We had that on the N900 and it just fucked up the performance of all the running applications, you have to actively manage what applications are and are not running just to keep it usable. Nice for the niche techie market, pain in the ass for everybody else.
In general, Google isn't blocking them because those creators haven't been suing Google's Android partners and running Anti-Google publicity campaigns.
So this whole thing is just a pretty transparent excuse to use for them to 'get back' at microsoft for that. In any case Google should be indemnifying users of Android from patent issues, it's one thing to say the patents are bogus but their failure to back that up with action suggests they believe otherwise.
So, if Microsoft Office is using a different Windows API than is available to competitors (it is their own product!), that is ok?
Of course it's ok, in fact the same thing exists with Android and iOS, anybody can use them but just be aware they are subject to change and since the vendor is the one changing them they can use them knowing they won't break their own apps, the app store actively blocks distribution of apps that use private APIs for exactly that reason but cydia doesn't and I pretty sure Google Play doesn't. The only one that actually enforces restrictions on private APIs (albeit only through their own channel - which of course is the only official one) is Apple.
Because they are subject to change and not available to 3rd parties, just like the private APIs that Apple has in iOS or the private APIs that Google has in Android, the difference is here they aren't private APIs, they are publicly available and used by non-Google entities.
What exactly entitles you to all-you-can-eat downloads and timeshifting of Google's content?
I'm downloading it anyway, why download it again and use up their bandwidth and mine just to watch it again.
Or the right to strip out the only thing--advertising-- which makes Youtube a sustainable enterprise?
They aren't stripping out anything. If you bothered to look at the APIs or RTFA you would see they aren't providing the API to display the ads and Microsoft are asking them to do that to bring them toward TOS compliance.
So is jailbreaking, you approve of jailbreakers being criminally convicted too? Or using ad-blockers on youtube, more criminal convictions there? What about all the youtube downloaders on the google play store? Seems pretty damn hypocritical to allow them to exist.
iOS is a dominant player and a vehicle for getting Google's services out there, iOS is big enough that not supporting won't kill iOS and it will only be a negative for Google. Supporting Windows Phone gives them next to no benefit at this stage and they are probably in a position to gain by preventing competition in the mobile OS space by doing it.
Likewise, most here that are arguing that Google is entitled to not have it's TOS broken, also think Jailbreaking iOS devices is OK, and the Pirate Bay are heroes.
I'd say most people here use ad-blockers and youtube downloaders too.
You really think that Google has the luxury of not caring?
They have to care. If they allow this app, they set up the next Viacom, Sony, RIAA and MPAA suit against them.
But it just so happens that Google benefits most from an open web
And this is a clear case of preventing an open web, if it were a truly open web then there would be no problem here. There are plenty of youtube downloaders and adblockers out there, why aren't they blocking them?
Which is good, the APIs are all out there and publicly visible.
so rather than build a compliant app Microsoft built an app that breaks Google's TOS by ad blocking and ALLOWING CONTENT DOWNLOAD.
Which are both great things for consumers! In fact ad-blockers are widely used by people as are youtube downloaders, should these be banned and prevented from being used too?
That is only if there is a case where the media stack isn't overtaken and the frames are decrypted by the CDM and returned to the browser but the content producer has some requirement over protecting that pipeline too, the answer is for the CDM to also provide the container. You don't need to go closed-source.
It's standardising breakage... as I've already said, let the content companies and their flunkies do their own work. It shouldn't be part of HTML 5 and it is fundamentally at odds with open source browsers.
It's like any other plugin, just standardizing a plugin interface and not requiring an application to run in a whole platform like Flash or Silverlight which then runs in the browser. None of the DRM is part of HTML5.
Like running WinSCP for the one or two times a year you use it, it's not going to be pinned anywhere.
In which case you type 'winscp' to find it, rather than inefficiently browsing a list.
As for supporting ios, android, OSX, no one does.
Really? Nobody supports those, so nobody has had to - to take your example - help a user to edit an image in OSX?
There's some exceptions on OSX for unis, but there's no 'corporate best practice' for toys.
I'm not talking about 'best practice' i'm saying you seem completely unable to solve this perceived scenario without a Start Menu, and you've proven that is correct.
Linux distros you ssh in, and the users are either too savvy to need support, or never touch anything ever, and aren't allowed to.
So again if you needed to support Linux you wouldn't be able to because it has no start menu.
