Funny. Last time I bought a PC, the cheapest Apple option for my needs was the most expensive iMac. It would have cost twice what I paid, and performed worse. Apple simply isn't competitive in the midrange.
Yes, it is claiming credit, and for an obvious idea. Jabber did it to other IM systems way back, apparently including email and SMS. The story is nothing but the usual fanboi wanking.
It would. But Google obviously doesn't do that, as there are Bing and Baidu apps in the Market. What they do, however, is demand that the phone has some core functionality in order to give it access to the market. And so, developers can expect that apps that depend on this will work -- and vice versa: if you remove core functionality from the phone, you can expect that plenty of apps will just stop working. And it just so happens that much of the core functionality is linked to Google's services. It's a Google OS, after all.
Not so much the Market (which kind of sucks, IMO), as Google services themselves, which are integrated into the OS. Remove things like Google Maps, and most location-aware apps will just stop working, access to Market or not. Oh, and of course Google search is integrated with Maps, so ditching Google search for Bing degrades the quality of the phone -- and not only because Bing sucks big hairy camel balls, which it actually does. Who would have thought that a Google phone was in fact a Google phone.
It's a fad. Not that it doesn't have its place, but considering that Apple and their brain dead followers in the mainstream press have pushed it as a "revolution" that would "change" (oh, where have I heard that before?) "everything", while being less capable and twice as expensive as a netbook, and that the only influence it has had is that news outlets can push their wares in the form of paid "apps" through iTunes instead of the usual web content, it just isn't worth the attention it has received. The tablets are pushed for everything, and are unsuitable for most: poor ebook readers, poor computers.
Unfortunately, you are wrong. There's only one phone that more or less automatically gets the latest version of the Android OS -- the Google Nexus One. It's got nothing to do with the carriers, just that different phones have different hardware, and the various hardware makers also like to customise the UI to differentiate themselves from other Android phone makers, and provide so-called "value" for their customers (the advertisers, not the end users). You can't just push stock Android on to any Android phone: it won't work. It depends entirely on HTC, Motorola, Sony Ericsson or whatever[1] to come up with an update. Sony Ericsson, for example, just updated their Android line to version 2.1, months after 2.2 was released. And that's their unbranded phones -- the branded ones were held back a little longer (actually as little as one week, in some cases).
Some system apps will be automatically updated, though. I've seen new versions of the Market app being pushed to Android 1.6 as late as a couple of months ago.
-- [1] Some phones also get community-developed Android versions.
Why shouldn't this be news, when new Windows and iPhone exploits are news? The question is whether these holes will be fixed for all Android phones, and not only in the upcoming Android 2.3.
Web sites are very poor when it comes to things like typography. Then again, so are Apple's iBooks, and even Amazon's Kindle, etc., as well, but they will improve with time. But yeah, magazines and journals will definitely have a place in digital distribution, like everything else, and no, they won't be web sites. Creating a top quality magazine for a limited readership costs money, and simply isn't viable as an ad supported web site with a more general audience.
The "facts", as they were presented in the story, were based on comparing an opening day (a Monday) to a launch weekend (incidentally a time when people have more time for shopping, if you didn't know) and a launch month. It is evident that this proves nothing.
I doubt the moderators actually disagreed. Rather, they saw that what I said was evidently true, and didn't want reality to interfere with a good Microsoft-bashing.
On Slashdot, it's stupid and irrelevant more often than not. People just post it because they have read it before and seen it get +5, insightful. You see it posted every single time there's a story about some indicator of something or other. So the correlation is certainly there.
I think there might be a weak causal relationship as well, since so many slashbots seem to just break down and stop thinking when they come across indicators and other correlations, believing the right answer is to mindlessly harp on about the same old meme, and thus spread it -- in the same mindless form. Most people intuitively understand the difference between correlation and causation, but when they are infected with this nasty little meme, they seem to lose the ability to understand what a correlation is.
Slashdot Mirror
Stuff like this is modded "insightful" is incontrovertible proof that Slashdot is a site for morons and clueless gadget freaks, not "nerds".
The summary is (surprise!) wrong. GNUstep has been following Cocoa for a while. So says this guy.
Funny. Last time I bought a PC, the cheapest Apple option for my needs was the most expensive iMac. It would have cost twice what I paid, and performed worse. Apple simply isn't competitive in the midrange.
Yes, but Bioshock has the problem of not being nearly as good.
No, that would be Fallout 3.
