I think you go a bit too far. There are many people who say things like "I'm sick of buying a whole album for one song" or who disparage popular music who then go buy single tracks and indie music at iTunes and eMusic. And there really are people who think that copyright violation (which, and I'm not saying this to condone it, isn't 'theft') is a way to hurt "the man". They're mistaken about that, and there may be many people who are being totally hypocritical when they say things like that, but I think you go too far by implying that this is the sole or even primary motivation for everyone on that side of the discussion.
Ripping off a song via Kazaa or Allofmp3 instead of buying indie music doesn't support independent music or hurt the RIAA any more than ripping off a copy of Word instead of using another product supports independent and free software developers or hurts Microsoft. But people DO honestly believe it does... in both cases.
And apparently some people believe that it advances understanding to attack people who may be honestly mistaken and giggle like a schoolgirl about it. It's probably worthwhile to think about whether that might also be an error.
Personally, I think Apple made a mistake releasing the iPhone without a native API. I won't be buying one because of it, and I agree that it's inconsistent with the spirit of the GPLv2... but Apple's totally compliant with the letter of the license they agreed to when they incorporated KHTML in Safari. Not only that, but they have completely and utterly bent over backwards for the free and open source software community.
* They were only obligated by the GPL to release the shipped versions of KHTML. When they were attacked for not going *far* beyond their obligations, what did they do? They went ahead and did it.
* Not only that, but they're continuing to release updates to the rest of the open source software they're using, not just the GPLed stuff.
* And they're open-sourcing their own code.
* And they've been doing this all the way back to Mac OS X 10.0.
Yes, I know Apple has a history of being downright weird about secrecy. That makes this long term commitment to free and open source software even more encouraging.
So what's the FSF do? Make veiled threats about what Apple might be hiding in the iPhone... even though it's all hidden in plain sight if you care to look.
Peter Brown, executive director of the FSF said, "Today, Steve Jobs and Apple release a product crippled with proprietary software and digital restrictions: crippled, because a device that isn't under the control of its owner works against the interests of its owner. We know that Apple has built its operating system, OS X, and its web browser Safari, using GPL-covered work - it will be interesting to see to what extent the iPhone uses GPLed software."
That's Peter Brown, executive director of the FSF, saying "will be interesting to see".
BSD zealot strikes again?
I see no references to BSD in the original announcement, the article referenced from slashdot, or the summary.
The real point is that the government has provided the RIAA with a monopoly on certain goods by the granting of copyrights
The government provides the creators with a temporary monopoly on reproduction of their works by granting of copyrights.
The creators have the ability to transfer their copyrights, license them (exclusively or otherwise), or manage them themselves.
Because of other aspects of the economy, it turns out that many artists have exclusive licenses with recording and production companies (labels), and through an organization they are members of they engage in political and legal actions to enforce those copyrights.
But it's not the RIAA that has the monopoly. Nobody buys music from the RIAA.
Going back to the original question, if you want to fight the RIAA you need to do something to reduce their income, influence, or power. The best way to do that is to support labels that are not RIAA members, and self-publishing musicians and musicians who contract with independent labels.
You can't "hurt the RIAA" or "promote independent music" by buying music from allofmp3, though. Allofmp3 isn't a neutron bomb that kills RIAA labels and leaves indie labels standing. Every time you buy a song from allofmp3 instead of emusic or cdbaby, you're really strengthening the RIAA... because that lost sale is *worth more*, comparatively, to the indies than to the majors.
If you want to hurt the major labels and the RIAA, BUY DIFFERENT MUSIC. It's not like you're going to be hurt by buying different music than the labels are pushing... but *they* will be, if only because strengthening the indies makes more artists consider abandoning the majors a viable option.
No contacts search. What was Apple thinking not including a contacts search feature on the iPhone? I have 700 contacts in Outlook and that's only the start of the problem - some of my entries have last names and some don't... plus I've got keywords stuffed into some of my contacts (for example, first name: Johnny plumber, last name: Appleseed). So when I'm looking for the plumber and I don't remember his name because I call him once a year, I want to type in 'plumber'. Come on Apple, gotta have contacts search!
