And I've had to trawl the Internet looking for solutions to Windows problems, whilst Ubuntu works fine.
I don't understand why the argument has to be one versus the other. They're both pretty good these days. Windows is still my preferred OS, but Ubuntu is not as bad as you make out anymore.
I agree - most social networking sites etc have the option to recover or reset passwords via email. So if your email is compromised, then they'll get access to these other sites too, anyway.
Whilst I agree the OP is talking nonsense and I can't stand that kind of response - you're being unfair on Ubuntu. Installation on my thrown-together hardware was as simple on Ubuntu as it was on Windows 7. Drivers were installed automatically just fine.
For codecs, Ubuntu did better - the media player automatically downloads required codes fine. WMP always tries to do this, but I've never once had it succeed, instead leaving me to manually download coded packs from somewhere on the Internet.
The only time I've needed to use the command line is for techy stuff like development, same as I have to on Windows.
I really hoped that Canonical would do for Linux what Apple did for NeXT, but it is pretty obvious now that just ain't gonna be the case.
Add a Fisher Price interface, make it depend on closed source components, and only make it run on expensive PCs that they build? Please no.
Maybe if you are a geek or have a CS degree and don't mind playing "hunt the fix" when the latest updates break your wireless and sound it would be okay, but how many average folks are gonna fit that profile?
This was my view of Ubuntu 8-10 years ago, but not anymore. (It was also my view of DOS/Windows about 15-20 years ago...)
Indeed - the UK had no trouble blocking an (entirely legal) Wikipedia page. They were only found out because Wikipedia admins spotted a problem with accesses from the UK; to the viewer, it's just a silent false 404 that you get.
Thank you Mr False Dichotomy. Obviously the only possibilities here are not posting anything at all about yourself and doing everything as an Anonymous Coward; and "publishing every detail of their personal life for the world to see".
The point here is that even if people are sharing something seemingly harmless like a bunch photos (not because they are "micro-celebrity wannabes", but because some people have friends), it can have adverse effects, which isn't immediately obvious. How do we make people aware of this issue? Perhaps by publishing stories like this.
but I hope you are not the economical advisory for any kind of software company.
Given the share and growth of Apple compared with Nokia and Android, I hope that you're not an economical advisory.
Whether you like it or not, the iOS devices are a huge phenomena
A billion dollar company is a huge phenomena - so? Lots of big companies are huge phenomena. Whether you like it or not, Nokia, RIM and now Android are even bigger phenomena. Lots of other products are huge phenomena. Why do Apple alone deserve praise for this? They're not some small startup.
If you ignore them as a developer, you are a fool.
Yet developers seem happy to ignore all but 3% of the market when writing only for the Iphone. *shrugs* When I write with Nokia's Qt, I get near 100% of the desktop market (Windows, Linux, OS X) and ~50% of the smartphone market (Symbian, Maemo).
However, I don't go around throwing playground insults on people, just because they develop for a different platform.
All these things have a very obvious thing in common, one thing that all that jump to compete with Apple don't realize: the iOS is not designed on desktop principles
But why do you think that netbooks succeeded, when years of small/portable PCs failed? I'd argue it's precisely because you can run a full OS like Windows or Linux on them, instead of cut down OSs like Windows CE.
And the Ipad didn't change anything - despite vast amounts of media coverage, it's turned out to be a bit of a wet blanket. Sure, they will sell some, just as there are all kinds of PMPs, phones, tablets and handheld games consoles. Sure, in these markets having a cutdown OS is useful, but these are not being used as mobile computers. Moreover, Apple is far from market leader, and there are many other companies in this space, not just the ones you list (most notably, you forgot Nokia).
I've seen tonnes of people with Windows (and Linux) netbooks. Yet to see a single Ipad. I'm not sure the "everyone will abandon the iPad" claim really holds much significant, when most people don't have one anyway.
but not until Apple produced one of their own has anyone really taken interest in them.
If by "interest" you mean "media given huge amounts of hype", sure, but I don't see what's good about spam and astroturfing.
