They are required by law to not misrepresent facts in quarterly disclosures.
I don't understand why you so desperately need to believe that Apple loses money on hardware and makes it back on iTunes; just look at the total number of Apps/music sold on iTunes, multiply that by their percentage and if even they had absolutely no overhead costs at all to run the store (like, say, their gigantic data centers) then it still wouldn't come anywhere close to justifying why they have $70 Billion in cash *right now*.
Learning vi or emacs is worth the learning curve because it enables the user to work more productively when performing complex tasks. Typical users of these programs use them 8+ hours a day for years and years; the learning curve is amortized over an incredible amount of actual usage.
Pretty much any other application that you will ever write will not be used nearly this much and doesn't have the same learning curve/total productivity-gain tradeoff. The problem arises when developers get a big head and think that their shitty litte app justifies the same learning curve investment as vi or emacs; or they think that what makes a technical user productive is the same thing that makes a non-technical user productive.
Until you can stop thinking about your users as "lazy morons" you will be doomed to producing crap.
doesn't mean that there are any jobs available in that career--although it is an understandable assumption. And frankly, it is just a horrible time to be looking for a job in almost any profession.
My advice is to look at who is hiring and for what, and try to morph yourself into the ideal candidate for that job.
Nobody cares about your petulant little bitchy opinion of Apple.
You get one life, thus far you have wasted it on a silly feud with a corporation that isn't aware that you exist. What are you going to do with the rest of it?
You may not be aware that many iPads are being sold as "the best tool for the job" in various industries, including point-of-sale applications and augmentative communications devices for the disabled.
Obviously they account for a small percentage and so your point stands, but just FYI.
You can drop the 'status' crap. People don't buy Apple to look cool. That's like saying that people only buy Lexus to look cool.
The justice system has been around for awhile. It has many flaws, but smart people have actually tried to think through some of this stuff. You should consider that perhaps your 30 seconds of analysis is inferior to hundreds of years of trial and error.
Have you ever seen an Apple product? it's all unibody brushed aluminum now. PCs are, for the most part, rickety flexing plastic.
Retail for computers is back for a simple reason--how computers look and feel is more important now than it has ever been as computers have become increasingly portable and consumerized. People want to hold and feel it before buying.
Apple controls the Javascript engine on their platform and their hardware will be designed to be power efficient for typical Javascript/HTML5 code (efficient video rendering, etc.). They also influence the standards process so they can steer things in a more battery-friendly direction.
They aren't at the mercy of a poorly supported 3rd party binary with whatever algorithms Adobe wants to use, and poor support for dedicated platform-specific hardware accelerators.
Now I'm certain that you don't understand computers.
iPhones and iPads are solidly engineered all the way around (hardware and software) and [yes] targeted at a non-technical audience, but still quite usable by nerds.
I don't understand the condescending attitude that many nerds have about iOS devices and their users.
That's fine, but why do you hang out on a technology web site?
Apple strongly supports HTML5 (and HTML5 is quickly acquiring all of Flash's capabilities) as a means of writing un-curated apps for iOS devices. There is no regression back to anything. All Apple wants is that the Apps which run on their platform won't destroy battery life, steal data, crash, or otherwise annoy their customers. This can be done by writing curated native apps or by working within industry standard protocols for uncurated web apps. Seems pretty simple to me. But then again, I understand how computers work and you don't.
it was the market that demanded native apps, Apple has been diligently pursuing the HTML5 path to provide as close to a native experience as possible for Web apps.
It's amazing to me all these people that are just sure they know what was going on in Steve Jobs' head in 2007--all possible evidence to the contrary.
The existence of a well-polished SDK 1 year after iPhone launch isn't proof that they were planning on 3rd party apps all along--obviously they had to write apps internally which means they would have had much of the SDK put together even if just for internal development.
