Completely off topic since this was just about the concept of blocking porn (if they were, they have the power to filter it through Safari.)
But you intrigue me, I had never heard of apple deleting apps from users devices, nor have I heard of them alloing some users to run software that others are not allowed to run.
Can you list links and examples of remote app deletion and apps that are not allowed to be used by certain consumers?
We would not stand for this control in any other medium. It should not be up to anyone but the owner of the device to exert control over what they wish to read or run.
Agree, but why people do this mess over the iPhone but not over video game consoles? They are even more closed and have been around longer. There do are a few groups working on their jailbreak but you don't hear the huge accusations against THOSE manufacturers. What makes Apple any more evil than Nintendo, Sega (in their day), Sony and Microsoft in the gaming department?
Apple does not "block" porn, they just refuse publishing porn themselves. Sure, there is that tiny deal about them not supporting any other distribution methods, but thats a different matter. Truth be told: I would not install a pornographic application on my iPad or iPhone if you put a gun on a kitten's head (if it was my head I'd install and delete it once the gun wielder was arrested.)
The web provides all the porn I could need, and it displays magnificently in the iPad, touch screens are easier to clean than the mouse or the keyboard too!!
Although the risks of being found are minimal, a smart attacker would minimize as much as possible despite the fact. Maybe I give them too much credit, maybe I dont. I have never audited spyware.
I can say, though, that I seen enough reports from security experts on this stuff. Spyware that does constant requests to a database for updated phone number lists to intercept will likely have to run out of calling time, not during call. That would increase the chances of a security expert to notice the unnecessary communication, just the same way they found applications sending unique IDs for iPhones.
Nah, the safest approach is just to work as silently as possible, and only once you get a credit card recognized you send the data. It would be even ideal this way, as it will be even less likely for data monitoring when some one is busy in a phone call.
Again, I may give spyware makers too much credit, but I would attempt to hide as much as possible until I get something to send back. If I'm caught after that, it's not that relevant as I already got what I wanted.
Things that Apple consider can intrude user privacy are either not allowed to be done at all or request user permission every time they are going to execute. Location requests must be re-approved every day and things like call recording are just not allowed.
During approval, Apple does check for calls to APIs that can access these services, and rejects the application if it finds any. Thats the reason for their "No Use of Non-Public APIs" restriction. This is no manual review, they have automated processes to make sure such hooks don't exist in the application.
Why limit your spyware to only specific lists of phone numbers? May as well go for the virulent gold and catch any credit-card number you catch, no matter who you are giving it too. A predetermined list also would mean the virus would be forced to carry extra overhead with a database of phone numbers. Given business closing up, opening up, and plainly changing numbers, things that happen every day, the list would be obsolete very fast. An online based database would require the virus to do constant checks and expose itself more often to discovery.
A remake of FF7 would require to rewrite the entire engine for the PS3 or XBox (or both)
A non-high-def release is out on the playstation network already, I presume that means the code still works. Although because that's already sold well (fastest seller on the PSN, and still near the top), that's probably filled half the market, so demand for an updated version is less:-(
Most classic games released this way are wrapped around emulators.
and then to redo all the art.
IIRC the backgrounds were a mix of 3D renders and hand-drawn scenes (This is why I particularly want FF7-9 and not FF6 or chrono trigger -- for pixelly games, big pixels still work; for hand-drawn backgrounds, they look beautiful (better than 3D) at their native res, but scale up horribly) -- I would hope they still have the originals somewhere that could be re-rendered / re-scanned at a higher res.
The 3D character models would need redoing, but the characters have appeared in enough other modern squeenix games that they should have most of them updated already...
When FF7 got released for PC back in the day, they were not able to update the pre-rendered backgrounds. This lead to weaker reviews. Apparently, Square never had the foresight of rendering at high res and then scaling down the results while retaining the original renders.
I think thats irrelevant, though, because a proper remake would no longer use pre-rendered background and be entirely real time.
I see where you are comming from but you are wrong about minimal effort.
This game will reuse art and all the code from the previous game.
