and in fact native applications are the only way to access certain device features, such as 3D rendering or the camera and microphone.
Not true.
You can access the camera for taking pictures and video from Safari since iOS 6. http://www.webmonkey.com/2012/09/new-html-tricks-for-web-developers-in-apples-ios-6-2/
Can I run Gecko on Chrome OS? Can I replace the native Webview that 3rd party apps use on Android with Gecko? Can an OEM decide to not include Chrome with Android and still license Google's other apps?
When I can buy a PC without Windows, without my supplier feeling pressured to include Windows on it, and the machine costs less...
It's not about being pressured, the supplier can put so much crapware on your Windows computer that they can more than make up the cost of a Windows license.
If Microsoft really wanted me to stop distrusting them, they'd ask the user which search provider they'd like to use (or just choose a random one) rather than make Bing the default
I've never gotten asked which search engine I wanted to use when I install Chrome, launch the browser on an Android device for the first time or use an iOS device (Google pays Apple $100 million a year to be the default search engine), or when I use Firefox.
Nearly 100% of the people that I know who are serious programmers have entirely moved their deployed products to OS solutions such as Linux and MariaDB and their development is generally done on an Apple or Linux PC as those most resemble the deployment platform.
So since everyone you know has done it, it must be a true valid statistical sample?
he iphone 3GS was discontinued in september 2012 (as in up until sep 2012 people were still buying them new on 2 year contracts usually "free") and it isn't supported with ios7 released in september 2013 one year later.
True, but Apple does still release security patches for the 3GS......
That's not an Android issue, its a Verizon issue. It's the main reason that I ditched Verizon. GSM phones are the most open phones.
No it is an Android issue. I've had an iPhone on three of the four major carriers - AT&T, Verizon, and T-Mobile and none of them have ever had carrier installed crapware and I didn't have to wait for the carrier to decide to allow me to update to the latest OS.
I agree with you that this sounds like it ought to be in violation of the Sherman Act, but give the shenanigans Apple has pulled and gotten away with on their ecosystem (rejecting apps that compete with their core offerings, that whole equal pricing through the app store and a merchants website, etc), I highly doubt any legal backlash over this policy.
2010 called they want there meme back.
What next? Are you going to complain that Apple sells DRM'd music?
Facebook can't read your texts on iOS because it's not possible. My app doesn't require a permission to access network state on iOS because my app can't change it anyway.
Why would I ever let a third party app access my text messages? The only thing that I need an app to know about my network state is if I'm connected and if I'm on cellular or wifi.
We're seeing the same thing now with phones as car audio devices... people are using their phone with the radio/car they have NOW, but dedicated Android double-DIN head units are already appearing,
Yes because I really want to tie my cars head unit to Android -- whose manufacturers are well known for continuing updates to old products -- instead of linking my car to a phone that I can update frequently.
Untrue. You can get a Galaxy S4, and HTC One for.99c for free, or a Nokia 920 compared to the the 5s that runs between $125 and $199. You can get an S3 free whereas the the 5c runs between $25 and & $99./i work for a major Telecom and I have to keep track of pricing of who is selling what, for how much, and where.
Neither the s4 or the HTC One have the performance levels of the 5s.
This is one of my favorite comments from apple fans Pro apple people. They claim that Apple is fine since it has the highest profits. Not sure they ever connect the fact that the consumers pay for those huge margins.
In the US, most consumers don't pay more for the iPhone than an equivalent Android. The carrier has to pay a higher subsidy to Apple. It may be argued that it causes all prices to go up across the board but not just Apple users.
If developers are forced to update their apps, then owners of old iPad, Pod, and Phones will be forced to upgrade as well. My Ipads have been left at ios5 with no upgrade path available. Eventually, I will no longer be able to buy apps in the app store.
An app must support iOS 7 != it can't support older devices. IIRC, the latest version of XCode supports back to 4.3.
As someone who does not use apple products and havent since the power PC days ( ok I lie, I had an ipod classic for a short period of time) does this mean there is no way to turn off "automatic updates" in an Idevice? I
The article is only half correct. When an update comes, it is downloaded to the device if there is enough space but not automatically installed. Unfortunately, you can't delete the update.
As for pointing the finger at PC vendors who chased the market share by cutting prices: what do you think all the big smartphone players are doing at the moment? Ever heard of the iPhone 5C? Or the low-end Lumias? It's the same thing. And in this cutthroat market Apple is already on the losing side because they can't afford to sell cheap phones (because of brand image as well as production costs) but more and more people can see that a $600 iPhone is not truly worth 4x more than a $150 Lumia WP or LG Android. Which explains why the iPhone took a dive from 45% to a mere 12% market share in less than 2 years. This does not mean that Apple is dying, but there is a limit to growth and overhype, and we are just starting to see that in their quarterly reports. Ask GM, once the biggest company in the world who now has 1/6 of Apple's assets.
Apple 'a 5c is not cheap. It is still $599 without the carrier subsidy. Apple has been selling last years model for $599 for years.
