The problem is all the game consoles and most (all?) of the cellphones are DRM encumbered. Nobody can publish a program for these systems unless they get the personal approval of the manufacturer or use an "illegal circumvention device."
Surely there's only one mobile phone company that this applies to (Apple)? The rest, you are free to write apps for them.
But this argument doesn't make sense, because the basic facts are that the Wii has sold 67 million, and all of the Iphone models combined are only at a mere 42 million, even taking into account that a family buys more phones than consoles.
And what about the Nintendo DS (that is the obvious better comparison to the Iphone)? At 125 million units sold, the Iphone doesn't come anywhere near close. Then there are the hundreds of millions of phones from other manufacturers, most notably Nokia...
Then don't support it. That doesn't address what the OP was talking about.
Most places don't support Windows 2000 anymore, but it'll still work often enough unless it needs a newer feature. Or unless they've artificially blocked it, which is also stupid.
I found it annoying that there didn't seem to be a way to update/refresh files when mp3 tags were updated, without reimporting the entire libary? And however good it is, the fundamental issue is if you're forced to use it, rather than Just Working with your choice of media player, as well as the option to just mount as an external drive.
But a commercial company is going to be far more worried about the risks of spending months of development on something, only to have it delayed or refused permission by Apple.
Actually I'd say that much of Apple's support is among geeks - with the exception of the mp3 player market, most people don't use Apple products, and it's just places like Slashdot where they are loved as the Best Ever.
Next time someone complains about Windows, I'll be sure to claim that "most people don't want to do it that way", and only a "few nerds" are going to use that. After all, if we're equating market share with desired specific features, it works for all companies.
I don't have these problems on my Sansa Clip+, so maybe they improved it if you have an older model by any chance? (And to be fair, the microSD is a plus in the sense that the Ipods, and most mp3 players, don't have that option at all - which I find surprising, given that every other kind of portable device has memory cards as standard, and surely music is the one you're most likely to want it...)
Indeed. Both my Sansa Clip+, and my 5800, automatically mount themselves as a USB drive (the 5800 also does bluetooth file transfer... I thought this was bog standard on most phones now?)
Jesus, why support a company whose practices you hate?
Er, as he said - "Obviously he didn't hate them until he experienced the product."
Some people here are well aware of Apple's limitations, and buy elsewhere (I love my Sansa Clip+, it's as cheap as an Ipod Shuffle, with more memory, and takes expandable memory via microSD on top of that, and you get a visual UI and controls, rather than the non-visual custom headphones thing). But some people are actually, you know, Apple customers who are then disappointed.
It certainly throws doubt on that Apple claim of "But 100% of Apple customers love Apple!"
And nice to see the classic Apple pleading - "But why do you really need that feature...?"
Next time there's a Microsoft bashing article, I do hope you'll be criticising people by saying that they shouldn't have bought Microsoft if they "hate" them so much.
the cut off between mercury and all other planets is a severe drop off
Not even a factor of 2 is not a "severe drop off".
likewise, if it doesn't orbit the sun, its a moon. completely different issue
I'm not saying that moons are planets. I'm asking you what you think the definition of a moon should be? If you're happy having hundreds of moons, why doesn't this apply for planets?
so what you do, to avoid all this pointless hullabaloo, is you pick the most obvious simple cut off
The most obvious cut off would surely be that of the gas giants. The rest is pretty arbitrary.
How many moons do you think we should have? Shouldn't we limit that, for the same reasons?
The radius of Mercury is 2,439km. The radius of Pluto is 1,153km, and the radius of Eris is 1,300km. So that's not even a factor of 2 separating your supposed "big obvious cut off point". We'd better hope we don't find anything else larger than Eris but smaller than Mercury.
I'm not saying the current system is wrong, I'm just saying it's still arbitrary, and the idea that there must only be a few planets is not a particularly strong one scientifically. There is no reason why "planet" needs to be a fixed, small, easily countable number - you don't have geologists having these arguments on the definition of a mountain ("But if you allow something smaller than my arbitrary height, next thing you know you'll be saying every pebble counts as a mountain, and there'll be millions of them!")