A remake of FF7 would require to rewrite the entire engine for the PS3 or XBox (or both) and then to redo all the art. From a development standpoint, a FF7 remake is as hard to pull off as making a brand new game from scratch, with the only difference being you have the design documents already done (and that's the easy part.)
Nothing you mentioned makes a tablet more appealing than a laptop at workplace.
Only if you have never attempted any of it with both formats to realize the full difference.
Laptops are bulky to carry around and there is a cable mess to deal with (at minimum taking turns at the VGA cables.) Power cords if you expect to be in long meetings.
Oh that reminds me, what VGA compatibility issues? How many times have you attempted to plug in or trouble shoot projectors? Depending on the user configuration alone (default resolution or dual monitor setups for their desks) you may have a slight headache making it work right with the projectors.
Something like AirPlay would be instant and without cables. Less time moving people around the table and unplugging cables, more time being productive during the meeting.
Note I used the word "tablet" throughout the post enough times (I hope) to make it clear I mean all tablets, not just the iPad. I mention the iPad by name enough times because I own one.
This is not a "pro apple" post, it's a "pro tablet" one. Android, iOS, WebOS, wont matter, as long as they end up having the same basic structure (lighter than a book, long battery life, touch screen, bluetooth [for walk-in-keyboard access], 3G, off the top of my head.)
The office can be drastically streamlined with the use of tablets and arguing otherwise is akin of command line DOS techies claiming the GUI would never take off back in the late 80s and early 90s.
The tablet format(, as a viable one, TabletPCs just were not viable), is very young, and only Apple has released one that can be considered viable. Until Honeycomb tablets come out, Android tablets are really not very viable, but this does not dismiss the fact that most tablets laptops are overkill.
BTW, not sure how pounds translate to dollars right now, but every time I got one of those supper affordable laptops I regretted it within 6 months due to hardware failures of one type or another (from cracking cases, monitors dying to power connectors dying.) The cheapest laptop I would consider a good investment right now costs more than the cheapest iPad, and for the user that just want web browsing and email, it's a darn good alternative. Time will offer more "open" alternatives if Apple is not acceptable.
The iPad was released last April, it has not even been a full year. I'm sure things will get drastically better very soon, for both, Android and Apple tablets, maybe even WebOS ones. Don't think Windows Tablets will get anywhere.
All things aside, the best thing that will come off the tablet takeover will be the end of the Microsoft dominance in consumer OS. The possibility is there, if everyone works fast enough, for a future with a well spread platform share. No more Microsoft dictating user experience.
That is like pretending that an ipad is just a laptop with no keyboard.
If you can't see the flexibility and power of keeping a Bluetooth keyboard at a desk, and being able to waltz away from it with the tablet in hand, congratulations: you are to contemporary computing what elderly with no computer appreciation were to the last two decades.
So a tablet is fine as a toy, and for some special productivity purposes, but it lousy for most general work related things. That alone means that computers aren't going anywhere. Even if homes became 100% tablet, offices wouldn't because you need to get shit done there. Managers are not at all going to be interested in moving over to tablets and then have everything slow to a crawl as people's typing speed (among other things) goes through the floor.
I don't see computers doing anywhere any time soon, particularly not in favour of tablets.
Interesting how you think its never going to happen but then resort to cover up the posibility of it happening with writting off an exception. But event hat exception shows lack of imagination. Imagine this future:
Business invest in tablets, they give every employee one for their cubiclues. They equip the cubicles with a bluetooth keyboard and a tall ipad stand that holds the ipad as if it was a monitor. The employee is at the cubicle, working full speed with the tablet and keyboard and now he has to go to a meeting. He just detaches the tablet from the stand and goes to the meeting room, tablet in hand, with access to all documents and email real time.
With the use of a simple cable, or even some tech like Apple's Air Play and an Apple TV hooked up to a projector, anyone in the room can just turn on their iWorks presentation and start displaying it while they do their part of the meeting.
