1. by your definition of 'nonfunctional', every appliance in the world is nonfunctional 2. the iPad is ugly because your pre-tween daughter says so? how about the millions that have been sold? were they all sold to blind people? 3. Apple got by on 'brand'? are you serious? Is 'brand' the reason that the iPad doesn't suffer any of the faults that the *story you are posting about* pointed out! 4. have you ever used an iPad? the battery lasts *forever* the whole thing is battery. The question of non-changeable batteries has been asked and answered by millions and millions of people who are delighted with their iPods/iPhones/iPads--none of which have changeable batteries--it's over, let it go. 5. oh right, we can't trust the hundreds of published reports on sales volumes (including revenue reporting from Apple, apparently they are just printing the money)--because no one really releases the real numbers and you went to a mall which had iPads for sale but had to scrape Amazon to find an Archos, and therefore Archos tablets have outsold iPads. Do you even listen to your self?
Your whole post was the worst kind of pathetic Apple-bashing and Android apologizing. You should to just accept that there are millions of people out there that want something different from their devices than what you want. That doesn't mean that they only care about 'brand' or that they are too stupid to understand changeable batteries or multi-tasking. Because frankly, you sound like a whiny little brat.
Apple exercises totalitarian control so that there aren't a sea of buggy and/or malicious apps out there like on Windows. It improves their customer experience which is why their customers like it. If you don't, then don't by an iPhone--just go buy some shitty Android and leave the rest of us alone.
Apple doesn't scrutinize the copyrights of every app that is submitted to them--that would be an impossible task. They do what everyone else does, waits for a complaint.
There are millions of Apps out there--it takes a while for Apple to process these complaints.
Seriously, is this all you have to feel indignant about? that some company somewhere is selling something that their customers want and just because it isn't what *you* want then the rest of us have to suffer your adolescent little shit fits?
Apple has been on a spirited campaign to make electronic appliances that normal people can use and want to use.
The smug technoratti think that electronic devices should only be used freely by geeks who are willing and able to spend a large fraction of their time babysitting those devices.
It's a fucking phone--stop pretending that you are Nelson Mandela.
Apple is asserting that the customer be given a choice whether to go through them or another vehicle; as far as I know there is nothing preventing the app from just charging the customer for the Apple tax if they choose to go that route.
I think it is a little bit silly rule, though possibly well-intended, and I expect it to get amended to allow for Amazon, etc.
iOS is a different animal than Windows. That's why it works reliably and people like it.
choice be given to the consumer whether to use the Apple in-app purchase or whether to use some other avenue. I don't see anything stopping them from charging more for an in-app purchase.
I imagine Amazon could negotiate a less than 30% cut for in-app purchases.
Nobody is forcing anyone to give Apple 30% of anything. Nobody is forcing anyone to sell anything using the Apple store.
The rule (which has existed for awhile) is that if you offer something via an in-app purchase, you need to offer the customer the choice of making that purchase via Apple's in-app purchase model. If you want to charge difference prices for the two then I don't know of anything which prohibits that.
I think it is a little bit silly rule--but I think the intent is for customers to feel safe making in-app purchases and not feel like they need to give out their payment info to a dozen different companies.
They are enforcing the original rules, which is that if you make an app that has a notion of in-app purchasing--you have to offer the content via Apple's in-app purchasing model, although you are free to offer the user the choice of two models and there's nothing that says they have to be the same price as far as I know.
Apple can't possibly require anyone who sells something over a website to also sell it through an Apple portal. Doesn't even make sense as phrased.
This probably has something to do with vendors who have an iPhone/iPad app that jumps out of the app to a webpage for making purchases and then downloads content consumed by the app--neatly circumventing the Apple 30% cut. Still kinda a dick move, though.
I also think it could be a big problem for Apple if Steve Jobs isn't able to lead anymore, but not because he lends some sort of cool hipster vibe to the product line. His cool hipster vibe isn't the reason that the iPhone is an incredibly easy to use, reliable and polished piece of hardware--it's because he has an unbending focus on making incredibly easy to use, reliable, and polished pieces of hardware and software.
There's a whole lot of engineering effort and industrial design that goes into making a great product--and it is incredibly expensive, which was the point of the original post. Apple spends a lot of money on development and other companies try to piggyback off of that. Some moron responded that Apple doesn't (in fact) spend any money on R&D--they just polish other peoples work and do intense marketing--which is so outrageously stupid I can't believe I even bothered responding to it.
And then you responded saying something equally stupid about garbage collectors--all caught up now?
