This is what typically happens when you mention quality. A car is quality based on the luxury features, the engine, the chasis (the ability to corner), the feel of the ride, etc... That's what defines quality. That's like saying ten hundred dollar bills is the same amount of money as ten fives because I'm only going to count the paper.
Your original statement boils down to "if you don't count any of the expensive to make features of a car to be worth anything then there is no difference between expensive cars and cheap cars". As for reliability that's nice. And I'll agree the Asians are excellent there. Mercedes for example picks up your car, drops off a loaner, and always honors their warranty. Poor reliability effects Mercedes more than it does the purchaser.
I have to get on highways fairly regularly where acceleration matters. Low acceleration is for me quite dangerous.
As for Armani teeshirts I looked them up. They seem to go for about $25-40 not $200. As far as the quality not surprisingly there is a huge difference. The quality of a cotton is defined by the ratio of high quality long even fibers to the short ragged fibers. Good tee shirts have 0 of the other type, bad cheap $1 tee shirts are mostly the short ones. For a printed tee shirt the smoothness of the knit is a defining feature since this influences how the ink lays and thus looks.
-- more expensive cotton -- higher reject rate -- more expensive weaving process
Let me just add. The life expectancy of a smartphone is not 2 years. It is 11.5 months. Now that includes: warranty replacement, extended warranty, insurance, buying new phones early and early terminators of their contract. The computer market never had turnover this high. That's why this is so exciting for device manufacturers.
As for extending lifetime of devices. Now that devices are $700 there is a vibrant resale market and the average consumer knows this. Increasing the price to a level that creates a vibrant 2nd hand market has extended the life of phones. The same way it does for cars.
It just seems that a majority of those who are attracted to Apple products are not tinkerers and hobbyists (among other things), but people who view computers and phones as an appliance.
Well of course that's true of the overwhelming majority on just about every phone out there. The exceptions might be some experimental phones with incomplete operating systems of alpha versions of innovative hardware. What's a more interesting question is what phone attracts the tinkerers and hobbyists. I think Android because of the wonderful mod community. They also have terrific hardware diversity. On the other hand OSX attracts a majority of the computer tinkerers at this point, essentially taking a good chunk of what could have been the desktop Linux market.
Sure they are. There are wonderful BI features in spreadsheets today that didn't exist 10 years ago. There are wonderful multimedia and collaboration features in word processing that didn't exist 10 years ago. You just don't use those features. Which means you shouldn't be running a premium suite.
You should take a look at the last decade of server support for Office. Office as a product line is way, way ahead of where it was 10 years ago. You don't use those features though which means you probably should be dropping down from a premium office suite.
If you aren't a demanding user and thus aren't willing to pay much... why should Microsoft care if they lose you?
When the PC revolution started getting PCs working was far more expensive and far more difficult than getting the developer SDK working on that expensive locked down toy. Maybe the people in line aren't the only ones you should be looking at regarding trading convenience for freedom.
Foundation handles the development. Corporation pays people and collects revenue. This is an artifact of tax law in the USA, Mozilla is still run by Foundation which is non profit.
The line of logic is simple: repairability is a plus since it cuts their repair costs. Repair costs a relatively larger on the phones than the computer and Apple loses money on phone warranties. That being said, they are willing to lose money for thin and light.
If you think a run of the mill Toyota or Ford offers anything comparable to a BMW or Mercedes then you aren't going to like expensive clothing. Just look at the seat adjustment features on the Mercedes and tell me where you can find that on your Toyota. The standard mercedes does 0-60 in 4.5 seconds your Toyota doesn't. The automatic transmission is 7 speed, not 4 like your lower end cars. I'm hard pressed to think of a single feature that's comparable between a $20k and an $80k car.
As for Armani they make suits. They specialize in designing terrific fits so that after tailoring the suit looks fantastic. That isn't done for jeans and tee-shirts. I'm not even sure why they sell them.
I have no idea what good turn by turn is for Europe. I was giving Magallian as an example for people in North America. I'm sure there are mapping apps for European countries.
As for the downsides of turn-by-turn GP was specifically asking for turn-by-turn. As for maps I haven't seen much integration outside of application and it would be really useful. So I'm hard pressed to see what I lose by Google based services using Google and Apple adding their own map to the pile. If you are saying that Apple does worse mapping than Google, yeah they probably do. Apple's should get better. But at the end of the day say by 2018 I suspect that given the company's personalities:
a) Apple maps has wonderful easy to use automatic features with nice integration with the rest of the OS b) Google maps are much more detailed and accurate less integration but better use of outside services
Or, you can get an Android phone and have it all integrated.
I don't necessarily want it all integrated the way Google integrated it. I don't use Android but for example I use Google docs for collaborative writing and because I don't use Google mail with my professional account I can't have contacts in docs. Google was tying together my blog with my workplace contacts.
Hell no. I don't trust Google's type of integration which is around tying together things in ways best suited for advertisers.
Here is their quote in response to whether there would be an iOS 6 app.
