify (which also works on Android and iOS) I don't need to consider a service that may or may not disappear in a year or two.
I know a lot of anti-Apple fanboys couldn't admit it but it's shit on Android because Flash is just going to be shit on a mobile device, imo. I never used it because it was shit so it's not big loss.
Windows mobile was a desktop OS put on a mobile phone and it sucked which is why it wasn't popular. Yes it allowed you to install what you want but one bonus against dozens of negatives didn't help. His point still stands that MS is playing catch up. WP7 was locked down like Apple's iphone. Now they're trying to be like Google and be ok with jail breaking but of course they're charing for that benefit.
Not really. It was Microsoft that was taken to court for hiding aspects of its API to keep a competitive edge over everyone else. They've used more closed formats to lock you into their systems where as Apple has even open sourced their ALAC format.
MS knows they won't stop jail breaking so they're just trying to profit from it by charging you for the tool. I expect them to still shit their pants if someone makes a free alternative.
Which is why as a Android manufacturer you would want to play up the benefits of Android and why your particular Android device is the best. Making some pointless CGI ad doesn't really help.
Of course Apple would want you to see how the iphone ties in with other Apple products and hopefully get you to buy more. But the Droid add doesn't really tell you anything so the odds are just as good than people will buy another phone anyway. But if you tell people about the good things in Android *and* why your particular Android phone is the best then maybe they'll be more likely to buy it.
The phones all cost about the same. The difference is the iphone doesn't get subsidised as much and actually that can work out cheaper for the consumer. My friend and i looked at the iphone 4S and was better off paying more upfront and getting the cheaper plan. There is a good chance you're paying more for your phone than if you bought it outright. This is true of phones other than the iphone too from what I see. Of course if you can't afford to pay for it outright then you don't have a choice.
An I would say Apple makes ads for everyone. Android phones are like video cards and other PC hardware where it's not marketed to everyone. It's marketed at young men and typically more towards the nerdy stereotype that the parent was talking about. When video cards have names that sound like monster trucks and feature ads with sexy women or blood and violence then that's only going to appeal to a certain audience. The same goes if you name you phone droid and and your ad features a pretty lady fighting CGI robots and the ad don't convey to most people what the ad is for until the end let alone what features the phone has.
A lot of us have made fun of jocks for being a bunch of bros who worry about fit women and hating on anything that might imply they're a fairy but the 'nerd' demographic isn't really any different. The only real difference is rather than conveying their masculinity through beer, bikinis and sports, it's through robots, blood and bikinis. If you want to appeal to the masses quite making the marketing look like something that is trying to convince the purchaser it will help convince people they're a man and not a sissy.
There could be something to that if there weren't complaints about Android for some time. Admittedly previous complaints were more about complete lack of support and there is no need for a report to point out the obvious that if you let anyone make an Android phone then a lot of them will be shit.
The main reason older devices don't get the newer OS is for genuine performance reasons. Many would even say the 3G with iOS4 isn't as slick as it should have been. It was supposedly improved after the initial iOS4 release but I think it's safe to say anything older would choke on iOS4.
My biggest annoyance with Android is phones don't get upgraded due to companies not wanting to do it not performance reasons. My G1 is still on 1.6 because I simply don't care to root it (especially now since it's nearly dead) where as my friend who rooted his got 2.1 to run happily and I believe he even had 2.2 so there is no reason the G1 should have been abandoned after one upgrade.
It depends entirely on the accident. My friend dropped his G1 in coleslaw and it was dead. My G1 works but the battery only lasts for about 15 minutes at best if you actually use it and I dropped it on the pavement so the screen it cracked. Though it was abou the 3rd time it was dropped in the 3 or so years. The difference being of course it was on pavement and the screen facing down. Another friend kept their iphone in the back pocket which are ok until she flopped down on a sofa and made it mostly useless with all the cracks in the screen.
So it's sort of hard comparing different types of damage. Water will kill any electric device if it gets inside while the device is on. Quality doesn't really have anything to do with it.
