More or less. The cult + those who are woefully uninformed about competing products. Half the people who are buying "ipods" dont even know there are alternatives. Much like most religions there are those who are the true believers and those who simply do not know anything else.
So what are all of these "better" alternatives -- especially to the Touch or the Nano? Every company but Apple has basically abandoned the high capacity market (except for Archos). So what's the alternative to the Classic?
However the ipod is just shit. Its highly proprietary and DRMed out the ass. I pods are more expensive their their equal quality competitors. iTunes is just a bastard of a bit of software. It causes massive stabability issues and is a complete and utter resource hog. Ipods are known to be fragile and scratch prone.
iTunes hasn't sold DRM'd music (or music videos) in over a year and where can you get DRM free video from any store -- either physical or electronic? The iPod plays bog standard MP3, WAV, AAC audio and H.264 and MPeg video. So where are all these cheaper better alternatives to the Touch, Nano, and Classic?
Do you have a source for your claims of fragility and a comparison of the reliability of the iPod compared to other music players?
Apple relies entirely on their cult to fund its sales. Unfortunatly for them their cult dose not make up a 10's of %s so they will stand no chance of taking significant market share. Search engines unlike hardware sales require large numbers of customers, not a small number willing to spend big bucks.
So it's only Apple's "cult" that bought 54 Million iPods last year, 20.5 Million iPhones, and 25% of all music sold in the US?
Considering that Apple only sold around 13 million Macs last year, I find that unbelievable.
Besides that, why should Apple care about search engine market share? As the article stated, the prime goal would be to keep Google from being able to data mine information from iPhone/iPod Touch users.
Doctorow's point was well put: if parents buy this for their kids, their kids will be conditioned not to tinker. I am sure millions will be sold...but those who would otherwise have tinkered will be deprived of an opportunity to do so. Maybe you do not care about such things, but some of us do.
Joel Johnson:
I'm glad the Apple ][+ came with schematics for the circuit boards. I'm glad it encouraged a generation of kids to tinker and explore. I'm also glad that I don't live in the fucking '70s and have to type in programs from a magazine anymore.
Perhaps we could compare to phones instead, you know, the market where Symbian runs on 250 million devices, Windows Mobile runs on 50 million - and Apple are where, remind me? (It's 42 million, for the curious.)
Actually, the iPhone OS runs on 70 Million + devices (iPhone's + iPod Touch).
All of those Windows Mobile devices aren't phones either....
Up to 2GB internal memory Support for compatible miniSD and microSD memory cards (with extender). Supports cards up to 8GB. (SD cards over 2GB must be SDHC compatible.)
One criticism of the iPad that I can't really get behind is the price. I'd like to see a cheaper alternative, while still retaining the same horsepower, not to mention a 9.6" IPS panel.
Competing tablet makers are reevaluating their pricing strategy in the wake of Apple's iPad announcement, according to a rumor in the Digitimes. The article cites the usual unnamed sources in claiming that companies like ASUS and MSI had expected Apple's iPad to debut at $1,000, and were planning to undercut that price by 20 to 30 percent with their own, presumably Android-based offerings. But with the iPad base model coming in at $499--the price of a decent netbook--the companies are now going to have to compete on something besides price.
Not bad for something that costs less than half the price of the iPad.
Half the price of the iPad But....
-- 2GB of storage (expandable to 8GB) - versus 16GB -- 802.11g -- versus 802.11n -- half the resolution -- 400Mhz processor versus 1GHz -- the screen is 3.5 inches versus 10 inches
So exactly why were you comparing this to an iPad?
With some 40 million or so iphones vs billions of phones capable of j2me midlets (not counting smybian etc...) that figure cant be true. Also, that article states that apple counted the free apps as well and insists only 16 million apps were sold for all other phones combined. Thats complete bullshit. There are MANY portals that sell more than 16 millions phone apps per year.
How many of those dumb phones have data plans? Do you have a reliable source for the number of apps sold/downloaded at the other portals?
Besides, you're forgetting about the 30M + iPod Touches.
However, I'm willing to go out on a limb and say that the iPhone platform would have much more software available if Apple treated it like they treat Mac OS X or how Microsoft treats Windows,
Yeah, they might get the other.6% of the mobile app market....
to rephrase the mantra: if microsoft had these requirements on developing software for Windows operating systems, you'd be typing up a furious reply condemning "M$."