I'm *addicted* to hitting "find" on PalmOS and having it search through *every* application on the device. It's just like Spotlight... except it came out almost a decade earlier. And it's faster, even on a 16 MHz 68000.
How could Apple have left search out of the iPhone?
Back when Karl and I developed "Tracers" on the Amiga one of our design principles was that, since we weren't trying to keep people pumping quarters, the game should be fun whether you were "good" or not, and you should be able to play more or less indefinitely, with cool stuff continuing to happen, even if you weren't "all that good".
For single player, even if they do insist on playability limits, you should bloody well get the cheat codes printed in the documentation.
I don't believe he was calling multiple buttons on a mouse a usability nightmare, just multiple buttons on a trackpad specifically.
Having a fundamentally different user interface when you're using a trackpad and when you're using a mouse is a bigger user interface nightmare. Control-click (two controls requiring two hands) is completely different from right-click (one hand).
On a trackpad, the way you use your hand is completely different.
But on the other hand, this is balderdash. There are differences but they're minor compared to the fundamental one of using one or two controls.
If you're having trouble holding the pointer still without letting go of the trackpad, something's wrong.
Yes, something's wrong. It's called "my wrist is damaged from years of working on soviet-quality dumb terminals from the '70s". But this is hardly an atypical physical impairment in this industry.
If the former, go to System Preferences / Keyboard & Mouse / Trackpad / Tracking Speed.
Significantly reducing the tracking speed significantly increases the amount of repetitive movement required to move the pointer. Do you see the problem here?
I'm sorry, but please try to understand that for those of us without your limitation, Apple's current solution works better for us than something that would work for you.
Um, I've already made that bloody point more than once, and you're missing a couple of big points (ones that I've already made in this thread, perhaps not clearly enough):
* My comment was about why I have a love-hate relationship with Apple, and why despite that I have nothing but praise for everyone I've every run into at an Apple store. Telling me I'm wrong to be frustrated with the pain their decisions caused, which is what you guys are doing, is just daft.
* What works for me would still work for you... having a second button wouldn't prevent you from using the trackpad the way you prefer, but not having it prevents me from using it the way I need.
Frankly I expect a lot of issues to vanish Monday, when the regular people get to work instead of the poor weekend shift.
So they would have done better, back when they announced Jun 29th, to say "Well, we can't quite make June, we'll release on July 2nd" instead of having the release after normal working hours on a Friday?
"I don't want a device that's easy to drop while using it one-handed. I'm concerned about damaging it."
While "it's really rugged" is a great response for the second part, it's kind of weak for the first.
OK, how about I put it this way?
"I don't want to drop any device while using it one-handed. I'm concerned about damaging it, losing it, being delayed by having to go back and get it, having it stolen before I can retrieve it, having it fall into moving equipment, be kicked out the door by a near-sighted insurance salesman from Topeka and off a balcony where it falls 14 stories onto a gravel path and bounces into a cement mixer, or just plain scratched and marred."
Devices that do not provide tactile feedback and have controls that are activated by casual contact are harder to use one-handed than devices that do. They are also harder to use by feel. This is not an easy problem to solve. I'm not convinced that it's possible even in principle to solve it. I understand that not everyone is concerned about it, but that doesn't mean it's not a problem.
I have. Which is why my daughter ended up with my iPod and I bought an iPod shuffle.
There is a distressing tendency for people who are enamored of a company's products to dismiss any criticism based on a problem that they haven't encountered with a comment like "I've never had that problem".
This argument doesn't serve to convince the person they're communicating it to: the message received is either "you're lying" or "you're incompetent". Even if the latter is true, it's not a useful argument to make.
You might consider that you simply don't use the device the same way, and so don't run into the problem. You might consider that you've subconsciously avoided doing something that triggers it. You might simply be more like Steve Jobs than I am in the way you approach devices. At least consider that the corollary of "I haven't noticed it" is not "it doesn't happen".
Not by any means. In fact when I'm using both hands I'm often not using the touchpad at all. I'm typing, or navigating using universal access controls, because it's quicker and more convenient (except in badly behaved apps that don't support universal access properly like iTunes). And when I'm using the mouse or touchpad my left hand is free to manipulate objects in the physical (as opposed to virtual) world: a cup, a phone, to gesture to someone in the same room (in three dimensions, even), turn the pages of a document or book, or move a rule or template about on a printed diagram...