If aliens found the solar system for the first time, I can't help feeling the most likely classification would be: One star, 4 gas giants, and a large number of rocky "whatever", of which Earth is the largest.
Perhaps we'd be better off adopting the Star Trek classification system (we have a "Class" system for stars, after all)...
But this isn't about getting insurance after your house has burned down or you've got the disease. It's about genetics that might make you more likely to show a condition. Plus there's the difference that if you build a new house, you can still get new insurance for that - you're not branded for life as uninsurable.
Insurance is a gamble for both sides - but it's one sided if they get to look at the cards you are carrying, which should be your private information.
The better analogy would be buying a house, and then after that someone saying "Oh by the way, we've done tests on you, and no insurance company will offer you house insurance, ever". But even for houses, the situation isn't that stupid - in the UK at least, you need to make sure insurance is arranged before you buy the house (if you want a mortgage, at least). Surely someone's health is even more important?
How exactly do you propose a baby gets insurance "before" their signs of disease show, if you count their DNA as already having the disease?. Someone's health is not like a house which can be replaced. The other problem is that even if DNA tests aren't routine, people who might benefit from them are deterred from getting them - because of insurance, you're better off not knowing.
These are all reasons why relying on laissez-faire private insurance for health is a bad idea - either there should be Government offered insurance, healthcare, and/or laws that regulate what information private insurance companies can access or use.
The Ipad isn't an e-reader. Or at least, if you're happy with an LCD device with poor battery life and display (compared to the Kindle and other actual e-readers), then any far cheaper netbook or tablet would do the job.
the only thing you have going for your clinging to pluto is adherence to tradition
Nonsense, that wasn't his point at all. His point is that drawing a line between Mercury and Pluto is no better than drawing a line just below Pluto. And he's saying that your argument of "But we can't have too many planets" is a weak one. I agree with him on both points.
Do you think that all of the small moons should have their moon status revoked? There are hundreds of moons now in the solar system, including some that are only a kilometre across!
Perhaps, but that's not what I see from the media. Fair enough if it was a single news story about the first Iphone, since Apple's first phone is obviously more newsworthy than yet another Nokia phone.
But it's not just one story. And here we are, years and several Iphone models later, and Apple still get constant media coverage. The media should still reflect what people use.
Indeed, if your argument was really true, surely Google should get no coverage for their search engine, and Apple should get no coverage for their Ipods, with instead the media only giving coverage to niche products in those markets? But that doesn't happen either.
Feature phones will be gone by the time anyone does anything with this.
I'm not sure how you mean - there is no strict line between "feature" and "smart" phone, instead the terms are just used to distinguished between low and high end phones. Are you seriously suggesting that low end phones are going to disappear? I don't think so.
The iPhone form factor is clearly where all phones are going
I'm not sure what you mean by "iPhone form factor". If you mean the candy-bar form with a full size touchscreen, then it's pretty much taken over, even among "feature" phones now.
Fixing Symbian to be modern should have happened a long time ago if at all.
What? Symbian is modern. This is about open sourcing it.
These hardware companies are getting killed by Apple because Apple is a software company.
*snort* Come back to me when you've checked the actual market figures. Here's a hint - Nokia are top with 39%, Apple are last after just about everyone else (except maybe Google), with a few per cent.
[snip opinion and assertions]
If you're happy with that level of debate, then "No you're wrong, my Nokia is much better than Apple blah blah".
Nokia make specific hardware with a very modern phoneOS. My 5800 does things the Iphone can't do, and at a fraction of the price - hell, even my old Motorola V980 could! And it's easy to use. Maybe there are some things an Apple phone does that no Nokia phone does, but the reverse is also true.
If you reply, let's have evidence and specific examples of how the Iphone is better than all other phones; not simply assertions that the Iphone is the Best Ever.
