" Apple can monitor the location of your iPhone from their control center. They can turn your phone off. They can put software on it. Apple has the keys to your iPhone. "
I don't know enough about Android, but I thought the same type of thing was possible, that is, it's possible to have an Android phone that has no connection to Google or Google services whatsoever. Someone correct me if I'm wrong here.
"Some of you use Microsoft's Skype service. "
So don't use Skype if you don't trust it. You don't have to use Skype with WP8, Android or iPhones, it's just an option. Will Skype be an option with BB10?
I love the Apple ecosystem. I have iPads, iPods, iPhones, Apple TVs, MacBooks, etc... I love it all. There are some exceptions, like using Microsoft Office instead of iWork and Mail, but for the most part, I really love Apple's ecosystem.
I don't want to start something here where platforms are argued, and I understand and respect other opinions, but for me... I've always had to use Windows through the years. I've developed for Windows and supported Windows for service and support. I can't stand using Windows. I find Macs and OS X to be far more elegant. I find things to be simple and easy for common tasks, but very robust for advanced tasks via the terminal and the fact that it's UNIX. I've always loved Google services, and bought a Nexus 7 to develop for Android.
Like my distaste for Windows, I have a distaste for Android. It's incredibly messy. Tasks that should be simple can be very difficult not just to figure out, but even to do on an ongoing basis. The iPhone feels like my Mac only with a mobile optimized interface. Even a PC has this same connection, but to a lesser extent. With Android, it just feels completely isolated from my Mac or PC as if it's own device. I think that feeling is fine for many people... hell, I think all of this is fine for different people, but for me, I want to feel like my set of usage is consistent across my notebook, netbook, desktop, phone, tablet, and tv.
I could go on and on about other things I really dislike about Android (fragmentation for example), but the bottom line is that WP8, Blackberry, WebOS, Android... iOS is what I prefer.
So all of the above is with *stock* iOS being preferred. So then comes the question of whether I prefer jailbroken iOS versus stock iOS. For me, I much prefer to jailbreak. In part because jailbreaking in of itself doesn't really do anything. Your iPhone is exactly the same except for a little Cydia icon. From there, you can do pretty much whatever you want, and you can do it in incremental steps in any direction you want. Want to change the default Map app? Boom, it's one tweak and everything else is the same. Want to go all out and make your phone a mess? You can do that too. I tend to be mostly conservative, making changes that only add mostly productive functionality, but I do add a nice subtle animated background and a few other cosmetic enhancements.
Also, it's not a "jumping through all these jailbreaking hoops". It's usually just a couple of months or so after a new iOS device cycle that a jailbreak is released and all you have to do is click and follow some simple instructions on the screen. It's not much different from say having a new Android OS come out and waiting before you can upgrade your device or if you buy a new device, waiting for some of your apps to upgrade for compatibility. So far, this is the longest we've had to wait for a jailbreak, and it's still much shorter than how long I've been waiting for some of my favorite apps (CNN, TiVo and others) to become compatible with my Nexus 7.
"If they launched something no more damaging than a dishwasher at San Francisco..."
I live in the San Francisco area and need a new dishwasher, so Korea, there you have it. Maximize your threat to the absolute limit and send me a new dishwasher!
And, Apple did incorporate the matching technology from Lala into iTunes as iTunes Match.
It seems to me like Lala was *sold* to Apple as people, IP, and customers for a service that Apple had(s) no interest in. Cutting the leads that didn't go into the iTunes store doesn't seem like that would be worth the time or effort, let alone the $80 million as Google was bound to just replace Lala with other search results.
Since when has torrents = piracy? All any peer to peer traffic means is that *data* was transferred peer to peer. And when one encrypts the data and sends it through a VPN, the ISP has no idea whatsoever what specific content you're downloading or uploading.
Ya, a lot of people are really confused about this.
There is no legal defense here. There is no law. This is Verizon (and other ISPs) stating their terms of service. People keep asking things like "well what if it's open WiFi" or "what if I was hacked" or "an IP isn't an individual", or "someone broke into our house, held a gun to our heads and made us pirate".
That's all great, but it doesn't matter.
Your account gets flagged for a copyright violation, that's a strike. Not according to a court of law, but according to Verizon. Why it was flagged doesn't matter.
On your 5th/6th strike, you can pay $35 to appeal, but again, you're not going to court. The law doesn't apply here. Only the rules of Verizon apply.
So ya, open your WiFi, and get those strikes, but don't expect to use any legal rationale because the law doesn't apply here.
The only way around this is VPN.
