Here comes the flood of people complaining about having to listen to other people talking...
Even though it's really no different to people talking to the person next to them, or having to put up with watching or listening to whatever movie they put on, or other conversations, or bullshit safety messages, etc etc.
It adds convenience for people. If you don't like it, nothing changes. Use earbuds/headphones/eyemask as per normal.
I love when people spend a day or 2 in a place as large and diverse as the USA and think their anecdotes are the representation of the country.
If Australia has lesser incidents of drunk driving deaths (something I am skeptical of but have not investigated), I would guess it's due to the stricter laws on selling alcohol and bars closing early. Oh, and shit is ridiculously expensive.
I'm not going to address the app average points, as I've provided a link and I'm really not interested in your rationalization to try and dismiss it. It's a valid argument, but it isn't worth more than actual cited stats. Sorry.
In any case, "most users don't have that many apps" isn't a valid counter-argument to a lack of functionality, which is why we even started discussing that.
No. I'm arguing that putting all downloaded apps on the main screen is better than hiding them away. Better than having another step to put add a shortcut to them on the main screen. Better that the additional (power user) alternative is to hide things (in a folder), rather than to show things (on the main screen)
The fact is, from an objective standpoint, that Android offers two options. You can effectively disable the App Drawer by removing the icon from the home screen, and setting every new app installed to place an icon on the home screen by default, and make folders as you like. Essentially iOS behaviour.
Or, instead of having to constantly rearrange icons and make folders, you can have only the apps you use frequently on your homescreens, and have the rest accessibly quickly from an icon arranged in alphabetical order.
I'm personally far more productive with the latter, and that kind of setup is simply not possible on iOS. On Android, you can work the same as you do on iOS. On iOS, I can't work the way I do on adnroid.
I see that lack of technical functionality as a disadvantage. The latter way I described is in my way, without a doubt, far more efficient.
Better than having another step to put add a shortcut to them on the main screen. Better that the additional (power user) alternative is to hide things (in a folder), rather than to show things (on the main screen)
I'm not sure if you get how the App Drawer works. Have you used it? Hiding icons away doesn't require another step to add a shortcut to the home screen. It is only another step depending if you have automatic placing of new apps on the homescreen disabled or not.
The power user alternative is not to hide things in a folder. That's the only option iOS users have. The power user option is to use a platform that gives you the choice to hide infrequently used apps while still leaving them easily accessible in alphabetical order, instead of arbitrary order of installation.
Having to waste space on my homescreens with necessary folders full of infrequently used apps sounds horrible. I'm truly glad I am not forced to do that.
However, since you raise the topic of choice. The answer is that choice can sometimes be a positive thing, and sometimes a negative thing, as discussed in the book "The Paradox of Choice". (There's also an interesting TED talk introduction to the topic, which I recommend.) It's absolutely wrong to assume that more choice is better.
I agree with you, but I don't know if I see the relevance of what you wrote, unless you are implying that having the choice to manage your installed apps on your homescreens is somehow not a positive thing?
OK, you're referring to the fact that manufacturer tweaked versions aren't available till some months after the Google Nexus version. (And sometimes not at all). You say that makes it non-comparable. I say that's the fundamental problem that makes the Android far worse than iOS for OS updates.
No, that isn't quiet what I'm saying.
I'm saying the improvements in KitKat will be rolled into the manufacturer tweaked versions, and those manufacturer tweaked versions are not necessarily considered Android 4.4 KitKat.
I don't see how that's a problem at all, it certainly isn't a disadvantage over iOS as a platform. If you want the stock version, you can get that. If you prefer a manufacturer tweaked version then you can have that. It's about choice.
As I explained earlier, there are no real downsides to this outside of specialized apps and 3d games.
??? Because time matters. You do know that. Just because you prefer Android overall doesn't mean it's a good idea for you to pretend that iOS doesn't have advantages in areas where it does.
I do prefer Android, but that doesn't blind me to any advantages iOS may have. The only advnatage I've ever seen is having a.com button in the keyboard by default. Not a great selling point.
