Hold on...read the following carefully and ignore what I might have typed eariler. I'm removing the sarcastic/ironic hyperbole about beatings:
I'm not saying that giving or taking a beating is right--I'm saying that it is WAY different than it used to be. Kids used to get in little scuffles but now they go medieval on each other--perhaps I didn't make that very clear. I miss the days when a bully just was a bully. These days, bullies are homicidal maniacs.
The bullying I received and witnessed as a kid was about as violent as a "kill the man" game of football where you got some bumps or bruises or a black eye just tackling each other. These days, kids get the living shit beat out of them--hospitalized or even scarred for life (if you're lucky enough to survive).
My point is this: what changed? Why is it so much more violent? Cyberbullying is not the problem--people who have no idea how to behave are the problem.
I think maybe you guys took my comments about the "old school" way of getting beat up too literally--it was hyperbole. I was trying to illustrate the extreme escalation of violent behavior in our society--especially amongst children.
If the people of the US think it is "normal" that our public schools have metal detectors and armed guards, I think we're in real trouble. I cannot recall anyone being killed, stabbed, shot, or maimed by another student between my time in public schools between 1973 and 1986. I'm sure it happened somewhere but not in the 10 different systems I went through. It just didn't happen. If it did, it was shocking and people were outraged. Today, it's practically expected--or we wouldn't have the metal detectors, armed guards, and attack dogs for FUCKING CHILDREN. People aren't outraged anymore, they're scared.
Cyberbullying is NOT the problem--it's just another byproduct of the root problem we can't seem to fix or even identify. The guards, razor wire, and metal detectors haven't fixed the problem--it only acknowledged it.
Points taken--but I think you have some anger issues. I can see that my comments hit a nerve about your own experience.
The real issue is parents can't keep up with their kids and/or don't know how to deal with them. The cyberbulling bullshit would not be a problem if kids any any sort of guidance for how to be decent human beings. THAT is really what I was trying to say in my rant. No one bothers to be polite or courteous vis-a-vis and, on the web, they're just plain rude. It's like "Web Rage" where people take out their frustrations on complete strangers with little regard for someone else's feelings or status as a human being.
Everyone is angry and has no qualms about putting someone else down if they have a different opinion. They are quick to insult, quick to judge, and quick to dismiss rather than engaging in polite discourse to explore how someone else thinks.
Dang, dude. I'd just ask for my money back. Maybe the powers-that-be are trying to tell you to get up out of that orange Cheetos dust and go outside and play, eh?
I get a little misty when I recall the times when getting my ass kicked at school for being a dork was just a way of life. It didn't kill me but it made me stronger. I can't imagine being intimidated by some other dork's IM, e-mail, or MySpace post.
I miss the days before we had to have cops patrolling the hallways as if the kids were in prison. I miss the days when kids just got into a little fight and that was that. Now, parents sue each other or even go to jail.
Sure, we could blame it on violence on TV or video games but they are a reflection of our culture--art immitating life. No kids even dreamed of pulling off a school bombing/shooting like Columbine in the 70s or 80s.
What's happened over the last 25-30 years? Maybe kids just need attention because their parents are addicted to the internet, drugs, work, TV, porn, or themselves? Or maybe they just need to get their ass whipped now and then in small doses (vice mass murder)? Maybe we should just pay more attention to them?
Seriously though--cyberbullying? puh-leez!
We keep putting up all these little rules to keep terrorists from blowing us up; or to keep kids from shooting up their schools; or to keep other bad random things from happening again. How about we look at the root cause for all the violence? I suppose the government (local, state, or federal) will magnanamously step in and declare cyberbullying a terroristic threat but that won't deal with the real issue: people in this country, including our kids, feel angry, frustrated, and violent about something.
When I was a kid, we felt scared all the time because of the Cold War--the Russians were going to bomb us any damn day. Today, we live in constant fear of everything--getting blown up by terrorist, shot by a crack head car jacker, mowed down by a drunk driver, run off the road by a road-raged commuter, crazy-ass snipers firing from the trunk of the car, drive-by shootings, attacked by stalkers, etc., etc., etc....
Now we have to fear intimitading electronic communications? Seriously--WTF?