The sad thing is that like most restrictions, this is going to hurt many innocent people. "Innocent" isn't the right word, but whatever... Many mom and pop businesses that depend on offering free wifi are going to suffer. Many people who travel and use free wifi are going to suffer. Big chains like Starbucks are going to start to implement registration services.
IANAL, but I don't think that's true. I believe the prosecution can use illegally obtained evidence if it was obtained by non-government individuals. See: Supreme Court Decision BURDEAU v. MCDOWELL, 256 U.S. 465 (1921)
Over 7 years ago I created a database of places in the US where you could get instant prints (UPS, Fedex/Kinkos, Walmart, CVS, Safeway, pretty much every friggin retail store on every single street). This database was for a photosharing service and we found that, surprise, even 7 years ago, people weren't that interested in printing once they had moved to digital photos. It only gets worse with cell phones.
Most stores even have apps for printing, not just photos, but any documents, from your phone. You can even forward email attachments of file formats that your phone may not have an app for.
Not to mention all of the photo printing and mailing services for phones. Snap a photo, go into the app, choose a print/card/calendar/mug/shirt/poster, select the contact from your address book, and boom...from anywhere, anytime.
The only solution I can think of that this good for is potentially raising "investment money" from people completely out of touch with things. In other words, this idea sounds so bad, it sounds like a scam.
Ok, speaking as someone who has had an iPad since launch...
I've maybe printed 10 pages in the last 31 months. And each time it's been "just in case they don't have a scanner" to read the barcode off my display. However, each time I printed those 10 pages, I used either my iPad or iPhone.
DVD... are you friggin' kidding me? I pulled the DVD from my MacBook Pro years ago. Netflix, torrents, rips, and a whole bunch of apps from TiVo, Comcast, and the major networks, along with YouTube and the like.
Fragile... I've yet to break one. I've always used a cover/case, but the insurance cost isn't that bad... and neither is the screen replacement.
Tiny screen? 10" held at arm's length is equivalent to being much larger than a standard widescreen TV, let alone a notebook.
Fingerprints? Nope, just keep your hands clean.
"they don't run 99% of software ever written"
That's funny because they run like 99% of the cool new software being developed today. Really, there's a reason why the running joke, "there's an app for that" got stale a long time ago.
"everything they do on it is designed to cost money"
I totally disagree with this one. Sure, not all software is free, but a lot of it is, especially if you already have a service for something else. For example, TiVo, Netflix, Comcast, etc... those apps are already free. Many are free ad based apps... YouTube, CNN, USAToday, etc... And apps on the iPad (or other mobile platforms) are MUCH cheaper than what we've experienced to date on desktops or other platform types. There are a lot of 99 cent apps, that offer functionality that on the PC back a few years would've matched for a ton more $$$.
"the browsers don't display pages correctly"
They mostly do now. Websites have moved away from Flash requirements, which is a good thing. Sure not all sites do display correctly, but they don't on every desktop browser either. On the other hand, many websites have native apps which provide increased functionality and features not present on their websites. Take a look at how much better sites like Reddit are as native apps (Alien Blue) or sites like eBay, Craigslist, YouTube, Facebook, CNN, etc...
"most don't have USB flash drive capabilities"
Many do if that matters to you. Those that don't, like the iPad, still can use wireless flash devices, or flash drives with an adapter.
The bottom line though is that the satisfaction level on the more popular tablets is incredibly high. Netbooks never really achieved this. Netbooks were falsely attractive because of a convenience that was offset by nothing but negatives. Other than size and weight, they offered no advantages, and the size/weight were unrealistically achieved. The negatives of a tablet over a PC still exist, but they're offset by the numerous advantages.
Sitting with a computer in my lap, or even on my desk, I feel no desire to reach out and touch the screen... not with a decent gesture based trackpad like the one on my MacBook.
However, standing over the shoulder of someone, it makes perfect sense to touch the screen as opposed to push them out of the way to use their trackpad. It also makes sense sometimes standing over your own computer, especially when demonstrating something to people.
Here's the thing, other than cost, there really isn't much downside to adding this functionality, and the cost may not be that significant, so why not add it?
"After all, how many iPad minis come with sandpaper for filing fingers down?'"
Every 7" iPad mini that Apple has ever sold has come with sandpaper. On the other hand, 7.9" iPad minis do not. Steve was talking about 7", not 7.9". That may seem pedantic, but he was being very specific about the crop of 7" tablets at the time, and the call for Apple to do a 7" iPad. That.9" may not seem like much, but when you actually get your hands on one, it's a HUGE difference.
