iTunes has DRM, and to use an iPod, you generally need iTunes, so I don't see how this is so much different to this issue. Besides, if you had read up about it, you would know this isn't a blacklist to disable any app, but to restrict an app from the Core Location API that Apple have made very strict for the obvious privacy and security implications of GPS.
The thing is, I don't just have philosophical reasons for not liking Microsoft, I also have practical ones. There is also the track-record aspect -- I still think Microsoft has done more worse things than Apple, so when I do get philosophical, I have to admit that I am bias towards Apple, but it's not blind loyalty -- things could change.
Although it probably wouldn't hard to write an app with a legitimate reason to use the GPS, and throw in a few lines that will also tell the author where you are as well.
Not even a malicious app that is violating someone's privacy without them noticing? I'd rather have Apple disable it and risk the possibility of a false deactivation which I can sort out later than have my iPhone pwned because someone decided that iPhones phoning home was something to get paranoid about.
How about we stop pretending that philosophical issues are the most important things when someone buys a product? Yeah, Apple products are more closed and restrictive, but they work for me. And until I get burnt by them bad enough to consider switching, I have no problem with them. I mean, they do behave pretty well for a Corporation. No need to spread FUD at the first sight of something that may not be ideal.
I should point out for people not familiar with this why that's incredible: It's a source of life that doesn't rely on the Sun in any way. Before, even the deepest deep sea creatures lived off the sun as they fed off what comes down from above -- when they're not eating each other, that is.
I read about this in a couple of places before Slashdot, and they suggested that the developer may have yanked it because they pay for the refund costs. I don't remember anything conclusive that it was Apple who yanked it.
They could try, but then others might decide to enforce their claims -- their biggest station (and the biggest in the continent, IIRC) is on an NZ claim. The US still reserves a right to make a claim, or something, even though there is a hold on new claims, and their is still a large amount of unclaimed land, but they would not be very popular if they started those kinds of activities.
I've yet to see a camera lens that actually looks like it could function as a firearm. Firearms and cannons need to be made of a single (or relatively few) pieces of thick metal that can contain an explosion. A lens is a puzzle of many different bits of thin metal and glass lenses. The two items probably couldn't look more different if you tried.
I'll agree to (2) if all programmers who can't design stop working, too. But that would be just as stupid. Have you never heard of specialisation?
I won't even go near (1), since it's obvious that you are one of those people who simply doesn't get it and has no interest in trying to understand the issue.
Then I guess you aren't really that devoted to your particular OSS project. But others are more devoted, but still expect non-coders to contribute code -- that's the problem. No one is asking you to devote all your time to a certain project -- that is something else altogether.
I think you must have missed Gruber's most recent post, which says it's more a question of authority. And I agree. There are plenty of usability experts out there who would volunteer their time, but who's to say anyone will listen?
That shouldn't matter, as many people can work on the same project, right? It's like John Gruber says -- it's about the people with design skills having no authority and just getting ignored.
There are also plenty of people who understand code, and can even code a bit themselves, that understand usability issues, but most of them know that it's a bit pointless to try and get involved when you'll just be ignored.
Not, it's not a matter of taste. Of you had ever done any real usability testing, you would know that.
See people, this is the problem right here. Many in the OSS community don't even take usability seriously and say that it's a matter of taste, what you are used to, that it's not possible to quantify or do any meaningful tests etc. How can they expect to improve usability when they think it doesn't matter in the first place?
And that's also a major cause of conflicts around the world, too.
We have similar issues here in NZ. It's about admitting wrong-doings and being diplomatic, rather than this antiquated notion of conquering other countries.
I think it's case of intentions, too. I don't think most trolls intend to enlighten their targets. I also suspect that Socrates was a bit crazy, hence his methods. We could talk about this all day, but I really don't think Socrates was a troll -- I'm sure many trolls would like to think he was, as it makes them feel special or gives them justification.
Slashdot Mirror
iTunes has DRM, and to use an iPod, you generally need iTunes, so I don't see how this is so much different to this issue. Besides, if you had read up about it, you would know this isn't a blacklist to disable any app, but to restrict an app from the Core Location API that Apple have made very strict for the obvious privacy and security implications of GPS.
The thing is, I don't just have philosophical reasons for not liking Microsoft, I also have practical ones. There is also the track-record aspect -- I still think Microsoft has done more worse things than Apple, so when I do get philosophical, I have to admit that I am bias towards Apple, but it's not blind loyalty -- things could change.