I personally think that Apple planned to have some number of 3rd party apps from large sophisticated customers (like the Google Maps and Youtube apps they had at launch), and they were genuinely hoping that Web apps would cover pretty much everybody else. If you put yourself back in 2007 then that's what made sense, because many analysts thought it would be a stretch for Apple to ever sell 1 million phones--which arguably wouldn't support much of an app ecosystem. Also, processing power and memory were genuine limiters then.
You cast this as some sort of malicious bait and switch and I just don't see it. I think even now Apple would be happy if half of the App Store apps were instead made available as HTML 5 web pages, and they have been doing everything possible to enable that path.
My experience is that moderate libertarians are unable to agree amongst themselves what things should be paid for with taxes, but they all agree it should be "less". In most ways they are indistinguishable from fiscal conservative Republicans or the slightly washed fraction of tea partiers.
Answer this question, someone who chooses not to (or cannot) purchase any insurance in your Libertarian utopia and then develops a serious and expensive to treat medical condition--should they be allowed to die? Children included? Physically disabled? Elderly?
You are too stupid to understand what I was trying to explain to you.
IEEE-1394 is a standard which exists with some Apple patents thrown in under FRAND terms. Anyone can build using IEEE-1394 and Apple doesn't insist on reciprocal access to all of the licensees intellectual property as a condition. That's how things are supposed to work.
and that places the value of Apple's products in the billions. It doesn't matter if you disagree.
Here's a question, yes or no. Should Samsung be allowed to make literal copies of Apple products in exchange for Apple licensing technology built into an industry standard?
Slashdot Mirror
and I own an iPad.
Your move, Einstein.
They are required by law to not misrepresent facts in quarterly disclosures.
I don't understand why you so desperately need to believe that Apple loses money on hardware and makes it back on iTunes; just look at the total number of Apps/music sold on iTunes, multiply that by their percentage and if even they had absolutely no overhead costs at all to run the store (like, say, their gigantic data centers) then it still wouldn't come anywhere close to justifying why they have $70 Billion in cash *right now*.
Learning vi or emacs is worth the learning curve because it enables the user to work more productively when performing complex tasks. Typical users of these programs use them 8+ hours a day for years and years; the learning curve is amortized over an incredible amount of actual usage.
Pretty much any other application that you will ever write will not be used nearly this much and doesn't have the same learning curve/total productivity-gain tradeoff. The problem arises when developers get a big head and think that their shitty litte app justifies the same learning curve investment as vi or emacs; or they think that what makes a technical user productive is the same thing that makes a non-technical user productive.
Until you can stop thinking about your users as "lazy morons" you will be doomed to producing crap.
doesn't mean that there are any jobs available in that career--although it is an understandable assumption. And frankly, it is just a horrible time to be looking for a job in almost any profession.
My advice is to look at who is hiring and for what, and try to morph yourself into the ideal candidate for that job.
with an MS in applied math/CS focus?
Do you look at some list of the hottest jobs and see somewhere "applied math/CS"? I would be pretty surprised if that was the case.
Nobody cares about your petulant little bitchy opinion of Apple.
You get one life, thus far you have wasted it on a silly feud with a corporation that isn't aware that you exist. What are you going to do with the rest of it?
You may not be aware that many iPads are being sold as "the best tool for the job" in various industries, including point-of-sale applications and augmentative communications devices for the disabled.
Obviously they account for a small percentage and so your point stands, but just FYI.
You can drop the 'status' crap. People don't buy Apple to look cool. That's like saying that people only buy Lexus to look cool.
Lets talk about what else you have going on in your life. We're all here to help, but most importantly, we're here to listen. This is a safe place.
Can you make a copy of it, change the ending, burn the original, and resell the new version?
That's exactly what Pystar was doing in this case. If you did that to your copy of Harry Potter then you would fully expect some legal ramifications.
The justice system has been around for awhile. It has many flaws, but smart people have actually tried to think through some of this stuff. You should consider that perhaps your 30 seconds of analysis is inferior to hundreds of years of trial and error.
Have you ever seen an Apple product? it's all unibody brushed aluminum now. PCs are, for the most part, rickety flexing plastic.
