Potentially interesting context: Softbank owns Sprint. If I were to hazard a guess, I'd say that might well have a great deal to do with Apple's interest in Softbank...
Much more interesting is Trump's touting of this fond, considering 45% of the money comes from Saudi Arabia, and what he said about the Saudis during his campaign. But then, he has 3 guys from Goldman Sachs in his cabinet. He doesn't seem to care much about what he said during the campaign.
Yes, a histogram showing the earnings of each development house (which sell apps that make revenue) by their percentage of the total App Store earnings, would give a better picture of how well most app developers are doing. My guess is it would look something like this:
Top 2% - $19.5 billion
Next 18% - $485 million
Next 20% - $14.75 million
Next 60% - $250 thousand
So what's your point? That people develop for Android instead? Ignoring that the distribution looks similar, the total revenue is half, spread amongst twice as many developers? Or any other market, where, again, the distribution looks similar, but the visibility of your app is even lower?
Anyway, that's just the money going though Apple's App Store payments. It ignores most income through ads, and all contracted developer income from free apps. Facebook, Google, Amazon, Netflix, Twitter and others offering services have hundreds if not thousands of contracted developers working on iOS apps. Similar for jobs writing apps to support hardware.
A first world problem is a problem experienced in the first world. If you want 3rd world problems move to some shithole. I have first world problems to deal with here which include not throwing away perfectly good electronics to appease some company's strategy for selling more Beats garbage.
I didn't say "having to throw away perfectly good electronics" is a good is a first world problem, I said claiming "having to throw away perfectly good electronics" is making up a first world problem.
Just stop making shit up. It's easier than making shit up.
While most computers don't get monumental improvement gains anymore
That is only true for the CPU not the GPU which has seen huge improvements over the past 4 years. Since the Mac Pro comes with its GPUs soldered to the board
Wrong. Unless you are talking about the actual chips. Then - so what?
Yeah it's great, now I need to carry an adapter with me when I go between work and home.
Or you could use one of dozens of Lightning-headphones. Are one of hundreds of Bluetooth headphones.
Well at least I can still charge wirelessly. Or not.
You can charge your phone wirelessly while you go between work and home? Or do you just restrict the boundaries of your first world problems so you can smugly blame Apple for not fixing them?
If you really, really need to charge at the same time there are already multiple solutions.
Since the original post said it could not be done - well, the word "bald faced lie" is really not too strong, now is it?
I don't know, considering that most reviews for those solutions are "it sucks", "it doesn't work", etc., the kickstarter campaign for one of them is suspended, and the $40 gigantic belkin adapter actually needs a second adapter on top of it to plug in headphones... "bald faced lie" seems a bit strong.
Yeah, it's possible, but for more money, much more bulkiness to carry around, and, it seems, a lot of luck.
BTW, I also keep my phone plugged in while listening to music pretty much all the time -- in car or at work. The only time I don't is when I'm going for a walk. I see a lot of people at work doing the same. I doubt that it's that much of a rarity.
I call your bullshit, and raise you two reality checks. For one, using Bluetooth headphones work just fine while charging an iPhone 7 (Plus).
And considering "Charging and listening on your expensive headphone" works just fine with any Lightning-Dock sold for 1.5 years before the iPhone 7 was introduced (and most third-party variations since the introduction of the Lightning conector), you don't even have to buy a device specially made for this first world "problem".
And yet in any test that compares Android phones to the iPhone, Android phones still blow it completely out of the water.
Coincidence that these test always come out a month before Apple releases their new phone? And "blow it completely out of the water" translates to "comes somewhat near".
Apple has completely stagnated under Tim Cook. What have we got since Steve?
Share price doubled? Number of iPhones sold per quarter quadrupled? Vastly improved camera in iPhone? Ax CPUs getting faster and more power efficient each generation? Want more?
Well, at least the reality inside my head is shared with most of the rest of the world, while all you guys have is your Collapsed Reality Distortion Bubble.
Are you claiming you are the only Anti-Apple-Troll here? Are the other accounts your sock-puppets? Or are you just imagining things?
