Really bothers me that you're at +4 right now. Is everyone's brain dead this weekend?
It's the enemy-of-my-enemy effect, combined with taking cultural relativism to an idiotic extreme. US conservatives don't like Muslims (often because they unquestioningly obey the *wrong* holy book), so many liberals feel compelled to defend them. This despite the fact that fundamentalist Islam is one of the most illiberal misogynistic anti-gay cultures in the world. Yes, even worse than Utah.
Do you think our greed is good bigger is better sexist racist homophobic culture is any better?
Yes. Was that supposed to be a hard question? Are you seriously claiming that sexism in the US is remotely comparable to the pervasive misogyny of fundamentalist Islam? Or that occasional anti-gay slurs are comparable to government-supported stoning of homosexuals?
Just like the iPhone (only you don't have to go so far as doing custom ROM's, you just jailbreak the OS so it's actually in some ways simpler).
That depends on the state of jailbreaking at any specific time. Right now it's easy; it's been difficult or impossible in the past and will likely be so again when Apple "fixes" the current "exploit". And there are lots of things Android does out of the box without rooting that you'd need to jailbreak an iPhone for.
If you're a hacker, you can enter into a perpetual cat and mouse game with a company that considers you to be a criminal, or you can choose a platform that welcomes you. Not a hard decision for me.
Well, for me the difference is that a fucking smartphone is something I do not want to invest even minutes in to tinker with.
And Apple's control isn't required to achieve that. You can use an Android phone as if it were an iPhone and have a very similar experience. It's true that the UI isn't quite as polished, but that's orthogonal to being open.
Android is much more open, yes. But then you (or at least the majority of users) will have Google inhaling all of your data day and night. Google will see what you search for and what you mail to whom and which maps you look at and what your calendar contains...
If you're using Google's services, they see that regardless of what OS you're running. And there's no requirement to use their services with Android. Granted, they do make it easy to do so.
Ex. Mac mini now 5x faster in graphic than previous generaiton with intel onboard graphics.
Um, that's not wrong. I've had minis with both the Intel and NVidia GPUs. The GMA950 is really, really bad. And being able to play semi-modern games is not insignificant.
That's a federal crime, and there's no guarantee that will be possible in the future.
Average users have a locked down device that basically works pretty well and they don't really maintain. Technical users can, and will enhance and expand the system to do WHATEVER they want
Yes, just like Android.
However, it should not be. Let the users have SOME option that is locked down so well they cannot easily screw it up.
Which Android does. You can use it like an iPhone and it will work fine; you never need to be aware of the options to run non-market apps or install custom ROMs.
I replaced my Ubuntu desktop and laptop with a Mac Mini 2 years ago
Mac OS X is a great OS because it both "just works" and lets you tinker when you want to. It's baffling to me that Apple has convinced so many people that they have to keep an iron grip in order to provide usability, when half of their product line is a counterexample.
The default for an Android developer should be the N1. The "weird screen" isn't a factor in practice, there still aren't any other phones with significantly better specs, and it's virtually guaranteed to get timely updates for the next few years because there are no incompetent and/or malicious middlemen.
In the real world creating a party of your own or voting third-party is more likely to allow the greater of two evils to win then to cause any real benefit.
In the real world, it's more likely that Earth will be swallowed by a giant space goat than that your individual vote will decide an election. A vote for a third party carries much more proportional weight than voting for the lesser of two evils. Nobody cares if the Republicrats win with 53 or 54 percent of the vote. The libertarians or greens jumping from 1 percent to 2 will have much more of an impact.
I bet someone can write a script to show just how many times people here have complained about consoles being locked down compared to the iPhone being locked down. I bet the people complaining about the iPhone are orders of magnitude larger.
Sure, because consoles being locked down doesn't have much of a negative impact. Yes, I should be able to run arbitrary code on my Xbox. But even if I could, that wouldn't give me any capabilities beyond what I can already do with a Mac mini hooked up to a TV. On the other hand, mobile computing introduces a whole new set of capabilities, so it's a much bigger deal when devices are deliberately crippled.