Manufacturer tweaked versions having a development schedule to stock android is not a disadvantage. It's just different.
Ubuntu may not have a new feature Debian has as soon as they have it, but they may roll their own new feature separate from that (not a great analogy as I know most features are in the kernel, but hopefully you get my point).
You knew damn well what I meant. Once again you ignored the argument being made and focused on a typo. Indicating you have no counter-argument, so I'll accept your pettiness as admitting you were wrong.
Who cares? Whether they are on a homescreen or in the app drawer makes no difference functionally unless you for some reason need everything there and arranged in alphabetical order, if you need that then great, you don't need to get so emotional about it.
Ahh, and here we have it. There is a large functional difference, ideally that having my most frequently used apps arranged in the way I like allows me to be more productive. Perhaps only a slight increase, but more productive nevertheless.
With your response of "Who cares" you are dismissing that extra functionality, that extra choice because you personally and subjectively see no value in it.
What cannot be denied though, is the additional choice exists on Android. iOS deprives you of that choice and functionality.
And on iOS instead of having "the rest" in the app drawer they just end up on additional homescreens, it's essentially the same thing.
Except it's not. It's a mess and unnecessary clutter, with no other alternative.
Anyway, I'm done arguing with you about it. You've realized I have a point, after I made it repeatedly.
The closing point is that just because you don't personally see value in added functionality, doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Glad I could get that through to you.
A SmartTV is a boon for me. I don't need a separate device like a roku or chromecast to access youtube or netflix, and those things can't do DLNA while the TV can. No extra device, no extra power usage...and the price difference is about what the most expensive roku costs anyway.
Just because you don't see benefits, does not mean they do not exist.
A great many of them were in the null pointer dereference checker, and were an entire category of exploit that was unknown until the NSA contributed SELinux
Unknown? No, that's Hyperbole and FUD. Less common maybe.
I disagree that an online class is inferior. Far too often lecturers don't really do anything more than quote a textbook verbatim.
The online approach allows for an easier way to look up things on the fly (alleviating the need for expensive textbooks somewhat) and allows a greater degree of social participation through things like forums.
It also allows more freedom for different methods of learning, instead of assuming everyone learns in the same way.
There are so many problems with prisons in this country it's not funny.
Lets see...
Non dangerous criminals go to prison and become hardened criminals, instead of being punished in a suitable way and giving back to the community
Those scary hackers and pirates get more prison time than rapists and in some caes murderers
You can go to prison for teaching someone how to beat a lie detector test. That is essentially a travesty because of what it indicates
Prison is used a a deterrent, so far too often the punishment does not fit the crime or anywhere near it. Justice indeed.
Prison is meant to be about rehabilitation, in part. If someone is released back into society, they are considered rehabilitated. Yet, they lose the right to vote.
Sigh. Why is it so hard for you to just admit you're wrong on this one particular point?
You've conveniently ignored my point, by focusing on the fact that I said homescreen and not homescreen.
Let me repeat it for you, clearly and succinctly.
On iOS, users have no choice but to have icons for all installed applications displayed on their homescreen(s), only being able to organize them in folders or move to to different homescreens, but not prevent them from displaying.
Androids users are not faced with that restrictions. There is the option of the exact same functionality without ever having to use the app drawer, or you can have only the icons you want on a homescreen and use the app drawer for the rest. I find this far, far more efficient, and even if you disagree on that point, it's nice to have the choice.
For some reason, you consider this added, different functionality as "additional duplication", when this is clearly not the case. It is not duplicated functionality, it's different functionality. The fact that it can behave exactly like the iPhone as well as in a different way should indicate that.
Let me give you an example on how my Android is set up. I have one screen of games, a screen of somewhat frequently used apps, and my main screen has my most frequently used apps, as well as some widgets. I simply can't have this setup on iOS. It is technically impossible.
Oh sure, I can arrange icons in the same way, but then I would have no choice to have additional homescreens with all the other apps I have installed. At the very least, it would be one folder with apps in it making an additional homescreen.
