"However, you can reasonably expect the market for the $50 game to be largely the same in three years time."
Tell that to Rock Band. Yes, they oversold, but -- like Rock Band -- how long are people going to continue buying games that are just "more of the same"?
On the flip side of that argument, I half suspect that the major-release $50 two-years-in-the-making video game is going to diminish in favor of $5 downloadable once-a-month add-on maps and missions for things like Halo or Mass Effect. Or the same, but subscription-based.
"Apple can sell anything for any price and people will buy it."
Fat nano. People didn't like it. Skinny nano. People liked it. Apple TV version one. It was a bit confusing to use and didn't work well. People didn't buy it. Apple TV 2. Cheaper and easier to use. Selling well. iPod Hi-Fi. Rather expensive, no killer features, and it didn't sell. iPhone. It worked great, reinvented the market, and sold like hotcakes. The Apple Bluetooth headset for the iPhone. Poor battery life, poor reception. Didn't work well, and people didn't buy it. iPad. Worked great, again reinvented the market, and also sold like hotcakes.
See a pattern here? People don't just buy anything with an Apple logo on it.
"Having a foreign first name is a sign that a person is a foreigner."
Really? Then why do I keep getting shuffled by voice mail systems to "Bob" in India? (grin)
That said... are you nuts? America was settled by the English, the French, the Spanish, the Germans, the Portuguese. Over the last few centuries we've had immigrants from India, from China, from Japan, from the Middle East.
In the melting pot that is America... WTF is a "foreign first name"?
Just because your new neighbor isn't named "Billy Joe Bob", doesn't mean he's a "foreigner".
"Or maybe the fact that one of his parents was born overseas, and his parents lived overseas a fairly substantial amount of time before he was born?"
As was said above: "You don't have to have two American parents to be American. One will do, even if you're born overseas. If you're born on US soil, neither of your parents has to be American - you automatically are. US Presidents have to be "natural born" citizens, not naturalized, and there are exactly two ways be be a natural born citizen: have a US citizen parent or be born on US soil."
"A caesarean section is obviously not a natural way of being born, therefore all candidates must prove they were born by vaginal birth, otherwise they are not eligible."
And no hospitals either. And definitely no pain meds. Those are all man-made and thus, by definition, unnatural. Indoors? Sorry.
If your mother didn't pop you out by squatting down in the middle of the field and letting go, then you're imply not eligible.
"If it's using a framework where the run loop is inside the framework, the Snow Leopard and later version of the framework might use GCD, but if you have your own run loop...."
GCD requires the application developer to explicitly call dispatch_async and pass in the task blocks to be executed.
"Not really, no. Google provide an Android emulator as part of the Android SDK. It's the standard way to develop for Android."
I know Android developers who have bought a dozen or more different Android phones on which to test their software.
If buying a used Mac to do iOS development is too much of an investment, and you believe that you can use the Android emulator to get by without testing across the myriad Android devices and platforms...
Then all I can say is that I'm very, very, VERY happy you're developing for the Android platform...
Blackberry's? Sorry, but corporate clients are abandoning the ship en masse. Market share is dropping and US sales in particular are tanking. The Storm line was il-received, and the Playbook is half-baked. Android app integration is going to kill QNX, just as Windows app integration put the final nail into OS/2.
"On the other hand, having to deal with Objective-C to code for IOS is a pain."
GC on iOS would be nice. OTOH, the NARC and autorelease rules are pretty straightforward, and in practice it's fairly hard to screw them up. OC isn't as simple as JavaScript, but then again, it's not the hell-on-earth that is C++ with STL and user-overloaded everything. Love the delegate system, and the dynamic selector mechanisms are pretty cool.
The Cocoa Touch frameworks are powerful, much better than Android's, and there are a lot of frameworks like MFMailComposeViewController and MPMoviePlayerViewController that do a ton of work for you with a very few lines of code. Love the new UISwipeGestureRecognizers. As you can see, Cocoa is pretty verbose, but Xcode's autocompletion tools knock it down to a manageable level. Tight integration with the LLVM compiler.