You might not feel the need for it, but you simply can't argue that because YOU don't need it, NOBODY needs it.
* I don't like everything Apple does. Arguing that I'm wrong about my own requirements isn't going to make me like Apple any better, it's just going to piss me off.
* You don't need the absence of the second button. You could easily ignore it or configure it to act like a left button. So there's no benefit to you from supporting Apple's design.
The existing touchpads already support multi-touch. The *driver* is what's making the double-tap show up as a right-click, so all they need to do is expose more of the touchpad info to the OS and then it's just a matter of software.
The control key is right there. And if you can't reach that fair, surely you can be arsed to leave two fingers on the touchpad while your thumb clicks the button?
Frequently I *need* (and if you think that's an inaccurate term, I pray you never have to suffer from RSI) to have *no* fingers on the touchpad while I click the button... because it's too hard to be sure the pointer is going to stay in the right place otherwise.
Having two touchpad buttons is a usability nightmare compared to chording with the control key
Oh, yes, it's better to hold my right hand in an uncomfortable position, especially when I'm already suffering because the crummy Macbook Pro keyboard has been aggravating my RSI, or use two hands just to control the mouse pointer.
And multitouch is sufficiently finicky to be unusable for me.
I've got the laptop, I have to use it Apple's way when I'm on the go, so it's not like I haven't tried... and it's always a huge relief to plug in a real multi-button mouse (and fire up my Logitech bluetooth keyboard) and get back to my "usability nightmare".
Seriously, you really don't want to have to remember where the cutoff is, or accidentally trigger the wrong button that often.
"remember where the cutoff is"?
That's *why* two buttons is better than chording or multi-touch. The second button is clearly distinct, you can find it by feel... you don't have to "remember" anything.
Seriously.
I've *never* had to "remember" where the cutoff was. I've *never* accidentally clicked the wrong button. Not until I discovered Apple's passive-aggressive relationship with multi-button mice and found it *impossible* to reliably right-click with the "Mighty Mouse" or with the chorded touchpad.
Gawd, it's like discovering a Harvard Soviet. I didn't think anyone outside Apple actuallly believed their one-button propaganda any more.
I can't stop fiddling around with it, but then I'm a huge technophile.
I used to think I was. But obviously I'm only a small technophile.
Objectively... it doesn't have any functionality that any Pocket PC Phone Edition device released in the past several years doesn't have. It just has a better user interface than these other touch-screen phones. If that's worth it to you, then it's not a "waste of money" for you... I've got a Macbook Pro. Objectively, it's overpriced and underpowered, but I consider that the price of getting a laptop with an OS that doesn't suck... it's not a "waste of money" but I'm not going to argue that it's not overpriced.
Needless to say, I was not impressed by the Cingular/AT&T people. They were typical of most subscription sales organizations I've run into. They just seemed slimy, and clearly had little concern for their customers, as long as they got their commission.
This is natural. Think about it. People who are working at the Apple store are working there because they want to work at an Apple store, just because it's an Apple store. There's more than enough people who want to work there that they have no need to hire people who are just going for the bucks.
Apple's got all kinds of problems, and they piss me off at times. Their computers are pretty but unexceptional and intentionally crippled (there's no way I'd have considered a Macbook over a Thinkpad for a second if I could run OS X on a Thinkpad), they've got this horrible tendency to stick to bad ideas forever (Steve, putting two buttons below the Macbook touchpad WILL NOT make the other kids laugh at you), and their approach to syncing leaves me cold (no, I'm NOT going to pay you for a.MAC account just so I can reliably sync my PDA to two Macs), and (by the way) the term "Genius Bar" is too twee to be believed... but the people they have working for them are top notch... and they let them show it.
While all of you morons were waiting on long lines for your iBrick, I was out listening to non-DRMed MP3's that I just copied to the flash card in my A-707 w/o having to use some god-awful buggy and inefficient middleware app.
You mean iTunes?
