Hey, we didn't publish from Word, of course. The designer imported the documents into Indesign or whatever and took it from there. But still, the document needs to be ready; no superfluous spaces or newlines, not dozens of slightly different quotation styles -- which is what you get if you fiddle with margins for each and every one of them (or worse).
Wowowow, you're a little desperate, aren't you? I didn't say anything about restrictions. Stop making up strawmen to support your "argument": you don't have one. As you just said yourself: "Mac OS 10.4 is getting phased out by many pieces of software". What was my point again? Oh, yes: Mac OS 10.4 is getting phased out by many pieces of software.
So we agree, then. Please try thinking before you post.
No. Mac developers tend to develop for the latest OS X version only, which is why owning a slightly old Mac is such a frustrating experience: virtually no new software supports it. On other platforms, including Windows and Android, most new software will support older OS versions (Windows XP, Android 1.6). Most new games support Windows XP just fine. Most new Android software supports 1.6. Because it's fairly easy to do.
Well, the old interface (of Word, specifically) encourages bad usage. People would choose fonts of various sizes instead of using styles, which makes working with the documents in an actual publishing setting a fucking nightmare. The new one is a lot easier to use properly, and it's much more obvious how. Just like OpenOffice, in fact, but it goes one step further and sorts the various features so that they can be readily accessible without making a convoluted and cluttered interface.
Objectively, it's simply better than the old one. If you prefer the old one, well, you were probably not using it correctly anyway.
Yes, let's subtract "technical people" from people who buy stuff so that we can pretend "consumers" don't purposefully buy Android phones. Let's also define "technical people" as "people who know what OS their phone runs" so that we aren't talking utter bullshit.
Sorry for nitpicking your nitpicking, Mr. Asperger, but the "!!11" should give you a hint that it's not meant to be read in a serious tone. More like something a geeky kid could come up with.
When saying "wouldn't it be cool to do a parachute jump -- from outer space!!11" gives you a monopoly on draining money off the people actually doing it, the concept of "intellectual property" really shows how childish and immature it is.
I should add that editing in Word or OpenOffice, while easier, gets frustrating very soon if there is an awful lot to edit. Even a short document, if it needs a lot of changes, it tends to get very slow to load, and text blocks move around randomly, causing a lot of confusion. So although it's easy initially, some of the functionality is extremely poorly implemented.
No. Word processors to a few things easier: simple formatting of small pieces of text for personal use (no word document is suitable for print), automatic updating of indexes, footnotes, etc., and editing. Even excellent writers who use a typewriter (there are a few of them out there still) tend to do an awful lot of editing, rewriting the same sentence or paragraph over and over until they are more or less happy with it. Good writing has more to do with the patience and time to get it right than to transmit something in one's head to paper. The reason why you think the era of the word processor has been detrimental to the clarity of writing is most likely that far more text is produced, by far more people, some of whom have no talent nor time for writing.
Of course, fashion might also come into it. American writing especially was influenced by the journalistic demands of brevity not too long ago, but fashion is always changing. Perhaps you're just old-fashioned, or perhaps you read the wrong books.
Crashes, hang-ups and GUI malfunctions? That was pretty much the main feature of Netscape 4.x, which was not only stable software, but also the dominant browser platform. And you never used it?
iPhones are only $99 if you disregard the cost of the contract. If you do, you're an idiot. Since you insist on being an idiot, I can only assume you work in marketing, and evidently you do: it's patently untrue that the iPhone is the best phone in the world if you take regular phone functionality into consideration, or even just email -- if your fingers get wet and cold, it's practically useless. Since those drawbacks are pretty extreme, it's simply not the best phone in the world. It's just more pleasant to use in a very limited number of situations.
No, you haven't given a single plausible reason, never mind a valid one, so I don't have to do anything except point out that your fantasy about the world's most expensive phone dominating the market is patently ridiculous.
Exactly. If you make simple things difficult enough, people will pay for even a complicated solution. That's the intention of Apple's design. Make people buy more stuff! And there's an app for that!