If by "interest" you mean what most people use, no, that still hasn't change. Netbooks and phones have had a far bigger impact on mobile computing (for which credit should go to companies like ASUS, Nokia, Intel, ARM and Microsoft, as well as Linux).
Let's wheel out Apple's one hit wonder, and extrapolate to assume that everything Apple will do will be the market leader. It's yet to happen, though.
Though personally I'm happy with my Sansa - 8GB for around half the price of the Ipod's 2GB, plus it takes an additional microSD card, allowing easy upgrading. Plus it actually has UI (I thought that was what Apple were supposed to be good at?) Never would have heard about it by reading so-called tech sites like Slashdot, I had to go and visit my mainstream shop.
Yes, exactly. The sad thing is though that the media are now giving this title to Apple long before they've earned it.
For the Ipod, sure, it's the market leader. But the Iphone? No, it isn't - yet every phone company now has to be covered with "Can they beat the Iphone?" It's particularly hilarious to see when people do this for Nokia, who sell vastly more than Apple. It's not uncommon for Iphone defenders to say "Have you actually used an Iphone" - but I'd argue that it's far more common that non-Iphone users have at least considered the Iphone, whilst many Iphone buyers seem oblivious that anything else exists, thanks to the media coverage.
Then there's the Ipad - here, the overwhelming media coverage started before the Ipad was even released - or in fact, actually announced. So now instead of using the perfectly good word "tablet", every device has to be branded an "Ipad competitor", granting free advertising to Apple long before they've earned such coverage.
Even for the Ipod though, is it fair? We don't see every mention of the Mac being labelled with "Can this beat the PC?"
Google and Apple are the only major players in this OS field.
We shouldn't forget netbooks, which still compete in a similar portable space - you can get touch netbooks, and basically a tablet is a netbook without a physical keyboard (we don't separate the phone market by whether they have a touchscreen and/or physical keyboard), and it's likely that they will compete, with many people considering one or the other.
And Windows is doing very well there - Apple meanwhile have zero presence. In fact, I'd go onto say that it's the netbook that finally gave us the "portable PC" - something that had failed after years of attempts with various portable devices. I'd say the success is down to being able to run a full OS like Linux or Windows, instead of things like Windows CE. ASUS are the ones who revolutionised mobile computing, but instead now all we hear about is the Islate/Ipad/etc, a keyboard-less device that came years later, runs a cut down OS designed for phones rather than a full OS, and so far has evidently failed to live up to the hype.
Indeed. The other issue is capacative screens you're stuck with fingerpainting - I'd say a resistive touchscreen at least is more suitable, where you have a choice of stylus.
Then there's software. Sure, someone's made a simple Paint program for the Ipad, but artists tend to be fussy about their tools, even to the extent of accepting nothing less than Photoshop. Fact is, if you were going to consider a portable touch device for art, a Windows based resistive touchscreen netbook running Photoshop (or at least, Linux if they're okay with GIMP) is far more relevant. But no, we never hear about that - instead the coverage is just "look, I can create finger paint art with my very expensive etcha-sketch!" as if the Ipad was the only touchscreen portable device in existence...
I love how stating the bare facts is deemed by the astroturfers to be "troll" - evidently the Iphone is so bad, you don't need to make it up: even the basic specifications are assumed to be the result of trolling!
Nowhere did I say whether it's an Apple restriction or not. If it's a restriction, it's a restriction - other phones I can buy on networks that don't have this restriction.
But hey, I see the pro-Apple mods are out in form, modding up straw man arguments, and modding down anyone who disagrees.
And a quick search suggests Apple do have a hand in this too.
Anyone who has graphical skills doesn't want some "programmer" dictating to them what art to make. Especially if they are not getting paid. They would rather make the art for their own game idea.
I don't think that fully explains, otherwise we'd at least see the results of their efforts. Unless you mean they attempt to make their own game, but fail because they lack programming skills, which yes does seem likely.
I think more generally, the problem is that artists aren't interested in making graphics specific for games at all - they'd rather draw say a picture, but game art takes a different kind of approach, and I can see it being less interesting (e.g., repeatedly drawing sprites over and over in different orientations; or making a set of 3D models that all work consistently with the same set of animation routines).