How is this any different from the requirements for developing for the XBox, Sony Playstation/PSP, or the Wii/Gameboy?
Depending on what you're doing, most if not all can be accomplished with OpenGL and GLUT.
And you said you could target Palm. Palm just released a native SDK for the WebOS a few days ago. OpenGL is not public yet for the Palm Pre and doesn't work on most Windows Mobile devices -- especially not the industrial ruggedized devices. Exactly how many of those platforms that you bragged about above have you actually programmed for?
I most certainly have the source to a pong clone that will compile on OSX, Linux, FreeBSD, and Windows out of the box. Not even an ifdef.
So how well did the Pong clone work on the iPhone? the Palm Pre? Windows Mobile?
Of course, EVERYONE uses 'frameworks' unless they are writing raw assembly and not using any linker libraries.
Yes everyone does use frameworks -- but none of those frameworks are as seamless or cross platform as you imply.
From my standpoint, there is no platform specific code, unless you count the command line required to start the build (its simple, single source file, didn't even bother with a makefile)
So how do you handle the difference between the touch screen interface of the iPhone/iPod Touch and non touch screen devices?
Screen resolutions are irrelevant to me, it just scales, if you were to put it on an iPhone, you'd need good vision, but thats easy enough to remedy without special treatment for the iPhone if you choose to give up things on desktop PCs.
And you have a poorly thought out app that no one would want...
Graphics hardware and input differences are taken into account by using OpenGL and GLUT. Note, these are native on OSX, OpenGL is native in windows, GLUT not so much, of course neither are native in FBSD or Linux, but again, everyone uses frameworks of some sort. So MS calls them Frameworks and I call them shared library, while technically different they are for practical purposes the same thing.
And you're still not taking into account text entry, hardware that doesn't support OpenGL, etc. Have you actually written any software for the iPhone or Windows Mobile?
Most certainly wrong, you are not able to do so. You may move the binary and run it, but it most certainly IS being recompiled. Thats part of what the Common Language Runtime does, unfortunately you're confusing MS marketing with reality, this leads me to believe you know even less about development than you realize. I could actually do the exact same thing as you are doing with C# source code and a wrapper to kickstart the process. It'd have to be a.NET wrapper since getting a batch file to run on WinMo isn't something you can do out of the box.
Who ever said anything about batch files?
My point is that really, none of this shit matters to anyone serious.
This shit from Microsoft is entirely to get crappy incapable programmers using MS dev tools to produce more things that businesses are tied into using MS platforms for. We can sit around and debate it, but the only people who think this is different are those that don't understand development in general, and those are EXACTLY the people MS wants to hit with this sort of thing.
I'm sorry, what was the point?
So what platform are we suppose to use? I did the whole C things for a decade, played around with Objective C, and for low level programming I still use C on WinMo. C# and the whole.Net platform is a godsend compared to C.
i've been writing code across many platforms with 100% code reuse - more importantly, not using a runtime - all my applications are native. just write a few basic entry points; put the platform specific points in a library and then all your applications link against this. you then end up with native binaries for each platform - just distribute. this is not news - most developers have been able to do this for years (including myself). i can build applications for windows, linux, macosx, iphone, windows mobile, symbian series 60/uiq, palmos, moblin, maemo et al by doing this and i've been doing it since 2003.
Let's see where to start....
1. If you are writing different libraries for each platform -- that's not 100% code re-use 2. You're not "just distributing" the same binary for each platform. 3. What are you using for graphics, sounds, storage, etc. on each platform? 4. You're doing this without a bunch of #ifdef's? 5. How are you accounting for different screen resolutions, graphics hardware, touch capabilities, and other hardware difference?
I've never programmed games for either the PC or mobile but I do write boring old business apps for Windows Mobile industrial devices. I'm able to target Windows Mobile and take the same app and run it flawlessly on the desktop -- without a recompile.
Oh there is - Java runs on just about all phones. The Iphones can't support it though, which is why custom apps have to be especially written for them instead.
Have you actually used Java to develop for multiple phones? The "Write Once Run Anywhere" mantra of Java is definitely not true for mobile platforms. Netflix can't just write a streaming media app in Java and it will run with every J2ME platform -- or even every phone from the same vendor.
Re:And the zombification of our children continues
on
The Wi-Fi On the Bus
·
· Score: 1
ust like good parenting...