I've had a variety of tablets, phones and notebooks, and the number of use cases "on a ladder" is pretty low. Certainly the number of cases where I'd much rather have a solid case and keyboard like with a MacBook Air versus a Surface is much higher. I think that's true with most people. There may be specialized fields where this isn't the case, but are those that need a "tablet on a ladder" needing to run the full version of Office or legacy apps? Or would they be better suited with a real tablet that has dedicated apps?
To me, the Surface RT seems like too small of a fragmented niche that won't have sufficient development and be abandoned by Microsoft, while the Surface Pro seems like the same old tablet strategy that Microsoft did for a decade without success before the iPad.
I think a better strategy for Microsoft would've been to develop the market for the Surface Pro only, and start of with a very aggressive price point and be ready for the market to really take off when Haswell arrives.
I can't believe how many people here feel so entitled to free content, free of ads.
Look, the websites are providing you content in exchange for receiving the ads. If you don't like the ads so much, the *right* thing to do is to send an email to the publisher and stop visiting the site until the reduce the obnoxiousness of the ads.
Stripping the ads may not be illegal or stealing, but you are receiving the content in a manner such that the publishers aren't getting paid for your viewing.
So ya, think only about yourself and strip those ads, or think about other viewers, and those who worked and invested in the site and decide you'll endure the horrible torture that is a friggin' ad.
Oh, and keep in mind that technology will always be a cat and mouse game. Ad strippers will advance and so will the advertisers. This is why the *really* obnoxious ads are fully gated, pre-roll, embedded, or breaking the wall between editorial and paid content. So keep it up, and things will only get worse.
All this said, I'm not for legislation, but come on people, be reasonable here and think a little bit more about what is right or wrong versus your own self interest and sense of entitlement.
What's odd to me about that is that I have over 36GB in apps alone... worse, I don't have all that many of the big games or text books. Text books can be HUGE. For example Pearson’s Biology: 2.77GB.
" the "Install0us" app installed, which is to be fair used solely for app pirating."
No it's not.
It's also one of the easiest (and in some cases only) way you can revert to previous versions of apps. I don't pirate apps on iOS, and I rarely have a use for Install0us, but a couple of times it's saved me when a newer version of an app was unusable and Install0us was the only way to get a previous version re-installed and running again.
In the spirit of being fair though, ya, it's mostly for pirating, but I wouldn't jump to the definitive conclusion that someone who has it on their iOS devices is pirating apps.
I realize that Surface RT may never get a library of 16GB worth of apps, but it's not uncommon on iOS for someone to have that many. All it takes is for a few hard core games and reference apps.
If you don't live in a swing state, voting for Romney or Obama won't make a difference, but it's not necessarily a "lesser of two evils". Do you really believe Obama and Romney would do everything exactly the same? If so, well... that would be pretty clueless. I could understand though if you felt Obama and Romney had their strengths and weaknesses and would weight them such that rating them would be exactly the same... but really what are the chances of that?
If one candidate seems even slightly better than the other, and you live in a swing state, I would strongly encourage you to vote for that candidate.
"They're only able to pick from two people pre-selected for them by the elite (meaning those with enough money and influence to boil the choices down to the final two they want to see you pick from). "
I totally disagree. We had a chance to vote for Gary Johnson as a Republican. He failed to get enough support early on, so he dropped out and is now "running" as a 3rd party candidate, but this is silly. It's not only that he can't win, but that he couldn't even win within one party.
Sorry, but I hear far too many people who don't participate in the primaries...and really even before that, who then complain about "the lesser of two evils" and then decide to not vote or vote 3rd party.
You have a binary choice that you're presented with today. Vote for Obama or vote for Romney. Not voting for either is not making the binary choice.
If you want more choices, sorry, but you're too late. 2016 is coming up, so be prepared and get involved early enough to make a difference... no not to support another 3rd party who has no chance, but support someone who can first get the nomination of one of the two parties.
I think a lot of people don't realize how unlikely this process is to ever change, or how unlikely it is that there will be a 3rd party president. In order for Johnson to win now, he'd have to get more votes than Romney and Obama ***combined***. That's a huge challenge considering he couldn't even beat Romney in the primaries.
And who's going to change the system? Neither Obama, nor Romney, nor anyone in either of the two parties in power. While occasionally we get a 3rd party who gets people in Congress, these people either usually don't last long or gain significant power within Congress.
Whatever you decide though, I respect your opinion, and right to vote however you want, including not at all.
I think you're missing the larger point due to the details.
I won't argue that developing across Windows all the way to the Xbox is easier than developing across iOS and OS X, but to your point, there is also code that can be shared going iOSOS X, developing across both is easy and an advantage. But it still doesn't mean much from the consumer who has to *purchase* per platform, and learn to use each with the different platform differences.