Compare that with today, where people take a while to hook up cables to a laptop and hope there are no compatibility issues (over the years I have seen some very strange behaviors even with identical models of laptops refusing to play nice with the projectors) and other than this one laptop hooked up to the projector (no way the meeting will be paused to change projectors) you now need to print hard copies of all relevant material before the meeting.
In a one to one meeting, the tactic still has huge advantages as no longer will you be forced to answer (or get answered) with "I'll have to look that up once I'm back in my desk and get back to you", a way too frequent thing in the office.
IT can benefit a lot from this too. I personally have a very robust RDP client and a VNC client on my iPad. This allows me to do most remote server management even from a meeting, or I can even adjust SQL security or Windows Network Security while standing by a user that is facing security issues. No longer do I have to walk back to my desktop to do the changes and call back to make sure this fixed the issues. Mind you, an Android Tablet with tablet designed software may be just as useful.
With more specialized apps, we could have complete network security handled without the need of something like an RDP/VNC client.
3G connectivity and VPN networking also means I can have those meetings in a restaurant and still pull out data as requested, or even handle emergencies while I'm in a traffic jam, in a Taxi, or any similar imaginable situation.
I don't think the PC is entirely going away, but in the next 10 years it will become a very specialized device, perhaps only slightly more common than servers.
These are not new ideas, either. I have been attempting to get these results for years with TabletPCs, but the technology was just not there yet. Bulky, heavy, and a mess to manage, not to mention useless if you loose the stylus (very easy to do.) The tablet has finally became viable thanks to Apple telling the world how to do them. Now that they did, the entire world is doing them Apple's way, or at least close to it. 2015's office environment will be very different from what we see these days, as more manufacturers make more alternatives and more office specialized applications become available.
We've got a few people at work that have iPads and they amount to nothing but toys. They all crow about how wonderful they are, but all they do with them were things they already did with
Okay, so we establish that tablets have a subset of functionality as PCs. I agree with this, I don't do software development, word processing or gaming on a tablet. But then the article notes that tablets herald the end of PCs. So are we expecting the software makers to bridge that gap that prevents me from playing World of Warcraft, writing a book in Word or LibreOffice, coding in Radrails, etc? I just don't see that happening. I think there's a fundamental hardware issue with capacitive touch. I am not certain it will ever get to the point where I feel comfortable doing serious work or serious gaming using a glassy surface as my input device. Maybe I'm getting old but I just have never been impressed with even the latest cellphone displays and their response.
This being/. I will default to assume your experience is mostly with Android. Truth be told, gaming is going crazy on the iOS, both in the iPad and iPhone/iPod. The touch screen is just perfect for games like Sim City, for one, and virtual gamepads just word great for the iPhone (although I am not fond of them in the iPad.) Heck, there are MMORPGs for the thing, most notorious one being Pocket Legends.
All these can be combined with the iPad's ability to use bluetooth keyboards. You can use simplistic on-screen keyboard for small changes to documents while standing in an elevator, or taking a potty break, while you can keep a bluetooth keyboard at your desk and just stand your tablet (if you have a case) or recline it against a wall and start typing away with your bluetooth keyboard, all without killing the viability of the device as a portable tablet.
As it stands, I have found myself not using my laptop. I have not touched it at all since about 2 weeks after I bought my iPad (been about 4 months already.) I, personally, would not get rid of the desktop machine, I still need it but I'm also a power user. I can see most users getting by just with a tablet and a bluetooth keyboard hanging around for when the need arises to type long letters.
At the end of the day, this will only support Flash. As for me, Chrome was only a viable browser due to it's ability to play either type of encoded video, although admittedly, I don't think I ever found it a requirement.
I been hating the silent auto-update since they day I realized it was happening, now that the only reason I installed it for will be gone (without an option of retaining a copy that keeps the h.264 decoder) I'll just remove the thing from my machine. The only choice they given me is the choice to give up on them.
BTW, by creating a WebM plugin for both, Safari and IE, they ARE supporting Apple and Microsoft's business models. This is not about that, this is about establishing a format they have patents over to become the web standard.
No, MS can just release a plugin for chrome that plays h.264. This is no more restrictive than IE9 not playing WebM without a plugin from Google.