All in all, it's a pretty good language, especially considering that it was created about 30 years ago. Objective-C is based on SmallTalk, which is too bad, 'cause I think using a full-blown SmallTalk system for iOS development would have been a blast.
Besides, learning a new language opens your mind a little, exposes you to knew ideas, stirs the creative juices, and all that... (grin)
"Google Inc.’s Android might be the most popular smartphone platform, but if you add other mobile devices like tablets to the mix, Apple Inc.’s iOS beats Android in the U.S. by a wide margin — 59% to be exact.
That’s according to new data being released Tuesday by measurement firm comScore, which surveyed 30,000 users of mobile devices for the three months ending in February to arrive at its estimates."
So, no, that's not "every device ever sold", but current users surveyed.
Secondly, you seem to like combining every Android phone sold and counting them together as a platform, but disregard every mobile device sold by Apple and counting those as a "platform".
And all of that considering that Android's "smartphone" sales were artificially propped up by the carriers. Am I surprised that the #1, #3, and #4 US carriers combined managed to sell more iPhone look-alikes when the iPhone wasn't available to them? Are you surprised that the iPhone is now the top seller on Verizon, outselling every other Android phone?
Or surprised that, in the tablet market, sales of every other tablet have been rather... dismal? Of course, tablets don't have the same "lock-in" with the carriers that phones had... and Verizon and Sprint also sell the iPad.
Finally, from Fortune: "The iPhone is growing at a pace of 85-100% each quarter. iPhone revenue is nearly doubling each quarter. After selling 39 million iPhones in 2010, Apple is going to sell more than 75 million in 2011, generating nearly $50 billion in revenue from a single device.
Google will probably report about $6.5 billion in total revenue when it releases its first quarter results later this week. Apple's iPhone alone will very likely eclipse $11 billion for the March quarter. For 2011, Google is expected to report about $27 billion on the top line compared to the iPhone's expected $48.2 billion in revenue. The iPhone as a business [by itself] is nearly twice the size of Google's entire operation.
This is a financial reality rarely illuminated in these so-called "platform market share" articles where Apple investors are supposed to be "deathly afraid" of the Android operating system that doesn't even create a fraction of the revenue Apple generates from the iPhone."
Funny, all of the professionals at NAB who saw the Sneak Peek seemed pretty jazzed about it.... at least from all of the clapping and cheering and standing ovations they gave it.
FCE has always been a "Prosumer" product, with some features ripped out simply to drop the price. With the price reduction, that gap isn't needed, and users who want more can simply buy the full program. You may have noticed that, with the Mac App store, Apple has been dropping prices of a lot of their software, including "Pro" software like Aperture.
Apple is a hardware company that makes software in order to sell the hardware. Pro users who dig Aperture or FCX will buy machines with the horsepower to run it, especially newer models with high-speed i/o features like Thunderbolt.
Finally, at least Apple is attempting to innovate in the space. Avid seems stuck on the same interface they first developed over twenty years ago. You're telling me that in all of that time, with all of our improvements in SW and HW, that's the best we can do?
Someone else published actual numbers below, but even Google execs have gone on record as saying that Android Marketplace app sales are "disappointing".
From Fortune, "The iPhone is growing at a pace of 85-100% each quarter. iPhone revenue is nearly doubling each quarter. After selling 39 million iPhones in 2010, Apple is going to sell more than 75 million in 2011, generating nearly $50 billion in revenue from a single device."
"Google will probably report about $6.5 billion in total revenue when it releases its first quarter results later this week. Apple's iPhone alone will very likely eclipse $11 billion for the March quarter. For 2011, Google is expected to report about $27 billion on the top line compared to the iPhone's expected $48.2 billion in revenue. The iPhone as a business is nearly twice the size of Google's entire operation. This is a financial reality rarely illuminated in these so-called "platform market share" articles where Apple investors are supposed to be "deathly afraid" of the Android operating system that doesn't even create a fraction of the revenue Apple generates from the iPhone."