The iPhone has never had a 48% market share worldwide. It peaked at around 20%. In the first few years it's sales were dwarfed by Nokia globally. There was only one quarter where Apple sold the most smart phones worldwide. That was while Nokia was going down and Samsung was coming up.
You keep focusing on "assets". A company's net worth is not based on assets. No income producing assets are. It's based on the present value of all future expected profits.
In Apple's current markets - mostly where the carrier subsidizes phones - the end user doesn't care about the price. They end up getting a $699 iPhone for the same price as a $450 Android. The carrier pays Apple a higher subsidy.
If Apple just creates a phone with a larger screen, it could take even more market share away from Android in subsidized markets. In the US where the price of the phone is hidden , Apple's been slowly growing market share since it's been on more carriers.
Okay, let's ignore market cap in determining how well a company is doing and let's look at profit.
I've already posted a link showing despite Apple's "market share", it's profit in the cell phone business is higher than every other vendor combined. But let's look at the profitability of Apple compared to those companies who chased after market share in the PC industry by cutting prices......
Apple - $41.73 billion Microsoft - $16.9 billion Dell - $2.73 billion. HP - negative 12.75 billion.
So Apple's profit was also 15x higher than Dell's.
So the question remains, why is seeking "market share" more important to a profit seeking company than....profit.
While I wouldn't dare say that there is no disruptive innovation left. What tech segment could possible be more profitable than the cell phone industry?
The cell phone industry is the perfect industry. There are over 6.7 billion cell phone subscriptions worldwide and about 4.3 billion unique subscribers (http://communities-dominate.blogs.com/brands/2013/03/the-annual-mobile-industry-numbers-and-stats-blog-yep-this-year-we-will-hit-the-mobile-moment.html). The average replacement rate is 18 months. What other industry can match those numbers? On top of that in a lot of Apples markets, those phones are sold cheaply with a contract.
What company is doing anything innovative in consumer tech?
Funny that you bring this up. Sales of PC from Dell and HP are actually improving while Macbooks sales are dwindling. Look at IDC latest numbers. As Mark Twain would say: the reports of the death of PC have been greatly exaggerated.
I never said that the PC is dead. But chasing volume on low margin products is not a recipe for success. Dell went private at a value that was 1/20th of Apple's market cap, HP's PC business is so bad that even when they were the number one PC maker, they were trying to get rid of their PC business. Even now their revenues and profits pale in comparison to Apple and are worth about a 10th of what Apple is worth in terms of market share.
People who bring up growth to explain high turnover at Google are like those Apple marketing magicians who sweep their shrinking market share under the carpet and pretend that what matters is that average users spend more time using iPhones than Androids on a daily basis.
What matters to who? What matters to Apple -- a profit seeking entity --is how much money it makes selling iPhones. Which currently is more than the rest of the cell phone industry combined.
Without launching at boot, how would an application designed to connect to an Internet service notify you of things relevant to your account on that service? For example, if an app store doesn't launch at boot, then you won't get notified about security updates to your existing apps until you happen to look for new apps, which might not be for weeks.
If you have 20 apps that allowed to send notifications, all 20 apps don't need to be in memory. All the apps send the notification to Apple and Apple sends all the notifications to your device. When you click on the notification, it opens the app.
The truce only holds for the patents that they have vested in RockStar. Any patent not fully vested is fair game.
The MS/Apple patent truce dates back to a 5 year patent cross licensing deal back in 1997. Apple and MS haven't gone after each other at all since then.
Slashdot Mirror
Not true.
You can access the camera for taking pictures and video from Safari since iOS 6.
http://www.webmonkey.com/2012/09/new-html-tricks-for-web-developers-in-apples-ios-6-2/
Webgl is also supported.
http://www.webmonkey.com/2012/09/new-html-tricks-for-web-developers-in-apples-ios-6-2/
Can I run Gecko on Chrome OS? Can I replace the native Webview that 3rd party apps use on Android with Gecko? Can an OEM decide to not include Chrome with Android and still license Google's other apps?
It's not about being pressured, the supplier can put so much crapware on your Windows computer that they can more than make up the cost of a Windows license.
I've never gotten asked which search engine I wanted to use when I install Chrome, launch the browser on an Android device for the first time or use an iOS device (Google pays Apple $100 million a year to be the default search engine), or when I use Firefox.
So since everyone you know has done it, it must be a true valid statistical sample?
How is that different from Chrome OS and FireFox OS?
Oh and ask Android OEMs about what happened when they tried using SkyHooks location services....
Can I run a WebKit based browser on FireFox OS?
True, but Apple does still release security patches for the 3GS......
http://support.apple.com/kb/HT...
http://9to5mac.com/2014/02/21/...
It's a bug in the Webview. The source code for Apple's implementation of Webkit is open source as well as the kernel (Darwin).
No it is an Android issue. I've had an iPhone on three of the four major carriers - AT&T, Verizon, and T-Mobile and none of them have ever had carrier installed crapware and I didn't have to wait for the carrier to decide to allow me to update to the latest OS.