I am at a total loss for what is wrong with us--as a society. Maybe we need to legalize marijuana--at least for a couple of weeks, and get everyone to just chill the f**k out and quit preying upon each other? I've never smoked but my friends who do/have are the least likely people to do ANYTHING much less commit an act of violence--unless you consider fighting over a bag of Cheetos "violent."
OK, maybe declaring a national Green Day (redefining "Green Peace") isn't a solution, but our whole country is edgy and willing to kill. Something is wrong.
Cyberbullying is the LEAST of our freaking problems.
If you want to get a colorful thread of comments started on slashdot, there are 3 ways to do it with guaranteed results:
1) Say something bad about linux (or about Apple).
2) Say something good about Microsoft (or about Apple).
3) Throw a grenade in the room about Open Source software like this:
The vast majority of those articles -- including a few I've written myself -- take it as an article of faith that Xen's paravirtualizing technical approach and open source business model are inherently superior to the closed source alternatives from VMware or Microsoft.
I'm not making any value judgements here--I'm just amused.
You can't really list the published vulnerabilities and say for certain which OS/Platform has the best or worst security. You've gotta look at practical daily use. Windows Server 2003 versus Red Hat Enterprise Linux 4 or Tiger Server? I couldn't tell you which one is more vulnerable. A good sysadmin can keep either up and running if they're vigilent and they all require care and feeding.
The real test is on the desktop--where the dumb users are.
I work at a University. I support Windows, Linux, and MacOS X boxes.
Guess which one has the most security problems? [Note the past tense]
Windows. Granted, it's XP. Why? Because most of the established scientific applications (the ones we use) don't work on Vista yet. Vista might prove to be a better mousetrap than XP with regards to security but we thought the same thing about XP SP2, right? Time will tell. Ask me again in 18 months.
Number 2 on the security problem list is linux. They are largely run by grad students in research labs (read as high turnover for greenhorn sysadmins). Sometimes, if we're lucky, we see some more interesting exploit injections but unpatched boxes with some sort of service running were usually quick and easy targets.
Amongst our 1500 Macs, I've only heard of 2 instances where they were compromised. In both cases, the vector of intrusion was SSH and a weak password. Despite all of the published Mac OS X vulnerabilities and sky-is-falling rhetoric from the security experts, I have yet to see any "real" exploits for them here on our campus.
Well, why the hell does that mean anything? Until this last semester, most of our campus was using static IP addresses in public addressable space. No firewalls, limited ACLs, and our computers exposed directly to the internet on a fat pipe. We've had botnet zombies out the wazoo, rootkits from hell, network scans from every black hat in the known universe, and pretty much every trick in the book has been thrown at us. [One of the reasons for our fancy new network with NAC]
The only thing that knocked-over our Macs were common dictionary attacks on SSH. Since most Mac users are completely ignorant of security (present company excluded, of course), that was a bush league exploit. Nobody ever exploited Safari bugs or any of the other services.
The scariest thing on campus are the Windows rootkits. None of us know how many "Silons" are among us. By the time we find one, it's way too late. Linux rootkits are ugly, too, but are not nearly as common.
As far as Vista vs Linux--again, time will tell. If you really want to know for yourself which is better, set them up side by side and hang their asses on public addressable network spaces. You'll find out which one has the best mojo for keeping out intrusions soon enough.
From my own experience, I'll put my money where my mouth is with my Mac any day.
From all I've gleaned from being at WWDC, reading the reviews, and sorting through the punditry, the most common negative themes seem to be these:
-The AT&T EDGE network sucks -The iPhone ignores some key smartphone features (vid capture, SMS/MMS, etc.) -The price -No Flash support for browser -No SDK for third-party developers (boo/hiss!)