That's the last of your straw man trolling I'm going to bother with, it's entertaining for a while but only so much.
Firstly there is no strawman, your inability to assist any user that doesn't have a Start Menu just shows your absolute incompetence. Secondly I'm fairly sure you'll continue to bother, but nice try.
Often you aren't exactly sure what you're looking for. For example, what's the name of the thing that optimizes your hard drive? If you know then it's just "defrag". However I typed "defragment" and the search was empty (if I had typed more slowly I might have seen it show up before I typed the "m" to erase it).
Arguably that should come up, though it is categorized so if you bring up Control Panel, which is where you would expect to find such things, (and it's telling that the focus immediately goes to the search box whereas in Windows 7 it doesn't) and then type 'defragment' it comes up. Having it come up in application search would be good too though.
Yeah, just that easy... or not, actually incredibly tedious and starts in a hidden folder with a horrible navigation system for what you're trying to accomplish.
What you're trying to accomplish is a really bizarre situation where you have a tech trying to edit an image on somebody elses computer where he doesn't know which - if any - image editing application is installed, do you go through the entire list to determine whether one is installed at all? In the end for some reason you are having a huge amount of difficulty accomplishing a very simple task without the start menu, which is really just a list of applications, how do you manage on ios, android, OSX or various linux distributions without the start menu?
Slashdot Mirror
We had that on the N900 and it just fucked up the performance of all the running applications, you have to actively manage what applications are and are not running just to keep it usable. Nice for the niche techie market, pain in the ass for everybody else.
All it has to do is be able to stream local content and not be completely locked to google and we will have a winner.
Why? I can't see anything particularly good about it over existing products.
In general, Google isn't blocking them because those creators haven't been suing Google's Android partners and running Anti-Google publicity campaigns.
So this whole thing is just a pretty transparent excuse to use for them to 'get back' at microsoft for that. In any case Google should be indemnifying users of Android from patent issues, it's one thing to say the patents are bogus but their failure to back that up with action suggests they believe otherwise.
So, if Microsoft Office is using a different Windows API than is available to competitors (it is their own product!), that is ok?
Of course it's ok, in fact the same thing exists with Android and iOS, anybody can use them but just be aware they are subject to change and since the vendor is the one changing them they can use them knowing they won't break their own apps, the app store actively blocks distribution of apps that use private APIs for exactly that reason but cydia doesn't and I pretty sure Google Play doesn't. The only one that actually enforces restrictions on private APIs (albeit only through their own channel - which of course is the only official one) is Apple.
They aren't stripping anything, RTFA.
Yeah, but writing a tool to break a website's TOS, and distributing that tool, makes you criminally liable under the DMCA.
Under what part of the DMCA does violating the terms of service of an API make you criminally liable?
It is possible.
It's not only possible, it's highly likely, in fact Apple does the same thing with iOS and Google does the same thing with Android.
Because they are subject to change and not available to 3rd parties, just like the private APIs that Apple has in iOS or the private APIs that Google has in Android, the difference is here they aren't private APIs, they are publicly available and used by non-Google entities.
You agree that Microsoft respects your privacy more than Google?
[citation needed]
Citation that he agrees with the message in the video that Microsoft respects your privacy more than Google.
What exactly entitles you to all-you-can-eat downloads and timeshifting of Google's content?
I'm downloading it anyway, why download it again and use up their bandwidth and mine just to watch it again.
Or the right to strip out the only thing--advertising-- which makes Youtube a sustainable enterprise?
They aren't stripping out anything. If you bothered to look at the APIs or RTFA you would see they aren't providing the API to display the ads and Microsoft are asking them to do that to bring them toward TOS compliance.
So is jailbreaking, you approve of jailbreakers being criminally convicted too? Or using ad-blockers on youtube, more criminal convictions there? What about all the youtube downloaders on the google play store? Seems pretty damn hypocritical to allow them to exist.
The point is that Microsofts application isn't using publicly available API's
Well obviously they are publicly available, otherwise they would be able to use them.
So like IOS, wait.....
iOS is a dominant player and a vehicle for getting Google's services out there, iOS is big enough that not supporting won't kill iOS and it will only be a negative for Google. Supporting Windows Phone gives them next to no benefit at this stage and they are probably in a position to gain by preventing competition in the mobile OS space by doing it.
