Or maybe it's because the iphone was the subject of the study and since the iphone4 is the most common smartphone (im pretty sure that's correct? if not i retract the statement) it would be the ideal choice as you would likely need the same chassis and hardware to get consistent results, so choosing the most common phone would be the logical thing to do. Given the methodology it looks like it could be equally applied to just about any smartphone though.
try this test: Write down a verbose description of the design, using as few actual measurements as possible. For the iPad, this would be something like "A rectangular platform with a glossy front surface. The front has a touch screen surrounded by a bezel roughly half an inch wide. There is a single concave button on a short side of the bezel with a picture of a house on it. The reverse is nondescript, with few markings except an Apple logo. In profile, the device has an overall flat appearance and curved edges, and is roughly a quarter of an inch thick." Now write one for the Galaxy Tab, and the 2001 tablet. Compare all three. If two descriptions are mostly the same (in meaning), the products are likely indistinguishable.
Funny, you should probably try that test with this or this or any one of these.
What would be the net result even if you could? At a glance you could quite easily mistake the AppleTV for a Western Digital Elements, doesn't really have any impact though. I bought a macbook air because of what it functionally is (running OSX), if samsung came out with an notebook that looked the same that wouldn't have changed my mind. Same with the ipad, i bought it because that's what i wanted - i don't particularly like the iphone but i wanted iOS apps - and a galaxy tablet would not have worked.
But it is irrelevant, we are talking about service THAT USE THE SERVICE THAT IS DOWN.
And playing music and video from your device and running local applications IS NOT USING THAT SERVICE you fool. How retarded are you to not know that?!
Nope. It's under the iCloud marketing umbrella but uses different servers.
Oh right, so now you're even disagreeing with Apple. Where is the service hosted then? And how is it separate from iCloud? But of course you don't know, just another false claim because you're desperate not to be wrong.
I give up (again!) trying to help you understand this simple point you keep deviating from, or for that matter understanding what iCloud is or is not.
You're the one who is so clearly ignorant of what iCloud is that when i said you won't be able to use iCloud services if they are down responded with this utter stupidity: Nope, I can still play music, or see videos, or use apps that have had data synced by iCloud.
Which, if you had any idea what iCloud is, you would know are not iCloud services, playing music or videos or using local apps is not a feature of iCloud so you shouldn't be surprised that such things work when iCloud is down, yet for some reason you are.
I give up, you are missing the connection. It was not about music, it was about features. an iCloud feature is music, a BES feature is messaging.
It's you that doesn't get it, an iCloud feature is music, that is not the only feature of icloud, it has many features and if icloud goes down then you lose all of them. For example 'Find my friends' when icloud goes down? Nope, can't do it.
And it doesn't on the blackberry either, you may not be able to email, but you can still call
You do not understand. On iOS I can still play music even if iCloud is down.
And on BB you can still play music even if BES/BIS is down.
There is no FEATURE that does not work even if all of Apple's revers explode. Siri being down means you create a calendar entry by hand; it's just a UI alternative and does not block me from creating calendar entries.
I'm not talking about whole different alternative paths of use.
I already gave you an example that you could have looked up if you weren't sure, 'Find My Friends' and 'Find My Phone' are all a part of that service and will not work if those servers are down.
if iCloud is down you can't use 'find my friends' or 'find my phone'
I don't think that is accurate, those are not part of iCloud.
See the website, it's all the same thing now.
gees if your statement were actually true they would only run the servers 50% of the time now wouldn't they.
No, because then things like iTunes transfers would not happen instantly. It would work but not be as "magical".
So quite clearly your statement that the benefit would be the same even if the servers only worked 50% of the time is false, the benefit would be less.
How so? Apple's iOS5 devices don't rely on iCloud any less than WP7 devices rely on Skydrive.
Again, Apple leans heavily on local storage as primary with cloud storage being secondary. I'm not sure to what degree WP7 does.
Why would you say Apple is relying much less on the network nature of the cloud than other devices or systems if you admittedly don't even know the degree to which those other systems rely on such infrastructure?
