Apple is the same way - which is why I'm not relying on any of their services too heavily.
iTools became.Mac, which became MobileMe, which spawned iWork.com which shut down when MobileMe went away with the launch of iCloud.
To be fair, until iCloud came along, these were changes in name only. MobileMe pretty much had the exact same set of services (with some new ones) as iTools. And I'm not sure it's unreasonable that after 10 years iCloud finally dropped some services.
The US should simply make it illegal for these US companies to do this.
The problem is these aren't technically US companies. That's how a shell company works.
It's not that I don't disagree with you. It would be great if the US could put a stop to this behavior. But on paper, these companies are fully foreign companies that happen to have a relationship with a US company. That relationship consists of holding a lot of money overseas.
You mean the "problem" where a user downloads an.apk from a warez site, sideloads it into their phone, the phone tells them "hey, this program is requesting permission to look at everything on your phone's internal storage, send information to who-knows-what internet server, and make phone calls and send SMS messages on your dime, are you sure you want to go through with installing this" and the the user clicks "okay"?
That "problem"? I'm not seeing the issue, here. I mean, at some point it becomes the user's fault.
I'm confused. Are you a Windows or Android apologist?
Google has almost 40'000 employees now. You underestimate them. Their PR is good tho.
What does their employee count (or PR) have to do with their commitment to Python or appreciation for employees?
A company's employee count or PR firm isn't connected to how good of an employer they are. Otherwise everyone at McDonalds or Walmart would be loving their jobs.
The iDevices of the world will reject any.ipa executable package that isn't DRM-encumbered. You can strip off the "fairplay" all you like; but unless you have a jailbroken device or access to a trusted signing key, you aren't going to be running it...
That's not strictly true. Apple allows one to load "entitlements" on a device which can pair the device with your own signing key, and away from the appstore review process and DRM.
Sure, they have to generate the entitlement. But for $200 they'll generate you an entitlement that can be loaded on as many devices as you want (aimed at enterprise.)
It will grow strongly, but they will not be able to gain back a majority or anything near it.
I don't think apple cares anyway. They want to be seen as a premium brand, and that means not selling the most units.
Sure, but as I said, this happens every year.
Apple will gain about 45% in Q4, and then drop back down to 25%-30% in Q1. Android will go back to about 60% in Q1.
In Q3 Verizon sold more iOS devices than Android devices. You can't seriously believe that in one quarter there has been some deep, lasting change where Android has established total domination while at Verizon iOS is outselling Android. These are yearly sales cycles that happen every year.
No, the reality is that growth in non-first world markets of android devices is huge. They lost this share not by losing customers but that the total smartphone market is growing far faster than apple device sales.
Ok, but even TFA agrees with me.
"With the launch of iPhone 5, Gartner analysts expect iOS share will grow strongly in the fourth quarter of 2012 because users held on to their replacements in many markets ahead of the iPhone 5 wider roll out."
3Q 2012 would have been when iOS was at it's lowest due to people waiting for the iPhone 5. You'll likely seem there temporarily be a large change in the numbers Q4, with them settling down to something in between Q1.
This happens once a year every year. The alternative would be believing that Apple suddenly lost half their share in one year, which also doesn't seem likely.
You can't actually. Apple doesn't make an iOS emulator, only an iOS SIMULATOR. That means you have to recompile your iOS app as an i386/Mac OS X application, and then run it under the simulator which simulates an iPhone display.
Except the patent isn't the same. There's no data being relayed over the magnetic field. Apple is just using the magnetic field to detect the presence of another device, not actually send any data stream. They use another protocol (likely in practice to be Bluetooth) to do the subsequent matchmaking and data transmission.
Apple's process actually avoids stepping on this patent at all by not using the magnetometer for data transmission.
It's a good idea to license your software before you release it.
An idea that's my choice. Other people trying to beat my software with it's dogmatic bats, even just by pressure, is not appreciated. For a group that supposedly supports freedom so much there are quite a few who seem to be intent on forcing their ideals on others.
The GPL is preventing that corporate psychopath from taking what he wants with his power and instead establishes a level playing field.
The attitude that closed source developers trying to deliver their software to Linux users are possible "corporate psychopaths" is why Linux will always have issues attracting third party developers.
Because if you want Google's data you play by Google's rules, and Google has things they want that Apple didn't want to give them.
Google is not the only company that offers maps with turn by turn directions. I'm actually surprised that Apple simply didn't buy a company that already has things up and running like they did with Siri. They could have purchased TomTom, for example and had everything up and running immediately. All they would have needed to do is write the app. I can't see how that would have been that much more expensive that starting from scratch and eating all the negative press.