Just to lay this out further, since I expect you to ignore my argument and focus on semantics. On iOS, I could have one homescreen with 20 games icons, not in any folders. I could have a second homescreen, with 20 apps, with no folders. And a 3rd homescreen with 20 of my most frequently used apps.
If that is all that I want and I have more apps installed, well it wont work. If I have 40 apps installed, I would either have to have another 2 homescreens without using folders, or at the very least one additional homescreen with 2 folders or some mix of folders and icons.
That is a technical difference. iOS is unable to give me an option that Android does, while Android offers both methods.
Because that's how Android has worked...for some time now. Having owned a Samsung phone, I know that I don't get pushed the latest updates from Google...I get updates for their modified Android on Samsung's own schedule.
Those figures don't extend to HTC, Samsung, LG etc versions of Android, which are not considered KitKat but will still incorporate most of the improvements.
I'm also not sure why you brought up CyanogenMod. I referred to stock Android, not Cyanogen.
Anyway, I'm not sure why you were trying to argue why iPhones having access to new versions of their operating system was an advantage over android phones, that also have access to new versions of their operating system.
Well, here we have a problem. You're making an assumption here, about the average user, and not backing it up with any link or source of your own.
All we know in fact is that the average user has 88 downloaded apps. It's fine to speculate about how much non-average users are skewing the average, or how close the average is to the median....but that's all it is, speculation.
So far, all we know is that on average, users tend to have 108 apps on their iPhones. If you have a better source showing different, I'd love to see it.
As far as homescreens, yes, I did think there were 12 icons per screen. I'm not sure why...perhaps that was on older phones? Anyway, yes, that's 5 pages. 5 pages that the only way to reduce is by using folders. That is the only way.
The app drawer method, regardless of if you think it better or not, gives you an alternative. So again, you are arguing that more choice is somehow a negative thing.
It's hard to say that the US dominates most sports it cares about, when there are not a lot of international competitors. Gridiron, Baseball and Basketball...it's mainly only the US that plays these sports.
Considering US performance in the Olympics and other sports that are played worldwide, like soccer, and it's even harder to make the argument of the US dominating at sports.
More than happy to apologize. I think too often in these debates on slashdot names like that get hurled around...I expect it and it never really bothers me much. I was kind of surprised to see that I struck first...
The figures are meaningless because measuring stock Android adoption does nothing to show it's actual adoption. Think of it like this...measuring adoption rates for the latest Debian upgrade only measures Debian users. It doesn't also measure every distro based on Debian that is slower to roll those changes into their version, or omit those changes and provide their own.
The changes KitKat brings will be pushed out to other phones and versions of android, even if they don't use stock Android KitKat.
All users do have access to stock Android, so that isn't an advantage iOS users have. It's just that most users tend to stick with their manufacturer modified version due to not caring, or actually liking that version better.
Not sure if that's a fair paraphrasing of what I said.
The app drawer uses far more screen space than a homescreen does, and I find it easier to navigate when looking for a specific app as things are arranged alphabetically, as opposed to order installed in.
If I have 200 apps, I can have 2 homescreens with 20 of my most frequently used apps, and go to the app drawer if I need to.
Slashdot Mirror
It's because the dictionary guys are wrong. Literally has been used as an intensifier since the time of Shakespeare.
It literally makes my jaw drop that those "dictionary guys" , and you, don't understand why they are wrong.
That's generally not true.
Women make less money than men *on average*.
For the same jobs, they tend to make the same as a man with the same amount of experience.
There are quite a few laws mandating that.
raises and ability to negotiate are a separate issue.
Generally female to male transsexuals are wired almost exactly like males, while male to female transsexuals are about 50% female wired...
http://www.medicaldaily.com/brain-mapping-gender-identity-what-makes-boy-girl-247122
People sharing something they like, promoting and advocating it which leads to new sales? Nothing groundbreaking here.
Piracy is a net benefit for society. Piracy leads to an increase in sales. Piracy is unstoppable and inevitable, as it should be.