Some of the surprises were:
-The battery life is close to the advertised numbers (well, more than expected anyways) -The virtual keypad is actually useable but it takes a little getting used to "using the Force" -The multi-touch thing works as advertised -the Safari web browser lives up to the hype -The WiFi is actually pretty good -The iPod part kicks ass (except if you want to use it with 3rd party headphones or in your car's iPod dock)
My own opinion as a "Mac Professional" and Smartphone addict:
-If you want one, wait for rev 2--as you should with all Apple products -If you don't want an iPhone but like some of the technology, your preferred phone will be getting updates, too -It will be nice to merge two more devices that go with me everywhere--my smartphone and my iPod. -The price is a bit high, but I think the market will bear it for now and the price will go down by Q4 -The missing features people are bitching about will come--some of them anyways -An SDK will appear after Leopard is launched -The entire market will benefit by the iPhone--and the tech will get cheaper
Well, we (the USA) haven't had a defensive war/military action since WWII. Korea, Viet Nam, Grenada, Panama, Iraq (parts 1 and 2), Somalia, Bosnia, etc., are the larger operations that come to mind. If you think the lack of a "national defense" focused military is new, you're about 45-50 years late to realize this.
Realistically, most of the kinds of fighting in the post WWII era has been much like it is in Iraq--urban guerilla warfare fighting against a smaller outgunned and almost invisible enemy that uses booby traps and bombs (now called "IEDs") to kill as many troops as possible. The fact that our casualties from this war are LOW compared to all previous conflicts is remarkable. Any technology that can help keep troops alive is a GOOD thing--military personnel, strictly speaking, don't really have a choice about who they fight or where they fight much less the reasons why.
Whether or not this ARPA project is a good or effective technology remains to be seen. Since the press release is not classified, I'm sure it's not the most effective tool or weapon on the drawing board for Iraq or whomever the USA decides to fight next.
Before I make my final comment, please bear in mind that I am neither a conservative or liberal--I'm a moderate with no agenda to push except reason:
I will believe the sincerity of liberals who rant about oil, genocide, and foreign policy when I see them giving up the comfortable lifestyle our petroleum-based economy affords them. Equally, I'll believe the the sincerity of conservatives when they stop bullshitting us about their motivations for using the military to enforce our "foreign policy."
Well, I did read it just before I saw this post. I compared the two phones (iPhone and the 8125) side-by-side to compare them. I must have been looking at an outdated spec sheet on the ATT site.
I'm not a rabid fanboy, but I don't think the iPhone deserves all of the "hater taters" its getting from the slashdot snobs. The ATT/Apple deal does suck, but the device itself looks pretty cool and appears to use the technology in intuitive ways. I bet Rev2 will be worth buying.
I wasn't trying to claim superiority, but I did intend to show that the iPhone does have its strengths. I don't think buying an iPhone necessarily makes one dumb--it's a nice little device (based on the specs--that's all we've been able to see). Some people think I'm dumb to buy a Mac when PCs are so much cheaper. I don't want to run Linux or Windows--I want MacOS X. It's not dumb--it's a preference.
I don't think anyone is happy with the unholy union between Apple and ATT/Cingular because the price point and service are the dumb part. Personally, I don't think sales will be as explosive as people seem to think it will be--unless all of the potential buyers are ready to pay through the nose for the service contract and the locked unsubsidized unit.
After the unlocked GSM versions leak out of Europe in Q4, we'll probably see the prices drop.
If it were cheaper and Apple released a freakin' SDK for it, I think the critics might like the iPhone better.
The deal breaker for people like me is the fact that I don't have to purchase or install Missing Sync to get basic synchronization to work. And by that, I mean clean sync between my address book and my iCal (the Apple calendar not the standard), iTunes, and iPhoto--all the things I use. Since it is also an iPod, my iTMS purchased music (hard to find classic jazz and orchestral music that is out of print) transfers nicely.
For now, I'm still happy with my aging Treo 600 and my iPod. When it's time to replace BOTH my phone and my iPod, the combined cost will equal or greater to the iPhone.
PS> Yes--memory is an ambiguous term. I should know better to be more precise because Slashdot weenies split hairs about such a general term for storage (a form of memory).
This guy won the Apple Design Award for this year (Best Widget).
The audience in The Presidio tonight was especially impressed with how slick this little app is. In fact, after seeing this, I had an epiphany about what Apple is doing for the iPhone--it is, indeed, going to be revolutionary. The trouble is no one thought it would be this simple. They were expecting some fancy-ass API or developer environment for the iPhone. With Dashcode--ANYONE can make a Widget. I imagine the iPhone possibilities will not be too far from this simplicity.
