That's not what I've heard. Jobs had to park his car away from where the people working under him did, to avoid it being keyed every day by pissed of employees fed up with his attitude and angry rants at them.
Yeah, because the employees where so overworked, they couldn't be bothered to drag themselves the few extra yards to Job's car to key it there:eyroll:
LG produced a full multitouch phone before Apple did,
Which one would that be? The LG Prada? That didn't get multi-touch until the LG Prada II, over a year later. Which also added a slider keyboard, because neither had a good on-screen keyboard.
The idea that europe has "stronger consumer protection laws" is utterly false in practice.
While yes, in europe you have some statutary differences compared to the USA - for example, a categorical right to return items purchase by post, what you do NOT have in europe, in general, is the ability to sue companies directly and/or seek punitive damages except in extremely extraordinary cases that require a myriad of hoops to be jumped through.
So Europeans don't have as much rights because they supposedly can't sue a manufacturer when your dog didn't survive being dried in the microwave oven they made.
Sure, with the way they are designed currently, but I'm pretty sure that they could design a parachute that would get 50% of the people to the ground with only minor injuries (some broken bones and scrapes). which may not sound that great, but it's better than dying.
Hindenburg survival rate was 64% - maybe we should be going back to Zeppelins filled with Hydrogen again.
In Europe there is a consumer law that demands that the sales person of a electronics device is required to give 2 years guarantee for free. So what our consumer-organisation is suing for is that apple only give 1 year and sells the other year for a profit while this should be free. (Or roughly something like that)
Than your consumer-organisation would be a bunch of morons, because Apple will most certainly grant the two year EU Statutory Warranty if they are the seller (and if they aren't, then that's non of their business anyway).
Google for one, which was the reason for the GMaps on Windows Phone brouhaha a few days ago.
False, Google didn't "only target Webkit", they claimed that GMaps a) was optimized for Webkit (which probably is true) and that b) they blocked Windows Phone users claiming that it wouldn't work (which was provably wrong).
Put together, at least $2.55 billion in costs on $3 billion in revenue, they're making at most $450 million on 40 billion downloads, or about 1.1 cents per download, tops. $450 million on 10 billion in revenue is less than 0.5% profit,
Where did you get "$10billion in revenue"? The app store gets $3billion in revenue, for which $450million is a very nice profit margin, considering, it's not even your main profit center, which is the iPhone (represents 2/3 of all Apple profits).
Again, an "excellent business model" for Apple.
You don't know what "revenue" means, don't you? It's all the money that comes in. You can't just declare away the 70% that Apple pays to the developers because you hate Apple.
Again, an "excellent business model" for people who know jack shit about business.
>"Did you not look at the article you linked to? They estimate Android tablets' market share will still lag 10% behind iPads' in 2016."
And even if it were true, then that would still mean 40% of the market, which is a HUGE share. So tablet does not equal iPad, neither now nor in the future.
Errm, around 3 iPad models sold (not counting color or cell mobile module variations) - vs. at least as many models by dozens of manufacturers? Yeah, when the best selling Android tablet sells less than half the number of the worst selling iPad model, tablet does equal iPad.
Earlier this month, we saw that the iPad market share had dropped to just 50.4%, so it may seem odd that it would take another 6-10 months before Apple finally slips under 50% of the tablet market, but Sameer Singh, analyst for Tech-Thoughts, says that the recent drop was something of an aberration, and Apple iPad market share will surge before dropping below 50 by mid-2013 will surge again before falling back.
You're kidding. There's more like 10,000 people download Red Hat Linux for every one that pays.
Obviously a lot of their community software is free, like Fedora. But they charge a lot more than a buck to their paying customers for subscription maintenance service.
Sure - but how much do they pay out to the developers? Time to move your picket line to Red Hat HQ.
Google provide developers with interesting metrics like the number of people who have your app installed and the number of people who actively use it (i.e. bother to open it semi-regularly).
Fuck, that's creepy. I seriously doubt Apple checks how often you open apps.
Well, consider this - the App Store is the ONLY market for iPhone software so those numbers are for all software sales for iPhone. That $7B figure that is tossed around is not for 2012, but since the App Store was created. Electronic Arts alone is making $4B a year in revenue. So, obviously, the iPhone is not supporting the kind of software ecosystem that either Windows or even Mac OS supports.
mjwx is right - it's a rube's game to develop for iPhone. It's certainly not something you can design a major company around.
So what can you design a major company around? Making big PC games like EA? Or apps for Android?
At the same time, that revenue figure is only a measurement of the paid apps revenue. The unknown figure for both platforms is how much developers are making from ad revenue. This could potentially be much higher on Android.
Ahh, yes. Android developers make their money with adds, while Android users block ads.
Well, the problem is that on average, it's dark for about 12 hours. And in the season when it becomes cold enough for it to trigger, it's dark even longer.
it wasn't the "Occupy Wall Street" hipsters that caused the global economy to collapse.
