Why pick the Iphone? By that logic, there are billions of phones without a real keyboard. But it's ludicrous to claim that therefore, people prefer not having a keyboard, all things being equal.
You could only test this if there were two phones, equal in all ways (including price), except that one had a real keyboard, and the other did not. The Iphone adds nothing to this discussion, no more than my 5800, or indeed my old Motorola V980, or the dumb phone I had before that.
Well, when was the last time you saw a Nintendo story, and how often do they appear?
The daily Apple free coverage works both ways - there's stories even about rumours, whilst actual products from other companies are ignored. So like any other Apple site, the bad news is more likely to be covered also:)
Except there are open systems that are far more successful (e.g., Nokia). So it's rather broken logic to say "Look, they're more successful than Google, therefore it must be because it's locked down".
Even if it was popular - does it make sense to say "Look, Windows and IE are vastly more popular than anything else. This is obviously because of all those 'flaws' that people talk about, therefore these flaws are a good thing"?
It's also interesting to note that all of the known exploits in the wild for iPhones have been for jailbroken iPhones,
It's also interesting to note that you can't do basic things without jailbreaking it, and whenever someone points out a missing feature, we have no end of people saying it doesn't matter, because you can jailbreak it. Which is it?
Where is anyone saying Apple don't have a right to do this? Yes, Apple run a completely closed locked down platform, and yes, this is a news article pointing that out, so that (potential) developers and users know about it. What's the problem?
If you don't like it, don't make apps for Apple products.
And how do I know if I might not like it, so I can develop for other products instead? Yes that's right, by reading about it in the news. Apple gets stories when there's so much as a rumour, so that works both ways.
Am I missing something? This has nothing at all to do with "My Rights Online"...IMNSHO.
So does this mean I can run X Box games on my Windows PC, or my Windows applications will run on a Windows 7 phone? They're the same platform and same OS, right?
The "Apple users pay for their stuff" is getting tiring. I remember it 15-20 years ago, when game developers were supporting the niche Mac and dropping the Amiga (despite the latter still being more popular in the home, back then). We're now seeing it with phones ("But Iphone users pay for their stuff, so you're better off developing for that, despite having about a tenth of the share of Nokia").
By that logic, my 5 year old cheap dumbphone could multitask, because I could run the built in mp3 player at the same time as the built in email client.
(And I just love that as soon as Apple drop multitasking, we have no end of people claiming it's a great thing. Should netbooks, laptops or desktops not multitask either? Why, when MS said they were going to limit Windows 7 on netbooks to 3 applications, didn't we have praise, with people saying they should go further and only allow 1 application?)
Why in the world would I want to share cycles with apps from other developers on a task oriented portable device? It's bad enough there are unforeseen push notifications from different vendors fucking up the UX, now I have to bend over backwards and play nice with every resource hog on the app store?
You do realise that no one is forcing you to install every single application on the "app" store? The reason I want to share cycles with an application, is that if I've chosen to install it, it probably means I want to share cycles with it! If I didn't want to, I wouldn't install it.
I love that when MS were considering limiting an edition of Windows on netbooks to three applications, there was no end of ridicule. Yet now Apple have a device with only one application at once, it's a good thing.
Just yesterday my son was saying he downloaded an app that does nothing but close other apps on his droid.
Not sure what that's about, I've no need for such a thing on Symbian.
How many applications are running on your computer right now - do you find it annoying to have to close them? Or maybe you're still using a (classic) Mac?
Indeed - and Facebook/MySpace weren't even first with web based social networks, there were plenty before them (I think Six Degrees was one of the earliest, launched in 1997.)
The point is that being most successful isn't just about having the idea first, there are many other factors. Consider, if I went back 10 years, does that mean I could write Facebook and now be rich? Probably not - chances are I might stumble or be unlucky on any number of factors, and lose out to someone else. I mean, what did SixDegrees do wrong that Facebook did right? I don't think it was that people didn't hear about it - I remember SixDegrees sweeping through my University, and we all joined. But we just got bored with it rather quickly, and couldn't see what it offered, that we weren't already able to do with email.
So an interface is good because it's easy, but anyone who finds it hard is stupid? By that logic, all the other mp3 players had just as good a UI - if the OP found them difficult, he was obviously stupid, right?
Funny how an interface is all important when it has one, but when Apple drop that, suddenly not only is it not important, but the fact that they droped it is itself revolutionary.
He calls it lame. That's not a prediction about it's success, it's an opinion about the product. A product being successful doesn't make that opinion wrong - unless you think Windows and IE are therefore the best ever?
Personally I prefer all the laughable predictions about how revolutionary products like the Air (remember that? Most people don't) was going to be. We still see this sort of thing today, with rumours over the Ipad and now Ikky.
I never considered writing a fart application. Doesn't mean that the first one who happened to do it deserves a patent. If someone gave me the problem of "I have a phone, and I want fart noises", I'm pretty sure it's not hard or non-obvious to derive the same solution.
Indeed - although in some ways now you look at things like the storage space on the Shuffle and the Nano, and it seems they've gone backwards. The Ipod isn't anything special anymore.