I used iTunes as the music manager for my non-iPod MP3 player: it handles non-DRM-ed MP3s just fine, and smart playlists are a really neat tool for managing your MP3 player's storage... I'm sure that they prototyped the iPod shuffle's smart shuffle that way.
I'll agree that the iPhone is overrated and overpriced, but when I criticize Apple (or any other company) I'm doing it as someone who uses... or at least researches... the products first. Not from a position of sloganeering or ignorance.
Q: Name one smartphone that can effectively be used with one hand.
I can name three that could be effectively used as a phone without even looking at them, let alone one-handed.
Samsung PdQ or PdQ2. When the cover (that incidentally protects the screen) was closed, you got a normal cellphone touchpad and display. You could also control it one-handed.
Microsoft's "Stinger" prototype also had a standard touch pad with tactile feedback.
The high end Nokia smartphones with their clamshell design and keypad on the outside of the clamshell.
I'm sure there's more examples.
But, really, the iPhone isn't a smartphone in the usual sense of "smart = programmable". It has no native API, you can't program it. It's a well designed (I don't like the design, but that doesn't mean it's not well designed for its target market, it just means I'm not in that market) high-end cellphone with a lot of built-in Internet apps, but it's no more a smartphone than my cheap Nokia is.
All phone functions can be carried out with one hand. (similar to how you handle an ipod with one hand.)
How to trash your iPod:
1. Try to use it one-handed. 2. Drop it.
BTDTGT violent argument with extended warranty customer support. I don't blame Apple for the customer support problem, but I'm never buying ANYTHING from Microcenter again.
Not to mention the other problem with BOTH the iPod and the iPhone: you can't control either without actually holding them where you can see them, and look at them while you're controlling them. Which is why I upgraded to the iPod Shuffle with its tactile feedback and controls that don't change meaning as you use them. I like being able to tap "next" when I hit a song that's a bit too energetic for what I'm doing. I don't like fumbling the 'pod out, switching off the lock, and checking to make sure that I'm going to hit "next" instead of something else, and remembering to switch it back on again. Yes, I tried the iPod wired remote... and returned it the next day.
Anyone remember that scene in the Superman movie where Clark looks for a phone booth, sees one of the modern "pods", shakes his head, and finds another place to change? I'm waiting for a scene where someone's been caught by the baddies and manages the "work you cellphone out of your pocket so you can dial for help" trick... but it's an iPhone, and his hands are tied behind his back...
We obviously thought about VoIP. You still need a cellular phone because you're not always going to be in a Wi-Fi hotspot. One you have a cellular phone plan, it costs you zero incremental dollars to use it when you're making the next phone call. VoIP, while an interesting technology, didn't seem to be a big breakthrough to us. But others might feel differently, and others may make Web-based VoIP clients available for the iPhone - I think someone's already working on that.
Not on AT&T's network... they explicitly prohibit VoIP.
I'm also a little disturbed by the implication that web applets would have access to the microphone. That sounds like a great opportunity for privacy invasion.
The WSJ guy seems pretty confused about the iPhone in the following paragraphs. Applets on the iPhone have nothing to do with apps on OSX. Of course that confusion is exactly why Apple's been promoting the idea that this kind of thing is an "iPhone API" for writing iPhone applications, rather than a web API for writing web applications that are styled to resemble the iPhone.
I've noticed that *some* people writing these apps are deliberately checking if they're running on an iPhone or not, and refusing to run if you view them in another browser, but the ones that don't work fine for me in Camino. This is the counterpart to the old problem of websites that checked for IE or specific versions of other browsers, and it's just as daft an idea now as it was then.
Slashdot Mirror
I think you go a bit too far. There are many people who say things like "I'm sick of buying a whole album for one song" or who disparage popular music who then go buy single tracks and indie music at iTunes and eMusic. And there really are people who think that copyright violation (which, and I'm not saying this to condone it, isn't 'theft') is a way to hurt "the man". They're mistaken about that, and there may be many people who are being totally hypocritical when they say things like that, but I think you go too far by implying that this is the sole or even primary motivation for everyone on that side of the discussion.
Ripping off a song via Kazaa or Allofmp3 instead of buying indie music doesn't support independent music or hurt the RIAA any more than ripping off a copy of Word instead of using another product supports independent and free software developers or hurts Microsoft. But people DO honestly believe it does... in both cases.