And I don't care if you insult people with actual swear words - you are insulting my intelligence with your obnoxious stupidity. You and your admitted sock-puppets.
So you admit counting all Android phones towards smartphone market share is bullshit because most are actually used as dumb- or feature-phones.
Bit of a leap from "fewer apps installed" to "most are used as dumb phones" don't you think? You seem to be very personally invested in OS usage patterns. If that makes you happy - go for it, I don't care.
Hey, you are the guys making the really big leaps here, what is your sex drive for Google based on?
Well, I'm sure the Vietnamese slaves who work in Samsung sweatshops for $1/hour will send you some of their money because you speak out on Samsung's behalf.
Discussing the crooked business practices of Apple is not the same as "speaking out on behalf of Samsung".
In your case it is. Do they pay well?
Do you high-five yourself when you post this kind of childish reply? If you're not interested in having grown-up discussions why are you wasting your time here?
Why would I want to have grown-up discussions with somebody who isn't? You are certainly not wise beyond your age. You just are a dumb troll, paid or not, who claims Apple is going down the chute for years now. Grow up. Not that I would want to have discussions with you then.
*Sigh*. Android users use less apps, yes we all know this. That also means doesn't it that the thing that's being claimed here can't be accurately measured from what Flurry can tell you. If Flurry only knows about a device when a suitable app is installed, then Flurry being less used for Android apps, and Android users installing less apps, is going to undercount Android *devices*. This article is trying to measure *device* numbers, which it's unsuitable for doing so. Give me comparison figures from Facebook, or some ubiquitous cross-platform app, but Flurry itself is flawed.
So you admit counting all Android phones towards smartphone market share is bullshit because most are actually used as dumb- or feature-phones. And it doesn't really matter whether "Flurry being less used for Android apps" is actually even true - you just need to run one Flurry app once, and you are counted.
He's referring to Flurry's other big selling point: a trove of mobile-app-user data that is bigger in reach than Google and Facebook.*
More than 400,000 apps now use the tool and, in return, funnel much of that user data back to Flurry. Flurry thus has a pipe into more than 1.2 billion devices globally and is inside seven to ten apps per device. It continuously triangulates among them all, collecting on average 3 terabytes of data each day.
* On Flurry's reach: while the company sees app activity from 1.2 billion devices each month, Facebook’s last released figure for its mobile products was 819 million monthly active users. In May 2013 Google said it had activated 900 million Android devices in the last five years.
And those numbers are three years old. At that time a total of 421 million iPhones had been sold If you add that to Google's 900 million, and pretend that every single one of them was active at least once a month, Flurry would reach 90% of them.
And even if you pretended that all those phones were still in use and so were (a very optimistic) 100 million more across Windows, BlackBerrys and other app capable phones, and you pretend that Flurry was on every single one of the non.Android phones - Flurry would still see more than 2/3 of all Android phones.
Stop pretending until you can come up with some actual numbers instead of just innuendo.
The documents you are citing appear to date back to Android 3.2 and are obviously out of date in regards to current handset specs.
Well, the second link comes directly from the first, so it's hardly my fault if Google's documentation is out of date. More proof that they don't care about Android any more.
Go on PhoneArena.com or GSMArena.com and do a search of Android handsets and sizes.
Well, what I find is current Android phones with smaller screens than the original iPhone. Anyway, you are confusing released models with actual sales numbers across those models.
Slashdot Mirror
Potentially interesting context: Softbank owns Sprint. If I were to hazard a guess, I'd say that might well have a great deal to do with Apple's interest in Softbank...
Yeah. If this wee an investment in Softbank. But it's an investment in Softbank's new technology fund
Much more interesting is Trump's touting of this fond, considering 45% of the money comes from Saudi Arabia, and what he said about the Saudis during his campaign. But then, he has 3 guys from Goldman Sachs in his cabinet. He doesn't seem to care much about what he said during the campaign.
Yes, a histogram showing the earnings of each development house (which sell apps that make revenue) by their percentage of the total App Store earnings, would give a better picture of how well most app developers are doing. My guess is it would look something like this:
Top 2% - $19.5 billion Next 18% - $485 million Next 20% - $14.75 million Next 60% - $250 thousand
So what's your point? That people develop for Android instead? Ignoring that the distribution looks similar, the total revenue is half, spread amongst twice as many developers? Or any other market, where, again, the distribution looks similar, but the visibility of your app is even lower?
