I wouldn't buy one of these, but if you look at these pictures and are not impressed with the engineering that went in to getting the performance that thing puts out into that package then you're not much of a geek in my estimation. It's like a swiss watch in there. Now a Casio tells time just as well as a precision engineered swiss mechanical for a fraction of the price and yet people still buy them at ridiculous prices because they like a nicely made thing, or they like the style, or they don't want to wear a fugly G-shock with their suit, or they just have money to burn. Whatever.
I have a condition called Keratoconus, a weakening of the structure of the cornea. I cannot have LASIK done. Unfortunately this condition is often asymptomatic until you are in your 20's, for some it will stay asymptomatic (correctable with glasses) but they still risk serious damage to already weakened corneas if they undergo LASIK. So have it done, sure, but please get your eyes examined by a professional beforehand.
The main difference between Apple without Jobs the first time 'round and now is that The Apple Jobs left the first time wasn't shaped by him but by the people who ousted him. This Apple however has Jobs stamp all over it, it has the people he picked, he trusted and he trained. If you think Jobs was a genius, which Ellison does, then that has to count for something.
What I find amusing is that Apple have a hundred billion dollars that they have no idea what to do with. Looks like they're now going to have to try and hire thousands of Nokia and Google map experts (and no, we're not just talking about software developers, they are ten a penny in comparison).
Anecdotally, I don't know of anyone who was affected by this reorganization of Apple's stores to even bother to mention it.
It affects all Apple employees in those stores as well as all customers who walk into those stores.
This would imply, in my world, that the first issue is a fluff piece, posted to garner this false aura of fairness, and the latter is a huge fuckup that he's apologizing for like a good lap dog eagerly waiting his tickets to the next great thing unveil.
Calling a senior Apple exec "a terrible hire" is a fluff piece and doesn't qualify as criticizing Apple ? It's your opinion but it shows your own bias at least.
A lot of people are thinking that the Apple Maps errors are just going to be shrugged off – that in a few months or a few years, they'll reach "good enough" status, and everyone will just forget this embarrassing incident. But I think it goes deeper than that. A major part of Apple's appeal, one big reason why they have been able to charge premium prices and get people lining up to buy their stuff, is that their devices "Just Work."
The thing to keep in mind here is that Google is the undisputed champion of mapping, whatever data Apple was going to use it just wasn't going to be as good as Google's. Google has sunk millions of dollars and man hours into their maps in the past few year and redefined people's expectations (a couple years ago who would've thought that having access to a nearly perfect global map at all times would be seen as a necessity ?) Google also knew of this advantage and used it as leverage. Sooner or later something would have to give and it has, unfortunately this means iOS users will have some minor inconvenience in the transition period.
Actually the best analysis so far is that the chip negotiates the assignment of pins in the reversible connector :
"The controller/driver chip tells the device what type it is, and for cases like the Lightning-to-USB cable whether a charger (that sends power) or a device (that needs power) is on the other end. The device can then switch the other pins between the SoC’s data lines or the power circuitry, as needed in each case. [...] I really see no justification for the “authentication chip” hypothesis"
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.
You can tell what a company finds important from what they patent. Google has a lots of patents regarding maps like a patent on ad technology that inserts ads in its Street View mapping images and a patent to use location data in ads. Those are the things Google wants access to, those were probably on the demand side in the Google v. Apple map negotiations. Now in the short term iOS users might be worse off in some cases, in the long term it might be worth it.
"“Even if the customer experience is compromised” are Allen’s words, summarizing what he heard from his sources, not Browett’s. But if they’re accurate, it’s hard to conclude anything other than that Apple made a terrible decision hiring him."
That's just one of many criticisms. Apple fans are some of the most critical around, you just don't notice because you only follow their news sporadically. The attitude of Apple fans is best summed up by John Siracusa's podcast tagline : "Nothing is so perfect that it can't be complained about." They'll happily rant for hours about how Apple stuff is near perfection and they'll happily rant for hours more on how it can become just that little bit more prefect as well.
They won't because Apple has more at stake. Google just doesn't want one company to control the device people view their ads on, Apple's building a lucrative platform which it needs to protect.
Except the guy on the street wasn't random, he had a boss who sat in on meetings which created that haircut design in the first place. And once that haircut was a hit that boss decided to become a barber himself.
Android is just Google's way of preventing Apple of being able to do "a Microsoft" and "Netscaping" them. Which is also why it's not viable long term: it doesn't make money for Google and handset makers and operators aren't interested in maintaining a platform so it comes down to gambling on the open source community which hasn't exactly got a good track record on the desktop (or in this case palmtop.)
Because it's an indicator of how likely support is going to continue in the future. All these companies selling crappy Android based phones for next to no profit are never going to support them. Apple will provided support and updates, etc.
After the quick frenzy of this occasional apple upgrade, the numbers will go back to being Android heavy.