I'm not sure it's the credit of Apple, or the fault of the other companies - the problem is that these days, large sections of the media happily give free advertising to Apple. I mean, it was bad enough with the Iphone, but now we have coverage of products that are merely rumoured or announced, whilst actual already available products from other companies are ignored. First the Ipad, now the Ikey. I once joked that if Apple started to make fridges, Slashdot would start covering kitchen appliances, but I honestly wouldn't be surprised to see an iFridge, iToaster or whatever.
Apple don't popularise anything - it's the media who do it for them. I don't know why it is - whether the Ipod sucked people in, or possibly it's a hangover from the days when Macs had a niche in publishing, so there's a far greater than average number of Apple fans among journalists?
We've already seen people (even on geek forums, where you'd think people know better) claiming phones as an "Apple first", it wouldn't surprise me if in years to come, the same is done for tablets.
Okay but in that case how much market share does a platform need in order to be a requirement for something being considered cross-platform?
And for 2, does this mean I can run X Box games on my Windows PC, or my Windows applications will run on a Windows 7 phone? They're the same platform, right?
I see what you're saying, but I'm not sure that means something can't be cross-platform - is something not cross-platform, as long as you can find at least one obscure platform it doesn't work on? E.g., Java isn't cross-platform, because it's not supported on devices like the Iphone/pad or Amiga?
Is anyone claiming it's the first ever kind of thing like this? It's still news either way. Makes a change to have some actual technology news, instead of just a rumour posted in a blog...
I see the point you're making - but most of those questions are only relevant for a party forming a Government.
There's no chance of that happening here - I don't mean that in a "they won't get that many votes" sense, but I mean in the sense that they don't have enough people even standing for election. So such a thing is impossible.
It's still important I think to have policies on a wide range of issues, because if you had one as your MP, you'd still want to write to him, and hope he has an opinion on more than a single issue, and such things would be voted on in the Commons.
But let's be fair - individual MPs are not expected to come up with solutions to the economy, or immigration problems. (As an aside, I'm not sure what uncontrolled problem you are referring to - although I appreciate that these might be questions asked by your typical Daily Mail reader, so it's useful to have responses to them.)
Slashdot Mirror
Nope, he's just one of over a billion people who choose Nokia.
Ah yes, the obligitary Iphone mention.
Why pick the Iphone? By that logic, there are billions of phones without a real keyboard. But it's ludicrous to claim that therefore, people prefer not having a keyboard, all things being equal.
You could only test this if there were two phones, equal in all ways (including price), except that one had a real keyboard, and the other did not. The Iphone adds nothing to this discussion, no more than my 5800, or indeed my old Motorola V980, or the dumb phone I had before that.
Well, when was the last time you saw a Nintendo story, and how often do they appear?
The daily Apple free coverage works both ways - there's stories even about rumours, whilst actual products from other companies are ignored. So like any other Apple site, the bad news is more likely to be covered also :)
Except there are open systems that are far more successful (e.g., Nokia). So it's rather broken logic to say "Look, they're more successful than Google, therefore it must be because it's locked down".
Even if it was popular - does it make sense to say "Look, Windows and IE are vastly more popular than anything else. This is obviously because of all those 'flaws' that people talk about, therefore these flaws are a good thing"?
It's also interesting to note that all of the known exploits in the wild for iPhones have been for jailbroken iPhones,
It's also interesting to note that you can't do basic things without jailbreaking it, and whenever someone points out a missing feature, we have no end of people saying it doesn't matter, because you can jailbreak it. Which is it?
Where is anyone saying Apple don't have a right to do this? Yes, Apple run a completely closed locked down platform, and yes, this is a news article pointing that out, so that (potential) developers and users know about it. What's the problem?
If you don't like it, don't make apps for Apple products.
And how do I know if I might not like it, so I can develop for other products instead? Yes that's right, by reading about it in the news. Apple gets stories when there's so much as a rumour, so that works both ways.
Am I missing something? This has nothing at all to do with "My Rights Online"...IMNSHO.
It's not in YRO. It's in Apple.
So does this mean I can run X Box games on my Windows PC, or my Windows applications will run on a Windows 7 phone? They're the same platform and same OS, right?
Iphone runs (I presume you meant that, not "is") OS X? Wow, with this announcement, I'll look forward to Steam and Valve games on the Iphone.
The "Apple users pay for their stuff" is getting tiring. I remember it 15-20 years ago, when game developers were supporting the niche Mac and dropping the Amiga (despite the latter still being more popular in the home, back then). We're now seeing it with phones ("But Iphone users pay for their stuff, so you're better off developing for that, despite having about a tenth of the share of Nokia").
Let's see some evidence for these claims?
By that logic, my 5 year old cheap dumbphone could multitask, because I could run the built in mp3 player at the same time as the built in email client.
(And I just love that as soon as Apple drop multitasking, we have no end of people claiming it's a great thing. Should netbooks, laptops or desktops not multitask either? Why, when MS said they were going to limit Windows 7 on netbooks to 3 applications, didn't we have praise, with people saying they should go further and only allow 1 application?)