I understand the point you're trying to make, that iOS isn't as reliant on access to Apple's servers for its core features as Blackberrys are, and i wouldn't dispute that, if i had concerns about the reliability of network infrastructure i would choose an iOS (or one of the many other alternatives) over a BB for this reason. However my point is that many of the new features of iOS5, the big selling points, do rely on that and will not work (as in you will need some other kind of workaround) without that access.
The operation of the device does not RELY on them being up any one moment.
And it doesn't on the blackberry either, you may not be able to email, but you can still call, in exactly the same way as if iCloud is down you can't use 'find my friends' or 'find my phone', but you can call the device.
The benefit that comes from iCloud would be just as good even if the servers operated only 50% of the time.
Yes, i'm sure everyone would agree that it would be just as good if it only worked 50% of the time as opposed to 100% of the time, gees if your statement were actually true they would only run the servers 50% of the time now wouldn't they.
The point is that Apple is relying much less on the network nature of the cloud than other devices or systems.
How so? Apple's iOS5 devices don't rely on iCloud any less than WP7 devices rely on Skydrive.
So what happens when you want to zoom in? Do you scroll around that 'page'? If so what's the point of having it as a page? And if not then how do you manage the content that is to the left and right when you're zoomed in? I'm assuming the stuff below and above what you're looking at would be reflowed into next and previous pages.
But not CONSTANT access. Remember the context, BBM going down - a momentary thing, NOT permanent.
Whether it's constant or intermittent makes no difference, if access to those servers isn't available when you need it then you can't use those features.
I think it's pretty clear what he meant, that most of the new iOS5 features require access to Apple's servers, so if those servers go down or you can't access them for whatever reason then those features simply will not work, those features are based on 'cloud' technologies and won't work without them.
that great new feature on the 4S, the voice assistant, is ALSO all cloud-based.
Really more service based, but yes that requires a data connection.
No, it's not just a data connection, you need a data connection that can access Apple's 'cloud', so if for whatever reason (routing issue, server outage, etc...) you cannot access Apple's servers you cannot use Siri. Also what's the distinction between 'cloud-based' and 'service-based'?
But you can use the system without Siri, that's just a convenience. It's not like Siri going down prevents you from doing ANYTHING you could do otherwise.
That's kind of the point though, the major strengths of iOS5 are in its use of 'cloud computing', it would have been a pretty bland release without that.
I haven't seen many. Cyanogen seem to have ROMs for most of the current crop - http://www.cyanogenmod.com/devices. Can you link to a few locked-down examples?
You really haven't seen many devices that you have to root before being able to install cyanogenmod?
Most users don't want control. They want to get on with what they want to do without having to configure everything themselves.
I definitely agree with this, as much as 'control for the user' is touted as a benefit of open source the prevalence and success of devices that don't offer this proves that the user does not want control, all they want is for the device to do what it is supposed to do, they want someone else to take care of the management and configuration of it for them.
You can program in C / C++ for Android, but you're still running everything through Goggle's ripoff virtual machine, with no performance benefit over using Java.
Are you sure you understand what C/C++ is? If you're programming in C/C++ you are running it native (see NDK, clue is in the title), which means that code is not running on the virtual machine.
I live within a 5-minute drive of over a dozen redbox kiosks, and so my current "acceptable" 24-hour rental fee is 1 USD.
That does completely ignore the fact that it's more difficult than pirating. I'd much rather pay the extra 99c and not have to do a 10minute round trip in the car.
The DMCA be damned, I bought the movie, I'll watch it however I want.
Damn straight! It's the movie industry's obsession with attempting to control it even after they've sold it to you.
what if it were a natural form of DRM? E.g. your name is inserted, encoded, as a watermark somewhere that lets the copy be traced back to you.
Yeah cos that would be impossible to get rid of.
Obviously. But now define affordable.
Where I'm from, $4.99 for a movie would not be considered affordable. For that matter, $1.99 wouldn't be
Where do you live the $1.99 isn't affordable for a movie?! Gees most people find that to be affordable for a song on iTunes.
