It's got 4GB or 8GB of Flash memory, much like the Nano. It's not hard drive based like a full-blown iPod. It's like the Nano's memory + full iPod screen + multitouch + wifi + phone.
I'd actually buy an iPhone if it came down to $200-300, and wasn't locked into AT&T.
Try entering text with a mouse sometime... it goes something like this:
1. Scan document for instance of the letter you want to type, scrolling as necessary. 2. Highlight, right-click, hover to "Copy", click. 3. Scroll back to your insertion point, right-click, hover to "Paste", click again.
Every time I hear about Yahoo! buying up some part of the internet, a little part of me dies inside. Every single thing they acquire gets made worse as a result. Flickr, OneList/eGroups, etc. It's sad, back when Yahoo! was a search engine + portal, they were probably the most useful web site on the internet, but after google eclipsed their search capability, they quickly became useless to me, despite every attempt they've made at staying relevant by offering email and IM services, etc. They're almost as bad as AOL these days.
Isn't all tentacle porn inter-species? Or are there actually some sick fucks in this world who actually like watching tentacle monsters raping other tentacle monsters?
...by writing a song about how the RIAA sucks, and uploading a video to YouTube that teaches everyone how to play guitar AND what to think about RIAA and copyright reform. That'd stick it in their craw real good.
Clearly not; however, it's still not true that $10 == free. Someone could save money by going with this plan based on their usage, but it still doesn't make the wifi free. It'd be accurate to say that you get unlimited wifi minutes for $10/mo, but that's still not free. I'm entirely aware that there are people who'll benefit from this plan, and that I'm not necessarily one of them; however, I care about how we use language.
What does it offer to businesses? The improved security is irrelevant in a corporate environment, because companies have everything locked-down pretty tightly already.
Uh, no they don't. Although lot of them do, and it's very costly, often done incorrectly and incompletely, and a constant headache. Of course, Vista's security model isn't really the right answer to that particular problem... but hey, if you like sending your money to Redmond and you just can't stop, it'll keep you wedded to Windows for another upgrade cycle.
Don't be ridiculous; I'm not saying that iPhone should run System 7. We've got OSes with protected memory and real multitasking now, you're not going to see Extension hell on a modern Mac. All I'm saying that installing applications isn't going to destroy Apple's image or make the iPhone suck.
If you installed a sucky app, or tweak the OS to your preference, you know you did it, you know who to blame -- either yourself or the provider of the app. This notion that Apple's image is so fragile that it can't be allowed to co-mingle with bits written by third parties is totally absurd.
So you can't run Skype on an iPhone to turn your expensive cell phone into a free mobile VOIP calling platform. Is that user unfriendly? No. Is it crippled? Yes. That's what I'm saying. FUDding that Skype might crash AT&T's network or make people hate Apple because of some Skype fuckup is just a smokescreen to hide the fact that Apple and AT&T don't want people making calls without paying hugely inflated prices for the privilege.
What reason do I or Apple have to think that "someone else" will be able to add functionality to iPhone without ruining the UI?
Right, well, I'm sure someone else *could* do something that is ruinous to the UI.
But the thing about Freedom is, you still wouldn't be forced to use it. With Freedom, you use what works, and you can play with it to make it work better. Take an example from the System 7.x days, you had these things called Extensions. People could hack up an Extensions file that would extend the OS in some fashion. There were a lot of good ones. Some were crappy. They often caused problems. But no one forced you to make use of them; you could if you wanted, if you found it useful. iPhone's got nothing like that.
That has nothing to do with the device running on open source software and everything to do with the user-friendliness of the software.
I'm not sure that I agree. It depends on what you mean by "user friendly". When most people think of "user friendly" they think of an easy to use, easy to learn interface with good ergonomics. They ALSO think of a device that does what THEY want it to do, but a missing feature, though desired, is not necessarily user un-friendly.
From what I can see, not having firsthand experience, the iPhone sets a new standard (not a perfect standard, but definitely a higher one than had existed prior) for user friendliness in UI in the things that it does, but still lacks certain features. If the platform were open, it would be no big deal for someone else to come along and hack those features in. But it isn't, and they can't.
