You've got it the wrong way around. The problem isn't environmentalism bashing capitalism. It's actually capitalism taking over environmentalism, e.g. the whole "carbon offset" business where it's OK to fly in your private jet all around the world as long as you "offset" it.
It's pure capitalism, disguised as a fluffy, environmentally-and-humanity-friendly new responsible business movement.
Are you kidding? Neo-nazis would love 99% of war games I would imagine. Most of the time, the Nazis are hardly even being mentioned, let alone painted in a bad light. It's usually the Germans who are depicted in WWII games, not the Nazis. And everybody loves playing the Germans.
That shouldn't be surprising really. What woman wouldn't like to be pampered and be the object of a man's attention for a few minutes?
And besides, it was a dance festival. Not an engineering sausage fest. I bet dance festivals tend to have more women than men in general anyway. Most women love to dance.
What a load of bullshit. So Apple's numerous contributions to open source don't count?
I don't see what what is so warm and fuzzy about Nokia developing and then patenting their own technologies is anyway. That's exactly what Apple is doing. How are they more caring and sharing than Apple?
You're totally missing the point, and if you ever entered the portable music player business you would crash and burn horribly.
People don't want flashy gadgets with a million and one features which are hard to use. iPods took over the market because they are easy to use, and buying or managing your music is an absolute snap.
Other competitors were free to do the same, but they never did, because they think just like you do: they totally dismiss the power of usability and ease of use. Most people in the world aren't Slashdot geeks.
User interaction design and usability doesn't just apply to portable music players, it applies to just about anything you interact with in everyday life. A lot of people are so used to mediocre engineering and design that they take these frustrations for granted. Apple is a company that spends their time addressing these issues and making things easier for the user, but sadly few other companies do.
Read "The Design of Everyday Things" by Donald Norman sometime, it's a real eye opener.
I hear what you're saying, but I think Steve Jobs' benevolent dictatorship is what has made Apple so successful. If it wasn't for Jobs being a demanding tyrant, Apple products would be mediocre at best. The guy isn't exactly known for being friendly, but I admire his strive for perfection.
Jobs has outstanding business sense. If he realises something isn't working, he'll change his approach. I don't think he's particularly tied down to any particular path. That's something a lot of commentators miss. The iPhone App Store thing is a constantly evolving beast.
But yeah, competition is good. I wish Google and others all the best.
If anything, Apple products on the surface look less nice and refined than their competitors. They tend to be minimalist and neat, but that's about it. I wouldn't call them beautiful -- and I would go so far as to say they tend to look conservative.
People buy Apple products because they're more usable than their competitors. And that makes them better products for the average consumer. Many "geeks" seem to have trouble comprehending the concept of usability, unfortunately, which is why Apple's success is a mystery to them and they try to explain it away by saying people are clueless sheep who prefer shiny objects.
The reason why people buy iPods is because Apple offer an integrated experience. You're not just buying an iPod, you're buying into iTunes and the iTunes music store. This doesn't appeal to a lot of techie types but it works really well for everyday users. Until other manufacturers offer the same integrated experience, Apple isn't going to be dethroned.
You probably hang out with a different (more tech-oriented?) crowd. Most of my friends now have iPods/iPhones as their primary portable music players, and more and more are becoming Mac converts. The Mac users tend to be programmers, web developers or photographers, but I was quite surprised to learn that a few of my finance friends were Mac users as well.
I don't see any evidence of apologism or Apple getting a free pass. Whenever Apple screws up, they're instantly on the front page of Slashdot, Digg, etc.
It surprised me when I discovered just how common terrorism was in the 70s and 80s in Europe. I mean, really, what we have nowadays is pretty tame compared to what was happening back then. Assassinations, gun battles, kidnappings, hostage situations and massacres, hijackings etc.
This is why I love the USA. You have both the extremes: super talented, innovative, imaginative, generous people who work towards the betterment of all.