But isn't it always going to be harder?
No, load up iTunes, search for the song, download. You'd do the same for movies.
For the free alternatives, there is no such hassle.
For a normal person putting in payment details and monitoring spend isn't a hassle, it's very basic and requires almost no effort, again, see the popularity of iTunes.
You can't prevent me from giving away a copy of a movie i purchased without creating an inconvenience when i want to use it legally, so get rid of DRM.
Make it affordable, obviously.
Make it accessible, if it's harder than downloading a torrent then you'll fail, people will pay but you can't make it harder than getting it for free.
Make it global, nothing is more annoying (ok maybe not entirely true) than finding out you can't get particular content because your region isn't licensed for it.
Which repositories require specifically the GPL as opposed to GPL-compatible free software licenses in general?
GNU Savannah just says "Use a license compatible with the GNU GPL, and use the "or any later version" formulation in your license notices."
So GNU Savannah does NOT require specifically the GPL as opposed to GPL-compatible free software licenses, in fact the passage you quoted explicitly states that.
These days users consider their accounts to have been 'hacked' if there is any unauthorized use, like if they leave their smartphone lying around and a friend posts a status update from it that seems to be considered being 'hacked'.
Slashdot Mirror
Or maybe it's because the iphone was the subject of the study and since the iphone4 is the most common smartphone (im pretty sure that's correct? if not i retract the statement) it would be the ideal choice as you would likely need the same chassis and hardware to get consistent results, so choosing the most common phone would be the logical thing to do. Given the methodology it looks like it could be equally applied to just about any smartphone though.
If RIM is going to switch OSes, why wouldn't they go with Android?
Yeah why not just do what everyone else is doing.
far larger app and developer base
Blackberry runtime for Android apps. They've already tapped into that community to a degree.
try this test: Write down a verbose description of the design, using as few actual measurements as possible. For the iPad, this would be something like "A rectangular platform with a glossy front surface. The front has a touch screen surrounded by a bezel roughly half an inch wide. There is a single concave button on a short side of the bezel with a picture of a house on it. The reverse is nondescript, with few markings except an Apple logo. In profile, the device has an overall flat appearance and curved edges, and is roughly a quarter of an inch thick." Now write one for the Galaxy Tab, and the 2001 tablet. Compare all three. If two descriptions are mostly the same (in meaning), the products are likely indistinguishable.
Funny, you should probably try that test with this or this or any one of these.
Could you, at a glance, mistake one for another?
What would be the net result even if you could? At a glance you could quite easily mistake the AppleTV for a Western Digital Elements, doesn't really have any impact though. I bought a macbook air because of what it functionally is (running OSX), if samsung came out with an notebook that looked the same that wouldn't have changed my mind. Same with the ipad, i bought it because that's what i wanted - i don't particularly like the iphone but i wanted iOS apps - and a galaxy tablet would not have worked.
But it is irrelevant, we are talking about service THAT USE THE SERVICE THAT IS DOWN.
And playing music and video from your device and running local applications IS NOT USING THAT SERVICE you fool. How retarded are you to not know that?!
Nope. It's under the iCloud marketing umbrella but uses different servers.
Oh right, so now you're even disagreeing with Apple. Where is the service hosted then? And how is it separate from iCloud? But of course you don't know, just another false claim because you're desperate not to be wrong.
I give up (again!) trying to help you understand this simple point you keep deviating from, or for that matter understanding what iCloud is or is not.
You're the one who is so clearly ignorant of what iCloud is that when i said you won't be able to use iCloud services if they are down responded with this utter stupidity:
Nope, I can still play music, or see videos, or use apps that have had data synced by iCloud.
Which, if you had any idea what iCloud is, you would know are not iCloud services, playing music or videos or using local apps is not a feature of iCloud so you shouldn't be surprised that such things work when iCloud is down, yet for some reason you are.
if icloud goes down then you lose all of them
Nope, I can still play music, or see videos, or use apps that have had data synced by iCloud.