We believe Google Maps are the most comprehensive, accurate and easy-to-use maps in the world. Our goal is to make Google Maps available to everyone who wants to use it, regardless of device, browser, or operating system.
This has been taken as "yes we are working on it". They gave the same answer in response to the YouTube issue which is currently the #1 app.
Agreed it is very good. I didn't know about some of those switches but I just "man open" and got a ton of new ones. The OSX command line has gotten very good. When I first started with OSX (10.1) there wasn't good support for lots of HFS features so you had to careful with even basic things like copying.
Apple does not have a problem with functionality. Virtually every application on the iPhone has tons of competitors. The problem with the Kindle app was selling without Apple getting their cut.
Very low. Apple is not in the mapping business. They were unhappy with Google using crippled iPhone mapping to sell Android phones. Having Google spend lots of money to create a superior iPhone product is to their advantage.
iPhone for several years has cached maps. You don't need a continuous a continuous connection as someone mentioned below. My wife does that in Europe all the time.
Hopefully, you'll be able to specify it as your default mapping App for integration with contacts, calendars, photos...
Very doubtful. Apple does not like letting people change defaults. The other two are likely. Apple is in the phone business not the map business. They didn't like Google using maps to sell Android phones, I don't think they really care what mapping people use. Conversely Google is in the map business because it sells advertising services.
I'd pretty much decided on the iPhone 5, but now that's entirely dependent on Google releasing a Maps App for it. Not a smart move by Apple.
If mapping matters that much to you there are lots of mapping apps better than either Apple's or Google's like Magellians which are already in the iPhone store.
Yes you are allowed to provide your engine. See Opera. What so far they aren't allowing any application to do is use a high power high speed general purpose javascript interpreter. No one has gotten approved for that because of the security risks. Through Trident (IE) is working with Apple and may get approval.
4) Most users are happy with Apple maps which starts off solid though a bit behind Google maps and improves radically. Google maps does well on the iPhone store as do other niche mapping applications like hopstop. Over the next 3 years the advantages of integration cause Apple maps to pull way ahead of Google from a usability perspective so that Google's maps become a niche application for specific subsets of data (like street level view) that Apple is unlikely to ever be close to.
Slashdot Mirror
This is what typically happens when you mention quality. A car is quality based on the luxury features, the engine, the chasis (the ability to corner), the feel of the ride, etc... That's what defines quality. That's like saying ten hundred dollar bills is the same amount of money as ten fives because I'm only going to count the paper.
Your original statement boils down to "if you don't count any of the expensive to make features of a car to be worth anything then there is no difference between expensive cars and cheap cars". As for reliability that's nice. And I'll agree the Asians are excellent there. Mercedes for example picks up your car, drops off a loaner, and always honors their warranty. Poor reliability effects Mercedes more than it does the purchaser.
I have to get on highways fairly regularly where acceleration matters. Low acceleration is for me quite dangerous.
As for Armani teeshirts I looked them up. They seem to go for about $25-40 not $200. As far as the quality not surprisingly there is a huge difference. The quality of a cotton is defined by the ratio of high quality long even fibers to the short ragged fibers. Good tee shirts have 0 of the other type, bad cheap $1 tee shirts are mostly the short ones. For a printed tee shirt the smoothness of the knit is a defining feature since this influences how the ink lays and thus looks.
-- more expensive cotton
-- higher reject rate
-- more expensive weaving process
That's what you are paying for.
Let me just add. The life expectancy of a smartphone is not 2 years. It is 11.5 months. Now that includes: warranty replacement, extended warranty, insurance, buying new phones early and early terminators of their contract. The computer market never had turnover this high. That's why this is so exciting for device manufacturers.
As for extending lifetime of devices. Now that devices are $700 there is a vibrant resale market and the average consumer knows this. Increasing the price to a level that creates a vibrant 2nd hand market has extended the life of phones. The same way it does for cars.
It just seems that a majority of those who are attracted to Apple products are not tinkerers and hobbyists (among other things), but people who view computers and phones as an appliance.
Well of course that's true of the overwhelming majority on just about every phone out there. The exceptions might be some experimental phones with incomplete operating systems of alpha versions of innovative hardware. What's a more interesting question is what phone attracts the tinkerers and hobbyists. I think Android because of the wonderful mod community. They also have terrific hardware diversity. On the other hand OSX attracts a majority of the computer tinkerers at this point, essentially taking a good chunk of what could have been the desktop Linux market.
I'd be cautious, we just don't know.
The analogy there would be owning the hardware. And yes if they owned the hardware that would be a non issue.
Sure they are. There are wonderful BI features in spreadsheets today that didn't exist 10 years ago. There are wonderful multimedia and collaboration features in word processing that didn't exist 10 years ago. You just don't use those features. Which means you shouldn't be running a premium suite.
Microsoft owns the OS. They can handle hacked versions of Office rather easily.
You should take a look at the last decade of server support for Office. Office as a product line is way, way ahead of where it was 10 years ago. You don't use those features though which means you probably should be dropping down from a premium office suite.