"there are plenty of separate iPhone and iPad versions of apps out there"
Yes, but most aren't, and it's very clear when they're separate. Again, having separate is a disadvantage. iPhone/iPad doesn't score a perfect 100 in this regard, but it's a hell of a lot better than 0.
" If anything, the common look and feel is their whole *point*. "
While there is more look and feel mobile to desktop with Metro, it's still not 100%. It depends on who you ask of course, but some feel it's a bastardization of both wherein having to use drop down menus on a phone or tablet sucks, while using something designed for touch on a desktop sucks. But even with this, it's still different enough to add to the confusion that Surface RT is not going to give someone the same experience.
"There is no reason Microsoft can't just install the correct version for each platform via that store."
Right, but the problem comes from a customer *buying* one and then going back to install on the another. They'll have to buy it again. Again, Apple isn't 100% perfect here, but much better than 0.
"And, while I agree the "2x mode" iPhone apps did help the iPad initially, it was never a particularly good experience. And in no way are they "universal binaries" - that term means binaries running on more than one CPU architecture"
Call them whatever you want, but the point is the app package contents contain resources and code which are designed to run optimized for different devices. I've never heard a different term for this. 2X on the other hand obviously wasn't optimized or ideal, but good enough to allow the iPad to be used for critical uses on day 1 until the optimized apps came out.
I was reviewing products for CNET back when MP3 players and software was starting to take off...before Apple had anything and SoundJam was its own thing.
I remember back then it seemed like everyone had a player before the iPod. Every consumer electronic company had one, as did Intel, Virgin, Coke, Nike, etc...
The one thing most of these had in common, along with many digital cameras, was that they didn't desktop mount, but required platform specific software. In fairness, this was in part an issue with how USB was implemented on PCs prior to Windows XP, but many vendors even after XP were thinking they were doing the consumer a favor by requiring the use of software that "facilitated the use" of their products.
I was dual Mac/PC platform at the time (now I use mostly Macs except to develop/test for PC). It was very frustrating that devices couldn't just mount on the Mac, although some devices that required software on the PC did just mount on the Mac.
So when Apple came out with iTunes and the iPod, at first, it seemed pretty screwed that they themselves went with a software required syncing system.
However, things have changed radically since then.
My *main* iTunes library is almost 1TB. I have other iTunes libraries on several volumes that I use for work, production, a media server and other uses. On my main library, I have, I don't know, a bazillion playlists? I have multiple iPads, iPods, and iPhones. I also sync iTunes with a media server, Sonos system, as well as flash cards in my car and other devices. It's not uncommon for me to sync multiple devices at the same time, some wirelessly and some plugged in via USB.
For the life of me, I have no idea how I could even begin to manage all of this on a system level without software. Likewise, without playlists, the idea of duplicating folders would be a nightmare, since many of the playlists have the same songs in them.
For a casual user, I can understand the "why can't I just drag and drop from the system", but for me, the filesystem is actually a generic purpose filesystem app, be it The Finder on the Mac, or Explorer on Windows that absolutely sucks for specific file purposes such as music or photos. And iTunes/iPhoto/Aperture are file management apps only much better suited for these file types.
I'll admit that iTunes is far better on the Mac than Windows, and of course there is no iPhoto/Aperture on Windows, but still it's far better than trying to manage everything yourself from the generic file system management app be it Finder or Explorer.
"AC is correct -- music from iTunes has been DRM free for years [again]. Originally it was all MP3's -- then yes, it was DRM'd AAC files."
Just to nitpick...
When the iTunes Music Store launched, it was with DRM'd AACs (at 128kbps). The iTunes Music Store never had MP3 files. When iTunes (the player) 1.0 launched it ripped to MP3, AIFF, or WAV, but could play any format supported by the QuickTime engine it used. The rest is correct... Just to add that Apple then transitioned to 256kps AAC files without DRM, and you could pay to upgrade individual files that were 128kbps DRM AAC from the store. Now, through iTunes Match, any DRM files that are matched are automatically replaced with 256kbpsDRM free AAC files.
Well that's a bit like saying that since iOS and OS X use the same Xcode tools that there's an advantage. And yes, that is one advantage Apple and its developers can leverage over Android which just has tablets and phones (in volume, along with a handful of Chromebooks, TV boxes, etc...). But it does little for the consumer who still needs to buy apps for both iOS and OS X and learn how to use each (often the apps have very little in common in terms of UI).
But with Microsoft, it's confusing and frustrating to the user when the purchased app for their phone won't run on their tablet or vice versa. One of the reasons the iPad took off was because on day one it could run a bazillion iPod/iPhone apps (in 2X) mode, and universal binaries quickly brought about optimized apps that were "buy once".