Tired of people who don't get that, and are only narrowminded and can only be concerned of their potentially lost sales.
Must be on your end, since I have a decent microphone in my phone.
Some people talk louder on the phone. Not all, or even most people.
There have been phones on planes for some times now. It hasn't hurt anyone.
Here comes the flood of people complaining about having to listen to other people talking...
Even though it's really no different to people talking to the person next to them, or having to put up with watching or listening to whatever movie they put on, or other conversations, or bullshit safety messages, etc etc.
It adds convenience for people. If you don't like it, nothing changes. Use earbuds/headphones/eyemask as per normal.
I love when people spend a day or 2 in a place as large and diverse as the USA and think their anecdotes are the representation of the country.
If Australia has lesser incidents of drunk driving deaths (something I am skeptical of but have not investigated), I would guess it's due to the stricter laws on selling alcohol and bars closing early. Oh, and shit is ridiculously expensive.
Right's exist because they are codified and you have a body to enforce them. The idea of natural rights is nonsense.
Outside of civilization or society, if we are starving, I have the natural right to kill you and take your food to keep me alive.
I'm not going to address the app average points, as I've provided a link and I'm really not interested in your rationalization to try and dismiss it. It's a valid argument, but it isn't worth more than actual cited stats. Sorry.
In any case, "most users don't have that many apps" isn't a valid counter-argument to a lack of functionality, which is why we even started discussing that.
No. I'm arguing that putting all downloaded apps on the main screen is better than hiding them away. Better than having another step to put add a shortcut to them on the main screen. Better that the additional (power user) alternative is to hide things (in a folder), rather than to show things (on the main screen)
The fact is, from an objective standpoint, that Android offers two options. You can effectively disable the App Drawer by removing the icon from the home screen, and setting every new app installed to place an icon on the home screen by default, and make folders as you like. Essentially iOS behaviour.
Or, instead of having to constantly rearrange icons and make folders, you can have only the apps you use frequently on your homescreens, and have the rest accessibly quickly from an icon arranged in alphabetical order.
I'm personally far more productive with the latter, and that kind of setup is simply not possible on iOS. On Android, you can work the same as you do on iOS. On iOS, I can't work the way I do on adnroid.
I see that lack of technical functionality as a disadvantage. The latter way I described is in my way, without a doubt, far more efficient.
Better than having another step to put add a shortcut to them on the main screen. Better that the additional (power user) alternative is to hide things (in a folder), rather than to show things (on the main screen)
I'm not sure if you get how the App Drawer works. Have you used it? Hiding icons away doesn't require another step to add a shortcut to the home screen. It is only another step depending if you have automatic placing of new apps on the homescreen disabled or not.
The power user alternative is not to hide things in a folder. That's the only option iOS users have. The power user option is to use a platform that gives you the choice to hide infrequently used apps while still leaving them easily accessible in alphabetical order, instead of arbitrary order of installation.
Having to waste space on my homescreens with necessary folders full of infrequently used apps sounds horrible. I'm truly glad I am not forced to do that.
However, since you raise the topic of choice. The answer is that choice can sometimes be a positive thing, and sometimes a negative thing, as discussed in the book "The Paradox of Choice". (There's also an interesting TED talk introduction to the topic, which I recommend.) It's absolutely wrong to assume that more choice is better.
I agree with you, but I don't know if I see the relevance of what you wrote, unless you are implying that having the choice to manage your installed apps on your homescreens is somehow not a positive thing?
OK, you're referring to the fact that manufacturer tweaked versions aren't available till some months after the Google Nexus version. (And sometimes not at all). You say that makes it non-comparable. I say that's the fundamental problem that makes the Android far worse than iOS for OS updates.
No, that isn't quiet what I'm saying.
I'm saying the improvements in KitKat will be rolled into the manufacturer tweaked versions, and those manufacturer tweaked versions are not necessarily considered Android 4.4 KitKat.
I don't see how that's a problem at all, it certainly isn't a disadvantage over iOS as a platform. If you want the stock version, you can get that. If you prefer a manufacturer tweaked version then you can have that. It's about choice.