In general, I suspect that the required level of coordination makes it harder. I've had someone offer to make graphics for an open source game I'm writing, but it isn't as simple as just bunging me a few JPEGs, we've got to work together to make sure everything's integrated into the game correctly.
Visual Studio Express (the free version) doesn't support 64 bit (at least as of 2008 edition, not sure if 2010 changed this?), so you have to pay for it. That's the reason why I don't compile for 64 bit (even when writing Windows-only applications, and even though I run 64 bit myself), and I suspect this may be a factor for other free developers too. I'm not sure if there are any other free compilers on Windows that support 64 bit?
It does seem odd to me that Microsoft would limit this functionality - whilst they obviously want a reason for people to pay for the full versions of Visual Studio, crippling 64 bit is surely going to harm adoption of 64 bit Windows, which can't be good for Microsoft.
By basic functionality, I mean things like tethering, which just worked on my five year old dirt cheap feature phone that I threw away in the trash six months ago - at one time that required jailbreaking on the Iphone, not sure if that's the case with the latest version. Or running unapproved apps, which works on major platforms like Symbian and Android with just a simple option change.
It's a sad day in computing if being able to run applications on your own device that haven't been approved by the one company is seen as "advanced functionality". That's exactly the sort of worrying mentality that platforms like the Iphone are leading us.
I never made any claims as to how many people might need these; just the fact that these were basic, in terms of being available on older, and more basic (in terms of hardware specs), phones. But if you do want to talk in terms of what consumers want, the fact that Nokia sell around twice as many phones per quarter than Apple have ever sold says it all in terms of providing what customers want.
Yes, it happens all the time in IP-related cases, in the form of an injunction.
Okay.
The only difference here is that the Festival owners don't know who is going to try to infringe their IP, so they need to get the injunction against John & Jane Does.
So in other words, it doesn't happen all the time at all.
This "only" difference is surely quite significant. A crucial part is that in an injunction, the person/company can defend themselves which, according to TFA, can't happen here, as it isn't being made against a specific person.
Furthermore, I don't see how this is like "John Doe" cases. I thought the point of "John Doe" was that it was still an action against a specific person (i.e., a person who has specifically done such and such), but where their identify (in the sense of their name) is unknown. This is not at all the same thing as an action that is against unspecified persons. Has there been any use of John Doe cases in the latter sense?
He's wrong to say it's only been a recent social norm. OTOH, it's still true that such people may include those in multiple relationships - polyamory is practiced in Western society (although admittedly, it wouldn't be that much of a factor in the statistics).
And regardless, even in areas where polygamy was allowed, thanks to population realities, I don't think you could even say that polygamy was the "societal norm." Think if you have a roughly 50/50 male/female ratio (I know that's not accurate, but close enough for these purposes)...how do you expect the average male to have 2 wives? Or 3 wives? Or 4 wives (the max allowed in Islam)? There aren't enough women to go around!
Er, maybe you could have women with multiple relationships too. Only allowing one-man-many-women is just one form (which unfortunately gets most publicity).
Indeed - they also forgot the market leader, Symbian. Not to mention that hundreds of millions of other phones that are sold (usually called "feature" phones) that make up the bulk of the market.
It's a common tactic to only include the platforms that perform worse than the Iphone, in an attempt to falsely make the Iphone look number one. Doing it for such a pathetic statistic as this is particularly low, however.
And yes, I do beat the Iphone average. (Obviously this is because I run Symbian, duh! Or rather not, since most of those came before I had a Symbian phone - and I suspect that most Iphone users' counts will be before they owned an Iphone, unless they were really inactive except for the last 3 years...)
Indeed. And similarly, it was wrong that the original news of the exploit was publicised as a good thing (or, at worst, neutral), rather than being publicised as a major security hole (like you know they would have had it have been something like Internet Explorer).