Samsung's the only one turning a decent profit though. And a lot of that market is selling low-end smartphones to be used as dumb phones. One company is building the next generation computing platform, the others are just selling handsets even if some are trying to create a cargo-cult facsimile of an ecosystem (like Samsung with their Samsung S-Cloud and what not.)
We're talking about the first 24 hours here, US only and directly from consumers. Galaxy S3's 9 million pre-orders was over a longer period, worldwide and pre-orders by carriers. You're comparing apples and lemons.
The story of too many of the "open" projects : * someone creates something worthwhile * it becomes very popular * some douchebag says: "I'll make something exactly like this, except it will be better because it's OPEN." * nothing of value is produced * Lather, rinse, repeat
All kidding aside though, it's not about aesthetics alone. If you're going to holding something in your hands for an extended period of time it needs to feel right and it needs to be solid and sturdy.
I disagree. If the Google model wins not only will we end up with a system where device support is non-existant, app quality is low and letting developers make money is a low priority (the current state of Android "ecosystem"), and we'll all end up paying for it all by trading away our privacy and our data because that's the real priority and reason Android was ever even developed. I prefer the Apple way because I think it'll end up creating a much better (if not exactly ideal) environment for both end users and developers. Of course if a third path should open my opinion might change but that doesn't look likely any time soon.
ALL remaining parties are "corporate shills" by the way. The true free as in speech alternatives died at the hands of the Android juggernaut.
So Amazon would be the ultimate underdog since despite huge revenues they make relatively little profit ? That makes no sense. These are both huge companies, used to getting their way. There are no underdogs here.
However, in the worst case the interview should have cleared up any question of motive.
That's the bad part: it did.
"But if things weren’t quite clear to the detectives at the start, they certainly were by the time they wrote up the case file. It states: "There is no evidence at this stage that this is anything other than a foolish comment posted on Twitter as a joke for only his close friends to see."
But they didn't want to appear to be soft on terrorism or whatever and so rather than make the judgement they knew to be correct they threw an innocent man into the legal system. Gutless.
Slashdot Mirror
I wouldn't buy one of these, but if you look at these pictures and are not impressed with the engineering that went in to getting the performance that thing puts out into that package then you're not much of a geek in my estimation. It's like a swiss watch in there. Now a Casio tells time just as well as a precision engineered swiss mechanical for a fraction of the price and yet people still buy them at ridiculous prices because they like a nicely made thing, or they like the style, or they don't want to wear a fugly G-shock with their suit, or they just have money to burn. Whatever.
I have a condition called Keratoconus, a weakening of the structure of the cornea. I cannot have LASIK done. Unfortunately this condition is often asymptomatic until you are in your 20's, for some it will stay asymptomatic (correctable with glasses) but they still risk serious damage to already weakened corneas if they undergo LASIK. So have it done, sure, but please get your eyes examined by a professional beforehand.
The main difference between Apple without Jobs the first time 'round and now is that The Apple Jobs left the first time wasn't shaped by him but by the people who ousted him. This Apple however has Jobs stamp all over it, it has the people he picked, he trusted and he trained. If you think Jobs was a genius, which Ellison does, then that has to count for something.
What I find amusing is that Apple have a hundred billion dollars that they have no idea what to do with. Looks like they're now going to have to try and hire thousands of Nokia and Google map experts (and no, we're not just talking about software developers, they are ten a penny in comparison).
They've been doing just that : "Source: Apple Aggressively Recruiting Ex-Google Maps Staff To Build Out iOS Maps". In an sector with, as you point out, very little competition this surely must be a good thing in the long run.
Anecdotally, I don't know of anyone who was affected by this reorganization of Apple's stores to even bother to mention it.
It affects all Apple employees in those stores as well as all customers who walk into those stores.
This would imply, in my world, that the first issue is a fluff piece, posted to garner this false aura of fairness, and the latter is a huge fuckup that he's apologizing for like a good lap dog eagerly waiting his tickets to the next great thing unveil.
Calling a senior Apple exec "a terrible hire" is a fluff piece and doesn't qualify as criticizing Apple ? It's your opinion but it shows your own bias at least.
A lot of people are thinking that the Apple Maps errors are just going to be shrugged off – that in a few months or a few years, they'll reach "good enough" status, and everyone will just forget this embarrassing incident. But I think it goes deeper than that. A major part of Apple's appeal, one big reason why they have been able to charge premium prices and get people lining up to buy their stuff, is that their devices "Just Work."
The thing to keep in mind here is that Google is the undisputed champion of mapping, whatever data Apple was going to use it just wasn't going to be as good as Google's. Google has sunk millions of dollars and man hours into their maps in the past few year and redefined people's expectations (a couple years ago who would've thought that having access to a nearly perfect global map at all times would be seen as a necessity ?) Google also knew of this advantage and used it as leverage. Sooner or later something would have to give and it has, unfortunately this means iOS users will have some minor inconvenience in the transition period.
Add that to the fact that the new Lightning connector on the iPhone has an IC designed solely to prevent creation of compatible cables
Actually the best analysis so far is that the chip negotiates the assignment of pins in the reversible connector :
"The controller/driver chip tells the device what type it is, and for cases like the Lightning-to-USB cable whether a charger (that sends power) or a device (that needs power) is on the other end.