Retail for computers is back for a simple reason--how computers look and feel is more important now than it has ever been as computers have become increasingly portable and consumerized. People want to hold and feel it before buying.
Apple controls the Javascript engine on their platform and their hardware will be designed to be power efficient for typical Javascript/HTML5 code (efficient video rendering, etc.). They also influence the standards process so they can steer things in a more battery-friendly direction.
They aren't at the mercy of a poorly supported 3rd party binary with whatever algorithms Adobe wants to use, and poor support for dedicated platform-specific hardware accelerators.
Now I'm certain that you don't understand computers.
iPhones and iPads are solidly engineered all the way around (hardware and software) and [yes] targeted at a non-technical audience, but still quite usable by nerds.
I don't understand the condescending attitude that many nerds have about iOS devices and their users.
I think the poster's point was that proprietary web access protocols are ultimately doomed.
iOS success in partly attributable to having a great, unfiltered, standards-compliant browser. In 2007 this was quite innovative on a mobile device.
who couldn't be easily defeated in debate by a 12 year old. It's actually kind of boring.
Okay, fine, whatever, Somalia is only one possible example of Libertarianism--you know, the one which taxes==theft.
That's fine, but why do you hang out on a technology web site?
Apple strongly supports HTML5 (and HTML5 is quickly acquiring all of Flash's capabilities) as a means of writing un-curated apps for iOS devices. There is no regression back to anything. All Apple wants is that the Apps which run on their platform won't destroy battery life, steal data, crash, or otherwise annoy their customers. This can be done by writing curated native apps or by working within industry standard protocols for uncurated web apps. Seems pretty simple to me. But then again, I understand how computers work and you don't.
it was the market that demanded native apps, Apple has been diligently pursuing the HTML5 path to provide as close to a native experience as possible for Web apps.
It's amazing to me all these people that are just sure they know what was going on in Steve Jobs' head in 2007--all possible evidence to the contrary.
The existence of a well-polished SDK 1 year after iPhone launch isn't proof that they were planning on 3rd party apps all along--obviously they had to write apps internally which means they would have had much of the SDK put together even if just for internal development.
I personally think that Apple planned to have some number of 3rd party apps from large sophisticated customers (like the Google Maps and Youtube apps they had at launch), and they were genuinely hoping that Web apps would cover pretty much everybody else. If you put yourself back in 2007 then that's what made sense, because many analysts thought it would be a stretch for Apple to ever sell 1 million phones--which arguably wouldn't support much of an app ecosystem. Also, processing power and memory were genuine limiters then.
You cast this as some sort of malicious bait and switch and I just don't see it. I think even now Apple would be happy if half of the App Store apps were instead made available as HTML 5 web pages, and they have been doing everything possible to enable that path.
Because that was the original post.
My experience is that moderate libertarians are unable to agree amongst themselves what things should be paid for with taxes, but they all agree it should be "less". In most ways they are indistinguishable from fiscal conservative Republicans or the slightly washed fraction of tea partiers.
Answer this question, someone who chooses not to (or cannot) purchase any insurance in your Libertarian utopia and then develops a serious and expensive to treat medical condition--should they be allowed to die? Children included? Physically disabled? Elderly?
is criminal. Agreed?
So do you disagree with the original post which says that all taxes are theft?
Aren't taxes theft? that's how this thread started.
Why don't you move to Somalia? Libertarian paradise.
You are too stupid to understand what I was trying to explain to you.
IEEE-1394 is a standard which exists with some Apple patents thrown in under FRAND terms. Anyone can build using IEEE-1394 and Apple doesn't insist on reciprocal access to all of the licensees intellectual property as a condition. That's how things are supposed to work.
Nobody has ever invented anything. Everything is just a refinement or combination of existing technologies.
Seriously, name one invention by any company ever.
and that places the value of Apple's products in the billions. It doesn't matter if you disagree.
Here's a question, yes or no. Should Samsung be allowed to make literal copies of Apple products in exchange for Apple licensing technology built into an industry standard?