"Sony e-readers use the established "open" format, ePub, while the Kindle does not."
Apple uses ePub format for iBooks also. I'm pretty sure both Apple and Sony encrypt the books but iBooks definitely will read unencrypted ePub books. Does that make Apple open? About as much as Sony on this specific issue. On the other hand Apple has developed a platform which has attracted the ingenuity and efforts of people who are trying to transcend current eReader standards like "push pop press" which is coming soon and Flipboard which is available already.
$0.00 is exactly what Apple gets if you take the time to go to the Kindle store on the web (the purchases are automatically delivered to your Kindle apps and devices). This is the only option today and it will continue to be available in the future. What exactly is the problem? Do people just enjoy whining and complaining or is there something obvious that I am missing?
Apple could not insist that Amazon implement in app purchases initially because the API was not ready when the Kindle app was launched. Now it is, so that rule is being asserted. It has no effect on you because you know how to buy directly from Amazon. Most people comparison shop for items all the time. It isn't as though I completely agree with everything that Apple does, but this really seems like a tempest in a teapot.
Two items for for the slower learners. First, developers are not required to use Apple's DRM. Apple tests for buggy software, use of private API's, etc. Second, the webkit browser gives you access to all the porn you could desire. Sorry if your favorite site is flash based, but that would be an issue of efficiency rather than morality.
Troll? Nah, uninformed and bombastic. If you knew what you were talking about you would know that this kerfuffle is about developers who did not bother to use the security measures provided by Apple. In the widely noted case Angry Birds just checked for a valid receipt without checking to see if it was a receipt for their app. It isn't just a matter of having an opinion, it helps to actually know something when you decide to comment.
Is this an impenetrable mystery to everyone? If you want a two button mouse with a Mac, buy a two button mouse, you cheapskate! Honestly, they are widely available, inexpensive and work with all Mac software. This has been true forever (at least since the late 80's when I bought my first two button, optical mouse). I am sure there are reasons why one might not choose to buy a Mac, but availability of multi-button mice is not a legitimate reason.
Yes, I read the article and understand what the author claims. But that does not mean I agree with his conclusions. In fact, since there is evidence that distracted driving (while texting or talking on a cellphone) diminishes ones ability to react just as much as driving while mildly, and illegally, intoxicated I suggested that a rational way to deal with the threat is to assign the same penalties.
I don't dispute that however severe the penalties are there are people who will continue to hold the safety of others in contempt. A drunk driver might lie to himself about his ability to drive but his blood alcohol level doesn't lie after an accident. A distracted driver may also be self deluded and he can lie about the cause of an accident. That is why I think we need to apply the level of punishment that society has assigned to driving while drunk and possibly slightly more because you know the person is likely to lie and get away with it (after an accident).
We don't have to respond by looking the other way as thirty to forty thousand people are killed each year. Driving is a privilege which you can lose if you treat the safety of others with contempt.
Please, in most states there are no criminal penalties for texting or making cellphone calls by the driver. On the other hand there is evidence that distracted driving reduces driving effectiveness to the level of a person who is guilty of DUI. When the article suggests that penalties will only cause people to be even more dangerous drivers my response is to make the penalties equal to how we deal with drunk drivers.
People will still break laws. Does that mean we should give up? If a person has to face the possibility of losing a driver's license or even a car, maybe that will be a sufficient motivation to re-evaluate how important that call really is. Currently the reality is that in every parking lot you can watch as people get in the car, start it, and then pull out a cellphone to make a call as the car starts to move. All the time.
Actually I did read the article and understood what it was claiming about unintended consequences which I found to be a load of crap. My suggestion of the death penalty was intended as a ridiculous exaggeration but the idea was that if the penalties were sufficiently severe we might have fewer dead bodies to scrape off the road.
But the more important point was that if what you want to communicate is so important then it is important enough for you to get the f*ck off the road and take care of it. It isn't like you are on a train or airplane and are unable to step off. You are driving several tons of metal down the road and almost always have the option of pulling over rather than adding more risk to everyone else on the road.
Here's an idea. If that text is so damned important, pull off the road, park the car and send the damned text. When you are done with all your calls and texting, start the car and drive. Problem solved. People found texting or calling while they are supposed to be driving should be flogged and repeat offenders could face the death penalty. Better they should die alone rather than take others with them. And you kids, get off my lawn!
John McCarthy, a celebrity? Please. The point is that Apple products get superficial criticism because they are so well designed and manufactured. As though they were jewelry rather than technically superior products that are desired and used by people whose acumen cannot be realistically challenged by denizens of slashdot.