Of course, it is a problem that you need to jailbreak an Iphone to enable basic functionality. But if the media has such a problem with that, maybe they could actually focus on that instead of praising Apple all the time, or conflating the issue with security exploits; or maybe give some coverage to the more popular platforms (Symbian, RIM, Android) that don't need to be jailbroken, instead of the overwhelming coverage of Apple all the time.
Quake, Duke3D,... Maybe they focused more on gameplay than graphics.
I'm amused at the irony of referring to games like Quake as "gameplay rather than graphics":)
When Quake came out, the most notable thing about it was how it was pushing the graphics barrier. Sure Quake was fun too, but I still remember people sitting around saying "But all these older games I like playing from the 80s are so much more fun, developers should concentrate on gameplay rather than graphics!" And indeed, the FPS genre since then has been the main one that such criticisms have been made against.
Presumably he covered that with "The iPad is just a fancy way of surfing the web and watching videos". Yes, clearly tablets (and phones) can replace laptops in some circumstances, but that doesn't mean they are a complete replacement, which is presumably what the point was about.
I'd say the real replacement though is the netbook - it fills that gap between laptop and phone, whilst still giving you a physical keyboard, and well as running the same full OS as laptops/desktops do.
So you're saying the Ipad is good, because a real device produced by a billion dollar company, is better than a fictional device that visual effects guys tried to come up with, 23 years ago, and on presumably a much smaller budget than Apple R&D for those effects? I mean, are you expecting that when we see special effects, the guys are actually meant to implement the device for real, and you're suprised that when actual products come out decades later, they might work properly?
Well, I know the Ipad's turned out to be a bit of a wet blanket after those months of hype how it would revolutionise mobile computing. But I never thought I'd see it get to the stage of touting the Ipad because it's better than what the visual effects guys cobbled together 23 years ago for a Star Trek.
And yes, there are other tablets besides the Ipad, as people have pointed out in comments. You just don't hear about them, because the media coverage is for nothing but Apple.
Slashdot Mirror
How well does the Windows Ubuntu Installer compare?
And I've had to trawl the Internet looking for solutions to Windows problems, whilst Ubuntu works fine.
I don't understand why the argument has to be one versus the other. They're both pretty good these days. Windows is still my preferred OS, but Ubuntu is not as bad as you make out anymore.
I agree - most social networking sites etc have the option to recover or reset passwords via email. So if your email is compromised, then they'll get access to these other sites too, anyway.
Whilst I agree the OP is talking nonsense and I can't stand that kind of response - you're being unfair on Ubuntu. Installation on my thrown-together hardware was as simple on Ubuntu as it was on Windows 7. Drivers were installed automatically just fine.
For codecs, Ubuntu did better - the media player automatically downloads required codes fine. WMP always tries to do this, but I've never once had it succeed, instead leaving me to manually download coded packs from somewhere on the Internet.
The only time I've needed to use the command line is for techy stuff like development, same as I have to on Windows.
I really hoped that Canonical would do for Linux what Apple did for NeXT, but it is pretty obvious now that just ain't gonna be the case.
Add a Fisher Price interface, make it depend on closed source components, and only make it run on expensive PCs that they build? Please no.
Maybe if you are a geek or have a CS degree and don't mind playing "hunt the fix" when the latest updates break your wireless and sound it would be okay, but how many average folks are gonna fit that profile?
This was my view of Ubuntu 8-10 years ago, but not anymore. (It was also my view of DOS/Windows about 15-20 years ago...)
Indeed - the UK had no trouble blocking an (entirely legal) Wikipedia page. They were only found out because Wikipedia admins spotted a problem with accesses from the UK; to the viewer, it's just a silent false 404 that you get.
Thank you Mr False Dichotomy. Obviously the only possibilities here are not posting anything at all about yourself and doing everything as an Anonymous Coward; and "publishing every detail of their personal life for the world to see".
The point here is that even if people are sharing something seemingly harmless like a bunch photos (not because they are "micro-celebrity wannabes", but because some people have friends), it can have adverse effects, which isn't immediately obvious. How do we make people aware of this issue? Perhaps by publishing stories like this.
but I hope you are not the economical advisory for any kind of software company.