It was the regulations that created a bubble in the housing market that caused it, which amounts to the same thing.
Even if the regulation allowed it, it was greed, ruthlessness and carelessness that made the people responsible give out loads risky loans in the hope their scheme would work out by putting the risk into bundles, completely ignoring the (all too obvious in hindsight) risk of a domino effect.
I don't know WHY our legal system is so faulty, but it is. NO ONE (and ONE includes any business) should be subjected to costs because someone else just happens to disagree. If someone sues YOU and in order to defend yourself, you need to hire attorney(s) at a cost of tens of thousands of dollars (which for some people can wipe them out, financially), wouldn't you want the other party to cover your costs?
Actually, I would think it should be a cause for a mistrial since the rich person is using unfair tactics against you. For example, lets say I was to be taken to court by one of the AA's. There is no way I could get a fair trial because I do NOT have the money they do. They can keep throwing money at the trial, delaying it, appealing it, etc way beyond what I, or any normal person could do. That isn't right. That is using money to buy the outcome you want.
Ahh, so you're saying that you should be allowed to do anything to anyone richer than you without legal consequences, because any legal action would be unfair against you. Unless your action made you richer than the other of course.
Apple has some good products but you have gone much too far drinking the coolade. Apple did nothing to contribute to the invention those displays they simply bought the highest res LCD panels and added them to their systems.
On June 28, 2012, the US Patent & Trademark Office published a patent application from Apple that reveals a system and method to improve image edge discoloration. Yet at the heart of the patent, Apple states that "some embodiments of the LCD panel may be a model of the Retina display, available from Apple Inc."
Slashdot Mirror
That's not what I've heard. Jobs had to park his car away from where the people working under him did, to avoid it being keyed every day by pissed of employees fed up with his attitude and angry rants at them.
Yeah, because the employees where so overworked, they couldn't be bothered to drag themselves the few extra yards to Job's car to key it there :eyroll:
LG produced a full multitouch phone before Apple did,
Which one would that be? The LG Prada? That didn't get multi-touch until the LG Prada II, over a year later. Which also added a slider keyboard, because neither had a good on-screen keyboard.
I'm sorry, but that's completely clueless.
The idea that europe has "stronger consumer protection laws" is utterly false in practice.
While yes, in europe you have some statutary differences compared to the USA - for example, a categorical right to return items purchase by post, what you do NOT have in europe, in general, is the ability to sue companies directly and/or seek punitive damages except in extremely extraordinary cases that require a myriad of hoops to be jumped through.
So Europeans don't have as much rights because they supposedly can't sue a manufacturer when your dog didn't survive being dried in the microwave oven they made.
Sure, with the way they are designed currently, but I'm pretty sure that they could design a parachute that would get 50% of the people to the ground with only minor injuries (some broken bones and scrapes). which may not sound that great, but it's better than dying.
Hindenburg survival rate was 64% - maybe we should be going back to Zeppelins filled with Hydrogen again.
Nazi - *Na*tionalso*zi*alistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei.
Wrong. It comes from pronouncing *Nati*onal in German.
In Europe there is a consumer law that demands that the sales person of a electronics device is required to give 2 years guarantee for free.
So what our consumer-organisation is suing for is that apple only give 1 year and sells the other year for a profit while this should be free.
(Or roughly something like that)
Than your consumer-organisation would be a bunch of morons, because Apple will most certainly grant the two year EU Statutory Warranty if they are the seller (and if they aren't, then that's non of their business anyway).
http://www.apple.com/uk/legal/statutory-warranty/ http://www.apple.com/benl/legal/statutory-warranty/
I think you mean "RAMDoubler" which supposedly compressed your virtual memory, but did so ineffectively.
However VMWare currently advertises a similar feature.
No, RAMDoubler at least had some effect, the scam was SoftRAM
Google for one, which was the reason for the GMaps on Windows Phone brouhaha a few days ago.
False, Google didn't "only target Webkit", they claimed that GMaps a) was optimized for Webkit (which probably is true) and that b) they blocked Windows Phone users claiming that it wouldn't work (which was provably wrong).
Now if Microsoft would switch to something other than Windows 8 and RT, maybe companies like Samsung wouldn't be abandoning them in droves.
http://www.samsung.com/global/ativ/ativ_s.html
Where did you get "$10billion in revenue"? The app store gets $3billion in revenue, for which $450million is a very nice profit margin, considering, it's not even your main profit center, which is the iPhone (represents 2/3 of all Apple profits).
Again, an "excellent business model" for Apple.
You don't know what "revenue" means, don't you? It's all the money that comes in. You can't just declare away the 70% that Apple pays to the developers because you hate Apple.
Again, an "excellent business model" for people who know jack shit about business.
Why? I would almost be more surprised if they *didn't* check that kind of data.
If they did, the press would be al over it - not to mention the Apple haters.