Anyway, that's just the money going though Apple's App Store payments. It ignores most income through ads, and all contracted developer income from free apps. Facebook, Google, Amazon, Netflix, Twitter and others offering services have hundreds if not thousands of contracted developers working on iOS apps. Similar for jobs writing apps to support hardware.
Never go full retard man.
Because I'd end up like you. Let's face it, you can't get more retarded than your argument.
Should read Lamar Smith (R-TX, not a scientist, Christian Scientist, believes that reality is purely spiritual and the material world an illusion)
A first world problem is a problem experienced in the first world. If you want 3rd world problems move to some shithole. I have first world problems to deal with here which include not throwing away perfectly good electronics to appease some company's strategy for selling more Beats garbage.
I didn't say "having to throw away perfectly good electronics" is a good is a first world problem, I said claiming "having to throw away perfectly good electronics" is making up a first world problem.
Just stop making shit up. It's easier than making shit up.
While most computers don't get monumental improvement gains anymore
That is only true for the CPU not the GPU which has seen huge improvements over the past 4 years. Since the Mac Pro comes with its GPUs soldered to the board
Wrong. Unless you are talking about the actual chips. Then - so what?
So what you're saying is I need to throw out all my existing headphones
No, I'm saying you are making up a first world problem.
And it also provides technology that Apple simply refuses to provide: a stylus (I love making sketches and taking notes on my Note 5),
How many times did you have to replace a lost stylus?
it includes a legacy headphone jack adaptor.
Yeah it's great, now I need to carry an adapter with me when I go between work and home.
Or you could use one of dozens of Lightning-headphones. Are one of hundreds of Bluetooth headphones.
Well at least I can still charge wirelessly. Or not.
You can charge your phone wirelessly while you go between work and home? Or do you just restrict the boundaries of your first world problems so you can smugly blame Apple for not fixing them?
Well, it should be easy to find a citation for that claim.
I don't know, considering that most reviews for those solutions are "it sucks", "it doesn't work", etc., the kickstarter campaign for one of them is suspended, and the $40 gigantic belkin adapter actually needs a second adapter on top of it to plug in headphones... "bald faced lie" seems a bit strong.
Yeah, it's possible, but for more money, much more bulkiness to carry around, and, it seems, a lot of luck.
BTW, I also keep my phone plugged in while listening to music pretty much all the time -- in car or at work. The only time I don't is when I'm going for a walk. I see a lot of people at work doing the same. I doubt that it's that much of a rarity.
I call your bullshit, and raise you two reality checks. For one, using Bluetooth headphones work just fine while charging an iPhone 7 (Plus). And considering "Charging and listening on your expensive headphone" works just fine with any Lightning-Dock sold for 1.5 years before the iPhone 7 was introduced (and most third-party variations since the introduction of the Lightning conector), you don't even have to buy a device specially made for this first world "problem".
AND CHARGE THEIR PHONE AT THE SAME TIME.
Do I have to spell it out for you?
It would be enough to be right. You fail.
And yet in any test that compares Android phones to the iPhone, Android phones still blow it completely out of the water.
Coincidence that these test always come out a month before Apple releases their new phone? And "blow it completely out of the water" translates to "comes somewhat near".
IOW jealousy among the Haterbois increased 75% since Jobs death.
Apple has completely stagnated under Tim Cook. What have we got since Steve?
Share price doubled? Number of iPhones sold per quarter quadrupled? Vastly improved camera in iPhone? Ax CPUs getting faster and more power efficient each generation? Want more?
what the fuck kind of bullshit is a site with like 3 pictures and text trying to pull that it pegs all 4 cores of my CPU
It's a design failure of your computer.
It must be a wonderful reality inside your head.
Well, at least the reality inside my head is shared with most of the rest of the world, while all you guys have is your Collapsed Reality Distortion Bubble.
I suppose that life in the Apple world means being constantly subject to the word farts of your ilk.