John McCarthy is the inventor/creator of Lisp and a Mac user. Just one of a great number of people far more intelligent and technically astute users that put comments from people like you in context. You really don't know how to use Wikipedia or Google to find that information in seconds? [the point of my post was putting you down for cluelessly parroting nonsense]
I owned a Newton and enjoyed it to some extent but to compare it to the iPad is beyond silly. It was a fine geek gadget but not in the same league as the iPad. More iPads were sold in its first week of availability than all Newtons for its entire history. Some of those limitations you allude to are an important part of why it transcends the tech market and manages to cross over to the mass market.
It will not be running iOS. It took Microsoft about 11 years to clone a bad copy of MacOS which managers were willing to inflict on their employees. Sarcastic and easily provoked critics can go on about things being "shiny" but there really a difference which people are willing to pay to enjoy. The marketing noise about iOS devices being "magical" strike me and many others are silly at best and often just plain annoying. But they are remarkably more natural than the conventional GUI. Commercial touchscreens I had used before the iPad were so annoying that I would usually prefer to see them destroyed rather than try to use them. It seems unlikely that the India pad will preserve that natural-ness with the hardware components and software that fit within its budget.
A sociological observation is that Shor was an undergrad at Caltech when McEliece was a professor there formulating the cryptosystem that would resist the quantum algorithm that Shor would develop years later. I wonder if knew each other.
All products have a measurable rate of return. The previous three iPhone models had measured rates of return. The rate of return of iPhone 4 was significantly less than the rate of return of the previous model iPhone 3GS.
If the antenna design of the iPhone 4 was the disaster as was often portrayed, the sales were off the charts and so few were being returned, how could these facts be reconciled? It seems to be the case of the dog that didn't bark. A simple explanation is that most of the noise was not from dissatisfied owners of the product but rather from the professionally disgruntled. In many (most?) cases people who loudly proclaim they never have and never will buy a product from Apple.
I think a much better case could be made that the main failing in this product is Apple's inability to ramp up production enough to meet the demand that exists.
"On a related note, does anyone know if the new WebKit browser on the now-$139 Kindle is any good?"
I don't know and hope someone who does provides some insight. I plan to buy one (next gen Kindle) but have low expectations for any browser running on an ePaper screen. Just watch a page turn on a Kindle and you should see what I mean.
You might want to look at how to escape from your own RDF. Consider how many iPhone4's have been sold, what the return rate is, and how Apple has still not been able to scale up manufacturing to meet demand. Your view (and to be fair a view shared by many who have been duped by the sensationalist press) is that the iPhone4 is a product disaster when it is actually one of the most successful product launches ever if you pay attention to the numbers rather than the distorted headlines. RDF, indeed!
Total number of TRS-80 Model 100 sold worldwide? Introduced in 1983 and sold over 6 million (Wikipedia) for $800. The iPad will sell many more than that in its first year and for a lower price with incomparably greater capabilities. Nostalgia isn't what it used to be.
Using the Roman numeral emphasizes that there is a tectonic shift from OS 9 to OS X. OS 9 was the last true Mac OS connected with the API's in the venerable Inside Macintosh tomes. OS X was NextStep adapted to look like Mac OS. Mac OS died, long live Mac OS!
If you use the Starbucks card you can pay just $1.50 for Pike Place blend and get as many refills as you want for free plus free wifi.There is often a copy of the Times available to read again for free. The seating is comfortable and on cool Tucson evenings one can sit on the patio and enjoy the outdoor gas fireplace.
With the confirmation that ice (water) is available in some craters near the moon's poles (and lots of it) much has changed. It could be possible to build self sufficient bases on the moon. I don' know what other activities might be pursued but it would be a great place for astronomical observatories away from signal pollution of the Earth (ok, actually mainly people) on the far side of the moon. Also there really is tritium in the moon's regolith. I don't know about the economic issues of sending it back to Earth but it might be possible to explore fusion research right there rather than some sensitive place like the Gulf of Mexico.
You might want to go easy on the glib psychobabble about the US. The recent and current exploration of the Solar System (missions to Jupiter, Saturn, their moons, etc), the solar observatories and cosmic background radiation observatories at the Lagrange libration points, impacting a comet, the list goes on and on. These are all arguably much more impressive scientifically and technologically.
Slashdot Mirror
"Sony e-readers use the established "open" format, ePub, while the Kindle does not."