Apple's products do that for me. After I bought my Dad an iMac, I've spent exactly 2 hours in 3 years upgrading his computer to OS 10.6 last christmas.
Exactly. And Macs can achieve this level of usability without being deliberately crippled. iPhone OS devices are locked down for the benefit of Apple, not users.
Why do people here on slashdot have this crazy notion that slashdotters are everyone? They're not. They are the minority.
Exactly the point. You can take away most people's computing freedom and they won't care. Of course that will kill innovation and allow the gatekeepers to extract monopoly rents, but those costs are nicely hidden.
Apple doesn't however design products for slashdotters.
Sure they do. Mac OS X is Unix with a great UI. They don't advertise the first part, because they don't have to. There's a reason why MacBooks are ubiquitous at tech conferences.
Macs are in fact a direct refutation of the theory that computing devices can't be both easy to use and powerful, which is why it's amazing to see so many Apple fanboys agreeing with it.
I find it comical that the Slashdot submission makes no mention at all that they also said 25% of downloaders were "pirating" it, and not paying even a single penny.
Typical game piracy rates are far above 25%, so if you're not a troll I'm not sure what your point is.
No, you just have to commit a federal crime. At least according to Apple, and they're probably correct as a matter of law.
Re:You signed away this "right" by picking Apple.
on
Flash Is Not a Right
·
· Score: 1
people are taking what is a normal and sane buisness practice
Normal, perhaps, although there have been plenty of phones where you could install whatever you wanted. Sane, not so much. Mobile carriers are among the most customer-hostile companies out there, and it's discouraging to see Apple adopting key parts of their business models.
Re:You signed away this "right" by picking Apple.
on
Flash Is Not a Right
·
· Score: 1
I just don't understand why it matters if the whole world starts using iPads.
At the same time, progressive medical advances have made it possible to add years to the end of many people's lives, and have made many previously fatal conditions survivable. Unfortunately, the older a person becomes, the more medical care he needs, and the more likely he is to develop a condition that is now survivable, but only at great expense.
Yes. This is one reason why we need to take a shot at curing aging.
iPhone yes, Mac no. You've always been able to use whatever software and hardware you wanted with a Mac. Although it's disturbingly likely that Steve considers that a design flaw to be corrected.
But for most people, that additional bit of freedom, which they'll never use costs them far more than what they'll lose out on.
If they'll never use it, how does it cost them anything? Is Mac OS X worse because it offers the ability to explore the Unix layer which most users won't need?
Fail to understand this and you'll be stuck at a loss to comprehend why those around you seem so willing to "sign away" their freedom, when it's you who has the absurd and extreme point of view.
Amazing that it's now an "extreme" position that I should be able to run software of my choice on my own hardware.
I have to say I think most of the Apple hate amongst the fellow nerds here is just jealousy.
Can you not understand the concern that Apple's strategy if successful will leave them with more of a stranglehold on mobile computing than Microsoft ever had on the desktop? You may not believe that's a significant possibility, and that's fine, but the idea that opposition to the iPad is primarily "jealousy" is silly. Most geeks like Mac OS X exactly because it's a solid Unix that grandparents can use.
Slashdot Mirror
It's the enemy-of-my-enemy effect, combined with taking cultural relativism to an idiotic extreme. US conservatives don't like Muslims (often because they unquestioningly obey the *wrong* holy book), so many liberals feel compelled to defend them. This despite the fact that fundamentalist Islam is one of the most illiberal misogynistic anti-gay cultures in the world. Yes, even worse than Utah.
Yes. Was that supposed to be a hard question? Are you seriously claiming that sexism in the US is remotely comparable to the pervasive misogyny of fundamentalist Islam? Or that occasional anti-gay slurs are comparable to government-supported stoning of homosexuals?
Food purity is the new "I don't have a TV".
Apple disagrees.
That depends on the state of jailbreaking at any specific time. Right now it's easy; it's been difficult or impossible in the past and will likely be so again when Apple "fixes" the current "exploit". And there are lots of things Android does out of the box without rooting that you'd need to jailbreak an iPhone for.