Why in the world would I want to share cycles with apps from other developers on a task oriented portable device? It's bad enough there are unforeseen push notifications from different vendors fucking up the UX, now I have to bend over backwards and play nice with every resource hog on the app store?
You do realise that no one is forcing you to install every single application on the "app" store? The reason I want to share cycles with an application, is that if I've chosen to install it, it probably means I want to share cycles with it! If I didn't want to, I wouldn't install it.
Try it on a non-Iphone. Multitasking just works fine on my 5800.
I love that when MS were considering limiting an edition of Windows on netbooks to three applications, there was no end of ridicule. Yet now Apple have a device with only one application at once, it's a good thing.
Just yesterday my son was saying he downloaded an app that does nothing but close other apps on his droid.
Not sure what that's about, I've no need for such a thing on Symbian.
How many applications are running on your computer right now - do you find it annoying to have to close them? Or maybe you're still using a (classic) Mac?
Indeed - and Facebook/MySpace weren't even first with web based social networks, there were plenty before them (I think Six Degrees was one of the earliest, launched in 1997.)
The point is that being most successful isn't just about having the idea first, there are many other factors. Consider, if I went back 10 years, does that mean I could write Facebook and now be rich? Probably not - chances are I might stumble or be unlucky on any number of factors, and lose out to someone else. I mean, what did SixDegrees do wrong that Facebook did right? I don't think it was that people didn't hear about it - I remember SixDegrees sweeping through my University, and we all joined. But we just got bored with it rather quickly, and couldn't see what it offered, that we weren't already able to do with email.
So an interface is good because it's easy, but anyone who finds it hard is stupid? By that logic, all the other mp3 players had just as good a UI - if the OP found them difficult, he was obviously stupid, right?
I don't know, were they like the Shuffle?
Funny how an interface is all important when it has one, but when Apple drop that, suddenly not only is it not important, but the fact that they droped it is itself revolutionary.
Where's the prediction?
He calls it lame. That's not a prediction about it's success, it's an opinion about the product. A product being successful doesn't make that opinion wrong - unless you think Windows and IE are therefore the best ever?
Personally I prefer all the laughable predictions about how revolutionary products like the Air (remember that? Most people don't) was going to be. We still see this sort of thing today, with rumours over the Ipad and now Ikky.
I never considered writing a fart application. Doesn't mean that the first one who happened to do it deserves a patent. If someone gave me the problem of "I have a phone, and I want fart noises", I'm pretty sure it's not hard or non-obvious to derive the same solution.
Iphone? Huge penetration? Citation for that please?
Apple's sheer volume
Possibly you were confused and thinking of the Ipod instead.
Indeed - although in some ways now you look at things like the storage space on the Shuffle and the Nano, and it seems they've gone backwards. The Ipod isn't anything special anymore.
I'm not sure it's the credit of Apple, or the fault of the other companies - the problem is that these days, large sections of the media happily give free advertising to Apple. I mean, it was bad enough with the Iphone, but now we have coverage of products that are merely rumoured or announced, whilst actual already available products from other companies are ignored. First the Ipad, now the Ikey. I once joked that if Apple started to make fridges, Slashdot would start covering kitchen appliances, but I honestly wouldn't be surprised to see an iFridge, iToaster or whatever.
Apple don't popularise anything - it's the media who do it for them. I don't know why it is - whether the Ipod sucked people in, or possibly it's a hangover from the days when Macs had a niche in publishing, so there's a far greater than average number of Apple fans among journalists?
We've already seen people (even on geek forums, where you'd think people know better) claiming phones as an "Apple first", it wouldn't surprise me if in years to come, the same is done for tablets.
Okay but in that case how much market share does a platform need in order to be a requirement for something being considered cross-platform?
And for 2, does this mean I can run X Box games on my Windows PC, or my Windows applications will run on a Windows 7 phone? They're the same platform, right?
Oh sorry, I've been told wrong by the mod. Apparently, selling now counts as non-commercial. Brilliant!
I see what you're saying, but I'm not sure that means something can't be cross-platform - is something not cross-platform, as long as you can find at least one obscure platform it doesn't work on? E.g., Java isn't cross-platform, because it's not supported on devices like the Iphone/pad or Amiga?
Is anyone claiming it's the first ever kind of thing like this? It's still news either way. Makes a change to have some actual technology news, instead of just a rumour posted in a blog...
I see the point you're making - but most of those questions are only relevant for a party forming a Government.
There's no chance of that happening here - I don't mean that in a "they won't get that many votes" sense, but I mean in the sense that they don't have enough people even standing for election. So such a thing is impossible.
It's still important I think to have policies on a wide range of issues, because if you had one as your MP, you'd still want to write to him, and hope he has an opinion on more than a single issue, and such things would be voted on in the Commons.
But let's be fair - individual MPs are not expected to come up with solutions to the economy, or immigration problems. (As an aside, I'm not sure what uncontrolled problem you are referring to - although I appreciate that these might be questions asked by your typical Daily Mail reader, so it's useful to have responses to them.)