Slashdot Mirror
" Apple can monitor the location of your iPhone from their control center. They can turn your phone off. They can put software on it. Apple has the keys to your iPhone. "
That's not entirely true. You can deploy iPhones for your enterprise:
http://www.apple.com/iphone/business/it-center/
I don't know enough about Android, but I thought the same type of thing was possible, that is, it's possible to have an Android phone that has no connection to Google or Google services whatsoever. Someone correct me if I'm wrong here.
"Some of you use Microsoft's Skype service. "
So don't use Skype if you don't trust it. You don't have to use Skype with WP8, Android or iPhones, it's just an option. Will Skype be an option with BB10?
I'll try to answer this...
I love the Apple ecosystem. I have iPads, iPods, iPhones, Apple TVs, MacBooks, etc... I love it all. There are some exceptions, like using Microsoft Office instead of iWork and Mail, but for the most part, I really love Apple's ecosystem.
I don't want to start something here where platforms are argued, and I understand and respect other opinions, but for me... I've always had to use Windows through the years. I've developed for Windows and supported Windows for service and support. I can't stand using Windows. I find Macs and OS X to be far more elegant. I find things to be simple and easy for common tasks, but very robust for advanced tasks via the terminal and the fact that it's UNIX. I've always loved Google services, and bought a Nexus 7 to develop for Android.
Like my distaste for Windows, I have a distaste for Android. It's incredibly messy. Tasks that should be simple can be very difficult not just to figure out, but even to do on an ongoing basis. The iPhone feels like my Mac only with a mobile optimized interface. Even a PC has this same connection, but to a lesser extent. With Android, it just feels completely isolated from my Mac or PC as if it's own device. I think that feeling is fine for many people... hell, I think all of this is fine for different people, but for me, I want to feel like my set of usage is consistent across my notebook, netbook, desktop, phone, tablet, and tv.
I could go on and on about other things I really dislike about Android (fragmentation for example), but the bottom line is that WP8, Blackberry, WebOS, Android... iOS is what I prefer.
So all of the above is with *stock* iOS being preferred. So then comes the question of whether I prefer jailbroken iOS versus stock iOS. For me, I much prefer to jailbreak. In part because jailbreaking in of itself doesn't really do anything. Your iPhone is exactly the same except for a little Cydia icon. From there, you can do pretty much whatever you want, and you can do it in incremental steps in any direction you want. Want to change the default Map app? Boom, it's one tweak and everything else is the same. Want to go all out and make your phone a mess? You can do that too. I tend to be mostly conservative, making changes that only add mostly productive functionality, but I do add a nice subtle animated background and a few other cosmetic enhancements.
Also, it's not a "jumping through all these jailbreaking hoops". It's usually just a couple of months or so after a new iOS device cycle that a jailbreak is released and all you have to do is click and follow some simple instructions on the screen. It's not much different from say having a new Android OS come out and waiting before you can upgrade your device or if you buy a new device, waiting for some of your apps to upgrade for compatibility. So far, this is the longest we've had to wait for a jailbreak, and it's still much shorter than how long I've been waiting for some of my favorite apps (CNN, TiVo and others) to become compatible with my Nexus 7.
"If they launched something no more damaging than a dishwasher at San Francisco..."
I live in the San Francisco area and need a new dishwasher, so Korea, there you have it. Maximize your threat to the absolute limit and send me a new dishwasher!
This.
And, Apple did incorporate the matching technology from Lala into iTunes as iTunes Match.
It seems to me like Lala was *sold* to Apple as people, IP, and customers for a service that Apple had(s) no interest in. Cutting the leads that didn't go into the iTunes store doesn't seem like that would be worth the time or effort, let alone the $80 million as Google was bound to just replace Lala with other search results.
Since when has torrents = piracy? All any peer to peer traffic means is that *data* was transferred peer to peer. And when one encrypts the data and sends it through a VPN, the ISP has no idea whatsoever what specific content you're downloading or uploading.
Ya, a lot of people are really confused about this.
There is no legal defense here. There is no law. This is Verizon (and other ISPs) stating their terms of service. People keep asking things like "well what if it's open WiFi" or "what if I was hacked" or "an IP isn't an individual", or "someone broke into our house, held a gun to our heads and made us pirate".
That's all great, but it doesn't matter.
Your account gets flagged for a copyright violation, that's a strike. Not according to a court of law, but according to Verizon. Why it was flagged doesn't matter.
On your 5th/6th strike, you can pay $35 to appeal, but again, you're not going to court. The law doesn't apply here. Only the rules of Verizon apply.
So ya, open your WiFi, and get those strikes, but don't expect to use any legal rationale because the law doesn't apply here.
