No one is forcing you - or anyone - to have an iPhone.
Most people enjoy having something that works and don't care about the ability to install apps from other sources, however. If they didn't, they could go and get a Windows Phone or another phone.
What "free" software is "locked out"? Open Office? Firefox? Something else? Oh yeah, those can all be installed. Most people don't really care, though, and if they did they'd jailbreak or get another type of phone.
This from the guy who founded a company that just started a social network which has no API and forces you to join whenever you want to sign up for an account for any of their services?
Never thought I'd see the day were you defended a pretty vile abuse of power by Google, just because it's the hipster thing to do these days to fawn over Google.
Those kind of people are few and far between, though -- at least, that's what I hope is the truth.
I use Apple products because I like them - it doesn't mean I don't like Windows. I honestly don't see Microsoft in competition with Apple since the invent of Intel Macs. Apple makes hardware, Microsoft makes software - two different things.
It all comes down to using what you like best - who cares what other people do. If you like something, use it.
(Google, on the other hand, I despise - but for other reasons then products. That's another issue, though!:))
They're falling into the same trap they did with IE6, back in the day.
By tying a browser so closely into the operating system to the point where it's impossible to install on a older version of the operating system, you're fragmenting the user base and forcing developers to continue to code for browsers that may not be up to standards.
For all this talk about how the IE team is "turning over a new leaf", they're not really doing so at all. It's more of the same old, same old.
They make their money off from ads and data collection - not from devices.
It's the reason Google pushed so hard for their new privacy policy which was supposedly supposed to be "better for the consumer" and the reason that they're forcing everyone into Google+ when they sign up for a Google account.
And for those that don't have their own domain, now if they want to create a simple account at Youtube they're forced to get a new email and social network service account too.
It's unnecessary.
And you know that the only numbers that Google uses when they count the number of Google+ users are those that initially sign up, even if they never use it.
Google has never been more "evil" with their current trend toward harvesting all of your data (the Google+ farce is just a smoke screen) for their ad-bots.
It amazes me that so much of the tech world continues to fawn over them.
If you can broad brush all Christians, then I can broad brush all athiests as loud mouths, too.
Seriously, there are nuts and loudmouths on both sides - athiests included. They don't reflect the majority of people who believe in something without feeling the need to go pushing it on others.
Slashdot Mirror
I believe Chrome knows what's best for Google's bottom line.
That's it.
Google and Chrome give lip-service to openness on the web.
Mozilla and Firefox actually DO something about it.
I see the "sue first ask questions later" crowd has been out in full force - first the stupid ebook nonsense now this.
No one is forcing you - or anyone - to have an iPhone.
Most people enjoy having something that works and don't care about the ability to install apps from other sources, however. If they didn't, they could go and get a Windows Phone or another phone.
What "free" software is "locked out"? Open Office? Firefox? Something else? Oh yeah, those can all be installed. Most people don't really care, though, and if they did they'd jailbreak or get another type of phone.
This from the guy who founded a company that just started a social network which has no API and forces you to join whenever you want to sign up for an account for any of their services?
I'm choking on all the irony.
Never thought I'd see the day were you defended a pretty vile abuse of power by Google, just because it's the hipster thing to do these days to fawn over Google.
The best browser in the marketplace would be Safari, followed by Opera, followed by Firefox.
The adware-ridden, privacy failure known as Chrome would be near the bottom, by IE.
..quaking in their boots.
Seriously, you think a third-rate "operating system" like Chrome OS is going to do anything but collect dust?
Those kind of people are few and far between, though -- at least, that's what I hope is the truth.
:))
I use Apple products because I like them - it doesn't mean I don't like Windows. I honestly don't see Microsoft in competition with Apple since the invent of Intel Macs. Apple makes hardware, Microsoft makes software - two different things.
It all comes down to using what you like best - who cares what other people do. If you like something, use it.
(Google, on the other hand, I despise - but for other reasons then products. That's another issue, though!
I dunno. Spend five minutes browsing Google+ and you'll find some special brands of Android zealot idiots.
Ah, typical internet.
Overreacting and blowing everything out of proportion before they know the facts for over 20 years.
They're falling into the same trap they did with IE6, back in the day.
By tying a browser so closely into the operating system to the point where it's impossible to install on a older version of the operating system, you're fragmenting the user base and forcing developers to continue to code for browsers that may not be up to standards.
For all this talk about how the IE team is "turning over a new leaf", they're not really doing so at all. It's more of the same old, same old.
They make their money off from ads and data collection - not from devices.
It's the reason Google pushed so hard for their new privacy policy which was supposedly supposed to be "better for the consumer" and the reason that they're forcing everyone into Google+ when they sign up for a Google account.
..is that it will now become easier to spot an idiot out of a large crowd. Just look for the schmuck wearing Google Glasses.
The government is full of egotistical douchebags.
What's one more?
Is there enough room in their parents basement for all of them?
Maybe, if we're lucky, they'll get caught and we can get rid of two annoying groups with one stone.
Answer: Get rid of the politicians.
Circles are just lists with a "cute" animation. And didn't Facebook implement video chat last year?
And for those that don't have their own domain, now if they want to create a simple account at Youtube they're forced to get a new email and social network service account too.
It's unnecessary.
And you know that the only numbers that Google uses when they count the number of Google+ users are those that initially sign up, even if they never use it.
I don't know if his head will be able to fit in the camera shot.
Then again, maybe he can have a show with Bill O'Reilly to determine who the bigger arse is.
Google has never been more "evil" with their current trend toward harvesting all of your data (the Google+ farce is just a smoke screen) for their ad-bots.
It amazes me that so much of the tech world continues to fawn over them.
Who cares, it's politics.
Worry about something more important in life then political nonsense.
They're just doing the same thing Dell and other distributors have been doing for the past couple of years?
One would hope since "Holo", like most Google designs, is hideous.
"Keeping your marriage together? That's a Plus!"
If you can broad brush all Christians, then I can broad brush all athiests as loud mouths, too.
Seriously, there are nuts and loudmouths on both sides - athiests included. They don't reflect the majority of people who believe in something without feeling the need to go pushing it on others.