And apparently some people believe that it advances understanding to attack people who may be honestly mistaken and giggle like a schoolgirl about it. It's probably worthwhile to think about whether that might also be an error.
Personally, I think Apple made a mistake releasing the iPhone without a native API. I won't be buying one because of it, and I agree that it's inconsistent with the spirit of the GPLv2... but Apple's totally compliant with the letter of the license they agreed to when they incorporated KHTML in Safari. Not only that, but they have completely and utterly bent over backwards for the free and open source software community.
* They were only obligated by the GPL to release the shipped versions of KHTML. When they were attacked for not going *far* beyond their obligations, what did they do? They went ahead and did it.
* Not only that, but they're continuing to release updates to the rest of the open source software they're using, not just the GPLed stuff.
* And they're open-sourcing their own code.
* And they've been doing this all the way back to Mac OS X 10.0.
Yes, I know Apple has a history of being downright weird about secrecy. That makes this long term commitment to free and open source software even more encouraging.
So what's the FSF do? Make veiled threats about what Apple might be hiding in the iPhone... even though it's all hidden in plain sight if you care to look.
Peter Brown, executive director of the FSF said, "Today, Steve Jobs and Apple release a product crippled with proprietary software and digital restrictions: crippled, because a device that isn't under the control of its owner works against the interests of its owner. We know that Apple has built its operating system, OS X, and its web browser Safari, using GPL-covered work - it will be interesting to see to what extent the iPhone uses GPLed software."
That's Peter Brown, executive director of the FSF, saying "will be interesting to see".
BSD zealot strikes again?
I see no references to BSD in the original announcement, the article referenced from slashdot, or the summary.
Comment poster != Article writer != BSD Zealot.
Sheesh.
The real point is that the government has provided the RIAA with a monopoly on certain goods by the granting of copyrights
The government provides the creators with a temporary monopoly on reproduction of their works by granting of copyrights.
The creators have the ability to transfer their copyrights, license them (exclusively or otherwise), or manage them themselves.
Because of other aspects of the economy, it turns out that many artists have exclusive licenses with recording and production companies (labels), and through an organization they are members of they engage in political and legal actions to enforce those copyrights.
But it's not the RIAA that has the monopoly. Nobody buys music from the RIAA.
Going back to the original question, if you want to fight the RIAA you need to do something to reduce their income, influence, or power. The best way to do that is to support labels that are not RIAA members, and self-publishing musicians and musicians who contract with independent labels.
You can't "hurt the RIAA" or "promote independent music" by buying music from allofmp3, though. Allofmp3 isn't a neutron bomb that kills RIAA labels and leaves indie labels standing. Every time you buy a song from allofmp3 instead of emusic or cdbaby, you're really strengthening the RIAA... because that lost sale is *worth more*, comparatively, to the indies than to the majors.
If you want to hurt the major labels and the RIAA, BUY DIFFERENT MUSIC. It's not like you're going to be hurt by buying different music than the labels are pushing... but *they* will be, if only because strengthening the indies makes more artists consider abandoning the majors a viable option.
No contacts search. What was Apple thinking not including a contacts search feature on the iPhone? I have 700 contacts in Outlook and that's only the start of the problem - some of my entries have last names and some don't... plus I've got keywords stuffed into some of my contacts (for example, first name: Johnny plumber, last name: Appleseed). So when I'm looking for the plumber and I don't remember his name because I call him once a year, I want to type in 'plumber'. Come on Apple, gotta have contacts search!
I'm *addicted* to hitting "find" on PalmOS and having it search through *every* application on the device. It's just like Spotlight... except it came out almost a decade earlier. And it's faster, even on a 16 MHz 68000.
How could Apple have left search out of the iPhone?
Rather than duplicate the post, I'll just link to it:
Why Apple's DRM is good for consumers
Bottom line: the more DRM is a problem, the less likely it is to spread. Apple's DRM is like a billion sterilized fruit flies in the DRM ecosystem.
Agreed.
Back when Karl and I developed "Tracers" on the Amiga one of our design principles was that, since we weren't trying to keep people pumping quarters, the game should be fun whether you were "good" or not, and you should be able to play more or less indefinitely, with cool stuff continuing to happen, even if you weren't "all that good".