As I explained earlier, there are no real downsides to this outside of specialized apps and 3d games.
??? Because time matters. You do know that. Just because you prefer Android overall doesn't mean it's a good idea for you to pretend that iOS doesn't have advantages in areas where it does.
I do prefer Android, but that doesn't blind me to any advantages iOS may have. The only advnatage I've ever seen is having a .com button in the keyboard by default. Not a great selling point.
Manufacturer tweaked versions having a development schedule to stock android is not a disadvantage. It's just different.
Ubuntu may not have a new feature Debian has as soon as they have it, but they may roll their own new feature separate from that (not a great analogy as I know most features are in the kernel, but hopefully you get my point).
You just wrote the exact same thing twice.
You knew damn well what I meant. Once again you ignored the argument being made and focused on a typo. Indicating you have no counter-argument, so I'll accept your pettiness as admitting you were wrong.
Who cares? Whether they are on a homescreen or in the app drawer makes no difference functionally unless you for some reason need everything there and arranged in alphabetical order, if you need that then great, you don't need to get so emotional about it.
Ahh, and here we have it. There is a large functional difference, ideally that having my most frequently used apps arranged in the way I like allows me to be more productive. Perhaps only a slight increase, but more productive nevertheless.
With your response of "Who cares" you are dismissing that extra functionality, that extra choice because you personally and subjectively see no value in it.
What cannot be denied though, is the additional choice exists on Android. iOS deprives you of that choice and functionality.
And on iOS instead of having "the rest" in the app drawer they just end up on additional homescreens, it's essentially the same thing.
Except it's not. It's a mess and unnecessary clutter, with no other alternative.
Anyway, I'm done arguing with you about it. You've realized I have a point, after I made it repeatedly.
The closing point is that just because you don't personally see value in added functionality, doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Glad I could get that through to you.
A SmartTV is a boon for me. I don't need a separate device like a roku or chromecast to access youtube or netflix, and those things can't do DLNA while the TV can. No extra device, no extra power usage...and the price difference is about what the most expensive roku costs anyway.
Just because you don't see benefits, does not mean they do not exist.
You expect consumers to care about privacy, but what does it cost him to care? You almost can't buy a decent TV these days that's not "smart".
That isn't true. I'm buying a TV soon and Smart TVs are always a few hundred extra...plenty of "dumb" models still available.
A great many of them were in the null pointer dereference checker, and were an entire category of exploit that was unknown until the NSA contributed SELinux
Unknown? No, that's Hyperbole and FUD. Less common maybe.
I disagree that an online class is inferior. Far too often lecturers don't really do anything more than quote a textbook verbatim.
The online approach allows for an easier way to look up things on the fly (alleviating the need for expensive textbooks somewhat) and allows a greater degree of social participation through things like forums.
It also allows more freedom for different methods of learning, instead of assuming everyone learns in the same way.
That's great. 2013, Slashdot allows HTML, and can't even display an unordered list properly.
There are so many problems with prisons in this country it's not funny.
Lets see...
I'm sure there's more....
Sigh. Why is it so hard for you to just admit you're wrong on this one particular point?
You've conveniently ignored my point, by focusing on the fact that I said homescreen and not homescreen.
Let me repeat it for you, clearly and succinctly.
On iOS, users have no choice but to have icons for all installed applications displayed on their homescreen(s), only being able to organize them in folders or move to to different homescreens, but not prevent them from displaying.
Androids users are not faced with that restrictions. There is the option of the exact same functionality without ever having to use the app drawer, or you can have only the icons you want on a homescreen and use the app drawer for the rest. I find this far, far more efficient, and even if you disagree on that point, it's nice to have the choice.
For some reason, you consider this added, different functionality as "additional duplication", when this is clearly not the case. It is not duplicated functionality, it's different functionality. The fact that it can behave exactly like the iPhone as well as in a different way should indicate that.