Chrome is REMOVING something that was there (that IS bite and switch, btw.) I already hate the fact that Chrome silently auto-updates, this makes it worse. Unless I hunt down for an auto-update hack, I cant even retain my current version of Chrome that actually supports h.264.
IE9, or Safari, never lured me in with any promise of "playing back any HTML5 video you ever see."
The only thing that concerns me about the web video format is that it needs to be unencumbered by royalties or other licensing. If I want to make a video, encode it, sell it, make ads off of a website, get 100 or 100,000 visitors, I should damn well be able to do that without having to pay a dime to anyone for the ability to make my own god damn videos--unless I optionally choose.
By killing h.264 support all together, though, you are killing the "choose" keyword. Google announced they are going to release WebM plugins for Safari and IE, that is a good way to go. But killing h.264 in their product as a mean of strong-arm the entire industry to go their way... well, its something Microsoft would had done in the late 90's.
Give choice, dont force. No matter how noble the intentions, forcing a choice is never a noble act.
Overall, I don't understand what's the problem. Worse case - you'd have have to switch platforms again / you're willing to abandon bought apps anyway. Seems a bit like "concerned FUD", actually.
The problem is there are some things you should shut up about if you have not a planned and ready marketing plan to disclose that information. Ballmer's statement has many Windows Phone advocates worried, this concern is very well justified.
So what? Clear possibility is there / you yourself said they have a great UI experience now (they know it / it was unraveling for some time / not a fluke), why they would throw it away?
Same reason they think they have to change the core of an OS that is working perfectly fine. Because Microsoft's current management does not get it. I would not be shocked if the next XBox is also made to have a Windows Desktop, complete with Start Menu.
Also, if Microsoft actually acknowledged this WP7's UI virtues, they would be pushing a new branch of THAT OS for tablets, not stupid Windows 7. They can say a lot to the public, but actions speak louder, and they don't seem to feel strong enough about the WP7 to push it as a tablet competitor.
MS's biggest mistake is they think people use Windows because they like to use windows. The average user uses Windows [desktop] because they feel they have to, not because they want to.
Can you guarantee next versions of any OS will run apps from older ones?
Apple does it's best to guarantee that. Same with Google. After 4 large revisions to the iOS, and 3 to the Android (I understand 2.2 is actually a rather large revision) you can still run software that was never updated aver version 1.0 of either OS.
Note we are not talking of some apps stopping working, we are talking of ALL apps not working there.
I would agree, but the crispy font in my higher than HDTV resolution monitor, made the article so easy to read that I dismissed it as unimportant and no longer recall why I started typing this.
Not sure if you missed a word there at the end, did you mean:
you express suspicion how changing the core/kernel to "Windows proper" will [change] that?
If so, simple: If I buy a Windows Phone 7 now, I will likely start buying apps. Some I'll love, some I'll depend on, and some I'll use often. Not to mention games. It is very likely, should they change the entire core of the OS, that all these applications will stop working in a completely different core, even if they tried to keep the looks similar.
So the fear is that such a change would treat Windows Phone 7 users as if they just adopted an entirely new platform and just switched from iPhones, Androids or Blackberries.
The issue lies in application compatibility. Buy a Windows Phone 7 now, spend hundreds of dollars in apps and games, and be rendered unable to use those in a Windows 8 Phone because it is not compatible.
Also note, iOS and OSX have similar origins, but they are two different branches. The differences are so large, that saying iOS and OSX are the same is on the lines of saying Unix and OSX are the same.
The summary is crap, because Balmer stated he wants to see Windows 8 running on all devices, not other operative systems with similar names, but core Win8 ported.
There is a collision, but it's not between Intel and MS, it's just Balmer vs Windows Phone 7. The platform just came out and he openly stated that he is going to kill it regardless of success or failure.
Slashdot Mirror
Completely off topic since this was just about the concept of blocking porn (if they were, they have the power to filter it through Safari.)
But you intrigue me, I had never heard of apple deleting apps from users devices, nor have I heard of them alloing some users to run software that others are not allowed to run.