The only way around this is VPN.
The sad thing is that like most restrictions, this is going to hurt many innocent people. "Innocent" isn't the right word, but whatever... Many mom and pop businesses that depend on offering free wifi are going to suffer. Many people who travel and use free wifi are going to suffer. Big chains like Starbucks are going to start to implement registration services.
IANAL, but I don't think that's true. I believe the prosecution can use illegally obtained evidence if it was obtained by non-government individuals. See:
Supreme Court Decision BURDEAU v. MCDOWELL, 256 U.S. 465 (1921)
They can't be serious about this?
Over 7 years ago I created a database of places in the US where you could get instant prints (UPS, Fedex/Kinkos, Walmart, CVS, Safeway, pretty much every friggin retail store on every single street). This database was for a photosharing service and we found that, surprise, even 7 years ago, people weren't that interested in printing once they had moved to digital photos. It only gets worse with cell phones.
Most stores even have apps for printing, not just photos, but any documents, from your phone. You can even forward email attachments of file formats that your phone may not have an app for.
Not to mention all of the photo printing and mailing services for phones. Snap a photo, go into the app, choose a print/card/calendar/mug/shirt/poster, select the contact from your address book, and boom...from anywhere, anytime.
The only solution I can think of that this good for is potentially raising "investment money" from people completely out of touch with things. In other words, this idea sounds so bad, it sounds like a scam.
So was USB support.
"you having a higher IQ than me — is a myth,' said Dr. Adrian Owen"
In other news, the same Dr. Adrian Owen claims to have discovered that penis size doesn't matter.
Ok, speaking as someone who has had an iPad since launch...
I've maybe printed 10 pages in the last 31 months. And each time it's been "just in case they don't have a scanner" to read the barcode off my display. However, each time I printed those 10 pages, I used either my iPad or iPhone.
DVD... are you friggin' kidding me? I pulled the DVD from my MacBook Pro years ago. Netflix, torrents, rips, and a whole bunch of apps from TiVo, Comcast, and the major networks, along with YouTube and the like.
Fragile... I've yet to break one. I've always used a cover/case, but the insurance cost isn't that bad... and neither is the screen replacement.
Tiny screen? 10" held at arm's length is equivalent to being much larger than a standard widescreen TV, let alone a notebook.
Fingerprints? Nope, just keep your hands clean.
"they don't run 99% of software ever written"
That's funny because they run like 99% of the cool new software being developed today. Really, there's a reason why the running joke, "there's an app for that" got stale a long time ago.
"everything they do on it is designed to cost money"
I totally disagree with this one. Sure, not all software is free, but a lot of it is, especially if you already have a service for something else. For example, TiVo, Netflix, Comcast, etc... those apps are already free. Many are free ad based apps... YouTube, CNN, USAToday, etc... And apps on the iPad (or other mobile platforms) are MUCH cheaper than what we've experienced to date on desktops or other platform types. There are a lot of 99 cent apps, that offer functionality that on the PC back a few years would've matched for a ton more $$$.
"the browsers don't display pages correctly"
They mostly do now. Websites have moved away from Flash requirements, which is a good thing. Sure not all sites do display correctly, but they don't on every desktop browser either. On the other hand, many websites have native apps which provide increased functionality and features not present on their websites. Take a look at how much better sites like Reddit are as native apps (Alien Blue) or sites like eBay, Craigslist, YouTube, Facebook, CNN, etc...
"most don't have USB flash drive capabilities"
Many do if that matters to you. Those that don't, like the iPad, still can use wireless flash devices, or flash drives with an adapter.
The bottom line though is that the satisfaction level on the more popular tablets is incredibly high. Netbooks never really achieved this. Netbooks were falsely attractive because of a convenience that was offset by nothing but negatives. Other than size and weight, they offered no advantages, and the size/weight were unrealistically achieved. The negatives of a tablet over a PC still exist, but they're offset by the numerous advantages.
Sitting with a computer in my lap, or even on my desk, I feel no desire to reach out and touch the screen... not with a decent gesture based trackpad like the one on my MacBook.
However, standing over the shoulder of someone, it makes perfect sense to touch the screen as opposed to push them out of the way to use their trackpad. It also makes sense sometimes standing over your own computer, especially when demonstrating something to people.
Here's the thing, other than cost, there really isn't much downside to adding this functionality, and the cost may not be that significant, so why not add it?
"After all, how many iPad minis come with sandpaper for filing fingers down?'"