MAX-quality movies at home with new projectors - cool, but just an incremental advance, hardly a revolution. mid-air mouse that requires no flat surface - useful if it enables us to get away from having to be at a desk to use a computer, but we're already close to being there thanks to notebooks, tablets, PDAs, smartphones, wearables, etc. These devices do need some kind of useful input device, but whether this is it remains to be seen. a home quantum computer - Let's concentrate on building *a* quantum computer, first. Presently most home users don't even get all they can out of the computer they currently own and don't know how to use. Quantum computing is interesting and opens up new doors, the closest thing on this list to a real revolutionary advance, but what's the killer app for a home user? Unbreakable encryption? NP-hard problems solved in O(n) time? a router-based peer-to-peer system - not exactly sure what that means, need to RTFA, but if we're talking embedding bittorrent engines in router firmware, we're already there, pretty much. What good is p2p if the content cartels will stop at nothing to make it illegal? I'd love to see all that latent bandwidth utilized and all the dark fiber in the world lit up with traffic, but without significant copyright reform I don't see it happening. Or, OK, it'll happen, but it'll continually be shut down and reinvented as technologies are sued and legislated out of existence. and a man-made brain - this sounds like a 50's media description of the mainframes and supercomputers of the day. Again, haven't read TFA, but what is this going to give us? Humanlike AI? We have billions of people to talk to already, so what good is a person you can manufacture? Will we enslave it?
We're talking about a few hundred million transistors. I imagine that detecting and fixing bugs when there's that many components involved is really, really difficult. Are other comparably complex processors better? How do AMD, VIA, Motorola, IBM, etc. fare?
Slashdot Mirror
It's got 4GB or 8GB of Flash memory, much like the Nano. It's not hard drive based like a full-blown iPod. It's like the Nano's memory + full iPod screen + multitouch + wifi + phone.
I'd actually buy an iPhone if it came down to $200-300, and wasn't locked into AT&T.
Get some cute chick to blow me while I hack and I bet I can crack that shit open in less than a minute.
Try entering text with a mouse sometime... it goes something like this:
1. Scan document for instance of the letter you want to type, scrolling as necessary.
2. Highlight, right-click, hover to "Copy", click.
3. Scroll back to your insertion point, right-click, hover to "Paste", click again.
Man is that slow and inefficient!
Every time I hear about Yahoo! buying up some part of the internet, a little part of me dies inside. Every single thing they acquire gets made worse as a result. Flickr, OneList/eGroups, etc. It's sad, back when Yahoo! was a search engine + portal, they were probably the most useful web site on the internet, but after google eclipsed their search capability, they quickly became useless to me, despite every attempt they've made at staying relevant by offering email and IM services, etc. They're almost as bad as AOL these days.
Isn't all tentacle porn inter-species? Or are there actually some sick fucks in this world who actually like watching tentacle monsters raping other tentacle monsters?
I mean, if you're going to stick someone in a videogame, why not go all-out?
...by writing a song about how the RIAA sucks, and uploading a video to YouTube that teaches everyone how to play guitar AND what to think about RIAA and copyright reform. That'd stick it in their craw real good.
Clearly not; however, it's still not true that $10 == free. Someone could save money by going with this plan based on their usage, but it still doesn't make the wifi free. It'd be accurate to say that you get unlimited wifi minutes for $10/mo, but that's still not free. I'm entirely aware that there are people who'll benefit from this plan, and that I'm not necessarily one of them; however, I care about how we use language.
Free != $10/mo. I don't go over my minute allotment as it is already. So this is like giving them an extra $10/mo for nothing.
Uh, no they don't. Although lot of them do, and it's very costly, often done incorrectly and incompletely, and a constant headache. Of course, Vista's security model isn't really the right answer to that particular problem... but hey, if you like sending your money to Redmond and you just can't stop, it'll keep you wedded to Windows for another upgrade cycle.
I'll just stick it in my gmail account, and mail a copy to everyone in my org. The Exchange Server shouldn't have a problem with that...
Why not give patients a cyanide capsule and "help" them not feel any more pain, ever?
Two words: Michael Bay.