The device can then switch the other pins between the SoC’s data lines or the power circuitry, as needed in each case.
[...]
I really see no justification for the “authentication chip” hypothesis"
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.
You can tell what a company finds important from what they patent. Google has a lots of patents regarding maps like a patent on ad technology that inserts ads in its Street View mapping images and a patent to use location data in ads. Those are the things Google wants access to, those were probably on the demand side in the Google v. Apple map negotiations. Now in the short term iOS users might be worse off in some cases, in the long term it might be worth it.
He was very critical of the guy who was going to "reorganize" Apple retail, that's no small thing :
"“Even if the customer experience is compromised” are Allen’s words, summarizing what he heard from his sources, not Browett’s. But if they’re accurate, it’s hard to conclude anything other than that Apple made a terrible decision hiring him."
That's just one of many criticisms. Apple fans are some of the most critical around, you just don't notice because you only follow their news sporadically. The attitude of Apple fans is best summed up by John Siracusa's podcast tagline : "Nothing is so perfect that it can't be complained about." They'll happily rant for hours about how Apple stuff is near perfection and they'll happily rant for hours more on how it can become just that little bit more prefect as well.
They won't because Apple has more at stake. Google just doesn't want one company to control the device people view their ads on, Apple's building a lucrative platform which it needs to protect.
Except the guy on the street wasn't random, he had a boss who sat in on meetings which created that haircut design in the first place. And once that haircut was a hit that boss decided to become a barber himself.
Yeah they should build a GUI on top of Java, it's all the rage in the "enterprise" you know.
Android is just Google's way of preventing Apple of being able to do "a Microsoft" and "Netscaping" them. Which is also why it's not viable long term: it doesn't make money for Google and handset makers and operators aren't interested in maintaining a platform so it comes down to gambling on the open source community which hasn't exactly got a good track record on the desktop (or in this case palmtop.)
That's the offer they made Samsung.
What would your response be to the bully on the playground? Bend over?
Winning a lawsuit in a democracy before a jury of your peers is bullying ? That's a very strange definition.
Because it's an indicator of how likely support is going to continue in the future. All these companies selling crappy Android based phones for next to no profit are never going to support them. Apple will provided support and updates, etc.
Lighten up, it's a joke.
And that was just one of MANY Android devices. :)
HTC, Motorola, LG, etc....
After the quick frenzy of this occasional apple upgrade, the numbers will go back to being Android heavy.
Samsung's the only one turning a decent profit though. And a lot of that market is selling low-end smartphones to be used as dumb phones. One company is building the next generation computing platform, the others are just selling handsets even if some are trying to create a cargo-cult facsimile of an ecosystem (like Samsung with their Samsung S-Cloud and what not.)
Galaxy S3 did not have 9 million preorders. Samsung confirmed it took just under 2 months to sell 10 million.
It was reported as such, which I assume GP was talking about : Samsung S3: 9 million pre-order new Galaxy phone.
We're talking about the first 24 hours here, US only and directly from consumers. Galaxy S3's 9 million pre-orders was over a longer period, worldwide and pre-orders by carriers. You're comparing apples and lemons.
The dustbin of history is littered with "superior" solutions. Implementation is everything.
The story of too many of the "open" projects :
* someone creates something worthwhile
* it becomes very popular
* some douchebag says: "I'll make something exactly like this, except it will be better because it's OPEN."
* nothing of value is produced
* Lather, rinse, repeat
It's also why I wear my phone in a holster even though I know it's not "cool".
Ahem
All kidding aside though, it's not about aesthetics alone. If you're going to holding something in your hands for an extended period of time it needs to feel right and it needs to be solid and sturdy.
I disagree. If the Google model wins not only will we end up with a system where device support is non-existant, app quality is low and letting developers make money is a low priority (the current state of Android "ecosystem"), and we'll all end up paying for it all by trading away our privacy and our data because that's the real priority and reason Android was ever even developed. I prefer the Apple way because I think it'll end up creating a much better (if not exactly ideal) environment for both end users and developers. Of course if a third path should open my opinion might change but that doesn't look likely any time soon.
ALL remaining parties are "corporate shills" by the way. The true free as in speech alternatives died at the hands of the Android juggernaut.
So Amazon would be the ultimate underdog since despite huge revenues they make relatively little profit ? That makes no sense. These are both huge companies, used to getting their way. There are no underdogs here.
However, in the worst case the interview should have cleared up any question of motive.
That's the bad part: it did.
"But if things weren’t quite clear to the detectives at the start, they certainly were by the time they wrote up the case file. It states: "There is no evidence at this stage that this is anything other than a foolish comment posted on Twitter as a joke for only his close friends to see."
But they didn't want to appear to be soft on terrorism or whatever and so rather than make the judgement they knew to be correct they threw an innocent man into the legal system. Gutless.