How do you propose that a carrier could update the OS on my iPhone?
2010 called they want there meme back.
What next? Are you going to complain that Apple sells DRM'd music?
Why would I ever let a third party app access my text messages? The only thing that I need an app to know about my network state is if I'm connected and if I'm on cellular or wifi.
Yes because I really want to tie my cars head unit to Android -- whose manufacturers are well known for continuing updates to old products -- instead of linking my car to a phone that I can update frequently.
Neither the s4 or the HTC One have the performance levels of the 5s.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/7335/the-iphone-5s-review/5
Their performance comes nowhere near the iPhone 5s.
And are you really saying that a $25 difference between the s3 and the (faster) 5c is consequential - especially considering the 2 year contract?
In the US, most consumers don't pay more for the iPhone than an equivalent Android. The carrier has to pay a higher subsidy to Apple. It may be argued that it causes all prices to go up across the board but not just Apple users.
An app must support iOS 7 != it can't support older devices. IIRC, the latest version of XCode supports back to 4.3.
The article is only half correct. When an update comes, it is downloaded to the device if there is enough space but not automatically installed. Unfortunately, you can't delete the update.
Apple 'a 5c is not cheap. It is still $599 without the carrier subsidy. Apple has been selling last years model for $599 for years.
The iPhone has never had a 48% market share worldwide. It peaked at around 20%. In the first few years it's sales were dwarfed by Nokia globally. There was only one quarter where Apple sold the most smart phones worldwide. That was while Nokia was going down and Samsung was coming up.
You keep focusing on "assets". A company's net worth is not based on assets. No income producing assets are. It's based on the present value of all future expected profits.
In Apple's current markets - mostly where the carrier subsidizes phones - the end user doesn't care about the price. They end up getting a $699 iPhone for the same price as a $450 Android. The carrier pays Apple a higher subsidy.
If Apple just creates a phone with a larger screen, it could take even more market share away from Android in subsidized markets. In the US where the price of the phone is hidden , Apple's been slowly growing market share since it's been on more carriers.
Okay, let's ignore market cap in determining how well a company is doing and let's look at profit.
I've already posted a link showing despite Apple's "market share", it's profit in the cell phone business is higher than every other vendor combined. But let's look at the profitability of Apple compared to those companies who chased after market share in the PC industry by cutting prices......
Fortune 500 2013
http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune500/2013/full_list/
Apple - $41.73 billion
Microsoft - $16.9 billion
Dell - $2.73 billion.
HP - negative 12.75 billion.
So Apple's profit was also 15x higher than Dell's.
So the question remains, why is seeking "market share" more important to a profit seeking company than....profit.
While I wouldn't dare say that there is no disruptive innovation left. What tech segment could possible be more profitable than the cell phone industry?
The cell phone industry is the perfect industry. There are over 6.7 billion cell phone subscriptions worldwide and about 4.3 billion unique subscribers (http://communities-dominate.blogs.com/brands/2013/03/the-annual-mobile-industry-numbers-and-stats-blog-yep-this-year-we-will-hit-the-mobile-moment.html). The average replacement rate is 18 months. What other industry can match those numbers? On top of that in a lot of Apples markets, those phones are sold cheaply with a contract.
What company is doing anything innovative in consumer tech?
I never said that the PC is dead. But chasing volume on low margin products is not a recipe for success. Dell went private at a value that was 1/20th of Apple's market cap, HP's PC business is so bad that even when they were the number one PC maker, they were trying to get rid of their PC business. Even now their revenues and profits pale in comparison to Apple and are worth about a 10th of what Apple is worth in terms of market share.
What matters to who? What matters to Apple -- a profit seeking entity --is how much money it makes selling iPhones. Which currently is more than the rest of the cell phone industry combined.
http://appleinsider.com/articles/13/11/14/apple-samsung-take-massive-109-of-mobile-industry-profits-while-competitors-lose-money
What matters to developers is where they can make the most money -- which is on iOS users.
http://www.businessinsider.com/google-play-revenue-pales-in-comparison-to-app-store-2013-10
So exactly who is market share important to?
How did "market share" help Dell, HP, Gateway, and the other titans of the PC industry? How are they doing now?
https://developer.apple.com/library/ios/documentation/NetworkingInternet/Conceptual/RemoteNotificationsPG/Chapters/ApplePushService.html
tl;dr;
If you have 20 apps that allowed to send notifications, all 20 apps don't need to be in memory. All the apps send the notification to Apple and Apple sends all the notifications to your device. When you click on the notification, it opens the app.
2007 Apple - you don't need native apps. You can build great web apps. Developers complain. Apple released a native SDK.
2009 Palm. You can build great apps using the web technologies you already know. Developers complain. Palm releases native SDK.
2011 RIM announces that you can build great apps using the technology you know. Developers complain. RIM releases native SDK.
The MS/Apple patent truce dates back to a 5 year patent cross licensing deal back in 1997. Apple and MS haven't gone after each other at all since then.