For single player, even if they do insist on playability limits, you should bloody well get the cheat codes printed in the documentation.
No doubt there is.
One of the threads in Stephen Baxter's "Xeelee" future history is about this.
It's got two additional bonuses:
* You don't get carts left between cars and loose in the parking lot.
* You get neighborhood kids corralling the few carts that do stray and bringing them back for the quarters.
I don't believe he was calling multiple buttons on a mouse a usability nightmare, just multiple buttons on a trackpad specifically.
Having a fundamentally different user interface when you're using a trackpad and when you're using a mouse is a bigger user interface nightmare. Control-click (two controls requiring two hands) is completely different from right-click (one hand).
On a trackpad, the way you use your hand is completely different.
But on the other hand, this is balderdash. There are differences but they're minor compared to the fundamental one of using one or two controls.
If you're having trouble holding the pointer still without letting go of the trackpad, something's wrong.
Yes, something's wrong. It's called "my wrist is damaged from years of working on soviet-quality dumb terminals from the '70s". But this is hardly an atypical physical impairment in this industry.
If the former, go to System Preferences / Keyboard & Mouse / Trackpad / Tracking Speed.
Significantly reducing the tracking speed significantly increases the amount of repetitive movement required to move the pointer. Do you see the problem here?
I'm sorry, but please try to understand that for those of us without your limitation, Apple's current solution works better for us than something that would work for you.
Um, I've already made that bloody point more than once, and you're missing a couple of big points (ones that I've already made in this thread, perhaps not clearly enough):
* My comment was about why I have a love-hate relationship with Apple, and why despite that I have nothing but praise for everyone I've every run into at an Apple store. Telling me I'm wrong to be frustrated with the pain their decisions caused, which is what you guys are doing, is just daft.
* What works for me would still work for you... having a second button wouldn't prevent you from using the trackpad the way you prefer, but not having it prevents me from using it the way I need.
Frankly I expect a lot of issues to vanish Monday, when the regular people get to work instead of the poor weekend shift.
So they would have done better, back when they announced Jun 29th, to say "Well, we can't quite make June, we'll release on July 2nd" instead of having the release after normal working hours on a Friday?
OK, let's try this again.
"I don't want a device that's easy to drop while using it one-handed. I'm concerned about damaging it."
While "it's really rugged" is a great response for the second part, it's kind of weak for the first.
OK, how about I put it this way?
"I don't want to drop any device while using it one-handed. I'm concerned about damaging it, losing it, being delayed by having to go back and get it, having it stolen before I can retrieve it, having it fall into moving equipment, be kicked out the door by a near-sighted insurance salesman from Topeka and off a balcony where it falls 14 stories onto a gravel path and bounces into a cement mixer, or just plain scratched and marred."
Devices that do not provide tactile feedback and have controls that are activated by casual contact are harder to use one-handed than devices that do. They are also harder to use by feel. This is not an easy problem to solve. I'm not convinced that it's possible even in principle to solve it. I understand that not everyone is concerned about it, but that doesn't mean it's not a problem.
What the fuck is that supposed to mean?
Been There Done That Got The...
I've never had that problem.
I have. Which is why my daughter ended up with my iPod and I bought an iPod shuffle.
There is a distressing tendency for people who are enamored of a company's products to dismiss any criticism based on a problem that they haven't encountered with a comment like "I've never had that problem".
This argument doesn't serve to convince the person they're communicating it to: the message received is either "you're lying" or "you're incompetent". Even if the latter is true, it's not a useful argument to make.
You might consider that you simply don't use the device the same way, and so don't run into the problem. You might consider that you've subconsciously avoided doing something that triggers it. You might simply be more like Steve Jobs than I am in the way you approach devices. At least consider that the corollary of "I haven't noticed it" is not "it doesn't happen".
You already have two hands on the thing already
Not by any means. In fact when I'm using both hands I'm often not using the touchpad at all. I'm typing, or navigating using universal access controls, because it's quicker and more convenient (except in badly behaved apps that don't support universal access properly like iTunes). And when I'm using the mouse or touchpad my left hand is free to manipulate objects in the physical (as opposed to virtual) world: a cup, a phone, to gesture to someone in the same room (in three dimensions, even), turn the pages of a document or book, or move a rule or template about on a printed diagram...