And then there's the sad little specimens like you.
I'm curious: if Steam were to switch to distributing games with no DRM whatsoever (like GOG.com for example), would you still consider them a monopoly?
Personally, I don't consider Steam a monopoly, and I still use it even though it sometimes annoys me and I was burned once -- I bought the Thai version of PC Orange Box for cheap and Valve blocked it from activating because I'm in Australia. I mostly just buy Valve games on Steam though.
Agreed that the problem is usually management, especially high-level executives or even the CEO. They will give the business to their contacts, who charge top dollar. Open source never comes into it. They ignore advice from front-line and mid-level management who actually have some technical expertise, and who have been briefed by actual IT staff who know what they're talking about.
Agreed. It's scary how similar to corporate enterprise it often is. The trend is for government to be more and more "business-like" these days. I still remember the early days when it was about public service. Now it's all about ROI, KPI, mission statements and $300/hour business consultants.
You obviously didn't read the article. Why did you have to weasel your rant into this discussion, when it's not even about Apple or the iPhone? It's about AT&T.
I think they mean that with technologies like cars, the costs are much more apparent, whereas with software, they are much more hidden to the average user. And there's plenty of free software out there, you can't say the same about cars of course. Software "feels" less tangible than cars. And it's so easy to copy software and media (movies, music, PDFs) that their value doesn't appear to stack up the value of a physical item that you can actually hold in your hands.
Slashdot Mirror
You've got it the wrong way around. The problem isn't environmentalism bashing capitalism. It's actually capitalism taking over environmentalism, e.g. the whole "carbon offset" business where it's OK to fly in your private jet all around the world as long as you "offset" it.
It's pure capitalism, disguised as a fluffy, environmentally-and-humanity-friendly new responsible business movement.
Are you kidding? Neo-nazis would love 99% of war games I would imagine. Most of the time, the Nazis are hardly even being mentioned, let alone painted in a bad light. It's usually the Germans who are depicted in WWII games, not the Nazis. And everybody loves playing the Germans.
That shouldn't be surprising really. What woman wouldn't like to be pampered and be the object of a man's attention for a few minutes?
And besides, it was a dance festival. Not an engineering sausage fest. I bet dance festivals tend to have more women than men in general anyway. Most women love to dance.
If any of the women who attended spoke out publicly, they'd get flamed to hell and back. No thanks, it wouldn't be worth the hassle and harassment.
What a load of bullshit. So Apple's numerous contributions to open source don't count?
I don't see what what is so warm and fuzzy about Nokia developing and then patenting their own technologies is anyway. That's exactly what Apple is doing. How are they more caring and sharing than Apple?
Huh? Granted, iTunes Store can be slow at times, but I think it's easy enough to use.
What specific usability problems did you run into?
You're totally missing the point, and if you ever entered the portable music player business you would crash and burn horribly.
People don't want flashy gadgets with a million and one features which are hard to use. iPods took over the market because they are easy to use, and buying or managing your music is an absolute snap.
Other competitors were free to do the same, but they never did, because they think just like you do: they totally dismiss the power of usability and ease of use. Most people in the world aren't Slashdot geeks.
User interaction design and usability doesn't just apply to portable music players, it applies to just about anything you interact with in everyday life. A lot of people are so used to mediocre engineering and design that they take these frustrations for granted. Apple is a company that spends their time addressing these issues and making things easier for the user, but sadly few other companies do.
Read "The Design of Everyday Things" by Donald Norman sometime, it's a real eye opener.
I hear what you're saying, but I think Steve Jobs' benevolent dictatorship is what has made Apple so successful. If it wasn't for Jobs being a demanding tyrant, Apple products would be mediocre at best. The guy isn't exactly known for being friendly, but I admire his strive for perfection.
Jobs has outstanding business sense. If he realises something isn't working, he'll change his approach. I don't think he's particularly tied down to any particular path. That's something a lot of commentators miss. The iPhone App Store thing is a constantly evolving beast.
