is because you [I'm guessing] are 23 years old and you aren't happy with your life. You want to belong to a club and you want a villain; the club you've chosen is "righteously indignant nerd" and predictably you've chosen Apple as your bad guy.
they only then release the source code because they are forced to, as well. It's a crafty move on their part.
Also, IBM--they've stolen so much from open source and then had to reluctantly give some source code back because they were obligated to.
Also anyone who has ever contributed anything to Linux or GNU only did so because they were legally obligated to after having raped and pillaged from the open source community.
Apple is clear and upfront with all customers about the walled garden. Just like Disney is pretty clear when you buy a ticket to Disneyworld that you are going to be restricted in what you can do within their walls. People who go to Disneyworld want to have a child-friendly environment and therefore don't mind that there aren't liquor stores and strip clubs within; you can always go somewhere else if you want those things.
Similarly, if you want a malware-infested fragmented cesspool in then you can buy a different phone.
Is that what you are implying? I think Sony is an excellent example for the point of the article. When Sony developed their walkman they were focused on maximizing customer value with a great product, and the profit followed. After that, the MBAs took over and they (a) stagnated, and (b) focused on customer lockin--and the profit went away.
They probably toyed with the idea of creating a iPod-like thing, but refused to do it because they didn't want it to cut into CD sales.
will kill you and take your stuff. It's pretty much the same answer as to any question about the fundamental purpose of income redistribution in governments.
The only reason that those with "little to no money" don't just overrun your pretty house and take what they want is because we have a government (derived from the consent of the governed) which offers an attractive vision of fairness and potential upward mobility to those with "little to no money".
Now that said, student loans are a pretty mild sacrifice towards this cause--because people generally do pay them back and it helps society in mutliple ways. I, for one, think that the government should be more aggressive in basing the student loan amounts on (a) the grades/test scores of the student, and (b) the value of the degree the student is pursuing.
than Samsung spends on R&D. Do you think that the iPhone and iPad just fell from the sky? There's a huge amount of R&D (probably more D than R, but still) that goes into those things.
What difference does it make if Apple acquired some IP by purchasing other companies--they are still paying for it, right? That's still an R&D expenditure.
What's more, Apple's never tried to submarine their patents into some global telecommunications standard (which required RAND terms, btw) and then came back a few years later and started extorting from licensees in a decidedly discriminatory fashion.
and a search warrant was issued. The judge took into account the journalism angle and concluded (properly) that being a journalist doesn't make you immune to being prosecuted for theft, and being prosecuted for theft requires the same kinds of searches for stolen goods and other evidence of being complicit in a crime. They are free to argue that such evidence isn't admissible in a trial, but they are going to lose that fight (if they haven't already).
Gizmodo stopped being protected by any journalism shield the moment they actively participated in theft of private property. There also appears to be evidence of malicious motives on their part. I don't see journalism anywhere around this case.
Why not use the old FCP while waiting for FCX to catch up?
Apple screwed up with the new FCX release, nobody is debating that. They deserve whatever anger that invokes--I don't think it's indicative of a broader strategy to kill all forms of creativity--which is what the post I was responding to was claiming.
I don't know what you mean about a new document model or dumbing down of MacPros.
Name a single thing you used to be able to do on Mac OS X that you can't do anymore on Mac OS X. They fumbled around with the new Final Cut Pro release--and they're trying to recover from that now. There is absolutely nothing else you can point to. You can still run Flash on OSX.
The 'iLine' is a new line of products specifically targeted at the handheld/mobile market. It has different constraints and craves a different solution. In case you haven't noticed, they're doing pretty well. Millions of people who otherwise wouldn't be using smart devices now are; and it hasn't prevented anyone from doing anything they could do before on Macs or any other kind of computer. If you think there is something bad about a type of technology just because it is aimed at non-technical users; then you just flat out do not understand the point of technology. Like many other so-called nerds on this forum, you think the point of technology is to create some sort of exclusive club with a sign out front that says "you must know *this* much about tech to enter".
BTW: if you are naive enough to think that the absence of web standards leads to a better, more democratic internet, then you are a lost cause.
Nobody cares that you are having some sort of one-sided feud with Apple. What the hell is your deal with Turing, anyway? did you just watch some documentary?
there are laws against copying look & feel for products in general, with explicit exclusions only for some markets. Computing devices isn't one of the exclusions.
B: It's lame. Have some frickin self-respect, Samsung.
and I chose an iPhone. I don't care that I can't easily modify the software on it; just like I don't care that I can't easily modify the software on my microwave.
iTunes doesn't add DRM to music ripped from your own CDs, and never has.
DRM was at the insistence of the music companies--Apple eventually convinced them to drop it. Apple's contracts with the music companies effectively prevented them from licensing Fairplay because those contracts made Apple responsible for hiding the necessary secrets for implementing Fairplay. There was one lawsuit by Real, but they lost it.
DRM was insisted upon by the Music companies--Apple eventually talked them out of it. Before Apple, for all intents and purposes there wasn't legal online music.
GE doesn't let you put your own software on your microwave--because it is an appliance. Do you own a microwave? then you are a hypocrite.
Slashdot Mirror
is because you [I'm guessing] are 23 years old and you aren't happy with your life. You want to belong to a club and you want a villain; the club you've chosen is "righteously indignant nerd" and predictably you've chosen Apple as your bad guy.
they only then release the source code because they are forced to, as well. It's a crafty move on their part.
Also, IBM--they've stolen so much from open source and then had to reluctantly give some source code back because they were obligated to.