Wrong. A Donald Duck story from 1949 was once cited as a prior art example, denying a patent on a method of raising a sunken ship. Link.
Yes, it is claiming credit, and for an obvious idea. Jabber did it to other IM systems way back, apparently including email and SMS. The story is nothing but the usual fanboi wanking.
It would. But Google obviously doesn't do that, as there are Bing and Baidu apps in the Market. What they do, however, is demand that the phone has some core functionality in order to give it access to the market. And so, developers can expect that apps that depend on this will work -- and vice versa: if you remove core functionality from the phone, you can expect that plenty of apps will just stop working. And it just so happens that much of the core functionality is linked to Google's services. It's a Google OS, after all.
Not so much the Market (which kind of sucks, IMO), as Google services themselves, which are integrated into the OS. Remove things like Google Maps, and most location-aware apps will just stop working, access to Market or not. Oh, and of course Google search is integrated with Maps, so ditching Google search for Bing degrades the quality of the phone -- and not only because Bing sucks big hairy camel balls, which it actually does. Who would have thought that a Google phone was in fact a Google phone.
"Most people" are actually getting used to this newfangled "web" thing by now.
It isn't dead, so obviously it hasn't been killed by anything.
It's a fad. Not that it doesn't have its place, but considering that Apple and their brain dead followers in the mainstream press have pushed it as a "revolution" that would "change" (oh, where have I heard that before?) "everything", while being less capable and twice as expensive as a netbook, and that the only influence it has had is that news outlets can push their wares in the form of paid "apps" through iTunes instead of the usual web content, it just isn't worth the attention it has received. The tablets are pushed for everything, and are unsuitable for most: poor ebook readers, poor computers.
It's interesting that while preaching "consistency" and "good UI", your examples are about gloss and marketing.
Unfortunately, you are wrong. There's only one phone that more or less automatically gets the latest version of the Android OS -- the Google Nexus One. It's got nothing to do with the carriers, just that different phones have different hardware, and the various hardware makers also like to customise the UI to differentiate themselves from other Android phone makers, and provide so-called "value" for their customers (the advertisers, not the end users). You can't just push stock Android on to any Android phone: it won't work. It depends entirely on HTC, Motorola, Sony Ericsson or whatever[1] to come up with an update. Sony Ericsson, for example, just updated their Android line to version 2.1, months after 2.2 was released. And that's their unbranded phones -- the branded ones were held back a little longer (actually as little as one week, in some cases).
Some system apps will be automatically updated, though. I've seen new versions of the Market app being pushed to Android 1.6 as late as a couple of months ago.
--
[1] Some phones also get community-developed Android versions.
Why shouldn't this be news, when new Windows and iPhone exploits are news? The question is whether these holes will be fixed for all Android phones, and not only in the upcoming Android 2.3.
The world doesn't revolve around you. The fact that you don't care is perfectly irrelevant: web typography sucks. Always.
You're reading bad magazines, then.
Web sites are very poor when it comes to things like typography. Then again, so are Apple's iBooks, and even Amazon's Kindle, etc., as well, but they will improve with time. But yeah, magazines and journals will definitely have a place in digital distribution, like everything else, and no, they won't be web sites. Creating a top quality magazine for a limited readership costs money, and simply isn't viable as an ad supported web site with a more general audience.
The "facts", as they were presented in the story, were based on comparing an opening day (a Monday) to a launch weekend (incidentally a time when people have more time for shopping, if you didn't know) and a launch month. It is evident that this proves nothing.
I doubt the moderators actually disagreed. Rather, they saw that what I said was evidently true, and didn't want reality to interfere with a good Microsoft-bashing.
At this moment, declaring Windows Phone 7 a flop is just FUD.
When moronic drivel like this is modded "insightful", you know Slashdot is no longer a site for geeks and nerds.
On Slashdot, it's stupid and irrelevant more often than not. People just post it because they have read it before and seen it get +5, insightful. You see it posted every single time there's a story about some indicator of something or other. So the correlation is certainly there.
I think there might be a weak causal relationship as well, since so many slashbots seem to just break down and stop thinking when they come across indicators and other correlations, believing the right answer is to mindlessly harp on about the same old meme, and thus spread it -- in the same mindless form. Most people intuitively understand the difference between correlation and causation, but when they are infected with this nasty little meme, they seem to lose the ability to understand what a correlation is.
The phrase "correlation is not causation" is strongly correlated with stupidity.
With a pen.