Somebody else can fix a bug or add a feature, copyright the fixed version, and then NOBODY ELSE, including YOU, can fix that bug or add that feature in YOUR version.
Of course you can fix the bug or add a feature independently, you're just not allowed to copy and paste from their version. How else do you think the same features are added to different copyrighted software programs? Note that the same issue applies to thinks like a BSD licence - if someone fixes the bug or adds a feature, they are free to release it under a non-open licence.
Somebody can make a distribution consisting of your PD software combined with that of others, copyright THAT, and then NOBODY ELSE, including YOU and the rest of the authors of the pieces, can produce a distribution structured like the copyrighted one
Depends on the court ruling - I don't think this could apply to trivial cases, so I don't see the problem with this? And can you cite me a particular court case on this?
And again, this same criticism could apply to licences like BSD. Yes, these are reasons why many people prefer the GPL, but I don't think it means BSD, or public domain, is awful.
The "big names" you mention are still niche players in the phone market (except perhaps RIM; admittedly they should also worrying about Android, not because of Google phones directly, but because the rest of the phone manufacturers such as Motorola may switch to Android; but Apple are a non-issue here).
I agree. I could understand the US media focusing less on Symbian (though even there, that still doesn't explain the Apple and Google fascination, since Motorola are American, and they sell way more phones too). But here in the UK, the BBC are also obsessed with covering the Iphone, and to a lesser extent, Android, whilst Nokia phones rarely get a mention.
He wasn't called that because of what you say, he was called that because he suggested deporting people based on their views (even though they may be British citizens).
For heaven's sake, I would have thought that on Slashdot at least there'd be opposition to such thought crimes! Are you going to say the Government's plans are okay, because censoring websites with views it doesn't like is fine? Or is it fine just so long as it doesn't affect you?
Slashdot Mirror
The problem is all the game consoles and most (all?) of the cellphones are DRM encumbered. Nobody can publish a program for these systems unless they get the personal approval of the manufacturer or use an "illegal circumvention device."
Surely there's only one mobile phone company that this applies to (Apple)? The rest, you are free to write apps for them.
This used to work fine, but now the Apple spamadvertising invades other sections too (mobile, or as in this case, games).
Every other phone is friendlier still - no payment, no permission required from the hardware company, and freedom to host wherever you like.
But this argument doesn't make sense, because the basic facts are that the Wii has sold 67 million, and all of the Iphone models combined are only at a mere 42 million, even taking into account that a family buys more phones than consoles.
And what about the Nintendo DS (that is the obvious better comparison to the Iphone)? At 125 million units sold, the Iphone doesn't come anywhere near close. Then there are the hundreds of millions of phones from other manufacturers, most notably Nokia...
Then don't support it. That doesn't address what the OP was talking about.
Most places don't support Windows 2000 anymore, but it'll still work often enough unless it needs a newer feature. Or unless they've artificially blocked it, which is also stupid.
I found it annoying that there didn't seem to be a way to update/refresh files when mp3 tags were updated, without reimporting the entire libary? And however good it is, the fundamental issue is if you're forced to use it, rather than Just Working with your choice of media player, as well as the option to just mount as an external drive.
But a commercial company is going to be far more worried about the risks of spending months of development on something, only to have it delayed or refused permission by Apple.
Actually I'd say that much of Apple's support is among geeks - with the exception of the mp3 player market, most people don't use Apple products, and it's just places like Slashdot where they are loved as the Best Ever.
Next time someone complains about Windows, I'll be sure to claim that "most people don't want to do it that way", and only a "few nerds" are going to use that. After all, if we're equating market share with desired specific features, it works for all companies.
I don't have these problems on my Sansa Clip+, so maybe they improved it if you have an older model by any chance? (And to be fair, the microSD is a plus in the sense that the Ipods, and most mp3 players, don't have that option at all - which I find surprising, given that every other kind of portable device has memory cards as standard, and surely music is the one you're most likely to want it...)