You can do all of those things on a blackberry if BES or BIS services go down too, that's no different.
For example 'Find my friends' when icloud goes down?
Yes, that is not part of iCloud.
Except that it is, and it's really really easy to find that out yet somehow you seem incapable of it.
I give up, you are missing the connection. It was not about music, it was about features. an iCloud feature is music, a BES feature is messaging.
It's you that doesn't get it, an iCloud feature is music, that is not the only feature of icloud, it has many features and if icloud goes down then you lose all of them. For example 'Find my friends' when icloud goes down? Nope, can't do it.
And it doesn't on the blackberry either, you may not be able to email, but you can still call
You do not understand. On iOS I can still play music even if iCloud is down.
And on BB you can still play music even if BES/BIS is down.
There is no FEATURE that does not work even if all of Apple's revers explode. Siri being down means you create a calendar entry by hand; it's just a UI alternative and does not block me from creating calendar entries.
I'm not talking about whole different alternative paths of use.
I already gave you an example that you could have looked up if you weren't sure, 'Find My Friends' and 'Find My Phone' are all a part of that service and will not work if those servers are down.
if iCloud is down you can't use 'find my friends' or 'find my phone'
I don't think that is accurate, those are not part of iCloud.
See the website, it's all the same thing now.
gees if your statement were actually true they would only run the servers 50% of the time now wouldn't they.
No, because then things like iTunes transfers would not happen instantly. It would work but not be as "magical".
So quite clearly your statement that the benefit would be the same even if the servers only worked 50% of the time is false, the benefit would be less.
How so? Apple's iOS5 devices don't rely on iCloud any less than WP7 devices rely on Skydrive.
Again, Apple leans heavily on local storage as primary with cloud storage being secondary. I'm not sure to what degree WP7 does.
Why would you say Apple is relying much less on the network nature of the cloud than other devices or systems if you admittedly don't even know the degree to which those other systems rely on such infrastructure?
I understand the point you're trying to make, that iOS isn't as reliant on access to Apple's servers for its core features as Blackberrys are, and i wouldn't dispute that, if i had concerns about the reliability of network infrastructure i would choose an iOS (or one of the many other alternatives) over a BB for this reason. However my point is that many of the new features of iOS5, the big selling points, do rely on that and will not work (as in you will need some other kind of workaround) without that access.
WHAT THE FUCK IS BBM?
Blackberry Messenger, thanks google.
The operation of the device does not RELY on them being up any one moment.
And it doesn't on the blackberry either, you may not be able to email, but you can still call, in exactly the same way as if iCloud is down you can't use 'find my friends' or 'find my phone', but you can call the device.
The benefit that comes from iCloud would be just as good even if the servers operated only 50% of the time.
Yes, i'm sure everyone would agree that it would be just as good if it only worked 50% of the time as opposed to 100% of the time, gees if your statement were actually true they would only run the servers 50% of the time now wouldn't they.
The point is that Apple is relying much less on the network nature of the cloud than other devices or systems.
How so? Apple's iOS5 devices don't rely on iCloud any less than WP7 devices rely on Skydrive.
So what happens when you want to zoom in? Do you scroll around that 'page'? If so what's the point of having it as a page? And if not then how do you manage the content that is to the left and right when you're zoomed in? I'm assuming the stuff below and above what you're looking at would be reflowed into next and previous pages.
But not CONSTANT access. Remember the context, BBM going down - a momentary thing, NOT permanent.
Whether it's constant or intermittent makes no difference, if access to those servers isn't available when you need it then you can't use those features.
Forgetting that iOS 5 is all cloud-based,
It's not cloud based.
I think it's pretty clear what he meant, that most of the new iOS5 features require access to Apple's servers, so if those servers go down or you can't access them for whatever reason then those features simply will not work, those features are based on 'cloud' technologies and won't work without them.
that great new feature on the 4S, the voice assistant, is ALSO all cloud-based.