Let me give you an example on how my Android is set up. I have one screen of games, a screen of somewhat frequently used apps, and my main screen has my most frequently used apps, as well as some widgets. I simply can't have this setup on iOS. It is technically impossible.
Oh sure, I can arrange icons in the same way, but then I would have no choice to have additional homescreens with all the other apps I have installed. At the very least, it would be one folder with apps in it making an additional homescreen.
Just to lay this out further, since I expect you to ignore my argument and focus on semantics. On iOS, I could have one homescreen with 20 games icons, not in any folders. I could have a second homescreen, with 20 apps, with no folders. And a 3rd homescreen with 20 of my most frequently used apps.
If that is all that I want and I have more apps installed, well it wont work. If I have 40 apps installed, I would either have to have another 2 homescreens without using folders, or at the very least one additional homescreen with 2 folders or some mix of folders and icons.
That is a technical difference. iOS is unable to give me an option that Android does, while Android offers both methods.
Because that's how Android has worked...for some time now. Having owned a Samsung phone, I know that I don't get pushed the latest updates from Google...I get updates for their modified Android on Samsung's own schedule.
Those figures don't extend to HTC, Samsung, LG etc versions of Android, which are not considered KitKat but will still incorporate most of the improvements.
I'm also not sure why you brought up CyanogenMod. I referred to stock Android, not Cyanogen.
Anyway, I'm not sure why you were trying to argue why iPhones having access to new versions of their operating system was an advantage over android phones, that also have access to new versions of their operating system.
Well, here we have a problem. You're making an assumption here, about the average user, and not backing it up with any link or source of your own.
All we know in fact is that the average user has 88 downloaded apps. It's fine to speculate about how much non-average users are skewing the average, or how close the average is to the median....but that's all it is, speculation.
So far, all we know is that on average, users tend to have 108 apps on their iPhones. If you have a better source showing different, I'd love to see it.
As far as homescreens, yes, I did think there were 12 icons per screen. I'm not sure why...perhaps that was on older phones? Anyway, yes, that's 5 pages. 5 pages that the only way to reduce is by using folders. That is the only way.
The app drawer method, regardless of if you think it better or not, gives you an alternative. So again, you are arguing that more choice is somehow a negative thing.
It's hard to say that the US dominates most sports it cares about, when there are not a lot of international competitors. Gridiron, Baseball and Basketball...it's mainly only the US that plays these sports.
Considering US performance in the Olympics and other sports that are played worldwide, like soccer, and it's even harder to make the argument of the US dominating at sports.
This is where you became objectively incorrect.
You cannot do the same thing on iOS, not by any stretch of the imagination. It is a technical limitation, not a subjective preference.
You have no choice but to have your icons on iOS. You can hide them in folders, but you still need them on the homescreen.
That's not true on Android. If I only want to have 3 icons and no folders across 2 homescreens, I can. That is impossible on iOS.
Again, you're trying to argue that a lack of choice is an advantage, It isn't.
Your second sentence indicates a lack of understanding about how the App Drawer actually works.
More than happy to apologize. I think too often in these debates on slashdot names like that get hurled around...I expect it and it never really bothers me much. I was kind of surprised to see that I struck first...
The figures are meaningless because measuring stock Android adoption does nothing to show it's actual adoption. Think of it like this...measuring adoption rates for the latest Debian upgrade only measures Debian users. It doesn't also measure every distro based on Debian that is slower to roll those changes into their version, or omit those changes and provide their own.
The changes KitKat brings will be pushed out to other phones and versions of android, even if they don't use stock Android KitKat.
All users do have access to stock Android, so that isn't an advantage iOS users have. It's just that most users tend to stick with their manufacturer modified version due to not caring, or actually liking that version better.
Not sure if that's a fair paraphrasing of what I said.
The app drawer uses far more screen space than a homescreen does, and I find it easier to navigate when looking for a specific app as things are arranged alphabetically, as opposed to order installed in.
If I have 200 apps, I can have 2 homescreens with 20 of my most frequently used apps, and go to the app drawer if I need to.
I don't have that choice on ios.