Can you list links and examples of remote app deletion and apps that are not allowed to be used by certain consumers?
We would not stand for this control in any other medium. It should not be up to anyone but the owner of the device to exert control over what they wish to read or run.
Agree, but why people do this mess over the iPhone but not over video game consoles? They are even more closed and have been around longer. There do are a few groups working on their jailbreak but you don't hear the huge accusations against THOSE manufacturers. What makes Apple any more evil than Nintendo, Sega (in their day), Sony and Microsoft in the gaming department?
Apple does not "block" porn, they just refuse publishing porn themselves. Sure, there is that tiny deal about them not supporting any other distribution methods, but thats a different matter. Truth be told: I would not install a pornographic application on my iPad or iPhone if you put a gun on a kitten's head (if it was my head I'd install and delete it once the gun wielder was arrested.)
The web provides all the porn I could need, and it displays magnificently in the iPad, touch screens are easier to clean than the mouse or the keyboard too!!
Although the risks of being found are minimal, a smart attacker would minimize as much as possible despite the fact. Maybe I give them too much credit, maybe I dont. I have never audited spyware.
I can say, though, that I seen enough reports from security experts on this stuff. Spyware that does constant requests to a database for updated phone number lists to intercept will likely have to run out of calling time, not during call. That would increase the chances of a security expert to notice the unnecessary communication, just the same way they found applications sending unique IDs for iPhones.
Nah, the safest approach is just to work as silently as possible, and only once you get a credit card recognized you send the data. It would be even ideal this way, as it will be even less likely for data monitoring when some one is busy in a phone call.
Again, I may give spyware makers too much credit, but I would attempt to hide as much as possible until I get something to send back. If I'm caught after that, it's not that relevant as I already got what I wanted.
Things that Apple consider can intrude user privacy are either not allowed to be done at all or request user permission every time they are going to execute. Location requests must be re-approved every day and things like call recording are just not allowed.
During approval, Apple does check for calls to APIs that can access these services, and rejects the application if it finds any. Thats the reason for their "No Use of Non-Public APIs" restriction. This is no manual review, they have automated processes to make sure such hooks don't exist in the application.
Why limit your spyware to only specific lists of phone numbers? May as well go for the virulent gold and catch any credit-card number you catch, no matter who you are giving it too. A predetermined list also would mean the virus would be forced to carry extra overhead with a database of phone numbers. Given business closing up, opening up, and plainly changing numbers, things that happen every day, the list would be obsolete very fast. An online based database would require the virus to do constant checks and expose itself more often to discovery.
When there is no limit to what Droid Gets, well.... there is no limit to what Droid Gets.
A remake of FF7 would require to rewrite the entire engine for the PS3 or XBox (or both)
A non-high-def release is out on the playstation network already, I presume that means the code still works. Although because that's already sold well (fastest seller on the PSN, and still near the top), that's probably filled half the market, so demand for an updated version is less :-(
Most classic games released this way are wrapped around emulators.
and then to redo all the art.
IIRC the backgrounds were a mix of 3D renders and hand-drawn scenes (This is why I particularly want FF7-9 and not FF6 or chrono trigger -- for pixelly games, big pixels still work; for hand-drawn backgrounds, they look beautiful (better than 3D) at their native res, but scale up horribly) -- I would hope they still have the originals somewhere that could be re-rendered / re-scanned at a higher res.
The 3D character models would need redoing, but the characters have appeared in enough other modern squeenix games that they should have most of them updated already...
When FF7 got released for PC back in the day, they were not able to update the pre-rendered backgrounds. This lead to weaker reviews. Apparently, Square never had the foresight of rendering at high res and then scaling down the results while retaining the original renders.
I think thats irrelevant, though, because a proper remake would no longer use pre-rendered background and be entirely real time.
I see where you are comming from but you are wrong about minimal effort.
This game will reuse art and all the code from the previous game.
A remake of FF7 would require to rewrite the entire engine for the PS3 or XBox (or both) and then to redo all the art. From a development standpoint, a FF7 remake is as hard to pull off as making a brand new game from scratch, with the only difference being you have the design documents already done (and that's the easy part.)