You might not feel the need for it, but you simply can't argue that because YOU don't need it, NOBODY needs it.
* I don't like everything Apple does. Arguing that I'm wrong about my own requirements isn't going to make me like Apple any better, it's just going to piss me off.
* You don't need the absence of the second button. You could easily ignore it or configure it to act like a left button. So there's no benefit to you from supporting Apple's design.
So what's your point?
The existing touchpads already support multi-touch. The *driver* is what's making the double-tap show up as a right-click, so all they need to do is expose more of the touchpad info to the OS and then it's just a matter of software.
Drivers I can believe.
But not (as the poster I was responding to claimed) libraries.
And if that's the case, Apple needs to update their web pages throughout to list 32-bit Windows as a requirement.
I wonder if we'll need new drivers for Leopard?
The control key is right there. And if you can't reach that fair, surely you can be arsed to leave two fingers on the touchpad while your thumb clicks the button?
Frequently I *need* (and if you think that's an inaccurate term, I pray you never have to suffer from RSI) to have *no* fingers on the touchpad while I click the button... because it's too hard to be sure the pointer is going to stay in the right place otherwise.
Having two touchpad buttons is a usability nightmare compared to chording with the control key
Oh, yes, it's better to hold my right hand in an uncomfortable position, especially when I'm already suffering because the crummy Macbook Pro keyboard has been aggravating my RSI, or use two hands just to control the mouse pointer.
And multitouch is sufficiently finicky to be unusable for me.
I've got the laptop, I have to use it Apple's way when I'm on the go, so it's not like I haven't tried... and it's always a huge relief to plug in a real multi-button mouse (and fire up my Logitech bluetooth keyboard) and get back to my "usability nightmare".
Seriously, you really don't want to have to remember where the cutoff is, or accidentally trigger the wrong button that often.
"remember where the cutoff is"?
That's *why* two buttons is better than chording or multi-touch. The second button is clearly distinct, you can find it by feel... you don't have to "remember" anything.
Seriously.
I've *never* had to "remember" where the cutoff was. I've *never* accidentally clicked the wrong button. Not until I discovered Apple's passive-aggressive relationship with multi-button mice and found it *impossible* to reliably right-click with the "Mighty Mouse" or with the chorded touchpad.
Gawd, it's like discovering a Harvard Soviet. I didn't think anyone outside Apple actuallly believed their one-button propaganda any more.
I can't stop fiddling around with it, but then I'm a huge technophile.
I used to think I was. But obviously I'm only a small technophile.
Objectively... it doesn't have any functionality that any Pocket PC Phone Edition device released in the past several years doesn't have. It just has a better user interface than these other touch-screen phones. If that's worth it to you, then it's not a "waste of money" for you... I've got a Macbook Pro. Objectively, it's overpriced and underpowered, but I consider that the price of getting a laptop with an OS that doesn't suck... it's not a "waste of money" but I'm not going to argue that it's not overpriced.
Even Tru64, which *never* ran on 32-bit hardware, has a 32-bit mode (using the amusingly obscure option "-taso"), and system libraries linked for it.
Every other 64-bit operating system is upgraded from a 32-bit OS, and everyone but Windows that I've ever used has supported 32-bit applications.
Why is Vista different?
Needless to say, I was not impressed by the Cingular/AT&T people. They were typical of most subscription sales organizations I've run into. They just seemed slimy, and clearly had little concern for their customers, as long as they got their commission.
.MAC account just so I can reliably sync my PDA to two Macs), and (by the way) the term "Genius Bar" is too twee to be believed... but the people they have working for them are top notch... and they let them show it.
This is natural. Think about it. People who are working at the Apple store are working there because they want to work at an Apple store, just because it's an Apple store. There's more than enough people who want to work there that they have no need to hire people who are just going for the bucks.