No, there's no creation involved at all. Second, this is something you can do easily on any phone, with no editing. The availability of apps solves a problem that simply isn't there on any other phone. Fact is, changing a ringtone on the iPhone is user hostile by design.
You forgot making the ringtone available first: The iPhone is this user friendly.
Frankly, I find it astonishing that people can pretend Apple "just works", when in reality you have to go through this kind of nonsense for even the simplest of tasks.
That's like saying the Chateau Latour wines had the chance to dominate the market if only they were sold in more restaurants.
1) They're hideously expensive 2) Although they're good, many others are also good, quite a few at a much lower price. 3) Even if they were the best in the world, they're not to everyone's taste. 4) Most people just want to get sloshed.
There are more people who will ditch AT&T for Verizon than there are people who will ditch Android for iPhone, for the simple fact that the U.S. isn't the whole world. Also, some people dislike the need for going through a goddamn 12 step program just to change the ringtone. For a few things where there's money involved for Apple, the iPhone is remarkably user hostile.
Your location is transmitted through the use of an ip address, made even simpler by the iPhone's preference of wifi, as the PDF stated. You claimed to have read it, but evidently you didn't.
And once again, you lie: the "50%" Android phones transmitting personal information such as GPS and phone number were in fact "Seven applications collected the deviceID [UDID] and, in some cases, the phone number and the SIM card serial number." So 7 out of 30 did the same as 70% of the iOS apps, and not quite your 50% shared phone numbers. Also, what you call "GPS location" is actually called "location data" in the PDF, which for the most part is actually not based on GPS but on (oh, guess) the wifi spot or the wireless tower. Like what you're doing anyway.
So, to reiterate: you're a fraud, deliberately trying to distort statistics to make Apple look good.
Slashdot Mirror
Hey, we didn't publish from Word, of course. The designer imported the documents into Indesign or whatever and took it from there. But still, the document needs to be ready; no superfluous spaces or newlines, not dozens of slightly different quotation styles -- which is what you get if you fiddle with margins for each and every one of them (or worse).
Wowowow, you're a little desperate, aren't you? I didn't say anything about restrictions. Stop making up strawmen to support your "argument": you don't have one. As you just said yourself: "Mac OS 10.4 is getting phased out by many pieces of software". What was my point again? Oh, yes: Mac OS 10.4 is getting phased out by many pieces of software.
So we agree, then. Please try thinking before you post.
Why don't you just shut up instead of wildly speculating about things you evidently don't understand?
Crippled how?
No. Mac developers tend to develop for the latest OS X version only, which is why owning a slightly old Mac is such a frustrating experience: virtually no new software supports it. On other platforms, including Windows and Android, most new software will support older OS versions (Windows XP, Android 1.6). Most new games support Windows XP just fine. Most new Android software supports 1.6. Because it's fairly easy to do.
Well, the old interface (of Word, specifically) encourages bad usage. People would choose fonts of various sizes instead of using styles, which makes working with the documents in an actual publishing setting a fucking nightmare. The new one is a lot easier to use properly, and it's much more obvious how. Just like OpenOffice, in fact, but it goes one step further and sorts the various features so that they can be readily accessible without making a convoluted and cluttered interface.
Objectively, it's simply better than the old one. If you prefer the old one, well, you were probably not using it correctly anyway.
Yes, let's subtract "technical people" from people who buy stuff so that we can pretend "consumers" don't purposefully buy Android phones. Let's also define "technical people" as "people who know what OS their phone runs" so that we aren't talking utter bullshit.
Sorry for nitpicking your nitpicking, Mr. Asperger, but the "!!11" should give you a hint that it's not meant to be read in a serious tone. More like something a geeky kid could come up with.
Yes, it's more likely a case of breach of contract, but I was trying to get first post.
When saying "wouldn't it be cool to do a parachute jump -- from outer space!!11" gives you a monopoly on draining money off the people actually doing it, the concept of "intellectual property" really shows how childish and immature it is.