But yeah, competition is good. I wish Google and others all the best.
If anything, Apple products on the surface look less nice and refined than their competitors. They tend to be minimalist and neat, but that's about it. I wouldn't call them beautiful -- and I would go so far as to say they tend to look conservative.
People buy Apple products because they're more usable than their competitors. And that makes them better products for the average consumer. Many "geeks" seem to have trouble comprehending the concept of usability, unfortunately, which is why Apple's success is a mystery to them and they try to explain it away by saying people are clueless sheep who prefer shiny objects.
The reason why people buy iPods is because Apple offer an integrated experience. You're not just buying an iPod, you're buying into iTunes and the iTunes music store. This doesn't appeal to a lot of techie types but it works really well for everyday users. Until other manufacturers offer the same integrated experience, Apple isn't going to be dethroned.
You probably hang out with a different (more tech-oriented?) crowd. Most of my friends now have iPods/iPhones as their primary portable music players, and more and more are becoming Mac converts. The Mac users tend to be programmers, web developers or photographers, but I was quite surprised to learn that a few of my finance friends were Mac users as well.
Thanks for your insightful observations -- I think you pretty much summed up what Steve Jobs intended the iPhone to be.
I don't see any evidence of apologism or Apple getting a free pass. Whenever Apple screws up, they're instantly on the front page of Slashdot, Digg, etc.
Way to generalise and stereotype!
I certainly don't think this instance is the user's fault.
It sounds like he was indeed shocked, and I don't envy the awkwardness this places him under:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/Building-a-World-that-Gives-Life-to-the-Promise-of-Our-Founding-Documents/
I actually feel sorry for Barack Obama. I'm sure it put him in a very awkward position -- and he actually says this in his official response.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/Building-a-World-that-Gives-Life-to-the-Promise-of-Our-Founding-Documents/
I'm not surprised that so many people are out to attack him personally, when this isn't any fault of his at all.
It surprised me when I discovered just how common terrorism was in the 70s and 80s in Europe. I mean, really, what we have nowadays is pretty tame compared to what was happening back then. Assassinations, gun battles, kidnappings, hostage situations and massacres, hijackings etc.
This is why I love the USA. You have both the extremes: super talented, innovative, imaginative, generous people who work towards the betterment of all.
And then there's the sad little specimens like you.
Way to go making yourself look stupid...
I'm curious: if Steam were to switch to distributing games with no DRM whatsoever (like GOG.com for example), would you still consider them a monopoly?
Personally, I don't consider Steam a monopoly, and I still use it even though it sometimes annoys me and I was burned once -- I bought the Thai version of PC Orange Box for cheap and Valve blocked it from activating because I'm in Australia. I mostly just buy Valve games on Steam though.
Agreed that the problem is usually management, especially high-level executives or even the CEO. They will give the business to their contacts, who charge top dollar. Open source never comes into it. They ignore advice from front-line and mid-level management who actually have some technical expertise, and who have been briefed by actual IT staff who know what they're talking about.
Agreed. It's scary how similar to corporate enterprise it often is. The trend is for government to be more and more "business-like" these days. I still remember the early days when it was about public service. Now it's all about ROI, KPI, mission statements and $300/hour business consultants.
It's like the world of Dilbert. Sad and true.
You obviously didn't read the article. Why did you have to weasel your rant into this discussion, when it's not even about Apple or the iPhone? It's about AT&T.
Can you give some examples? It really depends what field you work in -- are you in a specialised field?
For the average home user, most free/open source software seems to be available cross-platform.
I think they mean that with technologies like cars, the costs are much more apparent, whereas with software, they are much more hidden to the average user. And there's plenty of free software out there, you can't say the same about cars of course. Software "feels" less tangible than cars. And it's so easy to copy software and media (movies, music, PDFs) that their value doesn't appear to stack up the value of a physical item that you can actually hold in your hands.