I don't think the expectations are for web developers to make the world ready for the iPhone but rather provide ways to create NEW content/apps specfically for the iPhone.
Of course, Apple would love for web developers to make iPhone friendly websites, but that probably won't happen.
One of the problems for web developers and the iPhone's interface is that it is mouseless--there are no "hover" states for Javascript/AJAX applications for things like mouseover. The iPhone's web interface with Safari is being touted as the next best thing over current offerings but it's gonna have problems, too.
From what I can tell, Apple is jumping on the consumer bandwagon (or trying to)--it seems they're trying to increase the Webkit install base to raise the "awareness" factor for iPhone's web engine. From the sessions I went to today, it seems Apple is really pushing for Web 2.0 development. I was surprised by this--for a developer conference specifically for Apple's OS, there was this weird, eerie spell cast by the presenters for pushing web apps.
The vibe amongst the attendees is a weird mix of disbelief and bewilderment. Safari for Windows was not the big deal Steve was hoping it would be. In fact, most of the conversations I've overheard are pretty critical of this direction.
I don't think Apple is serious about competing for market share against FF or IE on Windows. I think they're offering the development platform based on Webkit so that web developers can make sure their code looks OK on the iPhone. Webkit-iness seems to be the only development platform for iPhone Apps.
Or, maybe Steve is starting to drink his own Kool-Aid.
Slashdot Mirror
Hold on...read the following carefully and ignore what I might have typed eariler. I'm removing the sarcastic/ironic hyperbole about beatings:
I'm not saying that giving or taking a beating is right--I'm saying that it is WAY different than it used to be. Kids used to get in little scuffles but now they go medieval on each other--perhaps I didn't make that very clear. I miss the days when a bully just was a bully. These days, bullies are homicidal maniacs.
The bullying I received and witnessed as a kid was about as violent as a "kill the man" game of football where you got some bumps or bruises or a black eye just tackling each other. These days, kids get the living shit beat out of them--hospitalized or even scarred for life (if you're lucky enough to survive).
My point is this: what changed? Why is it so much more violent? Cyberbullying is not the problem--people who have no idea how to behave are the problem.
I think maybe you guys took my comments about the "old school" way of getting beat up too literally--it was hyperbole. I was trying to illustrate the extreme escalation of violent behavior in our society--especially amongst children.
If the people of the US think it is "normal" that our public schools have metal detectors and armed guards, I think we're in real trouble. I cannot recall anyone being killed, stabbed, shot, or maimed by another student between my time in public schools between 1973 and 1986. I'm sure it happened somewhere but not in the 10 different systems I went through. It just didn't happen. If it did, it was shocking and people were outraged. Today, it's practically expected--or we wouldn't have the metal detectors, armed guards, and attack dogs for FUCKING CHILDREN. People aren't outraged anymore, they're scared.
Cyberbullying is NOT the problem--it's just another byproduct of the root problem we can't seem to fix or even identify. The guards, razor wire, and metal detectors haven't fixed the problem--it only acknowledged it.
Points taken--but I think you have some anger issues. I can see that my comments hit a nerve about your own experience.
The real issue is parents can't keep up with their kids and/or don't know how to deal with them. The cyberbulling bullshit would not be a problem if kids any any sort of guidance for how to be decent human beings. THAT is really what I was trying to say in my rant. No one bothers to be polite or courteous vis-a-vis and, on the web, they're just plain rude. It's like "Web Rage" where people take out their frustrations on complete strangers with little regard for someone else's feelings or status as a human being.
Everyone is angry and has no qualms about putting someone else down if they have a different opinion. They are quick to insult, quick to judge, and quick to dismiss rather than engaging in polite discourse to explore how someone else thinks.
Oh, wait...I forgot I'm on slashdot.
Dang, dude. I'd just ask for my money back. Maybe the powers-that-be are trying to tell you to get up out of that orange Cheetos dust and go outside and play, eh?
Thanks?
:-D
That's funny.
[RANT MODE ON]
Kids these days are such pussies.