Nothing you mentioned makes a tablet more appealing than a laptop at workplace.
Only if you have never attempted any of it with both formats to realize the full difference.
Laptops are bulky to carry around and there is a cable mess to deal with (at minimum taking turns at the VGA cables.) Power cords if you expect to be in long meetings.
Oh that reminds me, what VGA compatibility issues? How many times have you attempted to plug in or trouble shoot projectors? Depending on the user configuration alone (default resolution or dual monitor setups for their desks) you may have a slight headache making it work right with the projectors.
Something like AirPlay would be instant and without cables. Less time moving people around the table and unplugging cables, more time being productive during the meeting.
Note I used the word "tablet" throughout the post enough times (I hope) to make it clear I mean all tablets, not just the iPad. I mention the iPad by name enough times because I own one.
This is not a "pro apple" post, it's a "pro tablet" one. Android, iOS, WebOS, wont matter, as long as they end up having the same basic structure (lighter than a book, long battery life, touch screen, bluetooth [for walk-in-keyboard access], 3G, off the top of my head.)
The office can be drastically streamlined with the use of tablets and arguing otherwise is akin of command line DOS techies claiming the GUI would never take off back in the late 80s and early 90s.
The tablet format(, as a viable one, TabletPCs just were not viable), is very young, and only Apple has released one that can be considered viable. Until Honeycomb tablets come out, Android tablets are really not very viable, but this does not dismiss the fact that most tablets laptops are overkill.
BTW, not sure how pounds translate to dollars right now, but every time I got one of those supper affordable laptops I regretted it within 6 months due to hardware failures of one type or another (from cracking cases, monitors dying to power connectors dying.) The cheapest laptop I would consider a good investment right now costs more than the cheapest iPad, and for the user that just want web browsing and email, it's a darn good alternative. Time will offer more "open" alternatives if Apple is not acceptable.
The iPad was released last April, it has not even been a full year. I'm sure things will get drastically better very soon, for both, Android and Apple tablets, maybe even WebOS ones. Don't think Windows Tablets will get anywhere.
All things aside, the best thing that will come off the tablet takeover will be the end of the Microsoft dominance in consumer OS. The possibility is there, if everyone works fast enough, for a future with a well spread platform share. No more Microsoft dictating user experience.
Most people do not need windows at home on their pc.
Most people don't need home PCs, just a web browsing tablet.
If you can't see the flexibility and power of keeping a Bluetooth keyboard at a desk, and being able to waltz away from it with the tablet in hand, congratulations: you are to contemporary computing what elderly with no computer appreciation were to the last two decades.
So a tablet is fine as a toy, and for some special productivity purposes, but it lousy for most general work related things. That alone means that computers aren't going anywhere. Even if homes became 100% tablet, offices wouldn't because you need to get shit done there. Managers are not at all going to be interested in moving over to tablets and then have everything slow to a crawl as people's typing speed (among other things) goes through the floor.
I don't see computers doing anywhere any time soon, particularly not in favour of tablets.
Interesting how you think its never going to happen but then resort to cover up the posibility of it happening with writting off an exception. But event hat exception shows lack of imagination. Imagine this future:
Business invest in tablets, they give every employee one for their cubiclues. They equip the cubicles with a bluetooth keyboard and a tall ipad stand that holds the ipad as if it was a monitor. The employee is at the cubicle, working full speed with the tablet and keyboard and now he has to go to a meeting. He just detaches the tablet from the stand and goes to the meeting room, tablet in hand, with access to all documents and email real time.
With the use of a simple cable, or even some tech like Apple's Air Play and an Apple TV hooked up to a projector, anyone in the room can just turn on their iWorks presentation and start displaying it while they do their part of the meeting.
Compare that with today, where people take a while to hook up cables to a laptop and hope there are no compatibility issues (over the years I have seen some very strange behaviors even with identical models of laptops refusing to play nice with the projectors) and other than this one laptop hooked up to the projector (no way the meeting will be paused to change projectors) you now need to print hard copies of all relevant material before the meeting.