Stick a TV/DS/Xbox infront of your kid and they act all perfect.
Can't wait for the virtual elementary school. Just strap your kid to the gurney and put the goggles on 'em.
So what exactly should the bus driver be doing? Isn't better if he can concentrate on driving the bus instead of disciplining kids?
You are forgetting that apple was the first Online music store that implimented DRM, you should not give them credit for also convincing everyone to give it up. Because it was Amazon that had the first big DRM free music store.
As for the "gigantic runaway success" of the iTunes store, it was hardly the first such success, it is just the longest running. mp3.com was just as successful, considering the number of users and the smaller market size at that time. As I noted above, the only innovation or revolution to speak of here is the advertising.
So there was a time that mp3.com was the number 1 music store in the US and sold 1 out of every 4 songs being sold?
Safari can stream music in the background. As far as the not being able to play music in the background, isn't the "Media" app a standard BB app?
Don't bash the phone when the technology the carrier's network uses doesn't support a feature, or when the carrier disables a feature, or when 3rd party software the carrier includes on the phone doesn't do what you want. All of those fall squarely on the shoulders of the carrier
So why is it that Apple, a complete newcomer, was able to demand that network carriers don't artificially cripple the iPhone and RIM couldn't do the same?
Partly because the notion of distro-maintained repositories, containing tens of thousands of packages, vetted and verified by people who know way more than you or I, and subsequently checked by thousands of people who use them and examine them, is an inherently safer method than the Microsoft ecosystem method of "search the web and download unknown binary installers from god-knows-where which will do god-knows-what to your system".
t's pretty easy to use a device that can only run one app at a time to its potential. That said, I've been with AT&T for 9 years now and...
Let's look at the great multitasking capability of the BlackBerry compared to the iPhone -- I have a BB Curve on Sprint.
1. You can't use the web and talk on the phone at the same time 2. The media player doesn't work in the background 3. The browser doesn't stream music at all -- let alone in the background -- and the included Sprint TV media streaming service doesn't work in the background. 4. You can't use any GPS aware app on my BB while talking to someone.
In this day and age we should not need antivirus software and firewalls- Microsoft wake up! What the hell is going on here? A whole market devoted to protecting an OS that we all have to pay for when we buy a new PC? So, Microsoft taxes all new PCs, and we pay av vendors even more to protect the Microsoft OS. This is surreal and sick. We should ALL demand that our employers use Ubuntu... every day... until they give in...
So exactly how do you propose that an operating system prevent a user from downloading malware that can destroy the users files? How do you propose that an OS do anything but warn a user before a program can access priveleged parts of the OS?
Slashdot Mirror
So what are all of these "better" alternatives -- especially to the Touch or the Nano? Every company but Apple has basically abandoned the high capacity market (except for Archos). So what's the alternative to the Classic?
iTunes hasn't sold DRM'd music (or music videos) in over a year and where can you get DRM free video from any store -- either physical or electronic? The iPod plays bog standard MP3, WAV, AAC audio and H.264 and MPeg video. So where are all these cheaper better alternatives to the Touch, Nano, and Classic?
Do you have a source for your claims of fragility and a comparison of the reliability of the iPod compared to other music players?
So it's only Apple's "cult" that bought 54 Million iPods last year, 20.5 Million iPhones, and 25% of all music sold in the US?
Considering that Apple only sold around 13 million Macs last year, I find that unbelievable.
Besides that, why should Apple care about search engine market share? As the article stated, the prime goal would be to keep Google from being able to data mine information from iPhone/iPod Touch users.
Joel Johnson:
I'm glad the Apple ][+ came with schematics for the circuit boards. I'm glad it encouraged a generation of kids to tinker and explore. I'm also glad that I don't live in the fucking '70s and have to type in programs from a magazine anymore.
Actually, the iPhone OS runs on 70 Million + devices (iPhone's + iPod Touch).
All of those Windows Mobile devices aren't phones either....
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsmobile/en-us/devices/verticals/default.mspx
http://europe.nokia.com/support/product-support/nokia-n810/specifications
http://arstechnica.com/apple/news/2010/01/tablet-makers-rethinking-things-in-wake-of-ipads-low-price.ars
Half the price of the iPad But....