I get a little misty when I recall the times when getting my ass kicked at school for being a dork was just a way of life. It didn't kill me but it made me stronger. I can't imagine being intimidated by some other dork's IM, e-mail, or MySpace post.
I miss the days before we had to have cops patrolling the hallways as if the kids were in prison. I miss the days when kids just got into a little fight and that was that. Now, parents sue each other or even go to jail.
Sure, we could blame it on violence on TV or video games but they are a reflection of our culture--art immitating life. No kids even dreamed of pulling off a school bombing/shooting like Columbine in the 70s or 80s.
What's happened over the last 25-30 years? Maybe kids just need attention because their parents are addicted to the internet, drugs, work, TV, porn, or themselves? Or maybe they just need to get their ass whipped now and then in small doses (vice mass murder)? Maybe we should just pay more attention to them?
Seriously though--cyberbullying? puh-leez!
We keep putting up all these little rules to keep terrorists from blowing us up; or to keep kids from shooting up their schools; or to keep other bad random things from happening again. How about we look at the root cause for all the violence? I suppose the government (local, state, or federal) will magnanamously step in and declare cyberbullying a terroristic threat but that won't deal with the real issue: people in this country, including our kids, feel angry, frustrated, and violent about something.
When I was a kid, we felt scared all the time because of the Cold War--the Russians were going to bomb us any damn day. Today, we live in constant fear of everything--getting blown up by terrorist, shot by a crack head car jacker, mowed down by a drunk driver, run off the road by a road-raged commuter, crazy-ass snipers firing from the trunk of the car, drive-by shootings, attacked by stalkers, etc., etc., etc....
Now we have to fear intimitading electronic communications? Seriously--WTF?
I am at a total loss for what is wrong with us--as a society. Maybe we need to legalize marijuana--at least for a couple of weeks, and get everyone to just chill the f**k out and quit preying upon each other? I've never smoked but my friends who do/have are the least likely people to do ANYTHING much less commit an act of violence--unless you consider fighting over a bag of Cheetos "violent."
OK, maybe declaring a national Green Day (redefining "Green Peace") isn't a solution, but our whole country is edgy and willing to kill. Something is wrong.
Cyberbullying is the LEAST of our freaking problems.
[/RANT MODE OFF]
Normally, I don't really take sides on political issues, but this issue with Net Neutrality seems to be laissez-faire gone amuck.
Net Neutrality really means to the Bush administration:
-The government stays in neutral with regards to doing anything
-The telecoms neuter consumers' rights to choose
I love Theo--really. But he should change his name:
Theo de Rant.
I nearly sprayed coffee through my nose when I misread the headline as "Space Arse"
If you want to get a colorful thread of comments started on slashdot, there are 3 ways to do it with guaranteed results:
1) Say something bad about linux (or about Apple).
2) Say something good about Microsoft (or about Apple).
3) Throw a grenade in the room about Open Source software like this:
The vast majority of those articles -- including a few I've written myself -- take it as an article of faith that Xen's paravirtualizing technical approach and open source business model are inherently superior to the closed source alternatives from VMware or Microsoft.
I'm not making any value judgements here--I'm just amused.
I meant that there were no IM/MMS--the iPhone has SMS.
You can't really list the published vulnerabilities and say for certain which OS/Platform has the best or worst security. You've gotta look at practical daily use. Windows Server 2003 versus Red Hat Enterprise Linux 4 or Tiger Server? I couldn't tell you which one is more vulnerable. A good sysadmin can keep either up and running if they're vigilent and they all require care and feeding.
The real test is on the desktop--where the dumb users are.
I work at a University. I support Windows, Linux, and MacOS X boxes.
Guess which one has the most security problems? [Note the past tense]
Windows. Granted, it's XP. Why? Because most of the established scientific applications (the ones we use) don't work on Vista yet. Vista might prove to be a better mousetrap than XP with regards to security but we thought the same thing about XP SP2, right? Time will tell. Ask me again in 18 months.
Number 2 on the security problem list is linux. They are largely run by grad students in research labs (read as high turnover for greenhorn sysadmins). Sometimes, if we're lucky, we see some more interesting exploit injections but unpatched boxes with some sort of service running were usually quick and easy targets.