I should add that editing in Word or OpenOffice, while easier, gets frustrating very soon if there is an awful lot to edit. Even a short document, if it needs a lot of changes, it tends to get very slow to load, and text blocks move around randomly, causing a lot of confusion. So although it's easy initially, some of the functionality is extremely poorly implemented.
No. Word processors to a few things easier: simple formatting of small pieces of text for personal use (no word document is suitable for print), automatic updating of indexes, footnotes, etc., and editing. Even excellent writers who use a typewriter (there are a few of them out there still) tend to do an awful lot of editing, rewriting the same sentence or paragraph over and over until they are more or less happy with it. Good writing has more to do with the patience and time to get it right than to transmit something in one's head to paper. The reason why you think the era of the word processor has been detrimental to the clarity of writing is most likely that far more text is produced, by far more people, some of whom have no talent nor time for writing.
Of course, fashion might also come into it. American writing especially was influenced by the journalistic demands of brevity not too long ago, but fashion is always changing. Perhaps you're just old-fashioned, or perhaps you read the wrong books.
The fact that this wasn't in the first post here of this discussion is irrefutable proof of Slashdot's decline as a nerd site.
Crashes, hang-ups and GUI malfunctions? That was pretty much the main feature of Netscape 4.x, which was not only stable software, but also the dominant browser platform. And you never used it?
I've already replied to your presumed counterpoints; you're adding nothing but stupidity to the discussion.
iPhones are only $99 if you disregard the cost of the contract. If you do, you're an idiot. Since you insist on being an idiot, I can only assume you work in marketing, and evidently you do: it's patently untrue that the iPhone is the best phone in the world if you take regular phone functionality into consideration, or even just email -- if your fingers get wet and cold, it's practically useless. Since those drawbacks are pretty extreme, it's simply not the best phone in the world. It's just more pleasant to use in a very limited number of situations.
No, you haven't given a single plausible reason, never mind a valid one, so I don't have to do anything except point out that your fantasy about the world's most expensive phone dominating the market is patently ridiculous.
Exactly. If you make simple things difficult enough, people will pay for even a complicated solution. That's the intention of Apple's design. Make people buy more stuff! And there's an app for that!
No, there's no creation involved at all. Second, this is something you can do easily on any phone, with no editing. The availability of apps solves a problem that simply isn't there on any other phone. Fact is, changing a ringtone on the iPhone is user hostile by design.
You forgot making the ringtone available first: The iPhone is this user friendly.
Frankly, I find it astonishing that people can pretend Apple "just works", when in reality you have to go through this kind of nonsense for even the simplest of tasks.
Your fantasy about the iPhone dominating the market is worse.
True. Android has almost caught up with the iPhone in half the time.
That's like saying the Chateau Latour wines had the chance to dominate the market if only they were sold in more restaurants.
1) They're hideously expensive
2) Although they're good, many others are also good, quite a few at a much lower price.
3) Even if they were the best in the world, they're not to everyone's taste.
4) Most people just want to get sloshed.
There are more people who will ditch AT&T for Verizon than there are people who will ditch Android for iPhone, for the simple fact that the U.S. isn't the whole world. Also, some people dislike the need for going through a goddamn 12 step program just to change the ringtone. For a few things where there's money involved for Apple, the iPhone is remarkably user hostile.
Your location is transmitted through the use of an ip address, made even simpler by the iPhone's preference of wifi, as the PDF stated. You claimed to have read it, but evidently you didn't.
And once again, you lie: the "50%" Android phones transmitting personal information such as GPS and phone number were in fact "Seven applications collected the deviceID [UDID] and, in some cases, the phone number and the SIM card serial number." So 7 out of 30 did the same as 70% of the iOS apps, and not quite your 50% shared phone numbers. Also, what you call "GPS location" is actually called "location data" in the PDF, which for the most part is actually not based on GPS but on (oh, guess) the wifi spot or the wireless tower. Like what you're doing anyway.
So, to reiterate: you're a fraud, deliberately trying to distort statistics to make Apple look good.