Every 7" iPad mini that Apple has ever sold has come with sandpaper. On the other hand, 7.9" iPad minis do not. Steve was talking about 7", not 7.9". That may seem pedantic, but he was being very specific about the crop of 7" tablets at the time, and the call for Apple to do a 7" iPad. That .9" may not seem like much, but when you actually get your hands on one, it's a HUGE difference.
I've had a variety of tablets, phones and notebooks, and the number of use cases "on a ladder" is pretty low. Certainly the number of cases where I'd much rather have a solid case and keyboard like with a MacBook Air versus a Surface is much higher. I think that's true with most people. There may be specialized fields where this isn't the case, but are those that need a "tablet on a ladder" needing to run the full version of Office or legacy apps? Or would they be better suited with a real tablet that has dedicated apps?
To me, the Surface RT seems like too small of a fragmented niche that won't have sufficient development and be abandoned by Microsoft, while the Surface Pro seems like the same old tablet strategy that Microsoft did for a decade without success before the iPad.
I think a better strategy for Microsoft would've been to develop the market for the Surface Pro only, and start of with a very aggressive price point and be ready for the market to really take off when Haswell arrives.
I can't believe how many people here feel so entitled to free content, free of ads.
Look, the websites are providing you content in exchange for receiving the ads. If you don't like the ads so much, the *right* thing to do is to send an email to the publisher and stop visiting the site until the reduce the obnoxiousness of the ads.
Stripping the ads may not be illegal or stealing, but you are receiving the content in a manner such that the publishers aren't getting paid for your viewing.
So ya, think only about yourself and strip those ads, or think about other viewers, and those who worked and invested in the site and decide you'll endure the horrible torture that is a friggin' ad.
Oh, and keep in mind that technology will always be a cat and mouse game. Ad strippers will advance and so will the advertisers. This is why the *really* obnoxious ads are fully gated, pre-roll, embedded, or breaking the wall between editorial and paid content. So keep it up, and things will only get worse.
All this said, I'm not for legislation, but come on people, be reasonable here and think a little bit more about what is right or wrong versus your own self interest and sense of entitlement.
What's odd to me about that is that I have over 36GB in apps alone... worse, I don't have all that many of the big games or text books. Text books can be HUGE. For example Pearson’s Biology: 2.77GB.
Or a pirate!
" the "Install0us" app installed, which is to be fair used solely for app pirating."
No it's not.
It's also one of the easiest (and in some cases only) way you can revert to previous versions of apps. I don't pirate apps on iOS, and I rarely have a use for Install0us, but a couple of times it's saved me when a newer version of an app was unusable and Install0us was the only way to get a previous version re-installed and running again.
In the spirit of being fair though, ya, it's mostly for pirating, but I wouldn't jump to the definitive conclusion that someone who has it on their iOS devices is pirating apps.
I realize that Surface RT may never get a library of 16GB worth of apps, but it's not uncommon on iOS for someone to have that many. All it takes is for a few hard core games and reference apps.
If you don't live in a swing state, voting for Romney or Obama won't make a difference, but it's not necessarily a "lesser of two evils". Do you really believe Obama and Romney would do everything exactly the same? If so, well... that would be pretty clueless. I could understand though if you felt Obama and Romney had their strengths and weaknesses and would weight them such that rating them would be exactly the same... but really what are the chances of that?
If one candidate seems even slightly better than the other, and you live in a swing state, I would strongly encourage you to vote for that candidate.
"They're only able to pick from two people pre-selected for them by the elite (meaning those with enough money and influence to boil the choices down to the final two they want to see you pick from). "
I totally disagree. We had a chance to vote for Gary Johnson as a Republican. He failed to get enough support early on, so he dropped out and is now "running" as a 3rd party candidate, but this is silly. It's not only that he can't win, but that he couldn't even win within one party.
Sorry, but I hear far too many people who don't participate in the primaries...and really even before that, who then complain about "the lesser of two evils" and then decide to not vote or vote 3rd party.
You have a binary choice that you're presented with today. Vote for Obama or vote for Romney. Not voting for either is not making the binary choice.
If you want more choices, sorry, but you're too late. 2016 is coming up, so be prepared and get involved early enough to make a difference... no not to support another 3rd party who has no chance, but support someone who can first get the nomination of one of the two parties.
I think a lot of people don't realize how unlikely this process is to ever change, or how unlikely it is that there will be a 3rd party president. In order for Johnson to win now, he'd have to get more votes than Romney and Obama ***combined***. That's a huge challenge considering he couldn't even beat Romney in the primaries.
And who's going to change the system? Neither Obama, nor Romney, nor anyone in either of the two parties in power. While occasionally we get a 3rd party who gets people in Congress, these people either usually don't last long or gain significant power within Congress.
Whatever you decide though, I respect your opinion, and right to vote however you want, including not at all.