They certainly partnered with TomTom. The TomTom logo is/was present in the new Maps app.
Apple had plenty of opportunities to improve their navigation app without Google's help. For starters, they could have made it so that the phone wouldn't lock itself when in navigation mode. I can't count the number of seconds I had to take my eyes off of the road to enter my password.
Huh? That's your own setting. You told it to passcode after X number of seconds, and now you're wondering why it passcode locks after X number of seconds?
If you don't want that, turn it off.
Apple: people use this app while operating a vehicle that weighs thousands of pounds - I thought you were the guys that put thought into the user experience of your software. I hope for everyone's safety that this "feature" has been fixed.
Yeah, they added voice turn by turn, so now you don't even have to look at your phone at all.
I certainly hope you're not suggesting taking your eyes off the road while driving to look at your phone is at all a legitimate usage modal. If you are, please don't drive on my roads.
And finally, I'm not trying to troll here, but I can't help but wonder how all of this would be playing out if Google had patented every trivial feature of their map and navigation software like Apple does for all of its apps. That would certainly have made this scenario a hell of a lot more interesting.
I would assume: a) Those patents probably do exist. b) They're likely either expired, or owned by companies like Navigon who provide significant chunks of data to both Google and Apple (in addition to be the initial kickstarting source for both their data sets).
If you want access to map tiles, you simply can't get them, and Google will send their lawyers after you if you reverse engineer.
At least with Apple maps commercial use is free. And Bing will let you license the raw map tiles and provide you with an API to get them.)
(Citation: I've worked on software that implemented Maps from scratch and tried to license from Google. Google also made the news recently when they raised their rates: )
Come on, think of the awesome sales pitch these guys are getting. "Don 't be Evil"? Screw that. Come to the dark side. You have no idea of the full financial advantage of the dark side. Watch those that believe in open standards tremble at your feet.
Yes, because Google Maps is such an open standard./s
I own a retail store and one of my competitors has a wholesale/manufacturing business. We both hate each other as I use to work for them BUT I still sell their products as "I" make money off them.
The problem isn't that Walmart wouldn't make money on the Kindle.
The problem is that if you buy the Kindle, are you going to go back to Walmart to buy your movies/books/music?
Imagine you were selling a direct channel to your competitor. That probably wouldn't sit with you well.
It's nonsense. You can put audio and video over micro-USB (see: MHL)
Sure, you could add MHL which would result in more space being used on the board, higher device cost, and higher accessory cost, or you could come up with something that does the same functionality at a cheaper cost in a more efficient manner. After all, the higher cost is why the Nexus 7 doesn't ship with MHL.
But hey, let's stick with something that's broken, expensive, and not really part of the USB standard anyway. That sounds like a good plan.
The iPad 2 prefers to be charged directly from a power adapter. USB as a charging source is no longer enough for newer mobile devices. It was fine for devices from 2006-2009 but after that, things started to change quite a bit.
Newer computers (especially Macs) will actually provide 10 watts over USB. So if you have a computer with 10 watt USB ports, USB is still workable.
But I think in general you have a good point. As tablets become more like PCs and less like phones, the expectation they should be able to charge from USB should decrease.
Meanwhile, the rest of the industry seems to be moving away from wires and toward wireless. Wireless payments, wireless charging, wireless audio, etc. with NFC and other related technologies. Apple is for some strange reason the last to adopt these innovations, and it will be a whole year before they come up with an answer. In the mean time, they're piling on connectors and dongles galore. It's very strange.
Apple supports wireless sync just fine (and wireless video/streaming via AirPlay.) What Apple is not doing, however, is making assumptions that someone buying the device has these technologies at their disposal.
I'd also like to see this wireless charging system you're talking about that doesn't at all involve a cord plugged into a wall.
Slashdot Mirror
Apple is the same way - which is why I'm not relying on any of their services too heavily.
iTools became .Mac, which became MobileMe, which spawned iWork.com which shut down when MobileMe went away with the launch of iCloud.
To be fair, until iCloud came along, these were changes in name only. MobileMe pretty much had the exact same set of services (with some new ones) as iTools. And I'm not sure it's unreasonable that after 10 years iCloud finally dropped some services.
The US should simply make it illegal for these US companies to do this.
The problem is these aren't technically US companies. That's how a shell company works.
It's not that I don't disagree with you. It would be great if the US could put a stop to this behavior. But on paper, these companies are fully foreign companies that happen to have a relationship with a US company. That relationship consists of holding a lot of money overseas.