Indeed. Both my Sansa Clip+, and my 5800, automatically mount themselves as a USB drive (the 5800 also does bluetooth file transfer ... I thought this was bog standard on most phones now?)
Jesus, why support a company whose practices you hate?
Er, as he said - "Obviously he didn't hate them until he experienced the product."
Some people here are well aware of Apple's limitations, and buy elsewhere (I love my Sansa Clip+, it's as cheap as an Ipod Shuffle, with more memory, and takes expandable memory via microSD on top of that, and you get a visual UI and controls, rather than the non-visual custom headphones thing). But some people are actually, you know, Apple customers who are then disappointed.
It certainly throws doubt on that Apple claim of "But 100% of Apple customers love Apple!"
And nice to see the classic Apple pleading - "But why do you really need that feature...?"
Next time there's a Microsoft bashing article, I do hope you'll be criticising people by saying that they shouldn't have bought Microsoft if they "hate" them so much.
the cut off between mercury and all other planets is a severe drop off
Not even a factor of 2 is not a "severe drop off".
likewise, if it doesn't orbit the sun, its a moon. completely different issue
I'm not saying that moons are planets. I'm asking you what you think the definition of a moon should be? If you're happy having hundreds of moons, why doesn't this apply for planets?
so what you do, to avoid all this pointless hullabaloo, is you pick the most obvious simple cut off
The most obvious cut off would surely be that of the gas giants. The rest is pretty arbitrary.
How many moons do you think we should have? Shouldn't we limit that, for the same reasons?
The radius of Mercury is 2,439km. The radius of Pluto is 1,153km, and the radius of Eris is 1,300km. So that's not even a factor of 2 separating your supposed "big obvious cut off point". We'd better hope we don't find anything else larger than Eris but smaller than Mercury.
I'm not saying the current system is wrong, I'm just saying it's still arbitrary, and the idea that there must only be a few planets is not a particularly strong one scientifically. There is no reason why "planet" needs to be a fixed, small, easily countable number - you don't have geologists having these arguments on the definition of a mountain ("But if you allow something smaller than my arbitrary height, next thing you know you'll be saying every pebble counts as a mountain, and there'll be millions of them!")
If aliens found the solar system for the first time, I can't help feeling the most likely classification would be: One star, 4 gas giants, and a large number of rocky "whatever", of which Earth is the largest.
Perhaps we'd be better off adopting the Star Trek classification system (we have a "Class" system for stars, after all)...
But this isn't about getting insurance after your house has burned down or you've got the disease. It's about genetics that might make you more likely to show a condition. Plus there's the difference that if you build a new house, you can still get new insurance for that - you're not branded for life as uninsurable.
Insurance is a gamble for both sides - but it's one sided if they get to look at the cards you are carrying, which should be your private information.
The better analogy would be buying a house, and then after that someone saying "Oh by the way, we've done tests on you, and no insurance company will offer you house insurance, ever". But even for houses, the situation isn't that stupid - in the UK at least, you need to make sure insurance is arranged before you buy the house (if you want a mortgage, at least). Surely someone's health is even more important?
How exactly do you propose a baby gets insurance "before" their signs of disease show, if you count their DNA as already having the disease?. Someone's health is not like a house which can be replaced. The other problem is that even if DNA tests aren't routine, people who might benefit from them are deterred from getting them - because of insurance, you're better off not knowing.
These are all reasons why relying on laissez-faire private insurance for health is a bad idea - either there should be Government offered insurance, healthcare, and/or laws that regulate what information private insurance companies can access or use.
The Ipad isn't an e-reader. Or at least, if you're happy with an LCD device with poor battery life and display (compared to the Kindle and other actual e-readers), then any far cheaper netbook or tablet would do the job.
the only thing you have going for your clinging to pluto is adherence to tradition
Nonsense, that wasn't his point at all. His point is that drawing a line between Mercury and Pluto is no better than drawing a line just below Pluto. And he's saying that your argument of "But we can't have too many planets" is a weak one. I agree with him on both points.