Perhaps I'm not a paranoid zealot?
Although it probably wouldn't hard to write an app with a legitimate reason to use the GPS, and throw in a few lines that will also tell the author where you are as well.
Exactly.
Not even a malicious app that is violating someone's privacy without them noticing? I'd rather have Apple disable it and risk the possibility of a false deactivation which I can sort out later than have my iPhone pwned because someone decided that iPhones phoning home was something to get paranoid about.
How about we stop pretending that philosophical issues are the most important things when someone buys a product? Yeah, Apple products are more closed and restrictive, but they work for me. And until I get burnt by them bad enough to consider switching, I have no problem with them. I mean, they do behave pretty well for a Corporation. No need to spread FUD at the first sight of something that may not be ideal.
Especially when you consider that it's possible to write a program that tells someone exactly where you are.
I should point out for people not familiar with this why that's incredible: It's a source of life that doesn't rely on the Sun in any way. Before, even the deepest deep sea creatures lived off the sun as they fed off what comes down from above -- when they're not eating each other, that is.
Google created this technology and control it, therefore they are responsible for it's use.
It's not like there hasn't been any controversy about this technology in other countries.
I don't know that what google is doing is taboo seeing as they are a technology in this case not a person.
And Google is not run by people?
I read about this in a couple of places before Slashdot, and they suggested that the developer may have yanked it because they pay for the refund costs. I don't remember anything conclusive that it was Apple who yanked it.
No, but the countries they'd be dealing with in Antarctica would be a bit different to going after some of the places in the Middle East.
They could try, but then others might decide to enforce their claims -- their biggest station (and the biggest in the continent, IIRC) is on an NZ claim. The US still reserves a right to make a claim, or something, even though there is a hold on new claims, and their is still a large amount of unclaimed land, but they would not be very popular if they started those kinds of activities.
I've yet to see a camera lens that actually looks like it could function as a firearm. Firearms and cannons need to be made of a single (or relatively few) pieces of thick metal that can contain an explosion. A lens is a puzzle of many different bits of thin metal and glass lenses. The two items probably couldn't look more different if you tried.
I'll agree to (2) if all programmers who can't design stop working, too. But that would be just as stupid. Have you never heard of specialisation?
I won't even go near (1), since it's obvious that you are one of those people who simply doesn't get it and has no interest in trying to understand the issue.
Then I guess you aren't really that devoted to your particular OSS project. But others are more devoted, but still expect non-coders to contribute code -- that's the problem. No one is asking you to devote all your time to a certain project -- that is something else altogether.
I think you must have missed Gruber's most recent post, which says it's more a question of authority. And I agree. There are plenty of usability experts out there who would volunteer their time, but who's to say anyone will listen?
i use a lot of free software that has very good usability
Is this your personal opinion or have you conducted studies? Because if the former, then you have missed the point.
That shouldn't matter, as many people can work on the same project, right? It's like John Gruber says -- it's about the people with design skills having no authority and just getting ignored.
There are also plenty of people who understand code, and can even code a bit themselves, that understand usability issues, but most of them know that it's a bit pointless to try and get involved when you'll just be ignored.
Not, it's not a matter of taste. Of you had ever done any real usability testing, you would know that.
See people, this is the problem right here. Many in the OSS community don't even take usability seriously and say that it's a matter of taste, what you are used to, that it's not possible to quantify or do any meaningful tests etc. How can they expect to improve usability when they think it doesn't matter in the first place?
What does admitting wrong actually accomplish? Nothing.
I'm guessing that's just your personal opinion?
There's more value from working to establish real equality than from more pointless hand-wringing.
Equality? Since when has that been part of this? I think you are confused.
we'll do more than not use it, we will continue to point out how such a retarded policy is wrong, and that's it's costing apple customers.
Feel free to call their policy retarded. But costing them customers? Have you seen the sale figures of the iPhone?
That's what happens all over the world.
And that's also a major cause of conflicts around the world, too.
We have similar issues here in NZ. It's about admitting wrong-doings and being diplomatic, rather than this antiquated notion of conquering other countries.
I think it's case of intentions, too. I don't think most trolls intend to enlighten their targets. I also suspect that Socrates was a bit crazy, hence his methods. We could talk about this all day, but I really don't think Socrates was a troll -- I'm sure many trolls would like to think he was, as it makes them feel special or gives them justification.