Given the share and growth of Apple compared with Nokia and Android, I hope that you're not an economical advisory.
Whether you like it or not, the iOS devices are a huge phenomena
A billion dollar company is a huge phenomena - so? Lots of big companies are huge phenomena. Whether you like it or not, Nokia, RIM and now Android are even bigger phenomena. Lots of other products are huge phenomena. Why do Apple alone deserve praise for this? They're not some small startup.
If you ignore them as a developer, you are a fool.
Yet developers seem happy to ignore all but 3% of the market when writing only for the Iphone. *shrugs* When I write with Nokia's Qt, I get near 100% of the desktop market (Windows, Linux, OS X) and ~50% of the smartphone market (Symbian, Maemo).
However, I don't go around throwing playground insults on people, just because they develop for a different platform.
You've got it backwards:
All these things have a very obvious thing in common, one thing that all that jump to compete with Apple don't realize: the iOS is not designed on desktop principles
But why do you think that netbooks succeeded, when years of small/portable PCs failed? I'd argue it's precisely because you can run a full OS like Windows or Linux on them, instead of cut down OSs like Windows CE.
And the Ipad didn't change anything - despite vast amounts of media coverage, it's turned out to be a bit of a wet blanket. Sure, they will sell some, just as there are all kinds of PMPs, phones, tablets and handheld games consoles. Sure, in these markets having a cutdown OS is useful, but these are not being used as mobile computers. Moreover, Apple is far from market leader, and there are many other companies in this space, not just the ones you list (most notably, you forgot Nokia).
I've seen tonnes of people with Windows (and Linux) netbooks. Yet to see a single Ipad. I'm not sure the "everyone will abandon the iPad" claim really holds much significant, when most people don't have one anyway.
but not until Apple produced one of their own has anyone really taken interest in them.
If by "interest" you mean "media given huge amounts of hype", sure, but I don't see what's good about spam and astroturfing.
If by "interest" you mean what most people use, no, that still hasn't change. Netbooks and phones have had a far bigger impact on mobile computing (for which credit should go to companies like ASUS, Nokia, Intel, ARM and Microsoft, as well as Linux).
Let's wheel out Apple's one hit wonder, and extrapolate to assume that everything Apple will do will be the market leader. It's yet to happen, though.
Though personally I'm happy with my Sansa - 8GB for around half the price of the Ipod's 2GB, plus it takes an additional microSD card, allowing easy upgrading. Plus it actually has UI (I thought that was what Apple were supposed to be good at?) Never would have heard about it by reading so-called tech sites like Slashdot, I had to go and visit my mainstream shop.
Yes, exactly. The sad thing is though that the media are now giving this title to Apple long before they've earned it.
For the Ipod, sure, it's the market leader. But the Iphone? No, it isn't - yet every phone company now has to be covered with "Can they beat the Iphone?" It's particularly hilarious to see when people do this for Nokia, who sell vastly more than Apple. It's not uncommon for Iphone defenders to say "Have you actually used an Iphone" - but I'd argue that it's far more common that non-Iphone users have at least considered the Iphone, whilst many Iphone buyers seem oblivious that anything else exists, thanks to the media coverage.
Then there's the Ipad - here, the overwhelming media coverage started before the Ipad was even released - or in fact, actually announced. So now instead of using the perfectly good word "tablet", every device has to be branded an "Ipad competitor", granting free advertising to Apple long before they've earned such coverage.
Even for the Ipod though, is it fair? We don't see every mention of the Mac being labelled with "Can this beat the PC?"
Google and Apple are the only major players in this OS field.
We shouldn't forget netbooks, which still compete in a similar portable space - you can get touch netbooks, and basically a tablet is a netbook without a physical keyboard (we don't separate the phone market by whether they have a touchscreen and/or physical keyboard), and it's likely that they will compete, with many people considering one or the other.