"Most of the Android innovation comes not from the individual manufacturers but from Google. Google manages to finance its innovation in smartphones by leveraging its highly profitable search division, which isn't included in your analysis."
And that's a good thing? Basically, Google is doing ALL of this in order to drive mobile eyeballs to its ads. If that doesn't work, or if ad revenues fall off... then Android support and development becomes little more than a drag on the companies profits. And if that happens...
"Apple loses a small percentage of their high-end, media industry users every year."
Depends on the market. Use of Final Cut among the video and movie folk is rising.
"...or a significant change in their global market share, which has been hovering around 5%..."
Consider the numbers for US marketshare (9.3%), or US home marketshare (18.6%), or US college student marketshare (25%), and watch the numbers change dramatically. World marketshare is increasing as well, but commodity PC purchasing in India and China is increasing at an even faster rate, thus maintaining the same percentage, seen as a percentage of the whole, is actually a fairly significant accomplishment.
"And I am pretty sure that most people buy an iPod to listen to music."
They buy an "iPod" to listen to music. A Shuffle or nano or Classic.
They shell out more money for a Touch because in addition to listening to music they ALSO want to use the Kindle app, or watch movies and TV shows, or play Angry Birds or Fruit Ninja, or use Facebook or Twitter apps, or... you get the idea.
With two boys with Touches in the house (well, one now, the other upgraded to an iPhone), I'm fairly familiar with their usage pattern.
"They are going to write for both because they want to hit as many people as possible."
As an iOS developer, I'll tell you right now that I'm currently NOT writing for both. Several friends are, and wish they hadn't. Android platform sales suck, just as paid Linux application sales suck. 'Droid-boys don't buy, and as such it doesn't really matter how many eyeballs are on the platform. No sales == no sales.
That's why most of the Android apps are free and ad-based... at least then you have a chance at SOME money. Unfortunately, they don't tend to click on ads, either.
Google may need to follow in Apple's footsteps, and produce their own software like Pages, Numbers, Keynote, iMovie, and Garage Band. At least then SOMEONE will be writing quality apps for their platform.
I think rather dismal sales of the Galaxy Tab, Dell Streak, HP Xoom, and Blackberry Playbook as compared to iPad sales indicate just how strongly Android smartphone sales were artifically raised by carrier choice.
In the US and many markets, if you wanted a smartphone on a carrier which didn't sell the iPhone, Android was the only real "iPhone-like" choice available due to the AT&T exclusive. As such, many people didn't buy Android because they wanted Android, but because they wanted a comparable smartphone, didn't want AT&T, and because the Verizon / Sprint / T-Mobile salesperson told them that the Droid-X-Whatever was just as good.
So selling more smartphones from multiple manufacturers on the #1, #3, and #4 carriers combined? Duh.
As to why there's not a Android "iPod"? Good question. Apple has sold just as many iPod Touch units as iPhones, which is why combined sales of iPhone and Touch and iPad combind beat out Android combined devices by 59%.
I'd argue that including the Touch is valid, since I know several people who bought a Touch to get "smartphone" capabilities while keeping a dumbphone that doesn't require an expensive data plan. It means that they haven't bought iPhone, and it also means that they haven't bought Android, but they do have apps, games, and many of the benefits of owning a smartphone.
DavidTC did a great job responding to your other comments, so I'll just hit one minor thing...
"Littoral combat vessels aren't getting much real world use because they're small, agile ships mainly for freshwater use, while we are fighting countries that are either deserts or landlocked."