-- 2GB of storage (expandable to 8GB) - versus 16GB
-- 802.11g -- versus 802.11n
-- half the resolution
-- 400Mhz processor versus 1GHz
-- the screen is 3.5 inches versus 10 inches
So exactly why were you comparing this to an iPad?
How many of those dumb phones have data plans? Do you have a reliable source for the number of apps sold/downloaded at the other portals?
Besides, you're forgetting about the 30M + iPod Touches.
Yeah, they might get the other .6% of the mobile app market....
http://arstechnica.com/apple/news/2010/01/apple-responsible-for-994-of-mobile-app-sales-in-2009.ars
AT&T is already allowing VOIP over 3G.
http://share.skype.com/sites/en/2009/10/good_move_att.html
How is this any different from the requirements for developing for the XBox, Sony Playstation/PSP, or the Wii/Gameboy?
And you said you could target Palm. Palm just released a native SDK for the WebOS a few days ago. OpenGL is not public yet for the Palm Pre and doesn't work on most Windows Mobile devices -- especially not the industrial ruggedized devices. Exactly how many of those platforms that you bragged about above have you actually programmed for?
So how well did the Pong clone work on the iPhone? the Palm Pre? Windows Mobile?
Yes everyone does use frameworks -- but none of those frameworks are as seamless or cross platform as you imply.
So how do you handle the difference between the touch screen interface of the iPhone/iPod Touch and non touch screen devices?
And you have a poorly thought out app that no one would want...
And you're still not taking into account text entry, hardware that doesn't support OpenGL, etc. Have you actually written any software for the iPhone or Windows Mobile?
Who ever said anything about batch files?
So what platform are we suppose to use? I did the whole C things for a decade, played around with Objective C, and for low level programming I still use C on WinMo. C# and the whole .Net platform is a godsend compared to C.
Let's see where to start....
1. If you are writing different libraries for each platform -- that's not 100% code re-use
2. You're not "just distributing" the same binary for each platform.
3. What are you using for graphics, sounds, storage, etc. on each platform?
4. You're doing this without a bunch of #ifdef's?
5. How are you accounting for different screen resolutions, graphics hardware, touch capabilities, and other hardware difference?
I've never programmed games for either the PC or mobile but I do write boring old business apps for Windows Mobile industrial devices. I'm able to target Windows Mobile and take the same app and run it flawlessly on the desktop -- without a recompile.
They don't have to. Silverlight can stream a regular old H.264 video and use HTML 5 when targetting the iPhone:
http://www.downloadsquad.com/2009/11/28/microsoft-brings-silverlight-video-to-the-iphone-without-a-plug/
Have you actually used Java to develop for multiple phones? The "Write Once Run Anywhere" mantra of Java is definitely not true for mobile platforms. Netflix can't just write a streaming media app in Java and it will run with every J2ME platform -- or even every phone from the same vendor.
So what exactly should the bus driver be doing? Isn't better if he can concentrate on driving the bus instead of disciplining kids?
You're in luck -- Mobile Safari can stream web radio in the background and you can get alerts for IM using the notification api.
In 2006, according to analysts 58% of iPod users were thinking about buying a Zune.
http://www.abiresearch.com/products/research_brief/Consumer_Electronics_Market_Update/101
Those were earlier than iTunes. But do you remember that an early version of Windows added DRM to music that users ripped from their own CD's?
Pressplay 2002
MusicNet 2001
So there was a time that mp3.com was the number 1 music store in the US and sold 1 out of every 4 songs being sold?
Safari can stream music in the background. As far as the not being able to play music in the background, isn't the "Media" app a standard BB app?
So why is it that Apple, a complete newcomer, was able to demand that network carriers don't artificially cripple the iPhone and RIM couldn't do the same?
http://linux.slashdot.org/story/09/12/09/2215253/Malware-Found-Hidden-In-Screensaver-On-Gnome-Look
Let's look at the great multitasking capability of the BlackBerry compared to the iPhone -- I have a BB Curve on Sprint.
1. You can't use the web and talk on the phone at the same time
2. The media player doesn't work in the background
3. The browser doesn't stream music at all -- let alone in the background -- and the included Sprint TV media streaming service doesn't work in the background.
4. You can't use any GPS aware app on my BB while talking to someone.
All of this can easily be done on the iPhone.
So exactly how do you propose that an operating system prevent a user from downloading malware that can destroy the users files? How do you propose that an OS do anything but warn a user before a program can access priveleged parts of the OS?