Do you think that all of the small moons should have their moon status revoked? There are hundreds of moons now in the solar system, including some that are only a kilometre across!
Perhaps, but that's not what I see from the media. Fair enough if it was a single news story about the first Iphone, since Apple's first phone is obviously more newsworthy than yet another Nokia phone.
But it's not just one story. And here we are, years and several Iphone models later, and Apple still get constant media coverage. The media should still reflect what people use.
Indeed, if your argument was really true, surely Google should get no coverage for their search engine, and Apple should get no coverage for their Ipods, with instead the media only giving coverage to niche products in those markets? But that doesn't happen either.
Wow, a 7 year old phone isn't very good by today's standards, you say?
Feature phones will be gone by the time anyone does anything with this.
I'm not sure how you mean - there is no strict line between "feature" and "smart" phone, instead the terms are just used to distinguished between low and high end phones. Are you seriously suggesting that low end phones are going to disappear? I don't think so.
The iPhone form factor is clearly where all phones are going
I'm not sure what you mean by "iPhone form factor". If you mean the candy-bar form with a full size touchscreen, then it's pretty much taken over, even among "feature" phones now.
Fixing Symbian to be modern should have happened a long time ago if at all.
What? Symbian is modern. This is about open sourcing it.
These hardware companies are getting killed by Apple because Apple is a software company.
*snort* Come back to me when you've checked the actual market figures. Here's a hint - Nokia are top with 39%, Apple are last after just about everyone else (except maybe Google), with a few per cent.
[snip opinion and assertions]
If you're happy with that level of debate, then "No you're wrong, my Nokia is much better than Apple blah blah".
Nokia make specific hardware with a very modern phoneOS. My 5800 does things the Iphone can't do, and at a fraction of the price - hell, even my old Motorola V980 could! And it's easy to use. Maybe there are some things an Apple phone does that no Nokia phone does, but the reverse is also true.
If you reply, let's have evidence and specific examples of how the Iphone is better than all other phones; not simply assertions that the Iphone is the Best Ever.
Somebody else can fix a bug or add a feature, copyright the fixed version, and then NOBODY ELSE, including YOU, can fix that bug or add that feature in YOUR version.
Of course you can fix the bug or add a feature independently, you're just not allowed to copy and paste from their version. How else do you think the same features are added to different copyrighted software programs? Note that the same issue applies to thinks like a BSD licence - if someone fixes the bug or adds a feature, they are free to release it under a non-open licence.
Somebody can make a distribution consisting of your PD software combined with that of others, copyright THAT, and then NOBODY ELSE, including YOU and the rest of the authors of the pieces, can produce a distribution structured like the copyrighted one
Depends on the court ruling - I don't think this could apply to trivial cases, so I don't see the problem with this? And can you cite me a particular court case on this?
And again, this same criticism could apply to licences like BSD. Yes, these are reasons why many people prefer the GPL, but I don't think it means BSD, or public domain, is awful.
I'm not sure there's much evidence that Nokia are losing any ground? For last quarter of 2009, their sales were up 22%, their profits almost doubled, and their market share increased to 39%; in the "smartphone" market, their share increased from 35% to 40% .
The "big names" you mention are still niche players in the phone market (except perhaps RIM; admittedly they should also worrying about Android, not because of Google phones directly, but because the rest of the phone manufacturers such as Motorola may switch to Android; but Apple are a non-issue here).
I agree. I could understand the US media focusing less on Symbian (though even there, that still doesn't explain the Apple and Google fascination, since Motorola are American, and they sell way more phones too). But here in the UK, the BBC are also obsessed with covering the Iphone, and to a lesser extent, Android, whilst Nokia phones rarely get a mention.
He wasn't called that because of what you say, he was called that because he suggested deporting people based on their views (even though they may be British citizens).
For heaven's sake, I would have thought that on Slashdot at least there'd be opposition to such thought crimes! Are you going to say the Government's plans are okay, because censoring websites with views it doesn't like is fine? Or is it fine just so long as it doesn't affect you?