Developers! Developers! Developers! De-- hey where'd everybody go?
Don't be ridiculous; I'm not saying that iPhone should run System 7. We've got OSes with protected memory and real multitasking now, you're not going to see Extension hell on a modern Mac. All I'm saying that installing applications isn't going to destroy Apple's image or make the iPhone suck.
If you installed a sucky app, or tweak the OS to your preference, you know you did it, you know who to blame -- either yourself or the provider of the app. This notion that Apple's image is so fragile that it can't be allowed to co-mingle with bits written by third parties is totally absurd.
So you can't run Skype on an iPhone to turn your expensive cell phone into a free mobile VOIP calling platform. Is that user unfriendly? No. Is it crippled? Yes. That's what I'm saying. FUDding that Skype might crash AT&T's network or make people hate Apple because of some Skype fuckup is just a smokescreen to hide the fact that Apple and AT&T don't want people making calls without paying hugely inflated prices for the privilege.
Right, well, I'm sure someone else *could* do something that is ruinous to the UI.
But the thing about Freedom is, you still wouldn't be forced to use it. With Freedom, you use what works, and you can play with it to make it work better. Take an example from the System 7.x days, you had these things called Extensions. People could hack up an Extensions file that would extend the OS in some fashion. There were a lot of good ones. Some were crappy. They often caused problems. But no one forced you to make use of them; you could if you wanted, if you found it useful. iPhone's got nothing like that.
That has nothing to do with the device running on open source software and everything to do with the user-friendliness of the software.
I'm not sure that I agree. It depends on what you mean by "user friendly". When most people think of "user friendly" they think of an easy to use, easy to learn interface with good ergonomics. They ALSO think of a device that does what THEY want it to do, but a missing feature, though desired, is not necessarily user un-friendly.
From what I can see, not having firsthand experience, the iPhone sets a new standard (not a perfect standard, but definitely a higher one than had existed prior) for user friendliness in UI in the things that it does, but still lacks certain features. If the platform were open, it would be no big deal for someone else to come along and hack those features in. But it isn't, and they can't.
Who knew Mosaic was so bloated? No wonder no one uses it anymore.
Perhaps there's hope, and RMS can sue MSFT for the illegal infringement of his initials.
I hear the icon on the desktop isn't called My Computer anymore, it's now just "Computer". I guess in the fine print it says "BillG's Computer".
I can't even recognize my own handwriting half the time.
MAX-quality movies at home with new projectors - cool, but just an incremental advance, hardly a revolution.
mid-air mouse that requires no flat surface - useful if it enables us to get away from having to be at a desk to use a computer, but we're already close to being there thanks to notebooks, tablets, PDAs, smartphones, wearables, etc. These devices do need some kind of useful input device, but whether this is it remains to be seen.
a home quantum computer - Let's concentrate on building *a* quantum computer, first. Presently most home users don't even get all they can out of the computer they currently own and don't know how to use. Quantum computing is interesting and opens up new doors, the closest thing on this list to a real revolutionary advance, but what's the killer app for a home user? Unbreakable encryption? NP-hard problems solved in O(n) time?
a router-based peer-to-peer system - not exactly sure what that means, need to RTFA, but if we're talking embedding bittorrent engines in router firmware, we're already there, pretty much. What good is p2p if the content cartels will stop at nothing to make it illegal? I'd love to see all that latent bandwidth utilized and all the dark fiber in the world lit up with traffic, but without significant copyright reform I don't see it happening. Or, OK, it'll happen, but it'll continually be shut down and reinvented as technologies are sued and legislated out of existence.
and a man-made brain - this sounds like a 50's media description of the mainframes and supercomputers of the day. Again, haven't read TFA, but what is this going to give us? Humanlike AI? We have billions of people to talk to already, so what good is a person you can manufacture? Will we enslave it?
We're talking about a few hundred million transistors. I imagine that detecting and fixing bugs when there's that many components involved is really, really difficult. Are other comparably complex processors better? How do AMD, VIA, Motorola, IBM, etc. fare?
So, just like, a wave, right?
Oh, they're transparent all right. Whenever they make an announcement, it's usually completely obvious that their motives are other than stated.