Yeah but this is Microsoft, yes ad-blocking and video downloading are good for the consumer, but Microsoft is the one doing it so that makes it bad.
In fact Google even allows YouTube downloaders on their own marketplace.
Likewise, most here that are arguing that Google is entitled to not have it's TOS broken, also think Jailbreaking iOS devices is OK, and the Pirate Bay are heroes.
I'd say most people here use ad-blockers and youtube downloaders too.
You really think that Google has the luxury of not caring?
They have to care. If they allow this app, they set up the next Viacom, Sony, RIAA and MPAA suit against them.
Bullshit, they allow youtube downloaders in their own app store!
But it just so happens that Google benefits most from an open web
And this is a clear case of preventing an open web, if it were a truly open web then there would be no problem here. There are plenty of youtube downloaders and adblockers out there, why aren't they blocking them?
There are no hidden APIs here
Which is good, the APIs are all out there and publicly visible.
so rather than build a compliant app Microsoft built an app that breaks Google's TOS by ad blocking and ALLOWING CONTENT DOWNLOAD.
Which are both great things for consumers! In fact ad-blockers are widely used by people as are youtube downloaders, should these be banned and prevented from being used too?
There are not using any API's at all. They're just scraping YT's website.
Can you show me where you got that information? That doesn't seem right.
That's because the onus is on the user to install AdBlock.
And the onus is on the user to install the YouTube app.
Firefox doesn't come packaged with AdBlock.
Windows Phone doesn't come packaged with YouTube.
The user has the choice of whether or not to use AdBlock.
The user has the choice of whether to use the website or the ad-blocking app.
No... I'm right.
Try this
That is only if there is a case where the media stack isn't overtaken and the frames are decrypted by the CDM and returned to the browser but the content producer has some requirement over protecting that pipeline too, the answer is for the CDM to also provide the container. You don't need to go closed-source.
It's standardising breakage... as I've already said, let the content companies and their flunkies do their own work. It shouldn't be part of HTML 5 and it is fundamentally at odds with open source browsers.
It's like any other plugin, just standardizing a plugin interface and not requiring an application to run in a whole platform like Flash or Silverlight which then runs in the browser. None of the DRM is part of HTML5.
Each to their own I guess.
There is oddly enough, a sort of tutorial added later
There is a video tutorial right at the start, the first time a new user logs in, you can't actually skip it.
Like running WinSCP for the one or two times a year you use it, it's not going to be pinned anywhere.
In which case you type 'winscp' to find it, rather than inefficiently browsing a list.
As for supporting ios, android, OSX, no one does.
Really? Nobody supports those, so nobody has had to - to take your example - help a user to edit an image in OSX?
There's some exceptions on OSX for unis, but there's no 'corporate best practice' for toys.
I'm not talking about 'best practice' i'm saying you seem completely unable to solve this perceived scenario without a Start Menu, and you've proven that is correct.
Linux distros you ssh in, and the users are either too savvy to need support, or never touch anything ever, and aren't allowed to.
So again if you needed to support Linux you wouldn't be able to because it has no start menu.
That's the last of your straw man trolling I'm going to bother with, it's entertaining for a while but only so much.
Firstly there is no strawman, your inability to assist any user that doesn't have a Start Menu just shows your absolute incompetence. Secondly I'm fairly sure you'll continue to bother, but nice try.
Often you aren't exactly sure what you're looking for. For example, what's the name of the thing that optimizes your hard drive? If you know then it's just "defrag". However I typed "defragment" and the search was empty (if I had typed more slowly I might have seen it show up before I typed the "m" to erase it).
Arguably that should come up, though it is categorized so if you bring up Control Panel, which is where you would expect to find such things, (and it's telling that the focus immediately goes to the search box whereas in Windows 7 it doesn't) and then type 'defragment' it comes up. Having it come up in application search would be good too though.
Yeah, just that easy... or not, actually incredibly tedious and starts in a hidden folder with a horrible navigation system for what you're trying to accomplish.
What you're trying to accomplish is a really bizarre situation where you have a tech trying to edit an image on somebody elses computer where he doesn't know which - if any - image editing application is installed, do you go through the entire list to determine whether one is installed at all? In the end for some reason you are having a huge amount of difficulty accomplishing a very simple task without the start menu, which is really just a list of applications, how do you manage on ios, android, OSX or various linux distributions without the start menu?