Do you even read what you write? People buy Apple products because they are, frankly, pretty awesome. If they continue to be awesome post-Jobs then people will keep buying them. If not, then they won't.
makes medicine, makes the internet, makes planes fly, explains why birds fly and where babies comes from also tells us that evolution is how we got to where we are. Modern biology *is* evolutionary biology. If you want to become a doctor or a scientist or even a moderately informed citizen--you need to understand evolution and fit it into your belief system somewhere just like millions of other people before you have--including millions of engineers/doctors/scientists who are also Christians.
In the computer industry, the most impressive displays of stupidity generally result from linear extrapolation.
There will be 'exascale' computers, they just won't look like scaled up versions of today's computers, where the bulk of the die area, power, and complexity is spent on making something which is programmable by a hoard of low-skill programmers and performs equally poorly for thousands of different applications. The whole notion of general-purpose for the supercomputer industry is kinda silly, considering that there are only a handful of applications which justify the expense of building such a computer.
Just design a specialized machine for each of those applications and one can get a factor of hundred improvement.
My impression is that you are pretty locked into a now-antiquated world where basic computing endpoint devices require an extreme amount of management and administration. Prepare to watch the world go wizzing past you.
When my company rolled out iPad/iPhone support, it looked like this:
1. Buy yourself an iPad (or heck, here's some money and go buy one yourself) 2. When you do, go download this free app (which runs on Android/iPhone/iPad/etc) that lets you easily access and check your work email (here's the security code to use) 3. You can also access this free Citrix portal app that lets you connect to the internal network (remote-desktop/vnc/etc/Outlook/etc. here's the security code to use)
Don't need 'anti-virus/anti-malware' crap because, well, it's an Apple product, and it accesses the corporate network via secure and well defined protocols. If the iPad is lost/stolen, they invalidate the codes those apps use to connect to the network. If they need to distribute a custom app (which generally they wouldn't because they could just make it a public app with a security-code), they can do so via an Enterprise license.
that they can't do on an iOS platform. Now explain why that isn't stopping millions and millions of average users from buying iOS devices and being completely satisified with them (and replacing them with the next updated iOS device).
Slashdot Mirror
1. by your definition of 'nonfunctional', every appliance in the world is nonfunctional
2. the iPad is ugly because your pre-tween daughter says so? how about the millions that have been sold? were they all sold to blind people?
3. Apple got by on 'brand'? are you serious? Is 'brand' the reason that the iPad doesn't suffer any of the faults that the *story you are posting about* pointed out!
4. have you ever used an iPad? the battery lasts *forever* the whole thing is battery. The question of non-changeable batteries has been asked and answered by millions and millions of people who are delighted with their iPods/iPhones/iPads--none of which have changeable batteries--it's over, let it go.
5. oh right, we can't trust the hundreds of published reports on sales volumes (including revenue reporting from Apple, apparently they are just printing the money)--because no one really releases the real numbers and you went to a mall which had iPads for sale but had to scrape Amazon to find an Archos, and therefore Archos tablets have outsold iPads. Do you even listen to your self?
Your whole post was the worst kind of pathetic Apple-bashing and Android apologizing. You should to just accept that there are millions of people out there that want something different from their devices than what you want. That doesn't mean that they only care about 'brand' or that they are too stupid to understand changeable batteries or multi-tasking. Because frankly, you sound like a whiny little brat.
There is nothing requiring the book to be sold on the Apple Store. This is an in-app purchase.
Apple exercises totalitarian control so that there aren't a sea of buggy and/or malicious apps out there like on Windows. It improves their customer experience which is why their customers like it. If you don't, then don't by an iPhone--just go buy some shitty Android and leave the rest of us alone.
Apple doesn't scrutinize the copyrights of every app that is submitted to them--that would be an impossible task. They do what everyone else does, waits for a complaint.
There are millions of Apps out there--it takes a while for Apple to process these complaints.
Seriously, is this all you have to feel indignant about? that some company somewhere is selling something that their customers want and just because it isn't what *you* want then the rest of us have to suffer your adolescent little shit fits?
Apple has been on a spirited campaign to make electronic appliances that normal people can use and want to use.
The smug technoratti think that electronic devices should only be used freely by geeks who are willing and able to spend a large fraction of their time babysitting those devices.
It's a fucking phone--stop pretending that you are Nelson Mandela.
Apple is asserting that the customer be given a choice whether to go through them or another vehicle; as far as I know there is nothing preventing the app from just charging the customer for the Apple tax if they choose to go that route.
I think it is a little bit silly rule, though possibly well-intended, and I expect it to get amended to allow for Amazon, etc.
iOS is a different animal than Windows. That's why it works reliably and people like it.
choice be given to the consumer whether to use the Apple in-app purchase or whether to use some other avenue. I don't see anything stopping them from charging more for an in-app purchase.