Littoral Combat Ships are also designed to support costal operations. As such, we debated sending two of our new Littoral Combat Ships, that we have in fact received, to support operations in Libya. Libya, as you may or may not know, is in fact on the Med and not landlocked. Tripoli and Banghazi, both places where serious fighting is occurring, are on the Med, and also not landlocked. Both are, instead, either sitting in, or proceeding to... San Diego. [http://bit.ly/ig55tR]
"Right now most of a politician's time is spent trying to thwart the efforts of half the government."
Exactly, in fact the current crop of idiot Republicans have made things even worse. (I'm bipartisan, Democrats are idiots too.)
Where was I? Oh, yeah. It's bad enough when they spend their time hacking at each other when trying to solve problems, but now the Rebuplicans are spending half their time trying to figure out how to "undo" everything done during the previous session when the Dem's had control.
Which is now taking the game to a whole new level, 'cause you just know they're going to scream their silly little heads off the next time the Democrats regain control, and start spending all of THEIR time dismantling everything the Republicans did during their term.
I'd laugh, except the whole thing is too depressing...
Slashdot Mirror
"However, you can reasonably expect the market for the $50 game to be largely the same in three years time."
Tell that to Rock Band. Yes, they oversold, but -- like Rock Band -- how long are people going to continue buying games that are just "more of the same"?
On the flip side of that argument, I half suspect that the major-release $50 two-years-in-the-making video game is going to diminish in favor of $5 downloadable once-a-month add-on maps and missions for things like Halo or Mass Effect. Or the same, but subscription-based.
"Apple can sell anything for any price and people will buy it."
Fat nano. People didn't like it. Skinny nano. People liked it. Apple TV version one. It was a bit confusing to use and didn't work well. People didn't buy it. Apple TV 2. Cheaper and easier to use. Selling well. iPod Hi-Fi. Rather expensive, no killer features, and it didn't sell. iPhone. It worked great, reinvented the market, and sold like hotcakes. The Apple Bluetooth headset for the iPhone. Poor battery life, poor reception. Didn't work well, and people didn't buy it. iPad. Worked great, again reinvented the market, and also sold like hotcakes.
See a pattern here? People don't just buy anything with an Apple logo on it.
Don't suppose anyone's bothered to check other BC's from the same hospital from the same period to see if the same terminology was used?
Nah. Why ruin a perfectly good conspiracy theory with facts...
"Having a foreign first name is a sign that a person is a foreigner."
Really? Then why do I keep getting shuffled by voice mail systems to "Bob" in India? (grin)
That said... are you nuts? America was settled by the English, the French, the Spanish, the Germans, the Portuguese. Over the last few centuries we've had immigrants from India, from China, from Japan, from the Middle East.
In the melting pot that is America... WTF is a "foreign first name"?
Just because your new neighbor isn't named "Billy Joe Bob", doesn't mean he's a "foreigner".
"Or maybe the fact that one of his parents was born overseas, and his parents lived overseas a fairly substantial amount of time before he was born?"
As was said above: "You don't have to have two American parents to be American. One will do, even if you're born overseas. If you're born on US soil, neither of your parents has to be American - you automatically are. US Presidents have to be "natural born" citizens, not naturalized, and there are exactly two ways be be a natural born citizen: have a US citizen parent or be born on US soil."
"A caesarean section is obviously not a natural way of being born, therefore all candidates must prove they were born by vaginal birth, otherwise they are not eligible."
And no hospitals either. And definitely no pain meds. Those are all man-made and thus, by definition, unnatural. Indoors? Sorry.
If your mother didn't pop you out by squatting down in the middle of the field and letting go, then you're imply not eligible.
"If it's using a framework where the run loop is inside the framework, the Snow Leopard and later version of the framework might use GCD, but if you have your own run loop...."
GCD requires the application developer to explicitly call dispatch_async and pass in the task blocks to be executed.
"Not really, no. Google provide an Android emulator as part of the Android SDK. It's the standard way to develop for Android."
I know Android developers who have bought a dozen or more different Android phones on which to test their software.