Also anyone who has ever contributed anything to Linux or GNU only did so because they were legally obligated to after having raped and pillaged from the open source community.
Apple is clear and upfront with all customers about the walled garden. Just like Disney is pretty clear when you buy a ticket to Disneyworld that you are going to be restricted in what you can do within their walls. People who go to Disneyworld want to have a child-friendly environment and therefore don't mind that there aren't liquor stores and strip clubs within; you can always go somewhere else if you want those things.
Similarly, if you want a malware-infested fragmented cesspool in then you can buy a different phone.
Try reading it more carefully.
you from understanding the chart. The x-axis is "time beyond introduction date of the phone".
But that would be a non-traditional usage of the word "most".
millions of people are.
Is that what you are implying? I think Sony is an excellent example for the point of the article. When Sony developed their walkman they were focused on maximizing customer value with a great product, and the profit followed. After that, the MBAs took over and they (a) stagnated, and (b) focused on customer lockin--and the profit went away.
They probably toyed with the idea of creating a iPod-like thing, but refused to do it because they didn't want it to cut into CD sales.
Apple's market position is in absolutely no risk so long as all potential competitors think that their success is all about 'marketing'.
You've now proven that you know nothing about both business and technology. Presumably you are good at something else? gardening maybe?
will kill you and take your stuff. It's pretty much the same answer as to any question about the fundamental purpose of income redistribution in governments.
The only reason that those with "little to no money" don't just overrun your pretty house and take what they want is because we have a government (derived from the consent of the governed) which offers an attractive vision of fairness and potential upward mobility to those with "little to no money".
Now that said, student loans are a pretty mild sacrifice towards this cause--because people generally do pay them back and it helps society in mutliple ways. I, for one, think that the government should be more aggressive in basing the student loan amounts on (a) the grades/test scores of the student, and (b) the value of the degree the student is pursuing.
What are you, like 15?
than Samsung spends on R&D. Do you think that the iPhone and iPad just fell from the sky? There's a huge amount of R&D (probably more D than R, but still) that goes into those things.
What difference does it make if Apple acquired some IP by purchasing other companies--they are still paying for it, right? That's still an R&D expenditure.
What's more, Apple's never tried to submarine their patents into some global telecommunications standard (which required RAND terms, btw) and then came back a few years later and started extorting from licensees in a decidedly discriminatory fashion.
What the hell are you talking about?
and a search warrant was issued. The judge took into account the journalism angle and concluded (properly) that being a journalist doesn't make you immune to being prosecuted for theft, and being prosecuted for theft requires the same kinds of searches for stolen goods and other evidence of being complicit in a crime. They are free to argue that such evidence isn't admissible in a trial, but they are going to lose that fight (if they haven't already).
Basically, a crime was committed here.
Gizmodo stopped being protected by any journalism shield the moment they actively participated in theft of private property. There also appears to be evidence of malicious motives on their part. I don't see journalism anywhere around this case.
Why not use the old FCP while waiting for FCX to catch up?
Apple screwed up with the new FCX release, nobody is debating that. They deserve whatever anger that invokes--I don't think it's indicative of a broader strategy to kill all forms of creativity--which is what the post I was responding to was claiming.
I don't know what you mean about a new document model or dumbing down of MacPros.
Name a single thing you used to be able to do on Mac OS X that you can't do anymore on Mac OS X. They fumbled around with the new Final Cut Pro release--and they're trying to recover from that now. There is absolutely nothing else you can point to. You can still run Flash on OSX.
The 'iLine' is a new line of products specifically targeted at the handheld/mobile market. It has different constraints and craves a different solution. In case you haven't noticed, they're doing pretty well. Millions of people who otherwise wouldn't be using smart devices now are; and it hasn't prevented anyone from doing anything they could do before on Macs or any other kind of computer. If you think there is something bad about a type of technology just because it is aimed at non-technical users; then you just flat out do not understand the point of technology. Like many other so-called nerds on this forum, you think the point of technology is to create some sort of exclusive club with a sign out front that says "you must know *this* much about tech to enter".
BTW: if you are naive enough to think that the absence of web standards leads to a better, more democratic internet, then you are a lost cause.
Nobody cares that you are having some sort of one-sided feud with Apple. What the hell is your deal with Turing, anyway? did you just watch some documentary?
there are laws against copying look & feel for products in general, with explicit exclusions only for some markets. Computing devices isn't one of the exclusions.
B: It's lame. Have some frickin self-respect, Samsung.
that's equally nonsensical, is it equally funny?
You won't be able to understand what it is until you stop trying to think of it as rsync.
and I chose an iPhone. I don't care that I can't easily modify the software on it; just like I don't care that I can't easily modify the software on my microwave.
iTunes doesn't add DRM to music ripped from your own CDs, and never has.
DRM was at the insistence of the music companies--Apple eventually convinced them to drop it. Apple's contracts with the music companies effectively prevented them from licensing Fairplay because those contracts made Apple responsible for hiding the necessary secrets for implementing Fairplay. There was one lawsuit by Real, but they lost it.
DRM was insisted upon by the Music companies--Apple eventually talked them out of it. Before Apple, for all intents and purposes there wasn't legal online music.
GE doesn't let you put your own software on your microwave--because it is an appliance. Do you own a microwave? then you are a hypocrite.
Also, being a remarkable jerk when talking about a guy who died a few days ago.
Are you also upset that iPads don't come with a mouse?
Say hello to 1998 for me.
kinda like how everyone else has a girlfriend or doesn't live in their Mom's basement--people are different.