Apple's got all kinds of problems, and they piss me off at times. Their computers are pretty but unexceptional and intentionally crippled (there's no way I'd have considered a Macbook over a Thinkpad for a second if I could run OS X on a Thinkpad), they've got this horrible tendency to stick to bad ideas forever (Steve, putting two buttons below the Macbook touchpad WILL NOT make the other kids laugh at you), and their approach to syncing leaves me cold (no, I'm NOT going to pay you for a
(am I ambivalent about this company or what?)
While all of you morons were waiting on long lines for your iBrick, I was out listening to non-DRMed MP3's that I just copied to the flash card in my A-707 w/o having to use some god-awful buggy and inefficient middleware app.
You mean iTunes?
I used iTunes as the music manager for my non-iPod MP3 player: it handles non-DRM-ed MP3s just fine, and smart playlists are a really neat tool for managing your MP3 player's storage... I'm sure that they prototyped the iPod shuffle's smart shuffle that way.
I'll agree that the iPhone is overrated and overpriced, but when I criticize Apple (or any other company) I'm doing it as someone who uses... or at least researches... the products first. Not from a position of sloganeering or ignorance.
Q: Name one smartphone that can effectively be used with one hand.
I can name three that could be effectively used as a phone without even looking at them, let alone one-handed.
Samsung PdQ or PdQ2. When the cover (that incidentally protects the screen) was closed, you got a normal cellphone touchpad and display. You could also control it one-handed.
Microsoft's "Stinger" prototype also had a standard touch pad with tactile feedback.
The high end Nokia smartphones with their clamshell design and keypad on the outside of the clamshell.
I'm sure there's more examples.
But, really, the iPhone isn't a smartphone in the usual sense of "smart = programmable". It has no native API, you can't program it. It's a well designed (I don't like the design, but that doesn't mean it's not well designed for its target market, it just means I'm not in that market) high-end cellphone with a lot of built-in Internet apps, but it's no more a smartphone than my cheap Nokia is.
Neither is a Blackberry, by the way.
All phone functions can be carried out with one hand. (similar to how you handle an ipod with one hand.)
How to trash your iPod:
1. Try to use it one-handed.
2. Drop it.
BTDTGT violent argument with extended warranty customer support. I don't blame Apple for the customer support problem, but I'm never buying ANYTHING from Microcenter again.
Not to mention the other problem with BOTH the iPod and the iPhone: you can't control either without actually holding them where you can see them, and look at them while you're controlling them. Which is why I upgraded to the iPod Shuffle with its tactile feedback and controls that don't change meaning as you use them. I like being able to tap "next" when I hit a song that's a bit too energetic for what I'm doing. I don't like fumbling the 'pod out, switching off the lock, and checking to make sure that I'm going to hit "next" instead of something else, and remembering to switch it back on again. Yes, I tried the iPod wired remote... and returned it the next day.
Anyone remember that scene in the Superman movie where Clark looks for a phone booth, sees one of the modern "pods", shakes his head, and finds another place to change? I'm waiting for a scene where someone's been caught by the baddies and manages the "work you cellphone out of your pocket so you can dial for help" trick... but it's an iPhone, and his hands are tied behind his back...
We obviously thought about VoIP. You still need a cellular phone because you're not always going to be in a Wi-Fi hotspot. One you have a cellular phone plan, it costs you zero incremental dollars to use it when you're making the next phone call. VoIP, while an interesting technology, didn't seem to be a big breakthrough to us. But others might feel differently, and others may make Web-based VoIP clients available for the iPhone - I think someone's already working on that.
Not on AT&T's network... they explicitly prohibit VoIP.
I'm also a little disturbed by the implication that web applets would have access to the microphone. That sounds like a great opportunity for privacy invasion.
The WSJ guy seems pretty confused about the iPhone in the following paragraphs. Applets on the iPhone have nothing to do with apps on OSX. Of course that confusion is exactly why Apple's been promoting the idea that this kind of thing is an "iPhone API" for writing iPhone applications, rather than a web API for writing web applications that are styled to resemble the iPhone.
I've noticed that *some* people writing these apps are deliberately checking if they're running on an iPhone or not, and refusing to run if you view them in another browser, but the ones that don't work fine for me in Camino. This is the counterpart to the old problem of websites that checked for IE or specific versions of other browsers, and it's just as daft an idea now as it was then.