Amongst our 1500 Macs, I've only heard of 2 instances where they were compromised. In both cases, the vector of intrusion was SSH and a weak password. Despite all of the published Mac OS X vulnerabilities and sky-is-falling rhetoric from the security experts, I have yet to see any "real" exploits for them here on our campus.
Well, why the hell does that mean anything? Until this last semester, most of our campus was using static IP addresses in public addressable space. No firewalls, limited ACLs, and our computers exposed directly to the internet on a fat pipe. We've had botnet zombies out the wazoo, rootkits from hell, network scans from every black hat in the known universe, and pretty much every trick in the book has been thrown at us. [One of the reasons for our fancy new network with NAC]
The only thing that knocked-over our Macs were common dictionary attacks on SSH. Since most Mac users are completely ignorant of security (present company excluded, of course), that was a bush league exploit. Nobody ever exploited Safari bugs or any of the other services.
The scariest thing on campus are the Windows rootkits. None of us know how many "Silons" are among us. By the time we find one, it's way too late. Linux rootkits are ugly, too, but are not nearly as common.
As far as Vista vs Linux--again, time will tell. If you really want to know for yourself which is better, set them up side by side and hang their asses on public addressable network spaces. You'll find out which one has the best mojo for keeping out intrusions soon enough.
From my own experience, I'll put my money where my mouth is with my Mac any day.
From all I've gleaned from being at WWDC, reading the reviews, and sorting through the punditry, the most common negative themes seem to be these:
-The AT&T EDGE network sucks
-The iPhone ignores some key smartphone features (vid capture, SMS/MMS, etc.)
-The price
-No Flash support for browser
-No SDK for third-party developers (boo/hiss!)
Some of the surprises were:
-The battery life is close to the advertised numbers (well, more than expected anyways)
-The virtual keypad is actually useable but it takes a little getting used to "using the Force"
-The multi-touch thing works as advertised
-the Safari web browser lives up to the hype
-The WiFi is actually pretty good
-The iPod part kicks ass (except if you want to use it with 3rd party headphones or in your car's iPod dock)
My own opinion as a "Mac Professional" and Smartphone addict:
-If you want one, wait for rev 2--as you should with all Apple products
-If you don't want an iPhone but like some of the technology, your preferred phone will be getting updates, too
-It will be nice to merge two more devices that go with me everywhere--my smartphone and my iPod.
-The price is a bit high, but I think the market will bear it for now and the price will go down by Q4
-The missing features people are bitching about will come--some of them anyways
-An SDK will appear after Leopard is launched
-The entire market will benefit by the iPhone--and the tech will get cheaper
You would also need a really big bag of Purina Giant Penguin Chow!
Quit trolling slashdot, Steve Ballmer....
The experts need to meet with some WoW players--I'm pretty sure they will change their opinion on the mental disorder issue.
I was just wondering the same thing--I wonder if the government(s) contract with World Acronym Search Team Enterprises (WASTE).
Well, we (the USA) haven't had a defensive war/military action since WWII. Korea, Viet Nam, Grenada, Panama, Iraq (parts 1 and 2), Somalia, Bosnia, etc., are the larger operations that come to mind. If you think the lack of a "national defense" focused military is new, you're about 45-50 years late to realize this.
Realistically, most of the kinds of fighting in the post WWII era has been much like it is in Iraq--urban guerilla warfare fighting against a smaller outgunned and almost invisible enemy that uses booby traps and bombs (now called "IEDs") to kill as many troops as possible. The fact that our casualties from this war are LOW compared to all previous conflicts is remarkable. Any technology that can help keep troops alive is a GOOD thing--military personnel, strictly speaking, don't really have a choice about who they fight or where they fight much less the reasons why.
Whether or not this ARPA project is a good or effective technology remains to be seen. Since the press release is not classified, I'm sure it's not the most effective tool or weapon on the drawing board for Iraq or whomever the USA decides to fight next.
Before I make my final comment, please bear in mind that I am neither a conservative or liberal--I'm a moderate with no agenda to push except reason:
I will believe the sincerity of liberals who rant about oil, genocide, and foreign policy when I see them giving up the comfortable lifestyle our petroleum-based economy affords them. Equally, I'll believe the the sincerity of conservatives when they stop bullshitting us about their motivations for using the military to enforce our "foreign policy."