Apple uses ePub format for iBooks also. I'm pretty sure both Apple and Sony encrypt the books but iBooks definitely will read unencrypted ePub books. Does that make Apple open? About as much as Sony on this specific issue. On the other hand Apple has developed a platform which has attracted the ingenuity and efforts of people who are trying to transcend current eReader standards like "push pop press" which is coming soon and Flipboard which is available already.
$0.00 is exactly what Apple gets if you take the time to go to the Kindle store on the web (the purchases are automatically delivered to your Kindle apps and devices). This is the only option today and it will continue to be available in the future. What exactly is the problem? Do people just enjoy whining and complaining or is there something obvious that I am missing?
Apple could not insist that Amazon implement in app purchases initially because the API was not ready when the Kindle app was launched. Now it is, so that rule is being asserted. It has no effect on you because you know how to buy directly from Amazon. Most people comparison shop for items all the time. It isn't as though I completely agree with everything that Apple does, but this really seems like a tempest in a teapot.
Two items for for the slower learners. First, developers are not required to use Apple's DRM. Apple tests for buggy software, use of private API's, etc. Second, the webkit browser gives you access to all the porn you could desire. Sorry if your favorite site is flash based, but that would be an issue of efficiency rather than morality.
Troll? Nah, uninformed and bombastic. If you knew what you were talking about you would know that this kerfuffle is about developers who did not bother to use the security measures provided by Apple. In the widely noted case Angry Birds just checked for a valid receipt without checking to see if it was a receipt for their app. It isn't just a matter of having an opinion, it helps to actually know something when you decide to comment.
Is this an impenetrable mystery to everyone? If you want a two button mouse with a Mac, buy a two button mouse, you cheapskate! Honestly, they are widely available, inexpensive and work with all Mac software. This has been true forever (at least since the late 80's when I bought my first two button, optical mouse). I am sure there are reasons why one might not choose to buy a Mac, but availability of multi-button mice is not a legitimate reason.
Yes, I read the article and understand what the author claims. But that does not mean I agree with his conclusions. In fact, since there is evidence that distracted driving (while texting or talking on a cellphone) diminishes ones ability to react just as much as driving while mildly, and illegally, intoxicated I suggested that a rational way to deal with the threat is to assign the same penalties.
I don't dispute that however severe the penalties are there are people who will continue to hold the safety of others in contempt. A drunk driver might lie to himself about his ability to drive but his blood alcohol level doesn't lie after an accident. A distracted driver may also be self deluded and he can lie about the cause of an accident. That is why I think we need to apply the level of punishment that society has assigned to driving while drunk and possibly slightly more because you know the person is likely to lie and get away with it (after an accident).
We don't have to respond by looking the other way as thirty to forty thousand people are killed each year. Driving is a privilege which you can lose if you treat the safety of others with contempt.
Please, in most states there are no criminal penalties for texting or making cellphone calls by the driver. On the other hand there is evidence that distracted driving reduces driving effectiveness to the level of a person who is guilty of DUI. When the article suggests that penalties will only cause people to be even more dangerous drivers my response is to make the penalties equal to how we deal with drunk drivers.
People will still break laws. Does that mean we should give up? If a person has to face the possibility of losing a driver's license or even a car, maybe that will be a sufficient motivation to re-evaluate how important that call really is. Currently the reality is that in every parking lot you can watch as people get in the car, start it, and then pull out a cellphone to make a call as the car starts to move. All the time.
Actually I did read the article and understood what it was claiming about unintended consequences which I found to be a load of crap. My suggestion of the death penalty was intended as a ridiculous exaggeration but the idea was that if the penalties were sufficiently severe we might have fewer dead bodies to scrape off the road.
But the more important point was that if what you want to communicate is so important then it is important enough for you to get the f*ck off the road and take care of it. It isn't like you are on a train or airplane and are unable to step off. You are driving several tons of metal down the road and almost always have the option of pulling over rather than adding more risk to everyone else on the road.
Here's an idea. If that text is so damned important, pull off the road, park the car and send the damned text. When you are done with all your calls and texting, start the car and drive. Problem solved. People found texting or calling while they are supposed to be driving should be flogged and repeat offenders could face the death penalty. Better they should die alone rather than take others with them. And you kids, get off my lawn!
John McCarthy, a celebrity? Please. The point is that Apple products get superficial criticism because they are so well designed and manufactured. As though they were jewelry rather than technically superior products that are desired and used by people whose acumen cannot be realistically challenged by denizens of slashdot.