It may very well be that the hardware is similar but by selling cheaper models you get more people who don't care about their hardware and treat it worse or it is just a case of you get what you pay for. The iphone is indeed quite expensive but even if you did take any sort of Apple branding 'tax' off of it the hardware will be more expensive than something built at the same time for half the cost.
I agree the PS3 had a higher base price but at the same time to get a similar experience (ie getting the wifi add-on, the HD-DVD add-on rechargeable battery pack, gold membership, etc) it wasn't cheaper. I believe in fact it was more expensive.
A Ford Ka is dirt cheap compared to Ferrari but that doesn't mean anything. Just like the Xbox may be cheaper than a top of the line computer (though you can get a computer for $300) but when compared to other consoles and the costs to get the same experience then it's not exactly cheap.
Slashdot Mirror
NIH is a good thing sometimes. After all if it weren't for NIH we'd have one OS, one browser, etc. What good is that? jQuery would not exist because prototype came first. You should be grateful that people take their own attempts at a problem. We benefit tremendously from it.
Yeah because they don't want to be forced into paying money to MS *and* Apple. There is no need to fight MS because MS uses it for blackmail basically and in effect gives the money back when they give into selling WP7 phones where as Apple won't give them anything because their interest is in protecting their property.
I think that's BS. Not all releases fit the idea that regions with many more languages get theirs last (like this one) and if you do do English, Spanish and French you cover a lot of the world there. Throw in German and that's even more. So why not do those at once? And it's not like they take into consideration local variations of the languages. Spanish people have complained about getting Mexican spanish in their games and the UK frequently gets US english in software so they're not even doing a great job of it.
Personally I think they do it to minimise risk. If the game tanks in the US other regions won't get it or will get a smaller shipment. That in theory makes sense but they also make it likely it will sell less in those regions by doing that because people will either import it or not buy it because everyone in the US says it sucks when in reality maybe they wouldn't think that if they just bought it without being too biased from other sources.
Exactly. I'm sure this helps draw attention when people claim its Apple but even if Apple were to completely clean up everything within its own factories and its suppliers you still have dozens if not hundreds of other companies doing the same thing.
There were already ways for indie people to sell their music including through iTunes. People keep talking about the indie musician but no one is interested in buying their music and going by what people pirate they rather have the pop trash than the indie music.
Having yet another channel will of course help but it certainly won't revolutionize things for indie developers.
No you don't. It works fine without one. That's how I use it. It would like you to link to your FB account but it's not necessary.
Until it's pulled because it's deemed to be of no value. Spotify is already accessible on any desktop and on Android and iOS and for files I keep I rather rely on getting music from more independent companies like Amazon who want to sell to everyone where as it's more likely Google will give feature preference to Android and I may not always have an Android phone.
Why do I need Google Music when Amazon works with every device, has no DRM and is accessible in other countries. Between that and Spotify (which also works on Android and iOS) I don't need to consider a service that may or may not disappear in a year or two.
Because you're a closet homo?
Yeah but those people aren't very bright.
Which does nothing to help the majority of customers who will buy the system.
Surely a .xxx email address would be perfect for their football department.
He hasn't done it yet so don't hold your breath. He still has time to fold and give in.
Same here. If I see performance problems in Firefox there is a big flash banner somewhere in my tabs.
I know a lot of anti-Apple fanboys couldn't admit it but it's shit on Android because Flash is just going to be shit on a mobile device, imo. I never used it because it was shit so it's not big loss.
Windows mobile was a desktop OS put on a mobile phone and it sucked which is why it wasn't popular. Yes it allowed you to install what you want but one bonus against dozens of negatives didn't help. His point still stands that MS is playing catch up. WP7 was locked down like Apple's iphone. Now they're trying to be like Google and be ok with jail breaking but of course they're charing for that benefit.
Not really. It was Microsoft that was taken to court for hiding aspects of its API to keep a competitive edge over everyone else. They've used more closed formats to lock you into their systems where as Apple has even open sourced their ALAC format.