And Windows is doing very well there - Apple meanwhile have zero presence. In fact, I'd go onto say that it's the netbook that finally gave us the "portable PC" - something that had failed after years of attempts with various portable devices. I'd say the success is down to being able to run a full OS like Linux or Windows, instead of things like Windows CE. ASUS are the ones who revolutionised mobile computing, but instead now all we hear about is the Islate/Ipad/etc, a keyboard-less device that came years later, runs a cut down OS designed for phones rather than a full OS, and so far has evidently failed to live up to the hype.
Indeed. The other issue is capacative screens you're stuck with fingerpainting - I'd say a resistive touchscreen at least is more suitable, where you have a choice of stylus.
Then there's software. Sure, someone's made a simple Paint program for the Ipad, but artists tend to be fussy about their tools, even to the extent of accepting nothing less than Photoshop. Fact is, if you were going to consider a portable touch device for art, a Windows based resistive touchscreen netbook running Photoshop (or at least, Linux if they're okay with GIMP) is far more relevant. But no, we never hear about that - instead the coverage is just "look, I can create finger paint art with my very expensive etcha-sketch!" as if the Ipad was the only touchscreen portable device in existence...
I love how stating the bare facts is deemed by the astroturfers to be "troll" - evidently the Iphone is so bad, you don't need to make it up: even the basic specifications are assumed to be the result of trolling!
Enabling no-added-cost tethering is the best reason to jailbreak an iPhone.
But that was my original point, anyway. The whole question of whether it was Apple's idea or AT&T's is a straw man argument made up by tooyoung.
Nowhere did I say whether it's an Apple restriction or not. If it's a restriction, it's a restriction - other phones I can buy on networks that don't have this restriction.
But hey, I see the pro-Apple mods are out in form, modding up straw man arguments, and modding down anyone who disagrees.
And a quick search suggests Apple do have a hand in this too.
Anyone who has graphical skills doesn't want some "programmer" dictating to them what art to make. Especially if they are not getting paid. They would rather make the art for their own game idea.
I don't think that fully explains, otherwise we'd at least see the results of their efforts. Unless you mean they attempt to make their own game, but fail because they lack programming skills, which yes does seem likely.
I think more generally, the problem is that artists aren't interested in making graphics specific for games at all - they'd rather draw say a picture, but game art takes a different kind of approach, and I can see it being less interesting (e.g., repeatedly drawing sprites over and over in different orientations; or making a set of 3D models that all work consistently with the same set of animation routines).
In general, I suspect that the required level of coordination makes it harder. I've had someone offer to make graphics for an open source game I'm writing, but it isn't as simple as just bunging me a few JPEGs, we've got to work together to make sure everything's integrated into the game correctly.
Visual Studio Express (the free version) doesn't support 64 bit (at least as of 2008 edition, not sure if 2010 changed this?), so you have to pay for it. That's the reason why I don't compile for 64 bit (even when writing Windows-only applications, and even though I run 64 bit myself), and I suspect this may be a factor for other free developers too. I'm not sure if there are any other free compilers on Windows that support 64 bit?
It does seem odd to me that Microsoft would limit this functionality - whilst they obviously want a reason for people to pay for the full versions of Visual Studio, crippling 64 bit is surely going to harm adoption of 64 bit Windows, which can't be good for Microsoft.
By basic functionality, I mean things like tethering, which just worked on my five year old dirt cheap feature phone that I threw away in the trash six months ago - at one time that required jailbreaking on the Iphone, not sure if that's the case with the latest version. Or running unapproved apps, which works on major platforms like Symbian and Android with just a simple option change.
It's a sad day in computing if being able to run applications on your own device that haven't been approved by the one company is seen as "advanced functionality". That's exactly the sort of worrying mentality that platforms like the Iphone are leading us.
I never made any claims as to how many people might need these; just the fact that these were basic, in terms of being available on older, and more basic (in terms of hardware specs), phones. But if you do want to talk in terms of what consumers want, the fact that Nokia sell around twice as many phones per quarter than Apple have ever sold says it all in terms of providing what customers want.
Yes, it happens all the time in IP-related cases, in the form of an injunction.
Okay.
The only difference here is that the Festival owners don't know who is going to try to infringe their IP, so they need to get the injunction against John & Jane Does.