John McCarthy is the inventor/creator of Lisp and a Mac user. Just one of a great number of people far more intelligent and technically astute users that put comments from people like you in context. You really don't know how to use Wikipedia or Google to find that information in seconds? [the point of my post was putting you down for cluelessly parroting nonsense]
I owned a Newton and enjoyed it to some extent but to compare it to the iPad is beyond silly. It was a fine geek gadget but not in the same league as the iPad. More iPads were sold in its first week of availability than all Newtons for its entire history. Some of those limitations you allude to are an important part of why it transcends the tech market and manages to cross over to the mass market.
"the core of Apple's market", you mean people like John McCarthy? If you don't know who he is then just go away.
It will not be running iOS. It took Microsoft about 11 years to clone a bad copy of MacOS which managers were willing to inflict on their employees. Sarcastic and easily provoked critics can go on about things being "shiny" but there really a difference which people are willing to pay to enjoy. The marketing noise about iOS devices being "magical" strike me and many others are silly at best and often just plain annoying. But they are remarkably more natural than the conventional GUI. Commercial touchscreens I had used before the iPad were so annoying that I would usually prefer to see them destroyed rather than try to use them. It seems unlikely that the India pad will preserve that natural-ness with the hardware components and software that fit within its budget.
A sociological observation is that Shor was an undergrad at Caltech when McEliece was a professor there formulating the cryptosystem that would resist the quantum algorithm that Shor would develop years later. I wonder if knew each other.
All products have a measurable rate of return. The previous three iPhone models had measured rates of return. The rate of return of iPhone 4 was significantly less than the rate of return of the previous model iPhone 3GS.
If the antenna design of the iPhone 4 was the disaster as was often portrayed, the sales were off the charts and so few were being returned, how could these facts be reconciled? It seems to be the case of the dog that didn't bark. A simple explanation is that most of the noise was not from dissatisfied owners of the product but rather from the professionally disgruntled. In many (most?) cases people who loudly proclaim they never have and never will buy a product from Apple.
I think a much better case could be made that the main failing in this product is Apple's inability to ramp up production enough to meet the demand that exists.
"On a related note, does anyone know if the new WebKit browser on the now-$139 Kindle is any good?"
I don't know and hope someone who does provides some insight. I plan to buy one (next gen Kindle) but have low expectations for any browser running on an ePaper screen. Just watch a page turn on a Kindle and you should see what I mean.
You might want to look at how to escape from your own RDF. Consider how many iPhone4's have been sold, what the return rate is, and how Apple has still not been able to scale up manufacturing to meet demand. Your view (and to be fair a view shared by many who have been duped by the sensationalist press) is that the iPhone4 is a product disaster when it is actually one of the most successful product launches ever if you pay attention to the numbers rather than the distorted headlines. RDF, indeed!
Total number of TRS-80 Model 100 sold worldwide? Introduced in 1983 and sold over 6 million (Wikipedia) for $800. The iPad will sell many more than that in its first year and for a lower price with incomparably greater capabilities. Nostalgia isn't what it used to be.
Using the Roman numeral emphasizes that there is a tectonic shift from OS 9 to OS X. OS 9 was the last true Mac OS connected with the API's in the venerable Inside Macintosh tomes. OS X was NextStep adapted to look like Mac OS. Mac OS died, long live Mac OS!
So are you similarly "sad" for a family that chooses to read six different novels? Even if they chose to each sit in a different room?
Breugger quick, hide the dog! I think someone is planning to eat it.
If you use the Starbucks card you can pay just $1.50 for Pike Place blend and get as many refills as you want for free plus free wifi.There is often a copy of the Times available to read again for free. The seating is comfortable and on cool Tucson evenings one can sit on the patio and enjoy the outdoor gas fireplace.
Pretentious? Moi?
With the confirmation that ice (water) is available in some craters near the moon's poles (and lots of it) much has changed. It could be possible to build self sufficient bases on the moon. I don' know what other activities might be pursued but it would be a great place for astronomical observatories away from signal pollution of the Earth (ok, actually mainly people) on the far side of the moon. Also there really is tritium in the moon's regolith. I don't know about the economic issues of sending it back to Earth but it might be possible to explore fusion research right there rather than some sensitive place like the Gulf of Mexico.
You might want to go easy on the glib psychobabble about the US. The recent and current exploration of the Solar System (missions to Jupiter, Saturn, their moons, etc), the solar observatories and cosmic background radiation observatories at the Lagrange libration points, impacting a comet, the list goes on and on. These are all arguably much more impressive scientifically and technologically.