In a one to one meeting, the tactic still has huge advantages as no longer will you be forced to answer (or get answered) with "I'll have to look that up once I'm back in my desk and get back to you", a way too frequent thing in the office.
IT can benefit a lot from this too. I personally have a very robust RDP client and a VNC client on my iPad. This allows me to do most remote server management even from a meeting, or I can even adjust SQL security or Windows Network Security while standing by a user that is facing security issues. No longer do I have to walk back to my desktop to do the changes and call back to make sure this fixed the issues. Mind you, an Android Tablet with tablet designed software may be just as useful.
With more specialized apps, we could have complete network security handled without the need of something like an RDP/VNC client.
3G connectivity and VPN networking also means I can have those meetings in a restaurant and still pull out data as requested, or even handle emergencies while I'm in a traffic jam, in a Taxi, or any similar imaginable situation.
I don't think the PC is entirely going away, but in the next 10 years it will become a very specialized device, perhaps only slightly more common than servers.
These are not new ideas, either. I have been attempting to get these results for years with TabletPCs, but the technology was just not there yet. Bulky, heavy, and a mess to manage, not to mention useless if you loose the stylus (very easy to do.) The tablet has finally became viable thanks to Apple telling the world how to do them. Now that they did, the entire world is doing them Apple's way, or at least close to it. 2015's office environment will be very different from what we see these days, as more manufacturers make more alternatives and more office specialized applications become available.
We've got a few people at work that have iPads and they amount to nothing but toys. They all crow about how wonderful they are, but all they do with them were things they already did with
Okay, so we establish that tablets have a subset of functionality as PCs. I agree with this, I don't do software development, word processing or gaming on a tablet. But then the article notes that tablets herald the end of PCs. So are we expecting the software makers to bridge that gap that prevents me from playing World of Warcraft, writing a book in Word or LibreOffice, coding in Radrails, etc? I just don't see that happening. I think there's a fundamental hardware issue with capacitive touch. I am not certain it will ever get to the point where I feel comfortable doing serious work or serious gaming using a glassy surface as my input device. Maybe I'm getting old but I just have never been impressed with even the latest cellphone displays and their response.
This being /. I will default to assume your experience is mostly with Android. Truth be told, gaming is going crazy on the iOS, both in the iPad and iPhone/iPod. The touch screen is just perfect for games like Sim City, for one, and virtual gamepads just word great for the iPhone (although I am not fond of them in the iPad.) Heck, there are MMORPGs for the thing, most notorious one being Pocket Legends.
As far as productivity, there are various office products available, from Apple's own iWorks to cross platform alternatives like QuickOffice, Documents To Go and Office2.
All these can be combined with the iPad's ability to use bluetooth keyboards. You can use simplistic on-screen keyboard for small changes to documents while standing in an elevator, or taking a potty break, while you can keep a bluetooth keyboard at your desk and just stand your tablet (if you have a case) or recline it against a wall and start typing away with your bluetooth keyboard, all without killing the viability of the device as a portable tablet.
As it stands, I have found myself not using my laptop. I have not touched it at all since about 2 weeks after I bought my iPad (been about 4 months already.) I, personally, would not get rid of the desktop machine, I still need it but I'm also a power user. I can see most users getting by just with a tablet and a bluetooth keyboard hanging around for when the need arises to type long letters.
At the end of the day, this will only support Flash. As for me, Chrome was only a viable browser due to it's ability to play either type of encoded video, although admittedly, I don't think I ever found it a requirement.
I been hating the silent auto-update since they day I realized it was happening, now that the only reason I installed it for will be gone (without an option of retaining a copy that keeps the h.264 decoder) I'll just remove the thing from my machine. The only choice they given me is the choice to give up on them.
BTW, by creating a WebM plugin for both, Safari and IE, they ARE supporting Apple and Microsoft's business models. This is not about that, this is about establishing a format they have patents over to become the web standard.
No, MS can just release a plugin for chrome that plays h.264. This is no more restrictive than IE9 not playing WebM without a plugin from Google.