What malware problem?
You mean the "problem" where a user downloads an .apk from a warez site, sideloads it into their phone, the phone tells them "hey, this program is requesting permission to look at everything on your phone's internal storage, send information to who-knows-what internet server, and make phone calls and send SMS messages on your dime, are you sure you want to go through with installing this" and the the user clicks "okay"?
That "problem"? I'm not seeing the issue, here. I mean, at some point it becomes the user's fault.
I'm confused. Are you a Windows or Android apologist?
Google has almost 40'000 employees now. You underestimate them. Their PR is good tho.
What does their employee count (or PR) have to do with their commitment to Python or appreciation for employees?
A company's employee count or PR firm isn't connected to how good of an employer they are. Otherwise everyone at McDonalds or Walmart would be loving their jobs.
The iDevices of the world will reject any .ipa executable package that isn't DRM-encumbered. You can strip off the "fairplay" all you like; but unless you have a jailbroken device or access to a trusted signing key, you aren't going to be running it...
That's not strictly true. Apple allows one to load "entitlements" on a device which can pair the device with your own signing key, and away from the appstore review process and DRM.
Sure, they have to generate the entitlement. But for $200 they'll generate you an entitlement that can be loaded on as many devices as you want (aimed at enterprise.)
Actually, I know someone who worked in that department, and they do read all of them. They're then gathered for telemetry.
Huh... well look at that...
http://www.kantarworldpanel.com/Global/News/Soaring-iPhone-5-sales-in-US-knock-Android-into-second-place
It will grow strongly, but they will not be able to gain back a majority or anything near it.
I don't think apple cares anyway. They want to be seen as a premium brand, and that means not selling the most units.
Sure, but as I said, this happens every year.
Apple will gain about 45% in Q4, and then drop back down to 25%-30% in Q1. Android will go back to about 60% in Q1.
In Q3 Verizon sold more iOS devices than Android devices. You can't seriously believe that in one quarter there has been some deep, lasting change where Android has established total domination while at Verizon iOS is outselling Android. These are yearly sales cycles that happen every year.
No, the reality is that growth in non-first world markets of android devices is huge. They lost this share not by losing customers but that the total smartphone market is growing far faster than apple device sales.
Ok, but even TFA agrees with me.
"With the launch of iPhone 5, Gartner analysts expect iOS share will grow strongly in the fourth quarter of 2012 because users held on to their replacements in many markets ahead of the iPhone 5 wider roll out."
3Q 2012 would have been when iOS was at it's lowest due to people waiting for the iPhone 5. You'll likely seem there temporarily be a large change in the numbers Q4, with them settling down to something in between Q1.
This happens once a year every year. The alternative would be believing that Apple suddenly lost half their share in one year, which also doesn't seem likely.
MS and Apple don't have any FRAND patents of their own to cross-license, so they are obligated to pay full freight (2.25% per device).
I'm pretty sure Apple does have FRAND patents, especially in H.264. Apple and Microsoft have also been buying out groups of FRAND patents.
http://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/2012/February/12-at-210.html
You can't actually. Apple doesn't make an iOS emulator, only an iOS SIMULATOR. That means you have to recompile your iOS app as an i386/Mac OS X application, and then run it under the simulator which simulates an iPhone display.
Except the patent isn't the same. There's no data being relayed over the magnetic field. Apple is just using the magnetic field to detect the presence of another device, not actually send any data stream. They use another protocol (likely in practice to be Bluetooth) to do the subsequent matchmaking and data transmission.
Apple's process actually avoids stepping on this patent at all by not using the magnetometer for data transmission.
It's a good idea to license your software before you release it.
An idea that's my choice. Other people trying to beat my software with it's dogmatic bats, even just by pressure, is not appreciated. For a group that supposedly supports freedom so much there are quite a few who seem to be intent on forcing their ideals on others.
The GPL is preventing that corporate psychopath from taking what he wants with his power and instead establishes a level playing field.
The attitude that closed source developers trying to deliver their software to Linux users are possible "corporate psychopaths" is why Linux will always have issues attracting third party developers.
Because if you want Google's data you play by Google's rules, and Google has things they want that Apple didn't want to give them.
Google is not the only company that offers maps with turn by turn directions. I'm actually surprised that Apple simply didn't buy a company that already has things up and running like they did with Siri. They could have purchased TomTom, for example and had everything up and running immediately. All they would have needed to do is write the app. I can't see how that would have been that much more expensive that starting from scratch and eating all the negative press.