*poof* you're a sexbot
Well, I did read it just before I saw this post. I compared the two phones (iPhone and the 8125) side-by-side to compare them. I must have been looking at an outdated spec sheet on the ATT site.
I'm not a rabid fanboy, but I don't think the iPhone deserves all of the "hater taters" its getting from the slashdot snobs. The ATT/Apple deal does suck, but the device itself looks pretty cool and appears to use the technology in intuitive ways. I bet Rev2 will be worth buying.
I wasn't trying to claim superiority, but I did intend to show that the iPhone does have its strengths. I don't think buying an iPhone necessarily makes one dumb--it's a nice little device (based on the specs--that's all we've been able to see). Some people think I'm dumb to buy a Mac when PCs are so much cheaper. I don't want to run Linux or Windows--I want MacOS X. It's not dumb--it's a preference.
I don't think anyone is happy with the unholy union between Apple and ATT/Cingular because the price point and service are the dumb part. Personally, I don't think sales will be as explosive as people seem to think it will be--unless all of the potential buyers are ready to pay through the nose for the service contract and the locked unsubsidized unit.
After the unlocked GSM versions leak out of Europe in Q4, we'll probably see the prices drop.
If it were cheaper and Apple released a freakin' SDK for it, I think the critics might like the iPhone better.
The deal breaker for people like me is the fact that I don't have to purchase or install Missing Sync to get basic synchronization to work. And by that, I mean clean sync between my address book and my iCal (the Apple calendar not the standard), iTunes, and iPhoto--all the things I use. Since it is also an iPod, my iTMS purchased music (hard to find classic jazz and orchestral music that is out of print) transfers nicely.
For now, I'm still happy with my aging Treo 600 and my iPod. When it's time to replace BOTH my phone and my iPod, the combined cost will equal or greater to the iPhone.
PS> Yes--memory is an ambiguous term. I should know better to be more precise because Slashdot weenies split hairs about such a general term for storage (a form of memory).
Great creative comeback, Einstein.
It seems to me, that they are just a little different.
If you want to see just how cool a "Webkit" based app can be, check out what this guy did with it:
t ation/bartwidget.html
http://www.apple.com/downloads/dashboard/transpor
This guy won the Apple Design Award for this year (Best Widget).
The audience in The Presidio tonight was especially impressed with how slick this little app is. In fact, after seeing this, I had an epiphany about what Apple is doing for the iPhone--it is, indeed, going to be revolutionary. The trouble is no one thought it would be this simple. They were expecting some fancy-ass API or developer environment for the iPhone. With Dashcode--ANYONE can make a Widget. I imagine the iPhone possibilities will not be too far from this simplicity.
I don't think the expectations are for web developers to make the world ready for the iPhone but rather provide ways to create NEW content/apps specfically for the iPhone.
Of course, Apple would love for web developers to make iPhone friendly websites, but that probably won't happen.
One of the problems for web developers and the iPhone's interface is that it is mouseless--there are no "hover" states for Javascript/AJAX applications for things like mouseover. The iPhone's web interface with Safari is being touted as the next best thing over current offerings but it's gonna have problems, too.
From what I can tell, Apple is jumping on the consumer bandwagon (or trying to)--it seems they're trying to increase the Webkit install base to raise the "awareness" factor for iPhone's web engine. From the sessions I went to today, it seems Apple is really pushing for Web 2.0 development. I was surprised by this--for a developer conference specifically for Apple's OS, there was this weird, eerie spell cast by the presenters for pushing web apps.
The vibe amongst the attendees is a weird mix of disbelief and bewilderment. Safari for Windows was not the big deal Steve was hoping it would be. In fact, most of the conversations I've overheard are pretty critical of this direction.
I don't think Apple is serious about competing for market share against FF or IE on Windows. I think they're offering the development platform based on Webkit so that web developers can make sure their code looks OK on the iPhone. Webkit-iness seems to be the only development platform for iPhone Apps.
Or, maybe Steve is starting to drink his own Kool-Aid.