If buying a used Mac to do iOS development is too much of an investment, and you believe that you can use the Android emulator to get by without testing across the myriad Android devices and platforms...
Then all I can say is that I'm very, very, VERY happy you're developing for the Android platform...
Blackberry's? Sorry, but corporate clients are abandoning the ship en masse. Market share is dropping and US sales in particular are tanking. The Storm line was il-received, and the Playbook is half-baked. Android app integration is going to kill QNX, just as Windows app integration put the final nail into OS/2.
RIM is about to undergo a major implosion.
"On the other hand, having to deal with Objective-C to code for IOS is a pain."
GC on iOS would be nice. OTOH, the NARC and autorelease rules are pretty straightforward, and in practice it's fairly hard to screw them up. OC isn't as simple as JavaScript, but then again, it's not the hell-on-earth that is C++ with STL and user-overloaded everything. Love the delegate system, and the dynamic selector mechanisms are pretty cool.
The Cocoa Touch frameworks are powerful, much better than Android's, and there are a lot of frameworks like MFMailComposeViewController and MPMoviePlayerViewController that do a ton of work for you with a very few lines of code. Love the new UISwipeGestureRecognizers. As you can see, Cocoa is pretty verbose, but Xcode's autocompletion tools knock it down to a manageable level. Tight integration with the LLVM compiler.
All in all, it's a pretty good language, especially considering that it was created about 30 years ago. Objective-C is based on SmallTalk, which is too bad, 'cause I think using a full-blown SmallTalk system for iOS development would have been a blast.
Besides, learning a new language opens your mind a little, exposes you to knew ideas, stirs the creative juices, and all that... (grin)
Wel, if you read the article...
"Google Inc.’s Android might be the most popular smartphone platform, but if you add other mobile devices like tablets to the mix, Apple Inc.’s iOS beats Android in the U.S. by a wide margin — 59% to be exact.
That’s according to new data being released Tuesday by measurement firm comScore, which surveyed 30,000 users of mobile devices for the three months ending in February to arrive at its estimates."
So, no, that's not "every device ever sold", but current users surveyed.
Secondly, you seem to like combining every Android phone sold and counting them together as a platform, but disregard every mobile device sold by Apple and counting those as a "platform".
And all of that considering that Android's "smartphone" sales were artificially propped up by the carriers. Am I surprised that the #1, #3, and #4 US carriers combined managed to sell more iPhone look-alikes when the iPhone wasn't available to them? Are you surprised that the iPhone is now the top seller on Verizon, outselling every other Android phone?
Or surprised that, in the tablet market, sales of every other tablet have been rather... dismal? Of course, tablets don't have the same "lock-in" with the carriers that phones had... and Verizon and Sprint also sell the iPad.
Finally, from Fortune: "The iPhone is growing at a pace of 85-100% each quarter. iPhone revenue is nearly doubling each quarter. After selling 39 million iPhones in 2010, Apple is going to sell more than 75 million in 2011, generating nearly $50 billion in revenue from a single device.
Google will probably report about $6.5 billion in total revenue when it releases its first quarter results later this week. Apple's iPhone alone will very likely eclipse $11 billion for the March quarter. For 2011, Google is expected to report about $27 billion on the top line compared to the iPhone's expected $48.2 billion in revenue. The iPhone as a business [by itself] is nearly twice the size of Google's entire operation.
This is a financial reality rarely illuminated in these so-called "platform market share" articles where Apple investors are supposed to be "deathly afraid" of the Android operating system that doesn't even create a fraction of the revenue Apple generates from the iPhone."
Funny, all of the professionals at NAB who saw the Sneak Peek seemed pretty jazzed about it.... at least from all of the clapping and cheering and standing ovations they gave it.
FCE has always been a "Prosumer" product, with some features ripped out simply to drop the price. With the price reduction, that gap isn't needed, and users who want more can simply buy the full program. You may have noticed that, with the Mac App store, Apple has been dropping prices of a lot of their software, including "Pro" software like Aperture.