Chrome is REMOVING something that was there (that IS bite and switch, btw.) I already hate the fact that Chrome silently auto-updates, this makes it worse. Unless I hunt down for an auto-update hack, I cant even retain my current version of Chrome that actually supports h.264.
IE9, or Safari, never lured me in with any promise of "playing back any HTML5 video you ever see."
Chrome doesn't have the market share to warrant antitrust investigations is the difference.
My point was not about legal grounds, but moral ones.
The only thing that concerns me about the web video format is that it needs to be unencumbered by royalties or other licensing. If I want to make a video, encode it, sell it, make ads off of a website, get 100 or 100,000 visitors, I should damn well be able to do that without having to pay a dime to anyone for the ability to make my own god damn videos--unless I optionally choose.
By killing h.264 support all together, though, you are killing the "choose" keyword. Google announced they are going to release WebM plugins for Safari and IE, that is a good way to go. But killing h.264 in their product as a mean of strong-arm the entire industry to go their way... well, its something Microsoft would had done in the late 90's. Give choice, dont force. No matter how noble the intentions, forcing a choice is never a noble act.
Overall, I don't understand what's the problem. Worse case - you'd have have to switch platforms again / you're willing to abandon bought apps anyway. Seems a bit like "concerned FUD", actually.
The problem is there are some things you should shut up about if you have not a planned and ready marketing plan to disclose that information. Ballmer's statement has many Windows Phone advocates worried, this concern is very well justified.
So what? Clear possibility is there / you yourself said they have a great UI experience now (they know it / it was unraveling for some time / not a fluke), why they would throw it away?
Same reason they think they have to change the core of an OS that is working perfectly fine. Because Microsoft's current management does not get it. I would not be shocked if the next XBox is also made to have a Windows Desktop, complete with Start Menu.
Also, if Microsoft actually acknowledged this WP7's UI virtues, they would be pushing a new branch of THAT OS for tablets, not stupid Windows 7. They can say a lot to the public, but actions speak louder, and they don't seem to feel strong enough about the WP7 to push it as a tablet competitor.
MS's biggest mistake is they think people use Windows because they like to use windows. The average user uses Windows [desktop] because they feel they have to, not because they want to.
Can you guarantee next versions of any OS will run apps from older ones?
Apple does it's best to guarantee that. Same with Google. After 4 large revisions to the iOS, and 3 to the Android (I understand 2.2 is actually a rather large revision) you can still run software that was never updated aver version 1.0 of either OS.
Note we are not talking of some apps stopping working, we are talking of ALL apps not working there.
I would agree, but the crispy font in my higher than HDTV resolution monitor, made the article so easy to read that I dismissed it as unimportant and no longer recall why I started typing this.
From what I recall, same goes for Windows Mobile 6.5. How many of those apps are running in Windows Phone 7 now?
Not sure if you missed a word there at the end, did you mean:
you express suspicion how changing the core /kernel to "Windows proper" will [change] that?
If so, simple: If I buy a Windows Phone 7 now, I will likely start buying apps. Some I'll love, some I'll depend on, and some I'll use often. Not to mention games. It is very likely, should they change the entire core of the OS, that all these applications will stop working in a completely different core, even if they tried to keep the looks similar.
So the fear is that such a change would treat Windows Phone 7 users as if they just adopted an entirely new platform and just switched from iPhones, Androids or Blackberries.
The issue lies in application compatibility. Buy a Windows Phone 7 now, spend hundreds of dollars in apps and games, and be rendered unable to use those in a Windows 8 Phone because it is not compatible.
Also note, iOS and OSX have similar origins, but they are two different branches. The differences are so large, that saying iOS and OSX are the same is on the lines of saying Unix and OSX are the same.
The summary is crap, because Balmer stated he wants to see Windows 8 running on all devices, not other operative systems with similar names, but core Win8 ported.
There is a collision, but it's not between Intel and MS, it's just Balmer vs Windows Phone 7. The platform just came out and he openly stated that he is going to kill it regardless of success or failure.