Really more service based, but yes that requires a data connection.
No, it's not just a data connection, you need a data connection that can access Apple's 'cloud', so if for whatever reason (routing issue, server outage, etc...) you cannot access Apple's servers you cannot use Siri. Also what's the distinction between 'cloud-based' and 'service-based'?
But you can use the system without Siri, that's just a convenience. It's not like Siri going down prevents you from doing ANYTHING you could do otherwise.
That's kind of the point though, the major strengths of iOS5 are in its use of 'cloud computing', it would have been a pretty bland release without that.
errm...could it be because of MS's past history of tying everything in their ecosystem?
Yeah i can't think of any other companies that do that.
I haven't seen many. Cyanogen seem to have ROMs for most of the current crop - http://www.cyanogenmod.com/devices. Can you link to a few locked-down examples?
You really haven't seen many devices that you have to root before being able to install cyanogenmod?
Most users don't want control. They want to get on with what they want to do without having to configure everything themselves.
I definitely agree with this, as much as 'control for the user' is touted as a benefit of open source the prevalence and success of devices that don't offer this proves that the user does not want control, all they want is for the device to do what it is supposed to do, they want someone else to take care of the management and configuration of it for them.
You need much higher performance when your entire OS is Java based.
Pretty sure the Linux kernel isn't written in Java.
You can program in C / C++ for Android, but you're still running everything through Goggle's ripoff virtual machine, with no performance benefit over using Java.
Are you sure you understand what C/C++ is? If you're programming in C/C++ you are running it native (see NDK, clue is in the title), which means that code is not running on the virtual machine.
I live within a 5-minute drive of over a dozen redbox kiosks, and so my current "acceptable" 24-hour rental fee is 1 USD.
That does completely ignore the fact that it's more difficult than pirating. I'd much rather pay the extra 99c and not have to do a 10minute round trip in the car.
The DMCA be damned, I bought the movie, I'll watch it however I want.
Damn straight! It's the movie industry's obsession with attempting to control it even after they've sold it to you.
what if it were a natural form of DRM? E.g. your name is inserted, encoded, as a watermark somewhere that lets the copy be traced back to you.
Yeah cos that would be impossible to get rid of.
Obviously. But now define affordable.
Where I'm from, $4.99 for a movie would not be considered affordable. For that matter, $1.99 wouldn't be
Where do you live the $1.99 isn't affordable for a movie?! Gees most people find that to be affordable for a song on iTunes.
But isn't it always going to be harder?
No, load up iTunes, search for the song, download. You'd do the same for movies.
For the free alternatives, there is no such hassle.
For a normal person putting in payment details and monitoring spend isn't a hassle, it's very basic and requires almost no effort, again, see the popularity of iTunes.
You can't prevent me from giving away a copy of a movie i purchased without creating an inconvenience when i want to use it legally, so get rid of DRM.
Make it affordable, obviously.
Make it accessible, if it's harder than downloading a torrent then you'll fail, people will pay but you can't make it harder than getting it for free.
Make it global, nothing is more annoying (ok maybe not entirely true) than finding out you can't get particular content because your region isn't licensed for it.
Which repositories require specifically the GPL as opposed to GPL-compatible free software licenses in general?
GNU Savannah just says "Use a license compatible with the GNU GPL, and use the "or any later version" formulation in your license notices."
So GNU Savannah does NOT require specifically the GPL as opposed to GPL-compatible free software licenses, in fact the passage you quoted explicitly states that.
Also: Whenever life is going well, praise the lord for your good fortune. Whenever your life hits a snag, your faith is being "tested".
How convenient.
These days users consider their accounts to have been 'hacked' if there is any unauthorized use, like if they leave their smartphone lying around and a friend posts a status update from it that seems to be considered being 'hacked'.
No way.
No way? He was one of the few people that built up one of the most influential technology companies in the world.
But Apple would be nothing without the hard work of the faceless employees who actually gave form to Jobs's ideas.
Yes obviously, i don't think Steve Jobs could successfully run Apple without any employees.