If you aren't a demanding user and thus aren't willing to pay much... why should Microsoft care if they lose you?
When the PC revolution started getting PCs working was far more expensive and far more difficult than getting the developer SDK working on that expensive locked down toy. Maybe the people in line aren't the only ones you should be looking at regarding trading convenience for freedom.
Find another 50m people who agree with you about being will to pay and talk to Microsoft.
It is happening in both consumer, small business and enterprise. Many stats have the OO family around 18% marketshare.
Foundation handles the development. Corporation pays people and collects revenue. This is an artifact of tax law in the USA, Mozilla is still run by Foundation which is non profit.
The line of logic is simple: repairability is a plus since it cuts their repair costs. Repair costs a relatively larger on the phones than the computer and Apple loses money on phone warranties. That being said, they are willing to lose money for thin and light.
If you think a run of the mill Toyota or Ford offers anything comparable to a BMW or Mercedes then you aren't going to like expensive clothing. Just look at the seat adjustment features on the Mercedes and tell me where you can find that on your Toyota. The standard mercedes does 0-60 in 4.5 seconds your Toyota doesn't. The automatic transmission is 7 speed, not 4 like your lower end cars. I'm hard pressed to think of a single feature that's comparable between a $20k and an $80k car.
As for Armani they make suits. They specialize in designing terrific fits so that after tailoring the suit looks fantastic. That isn't done for jeans and tee-shirts. I'm not even sure why they sell them.
I have no idea what good turn by turn is for Europe. I was giving Magallian as an example for people in North America. I'm sure there are mapping apps for European countries.
As for the downsides of turn-by-turn GP was specifically asking for turn-by-turn. As for maps I haven't seen much integration outside of application and it would be really useful. So I'm hard pressed to see what I lose by Google based services using Google and Apple adding their own map to the pile. If you are saying that Apple does worse mapping than Google, yeah they probably do. Apple's should get better. But at the end of the day say by 2018 I suspect that given the company's personalities:
a) Apple maps has wonderful easy to use automatic features with nice integration with the rest of the OS
b) Google maps are much more detailed and accurate less integration but better use of outside services
Or, you can get an Android phone and have it all integrated.
I don't necessarily want it all integrated the way Google integrated it. I don't use Android but for example I use Google docs for collaborative writing and because I don't use Google mail with my professional account I can't have contacts in docs. Google was tying together my blog with my workplace contacts.
Hell no. I don't trust Google's type of integration which is around tying together things in ways best suited for advertisers.
Here is their quote in response to whether there would be an iOS 6 app.
This has been taken as "yes we are working on it". They gave the same answer in response to the YouTube issue which is currently the #1 app.
Agreed it is very good. I didn't know about some of those switches but I just "man open" and got a ton of new ones. The OSX command line has gotten very good. When I first started with OSX (10.1) there wasn't good support for lots of HFS features so you had to careful with even basic things like copying.
You are right, my memory was wrong. Still it is a PCL printer so same thing applies just send generic PCL 4 to it.
Yes they were. But the license forbid turn by turn. The problem was Google not Apple.
Yes. Apple is a public company. They release data on how they make money every quarter.
Apple does not have a problem with functionality. Virtually every application on the iPhone has tons of competitors. The problem with the Kindle app was selling without Apple getting their cut.
Very low. Apple is not in the mapping business. They were unhappy with Google using crippled iPhone mapping to sell Android phones. Having Google spend lots of money to create a superior iPhone product is to their advantage.
Apple didn't want to pay a high licensing fee for ad free youtube. That's different than not wanting to maintain it.
iPhone for several years has cached maps. You don't need a continuous a continuous connection as someone mentioned below. My wife does that in Europe all the time.
Hopefully, you'll be able to specify it as your default mapping App for integration with contacts, calendars, photos...
Very doubtful. Apple does not like letting people change defaults. The other two are likely. Apple is in the phone business not the map business. They didn't like Google using maps to sell Android phones, I don't think they really care what mapping people use. Conversely Google is in the map business because it sells advertising services.
I'd pretty much decided on the iPhone 5, but now that's entirely dependent on Google releasing a Maps App for it. Not a smart move by Apple.
If mapping matters that much to you there are lots of mapping apps better than either Apple's or Google's like Magellians which are already in the iPhone store.
Yes you are allowed to provide your engine. See Opera. What so far they aren't allowing any application to do is use a high power high speed general purpose javascript interpreter. No one has gotten approved for that because of the security risks. Through Trident (IE) is working with Apple and may get approval.
I think 4
4) Most users are happy with Apple maps which starts off solid though a bit behind Google maps and improves radically. Google maps does well on the iPhone store as do other niche mapping applications like hopstop. Over the next 3 years the advantages of integration cause Apple maps to pull way ahead of Google from a usability perspective so that Google's maps become a niche application for specific subsets of data (like street level view) that Apple is unlikely to ever be close to.