They certainly partnered with TomTom. The TomTom logo is/was present in the new Maps app.
Apple had plenty of opportunities to improve their navigation app without Google's help. For starters, they could have made it so that the phone wouldn't lock itself when in navigation mode. I can't count the number of seconds I had to take my eyes off of the road to enter my password.
Huh? That's your own setting. You told it to passcode after X number of seconds, and now you're wondering why it passcode locks after X number of seconds?
If you don't want that, turn it off.
Apple: people use this app while operating a vehicle that weighs thousands of pounds - I thought you were the guys that put thought into the user experience of your software. I hope for everyone's safety that this "feature" has been fixed.
Yeah, they added voice turn by turn, so now you don't even have to look at your phone at all.
I certainly hope you're not suggesting taking your eyes off the road while driving to look at your phone is at all a legitimate usage modal. If you are, please don't drive on my roads.
And finally, I'm not trying to troll here, but I can't help but wonder how all of this would be playing out if Google had patented every trivial feature of their map and navigation software like Apple does for all of its apps. That would certainly have made this scenario a hell of a lot more interesting.
I would assume:
a) Those patents probably do exist.
b) They're likely either expired, or owned by companies like Navigon who provide significant chunks of data to both Google and Apple (in addition to be the initial kickstarting source for both their data sets).
I'd believe Florian Mueller and Steve Jobs when he was alive before I'd believe searchenginewatch.
Google work for you?
https://developers.google.com/maps/faq#usagelimits
Yes, because Google Maps is such an open standard. /s
They provide access to their API, anyone can freely integrate it into their software, websites, or Android apps and even insert their own maps.
https://developers.google.com/maps/
Misleading, at best.
Google charges you if you go over a certain number of users:
http://searchenginewatch.com/article/2122151/Google-Maps-API-to-Charge-for-High-Volume-Usage
If you want access to map tiles, you simply can't get them, and Google will send their lawyers after you if you reverse engineer.
At least with Apple maps commercial use is free. And Bing will let you license the raw map tiles and provide you with an API to get them.)
(Citation: I've worked on software that implemented Maps from scratch and tried to license from Google. Google also made the news recently when they raised their rates: )
And Apple rules at ATT is that if you want to upgrade before you contract is over, you pay 250 bucks plus the cost of the upgrade.
Just upgraded my iPhone before my contract was over, no $250 on top of the upgrade price. In fact, I got $100 off the off-contract device cost.
Calling shenanigans...
Come on, think of the awesome sales pitch these guys are getting. "Don 't be Evil"? Screw that. Come to the dark side. You have no idea of the full financial advantage of the dark side. Watch those that believe in open standards tremble at your feet.
Yes, because Google Maps is such an open standard. /s
I own a retail store and one of my competitors has a wholesale/manufacturing business. We both hate each other as I use to work for them BUT I still sell their products as "I" make money off them.
The problem isn't that Walmart wouldn't make money on the Kindle.
The problem is that if you buy the Kindle, are you going to go back to Walmart to buy your movies/books/music?
Imagine you were selling a direct channel to your competitor. That probably wouldn't sit with you well.
It's nonsense. You can put audio and video over micro-USB (see: MHL)
Sure, you could add MHL which would result in more space being used on the board, higher device cost, and higher accessory cost, or you could come up with something that does the same functionality at a cheaper cost in a more efficient manner. After all, the higher cost is why the Nexus 7 doesn't ship with MHL.
But hey, let's stick with something that's broken, expensive, and not really part of the USB standard anyway. That sounds like a good plan.
The iPad 2 prefers to be charged directly from a power adapter. USB as a charging source is no longer enough for newer mobile devices. It was fine for devices from 2006-2009 but after that, things started to change quite a bit.
Newer computers (especially Macs) will actually provide 10 watts over USB. So if you have a computer with 10 watt USB ports, USB is still workable.
But I think in general you have a good point. As tablets become more like PCs and less like phones, the expectation they should be able to charge from USB should decrease.
Meanwhile, the rest of the industry seems to be moving away from wires and toward wireless. Wireless payments, wireless charging, wireless audio, etc. with NFC and other related technologies. Apple is for some strange reason the last to adopt these innovations, and it will be a whole year before they come up with an answer. In the mean time, they're piling on connectors and dongles galore. It's very strange.
Apple supports wireless sync just fine (and wireless video/streaming via AirPlay.) What Apple is not doing, however, is making assumptions that someone buying the device has these technologies at their disposal.
I'd also like to see this wireless charging system you're talking about that doesn't at all involve a cord plugged into a wall.