So in other words, it doesn't happen all the time at all.
This "only" difference is surely quite significant. A crucial part is that in an injunction, the person/company can defend themselves which, according to TFA, can't happen here, as it isn't being made against a specific person.
Furthermore, I don't see how this is like "John Doe" cases. I thought the point of "John Doe" was that it was still an action against a specific person (i.e., a person who has specifically done such and such), but where their identify (in the sense of their name) is unknown. This is not at all the same thing as an action that is against unspecified persons. Has there been any use of John Doe cases in the latter sense?
He's wrong to say it's only been a recent social norm. OTOH, it's still true that such people may include those in multiple relationships - polyamory is practiced in Western society (although admittedly, it wouldn't be that much of a factor in the statistics).
And regardless, even in areas where polygamy was allowed, thanks to population realities, I don't think you could even say that polygamy was the "societal norm." Think if you have a roughly 50/50 male/female ratio (I know that's not accurate, but close enough for these purposes) ...how do you expect the average male to have 2 wives? Or 3 wives? Or 4 wives (the max allowed in Islam)? There aren't enough women to go around!
Er, maybe you could have women with multiple relationships too. Only allowing one-man-many-women is just one form (which unfortunately gets most publicity).
Indeed - they also forgot the market leader, Symbian. Not to mention that hundreds of millions of other phones that are sold (usually called "feature" phones) that make up the bulk of the market.
It's a common tactic to only include the platforms that perform worse than the Iphone, in an attempt to falsely make the Iphone look number one. Doing it for such a pathetic statistic as this is particularly low, however.
And yes, I do beat the Iphone average. (Obviously this is because I run Symbian, duh! Or rather not, since most of those came before I had a Symbian phone - and I suspect that most Iphone users' counts will be before they owned an Iphone, unless they were really inactive except for the last 3 years...)
Indeed. And similarly, it was wrong that the original news of the exploit was publicised as a good thing (or, at worst, neutral), rather than being publicised as a major security hole (like you know they would have had it have been something like Internet Explorer).
Of course, it is a problem that you need to jailbreak an Iphone to enable basic functionality. But if the media has such a problem with that, maybe they could actually focus on that instead of praising Apple all the time, or conflating the issue with security exploits; or maybe give some coverage to the more popular platforms (Symbian, RIM, Android) that don't need to be jailbroken, instead of the overwhelming coverage of Apple all the time.
Quake, Duke3D, ... Maybe they focused more on gameplay than graphics.
I'm amused at the irony of referring to games like Quake as "gameplay rather than graphics" :)
When Quake came out, the most notable thing about it was how it was pushing the graphics barrier. Sure Quake was fun too, but I still remember people sitting around saying "But all these older games I like playing from the 80s are so much more fun, developers should concentrate on gameplay rather than graphics!" And indeed, the FPS genre since then has been the main one that such criticisms have been made against.
Presumably he covered that with "The iPad is just a fancy way of surfing the web and watching videos". Yes, clearly tablets (and phones) can replace laptops in some circumstances, but that doesn't mean they are a complete replacement, which is presumably what the point was about.
I'd say the real replacement though is the netbook - it fills that gap between laptop and phone, whilst still giving you a physical keyboard, and well as running the same full OS as laptops/desktops do.
So you're saying the Ipad is good, because a real device produced by a billion dollar company, is better than a fictional device that visual effects guys tried to come up with, 23 years ago, and on presumably a much smaller budget than Apple R&D for those effects? I mean, are you expecting that when we see special effects, the guys are actually meant to implement the device for real, and you're suprised that when actual products come out decades later, they might work properly?
Well, I know the Ipad's turned out to be a bit of a wet blanket after those months of hype how it would revolutionise mobile computing. But I never thought I'd see it get to the stage of touting the Ipad because it's better than what the visual effects guys cobbled together 23 years ago for a Star Trek.
And yes, there are other tablets besides the Ipad, as people have pointed out in comments. You just don't hear about them, because the media coverage is for nothing but Apple.