No it means constantly being subject to the brain farts of your ilk. And boy do they stink.
Are you claiming you are the only Anti-Apple-Troll here? Are the other accounts your sock-puppets? Or are you just imagining things? And I don't care if you insult people with actual swear words - you are insulting my intelligence with your obnoxious stupidity. You and your admitted sock-puppets.
So you admit counting all Android phones towards smartphone market share is bullshit because most are actually used as dumb- or feature-phones.
Bit of a leap from "fewer apps installed" to "most are used as dumb phones" don't you think? You seem to be very personally invested in OS usage patterns. If that makes you happy - go for it, I don't care.
Hey, you are the guys making the really big leaps here, what is your sex drive for Google based on?
Yes, you did your job of spreading stupidity
Yeah, because I quoted him - and you. Spread it out real thick to thin it.
Well, I'm sure the Vietnamese slaves who work in Samsung sweatshops for $1/hour will send you some of their money because you speak out on Samsung's behalf.
Discussing the crooked business practices of Apple is not the same as "speaking out on behalf of Samsung".
In your case it is. Do they pay well?
Do you high-five yourself when you post this kind of childish reply? If you're not interested in having grown-up discussions why are you wasting your time here?
Why would I want to have grown-up discussions with somebody who isn't? You are certainly not wise beyond your age. You just are a dumb troll, paid or not, who claims Apple is going down the chute for years now. Grow up. Not that I would want to have discussions with you then.
*Sigh*. Android users use less apps, yes we all know this. That also means doesn't it that the thing that's being claimed here can't be accurately measured from what Flurry can tell you. If Flurry only knows about a device when a suitable app is installed, then Flurry being less used for Android apps, and Android users installing less apps, is going to undercount Android *devices*. This article is trying to measure *device* numbers, which it's unsuitable for doing so. Give me comparison figures from Facebook, or some ubiquitous cross-platform app, but Flurry itself is flawed.
So you admit counting all Android phones towards smartphone market share is bullshit because most are actually used as dumb- or feature-phones. And it doesn't really matter whether "Flurry being less used for Android apps" is actually even true - you just need to run one Flurry app once, and you are counted.
He's referring to Flurry's other big selling point: a trove of mobile-app-user data that is bigger in reach than Google and Facebook.*
More than 400,000 apps now use the tool and, in return, funnel much of that user data back to Flurry. Flurry thus has a pipe into more than 1.2 billion devices globally and is inside seven to ten apps per device. It continuously triangulates among them all, collecting on average 3 terabytes of data each day.
* On Flurry's reach: while the company sees app activity from 1.2 billion devices each month, Facebook’s last released figure for its mobile products was 819 million monthly active users. In May 2013 Google said it had activated 900 million Android devices in the last five years.
And those numbers are three years old. At that time a total of 421 million iPhones had been sold If you add that to Google's 900 million, and pretend that every single one of them was active at least once a month, Flurry would reach 90% of them.
And even if you pretended that all those phones were still in use and so were (a very optimistic) 100 million more across Windows, BlackBerrys and other app capable phones, and you pretend that Flurry was on every single one of the non.Android phones - Flurry would still see more than 2/3 of all Android phones.
Stop pretending until you can come up with some actual numbers instead of just innuendo.
Where did you get that idea? According to Google's own statistics, 90% of all screens are "small" or "normal" with "normal" ending somewhere below 5" on their vague "definition" chart. https://developer.android.com/about/dashboards/index.html . https://developer.android.com/guide/practices/screens_support.html#range
The documents you are citing appear to date back to Android 3.2 and are obviously out of date in regards to current handset specs.
Well, the second link comes directly from the first, so it's hardly my fault if Google's documentation is out of date. More proof that they don't care about Android any more.
Go on PhoneArena.com or GSMArena.com and do a search of Android handsets and sizes.
Well, what I find is current Android phones with smaller screens than the original iPhone. Anyway, you are confusing released models with actual sales numbers across those models.
I felt more stupid after reading your post.
Then I did my job: to inform you of your stupidity. I hope you keep up feeling even more stupid every day, because lets face it: you are.