I imagine Amazon could negotiate a less than 30% cut for in-app purchases.
Nobody is forcing anyone to give Apple 30% of anything. Nobody is forcing anyone to sell anything using the Apple store.
The rule (which has existed for awhile) is that if you offer something via an in-app purchase, you need to offer the customer the choice of making that purchase via Apple's in-app purchase model. If you want to charge difference prices for the two then I don't know of anything which prohibits that.
I think it is a little bit silly rule--but I think the intent is for customers to feel safe making in-app purchases and not feel like they need to give out their payment info to a dozen different companies.
That would be really awful, and *illegal*. What if you decide to start molesting goats? There are so many things to worry about...
They are enforcing the original rules, which is that if you make an app that has a notion of in-app purchasing--you have to offer the content via Apple's in-app purchasing model, although you are free to offer the user the choice of two models and there's nothing that says they have to be the same price as far as I know.
Apple can't possibly require anyone who sells something over a website to also sell it through an Apple portal. Doesn't even make sense as phrased.
This probably has something to do with vendors who have an iPhone/iPad app that jumps out of the app to a webpage for making purchases and then downloads content consumed by the app--neatly circumventing the Apple 30% cut. Still kinda a dick move, though.
I also think it could be a big problem for Apple if Steve Jobs isn't able to lead anymore, but not because he lends some sort of cool hipster vibe to the product line. His cool hipster vibe isn't the reason that the iPhone is an incredibly easy to use, reliable and polished piece of hardware--it's because he has an unbending focus on making incredibly easy to use, reliable, and polished pieces of hardware and software.
There's a whole lot of engineering effort and industrial design that goes into making a great product--and it is incredibly expensive, which was the point of the original post. Apple spends a lot of money on development and other companies try to piggyback off of that. Some moron responded that Apple doesn't (in fact) spend any money on R&D--they just polish other peoples work and do intense marketing--which is so outrageously stupid I can't believe I even bothered responding to it.
And then you responded saying something equally stupid about garbage collectors--all caught up now?
Do you even read what you write? People buy Apple products because they are, frankly, pretty awesome. If they continue to be awesome post-Jobs then people will keep buying them. If not, then they won't.
but for millions of people out there the difference is night and day.
Do you have any idea how many people Apple employs doing HW/SW R&D? care to compare that to other companies?
Do you think that the all those billion dollar products just fall from the frickin sky?
makes medicine, makes the internet, makes planes fly, explains why birds fly and where babies comes from also tells us that evolution is how we got to where we are. Modern biology *is* evolutionary biology. If you want to become a doctor or a scientist or even a moderately informed citizen--you need to understand evolution and fit it into your belief system somewhere just like millions of other people before you have--including millions of engineers/doctors/scientists who are also Christians.
Try that.
In the computer industry, the most impressive displays of stupidity generally result from linear extrapolation.
There will be 'exascale' computers, they just won't look like scaled up versions of today's computers, where the bulk of the die area, power, and complexity is spent on making something which is programmable by a hoard of low-skill programmers and performs equally poorly for thousands of different applications. The whole notion of general-purpose for the supercomputer industry is kinda silly, considering that there are only a handful of applications which justify the expense of building such a computer.
Just design a specialized machine for each of those applications and one can get a factor of hundred improvement.
elevator is a lift and french fries are chips, right?
I'll wait for you to reboot and apply patches before responding.
My impression is that you are pretty locked into a now-antiquated world where basic computing endpoint devices require an extreme amount of management and administration. Prepare to watch the world go wizzing past you.
When my company rolled out iPad/iPhone support, it looked like this:
1. Buy yourself an iPad (or heck, here's some money and go buy one yourself)
2. When you do, go download this free app (which runs on Android/iPhone/iPad/etc) that lets you easily access and check your work email (here's the security code to use)
3. You can also access this free Citrix portal app that lets you connect to the internal network (remote-desktop/vnc/etc/Outlook/etc. here's the security code to use)
Don't need 'anti-virus/anti-malware' crap because, well, it's an Apple product, and it accesses the corporate network via secure and well defined protocols. If the iPad is lost/stolen, they invalidate the codes those apps use to connect to the network. If they need to distribute a custom app (which generally they wouldn't because they could just make it a public app with a security-code), they can do so via an Enterprise license.
Done. Welcome to 2011.
that they can't do on an iOS platform. Now explain why that isn't stopping millions and millions of average users from buying iOS devices and being completely satisified with them (and replacing them with the next updated iOS device).
that they can't recompile the Linux kernel while watching flash videos?
No flash, though.
funney
Because I don't own a Motorola. I own an iPhone. Apple likes its customers and tries not to cultivate hatred amongst them.
All companies which produce locked-down appliances are not equal.