I think you're missing the larger point due to the details.
I won't argue that developing across Windows all the way to the Xbox is easier than developing across iOS and OS X, but to your point, there is also code that can be shared going iOSOS X, developing across both is easy and an advantage. But it still doesn't mean much from the consumer who has to *purchase* per platform, and learn to use each with the different platform differences.
"there are plenty of separate iPhone and iPad versions of apps out there"
Yes, but most aren't, and it's very clear when they're separate. Again, having separate is a disadvantage. iPhone/iPad doesn't score a perfect 100 in this regard, but it's a hell of a lot better than 0.
" If anything, the common look and feel is their whole *point*. "
While there is more look and feel mobile to desktop with Metro, it's still not 100%. It depends on who you ask of course, but some feel it's a bastardization of both wherein having to use drop down menus on a phone or tablet sucks, while using something designed for touch on a desktop sucks. But even with this, it's still different enough to add to the confusion that Surface RT is not going to give someone the same experience.
"There is no reason Microsoft can't just install the correct version for each platform via that store."
Right, but the problem comes from a customer *buying* one and then going back to install on the another. They'll have to buy it again. Again, Apple isn't 100% perfect here, but much better than 0.
"And, while I agree the "2x mode" iPhone apps did help the iPad initially, it was never a particularly good experience. And in no way are they "universal binaries" - that term means binaries running on more than one CPU architecture"
Call them whatever you want, but the point is the app package contents contain resources and code which are designed to run optimized for different devices. I've never heard a different term for this. 2X on the other hand obviously wasn't optimized or ideal, but good enough to allow the iPad to be used for critical uses on day 1 until the optimized apps came out.
I'll try not to sound like a fanboi here...
I was reviewing products for CNET back when MP3 players and software was starting to take off...before Apple had anything and SoundJam was its own thing.
I remember back then it seemed like everyone had a player before the iPod. Every consumer electronic company had one, as did Intel, Virgin, Coke, Nike, etc...
The one thing most of these had in common, along with many digital cameras, was that they didn't desktop mount, but required platform specific software. In fairness, this was in part an issue with how USB was implemented on PCs prior to Windows XP, but many vendors even after XP were thinking they were doing the consumer a favor by requiring the use of software that "facilitated the use" of their products.
I was dual Mac/PC platform at the time (now I use mostly Macs except to develop/test for PC). It was very frustrating that devices couldn't just mount on the Mac, although some devices that required software on the PC did just mount on the Mac.
So when Apple came out with iTunes and the iPod, at first, it seemed pretty screwed that they themselves went with a software required syncing system.
However, things have changed radically since then.
My *main* iTunes library is almost 1TB. I have other iTunes libraries on several volumes that I use for work, production, a media server and other uses. On my main library, I have, I don't know, a bazillion playlists? I have multiple iPads, iPods, and iPhones. I also sync iTunes with a media server, Sonos system, as well as flash cards in my car and other devices. It's not uncommon for me to sync multiple devices at the same time, some wirelessly and some plugged in via USB.
For the life of me, I have no idea how I could even begin to manage all of this on a system level without software. Likewise, without playlists, the idea of duplicating folders would be a nightmare, since many of the playlists have the same songs in them.
For a casual user, I can understand the "why can't I just drag and drop from the system", but for me, the filesystem is actually a generic purpose filesystem app, be it The Finder on the Mac, or Explorer on Windows that absolutely sucks for specific file purposes such as music or photos. And iTunes/iPhoto/Aperture are file management apps only much better suited for these file types.
I'll admit that iTunes is far better on the Mac than Windows, and of course there is no iPhoto/Aperture on Windows, but still it's far better than trying to manage everything yourself from the generic file system management app be it Finder or Explorer.
Just to nitpick...
When the iTunes Music Store launched, it was with DRM'd AACs (at 128kbps). The iTunes Music Store never had MP3 files. When iTunes (the player) 1.0 launched it ripped to MP3, AIFF, or WAV, but could play any format supported by the QuickTime engine it used. The rest is correct... Just to add that Apple then transitioned to 256kps AAC files without DRM, and you could pay to upgrade individual files that were 128kbps DRM AAC from the store. Now, through iTunes Match, any DRM files that are matched are automatically replaced with 256kbpsDRM free AAC files.
Hey this is fun. I'm going to go with 'Kin.
But with Microsoft, it's confusing and frustrating to the user when the purchased app for their phone won't run on their tablet or vice versa. One of the reasons the iPad took off was because on day one it could run a bazillion iPod/iPhone apps (in 2X) mode, and universal binaries quickly brought about optimized apps that were "buy once".