>"Did you not look at the article you linked to? They estimate Android tablets' market share will still lag 10% behind iPads' in 2016."
And even if it were true, then that would still mean 40% of the market, which is a HUGE share. So tablet does not equal iPad, neither now nor in the future.
Errm, around 3 iPad models sold (not counting color or cell mobile module variations) - vs. at least as many models by dozens of manufacturers? Yeah, when the best selling Android tablet sells less than half the number of the worst selling iPad model, tablet does equal iPad.
"Ok, tablet == iPad. None of those other "tablets" are selling that well."
http://bgr.com/2012/12/05/tablet-market-share-2012/
Not only does tablet not equal iPad. iPads look to have a smaller marketshare than Android in the near future.
Odd that your source doesn't say that at all.
Maybe for another few months.
Earlier this month, we saw that the iPad market share had dropped to just 50.4%, so it may seem odd that it would take another 6-10 months before Apple finally slips under 50% of the tablet market, but Sameer Singh, analyst for Tech-Thoughts, says that the recent drop was something of an aberration, and Apple iPad market share will surge before dropping below 50 by mid-2013 will surge again before falling back.
http://www.phonearena.com/news/iPad-market-share-will-surge-before-dropping-below-50-by-mid-2013_id36694
Errm, this was the quarter before the iPad Mini came out.
You're kidding. There's more like 10,000 people download Red Hat Linux for every one that pays.
Obviously a lot of their community software is free, like Fedora. But they charge a lot more than a buck to their paying customers for subscription maintenance service.
Sure - but how much do they pay out to the developers? Time to move your picket line to Red Hat HQ.
Google provide developers with interesting metrics like the number of people who have your app installed and the number of people who actively use it (i.e. bother to open it semi-regularly).
Fuck, that's creepy. I seriously doubt Apple checks how often you open apps.
Well, consider this - the App Store is the ONLY market for iPhone software so those numbers are for all software sales for iPhone. That $7B figure that is tossed around is not for 2012, but since the App Store was created. Electronic Arts alone is making $4B a year in revenue. So, obviously, the iPhone is not supporting the kind of software ecosystem that either Windows or even Mac OS supports.
mjwx is right - it's a rube's game to develop for iPhone. It's certainly not something you can design a major company around.
So what can you design a major company around? Making big PC games like EA? Or apps for Android?
At the same time, that revenue figure is only a measurement of the paid apps revenue. The unknown figure for both platforms is how much developers are making from ad revenue. This could potentially be much higher on Android.
Ahh, yes. Android developers make their money with adds, while Android users block ads.
Well, the problem is that on average, it's dark for about 12 hours. And in the season when it becomes cold enough for it to trigger, it's dark even longer.
it was greed, ruthlessness and carelessness
You sound like the pope talking about masturbation.
At least I don't sound like a moron. Bye.
Difference is Intel asked whereas Apple just starts suing.
No, the difference is that Intel keeps suing everyone who uses "intel" anywhere - IOW there is no difference. But nice try to change the topic.
it wasn't the "Occupy Wall Street" hipsters that caused the global economy to collapse.
It was the regulations that created a bubble in the housing market that caused it, which amounts to the same thing.
Even if the regulation allowed it, it was greed, ruthlessness and carelessness that made the people responsible give out loads risky loans in the hope their scheme would work out by putting the risk into bundles, completely ignoring the (all too obvious in hindsight) risk of a domino effect.
shoestore.com (logo) - live
THE SHOE STORE - ABANDONED
GROCERY STORES - ABANDONED
THE HARDWARE STORE (logo) - live
All of them have at least been tried to be trademarked. As logos at least they worked.
I don't know WHY our legal system is so faulty, but it is. NO ONE (and ONE includes any business) should be subjected to costs because someone else just happens to disagree. If someone sues YOU and in order to defend yourself, you need to hire attorney(s) at a cost of tens of thousands of dollars (which for some people can wipe them out, financially), wouldn't you want the other party to cover your costs?
Actually, I would think it should be a cause for a mistrial since the rich person is using unfair tactics against you. For example, lets say I was to be taken to court by one of the AA's. There is no way I could get a fair trial because I do NOT have the money they do. They can keep throwing money at the trial, delaying it, appealing it, etc way beyond what I, or any normal person could do. That isn't right. That is using money to buy the outcome you want.
Ahh, so you're saying that you should be allowed to do anything to anyone richer than you without legal consequences, because any legal action would be unfair against you. Unless your action made you richer than the other of course.
Apple has some good products but you have gone much too far drinking the coolade. Apple did nothing to contribute to the invention those displays they simply bought the highest res LCD panels and added them to their systems.
Apple's Retina Display Patent Comes to Light
On June 28, 2012, the US Patent & Trademark Office published a patent application from Apple that reveals a system and method to improve image edge discoloration. Yet at the heart of the patent, Apple states that "some embodiments of the LCD panel may be a model of the Retina display, available from Apple Inc."