MS knows they won't stop jail breaking so they're just trying to profit from it by charging you for the tool. I expect them to still shit their pants if someone makes a free alternative.
Which is why as a Android manufacturer you would want to play up the benefits of Android and why your particular Android device is the best. Making some pointless CGI ad doesn't really help.
Of course Apple would want you to see how the iphone ties in with other Apple products and hopefully get you to buy more. But the Droid add doesn't really tell you anything so the odds are just as good than people will buy another phone anyway. But if you tell people about the good things in Android *and* why your particular Android phone is the best then maybe they'll be more likely to buy it.
The phones all cost about the same. The difference is the iphone doesn't get subsidised as much and actually that can work out cheaper for the consumer. My friend and i looked at the iphone 4S and was better off paying more upfront and getting the cheaper plan. There is a good chance you're paying more for your phone than if you bought it outright. This is true of phones other than the iphone too from what I see. Of course if you can't afford to pay for it outright then you don't have a choice.
An I would say Apple makes ads for everyone. Android phones are like video cards and other PC hardware where it's not marketed to everyone. It's marketed at young men and typically more towards the nerdy stereotype that the parent was talking about. When video cards have names that sound like monster trucks and feature ads with sexy women or blood and violence then that's only going to appeal to a certain audience. The same goes if you name you phone droid and and your ad features a pretty lady fighting CGI robots and the ad don't convey to most people what the ad is for until the end let alone what features the phone has.
A lot of us have made fun of jocks for being a bunch of bros who worry about fit women and hating on anything that might imply they're a fairy but the 'nerd' demographic isn't really any different. The only real difference is rather than conveying their masculinity through beer, bikinis and sports, it's through robots, blood and bikinis. If you want to appeal to the masses quite making the marketing look like something that is trying to convince the purchaser it will help convince people they're a man and not a sissy.
There could be something to that if there weren't complaints about Android for some time. Admittedly previous complaints were more about complete lack of support and there is no need for a report to point out the obvious that if you let anyone make an Android phone then a lot of them will be shit.
The main reason older devices don't get the newer OS is for genuine performance reasons. Many would even say the 3G with iOS4 isn't as slick as it should have been. It was supposedly improved after the initial iOS4 release but I think it's safe to say anything older would choke on iOS4.
My biggest annoyance with Android is phones don't get upgraded due to companies not wanting to do it not performance reasons. My G1 is still on 1.6 because I simply don't care to root it (especially now since it's nearly dead) where as my friend who rooted his got 2.1 to run happily and I believe he even had 2.2 so there is no reason the G1 should have been abandoned after one upgrade.
It depends entirely on the accident. My friend dropped his G1 in coleslaw and it was dead. My G1 works but the battery only lasts for about 15 minutes at best if you actually use it and I dropped it on the pavement so the screen it cracked. Though it was abou the 3rd time it was dropped in the 3 or so years. The difference being of course it was on pavement and the screen facing down. Another friend kept their iphone in the back pocket which are ok until she flopped down on a sofa and made it mostly useless with all the cracks in the screen.
So it's sort of hard comparing different types of damage. Water will kill any electric device if it gets inside while the device is on. Quality doesn't really have anything to do with it.
It may very well be that the hardware is similar but by selling cheaper models you get more people who don't care about their hardware and treat it worse or it is just a case of you get what you pay for. The iphone is indeed quite expensive but even if you did take any sort of Apple branding 'tax' off of it the hardware will be more expensive than something built at the same time for half the cost.
I agree the PS3 had a higher base price but at the same time to get a similar experience (ie getting the wifi add-on, the HD-DVD add-on rechargeable battery pack, gold membership, etc) it wasn't cheaper. I believe in fact it was more expensive.
A Ford Ka is dirt cheap compared to Ferrari but that doesn't mean anything. Just like the Xbox may be cheaper than a top of the line computer (though you can get a computer for $300) but when compared to other consoles and the costs to get the same experience then it's not exactly cheap.