If you're a hacker, you can enter into a perpetual cat and mouse game with a company that considers you to be a criminal, or you can choose a platform that welcomes you. Not a hard decision for me.
And Apple's control isn't required to achieve that. You can use an Android phone as if it were an iPhone and have a very similar experience. It's true that the UI isn't quite as polished, but that's orthogonal to being open.
If you're using Google's services, they see that regardless of what OS you're running. And there's no requirement to use their services with Android. Granted, they do make it easy to do so.
Yes, AT&T are being their usual pricks. But even on their crippled phones you can apparently install arbitrary apps using the Android developer tools.
Um, that's not wrong. I've had minis with both the Intel and NVidia GPUs. The GMA950 is really, really bad. And being able to play semi-modern games is not insignificant.
That's a federal crime, and there's no guarantee that will be possible in the future.
Yes, just like Android.
Which Android does. You can use it like an iPhone and it will work fine; you never need to be aware of the options to run non-market apps or install custom ROMs.
Almost all Android phones allow you to run apps from any source, and to deploy your own code to your own hardware without begging for permission.
Mac OS X is a great OS because it both "just works" and lets you tinker when you want to. It's baffling to me that Apple has convinced so many people that they have to keep an iron grip in order to provide usability, when half of their product line is a counterexample.
The default for an Android developer should be the N1. The "weird screen" isn't a factor in practice, there still aren't any other phones with significantly better specs, and it's virtually guaranteed to get timely updates for the next few years because there are no incompetent and/or malicious middlemen.
In the real world, it's more likely that Earth will be swallowed by a giant space goat than that your individual vote will decide an election. A vote for a third party carries much more proportional weight than voting for the lesser of two evils. Nobody cares if the Republicrats win with 53 or 54 percent of the vote. The libertarians or greens jumping from 1 percent to 2 will have much more of an impact.
Sure, because consoles being locked down doesn't have much of a negative impact. Yes, I should be able to run arbitrary code on my Xbox. But even if I could, that wouldn't give me any capabilities beyond what I can already do with a Mac mini hooked up to a TV. On the other hand, mobile computing introduces a whole new set of capabilities, so it's a much bigger deal when devices are deliberately crippled.
Exactly. And Macs can achieve this level of usability without being deliberately crippled. iPhone OS devices are locked down for the benefit of Apple, not users.
Exactly the point. You can take away most people's computing freedom and they won't care. Of course that will kill innovation and allow the gatekeepers to extract monopoly rents, but those costs are nicely hidden.
Sure they do. Mac OS X is Unix with a great UI. They don't advertise the first part, because they don't have to. There's a reason why MacBooks are ubiquitous at tech conferences.
Macs are in fact a direct refutation of the theory that computing devices can't be both easy to use and powerful, which is why it's amazing to see so many Apple fanboys agreeing with it.
Typical game piracy rates are far above 25%, so if you're not a troll I'm not sure what your point is.
No, you just have to commit a federal crime. At least according to Apple, and they're probably correct as a matter of law.
Normal, perhaps, although there have been plenty of phones where you could install whatever you wanted. Sane, not so much. Mobile carriers are among the most customer-hostile companies out there, and it's discouraging to see Apple adopting key parts of their business models.
This is why.
Yes. This is one reason why we need to take a shot at curing aging.
Better put a decimal point in those numbers, otherwise you're confirming that 0>=0.
iPhone yes, Mac no. You've always been able to use whatever software and hardware you wanted with a Mac. Although it's disturbingly likely that Steve considers that a design flaw to be corrected.
If they'll never use it, how does it cost them anything? Is Mac OS X worse because it offers the ability to explore the Unix layer which most users won't need?
Amazing that it's now an "extreme" position that I should be able to run software of my choice on my own hardware.
Can you not understand the concern that Apple's strategy if successful will leave them with more of a stranglehold on mobile computing than Microsoft ever had on the desktop? You may not believe that's a significant possibility, and that's fine, but the idea that opposition to the iPad is primarily "jealousy" is silly. Most geeks like Mac OS X exactly because it's a solid Unix that grandparents can use.
Of course not. That would be as absurd as shipping a Unix shell with a consumer operating system