Apple is a hardware company that makes software in order to sell the hardware. Pro users who dig Aperture or FCX will buy machines with the horsepower to run it, especially newer models with high-speed i/o features like Thunderbolt.
Finally, at least Apple is attempting to innovate in the space. Avid seems stuck on the same interface they first developed over twenty years ago. You're telling me that in all of that time, with all of our improvements in SW and HW, that's the best we can do?
Someone else published actual numbers below, but even Google execs have gone on record as saying that Android Marketplace app sales are "disappointing".
From Fortune, "The iPhone is growing at a pace of 85-100% each quarter. iPhone revenue is nearly doubling each quarter. After selling 39 million iPhones in 2010, Apple is going to sell more than 75 million in 2011, generating nearly $50 billion in revenue from a single device."
"Google will probably report about $6.5 billion in total revenue when it releases its first quarter results later this week. Apple's iPhone alone will very likely eclipse $11 billion for the March quarter. For 2011, Google is expected to report about $27 billion on the top line compared to the iPhone's expected $48.2 billion in revenue. The iPhone as a business is nearly twice the size of Google's entire operation. This is a financial reality rarely illuminated in these so-called "platform market share" articles where Apple investors are supposed to be "deathly afraid" of the Android operating system that doesn't even create a fraction of the revenue Apple generates from the iPhone."
"Most of the Android innovation comes not from the individual manufacturers but from Google. Google manages to finance its innovation in smartphones by leveraging its highly profitable search division, which isn't included in your analysis."
And that's a good thing? Basically, Google is doing ALL of this in order to drive mobile eyeballs to its ads. If that doesn't work, or if ad revenues fall off... then Android support and development becomes little more than a drag on the companies profits. And if that happens...
"Apple loses a small percentage of their high-end, media industry users every year."
Depends on the market. Use of Final Cut among the video and movie folk is rising.
"...or a significant change in their global market share, which has been hovering around 5%..."
Consider the numbers for US marketshare (9.3%), or US home marketshare (18.6%), or US college student marketshare (25%), and watch the numbers change dramatically. World marketshare is increasing as well, but commodity PC purchasing in India and China is increasing at an even faster rate, thus maintaining the same percentage, seen as a percentage of the whole, is actually a fairly significant accomplishment.
"And I am pretty sure that most people buy an iPod to listen to music."
They buy an "iPod" to listen to music. A Shuffle or nano or Classic.
They shell out more money for a Touch because in addition to listening to music they ALSO want to use the Kindle app, or watch movies and TV shows, or play Angry Birds or Fruit Ninja, or use Facebook or Twitter apps, or... you get the idea.
With two boys with Touches in the house (well, one now, the other upgraded to an iPhone), I'm fairly familiar with their usage pattern.
"They are going to write for both because they want to hit as many people as possible."
As an iOS developer, I'll tell you right now that I'm currently NOT writing for both. Several friends are, and wish they hadn't. Android platform sales suck, just as paid Linux application sales suck. 'Droid-boys don't buy, and as such it doesn't really matter how many eyeballs are on the platform. No sales == no sales.
That's why most of the Android apps are free and ad-based... at least then you have a chance at SOME money. Unfortunately, they don't tend to click on ads, either.
Google may need to follow in Apple's footsteps, and produce their own software like Pages, Numbers, Keynote, iMovie, and Garage Band. At least then SOMEONE will be writing quality apps for their platform.
I think rather dismal sales of the Galaxy Tab, Dell Streak, HP Xoom, and Blackberry Playbook as compared to iPad sales indicate just how strongly Android smartphone sales were artifically raised by carrier choice.
In the US and many markets, if you wanted a smartphone on a carrier which didn't sell the iPhone, Android was the only real "iPhone-like" choice available due to the AT&T exclusive. As such, many people didn't buy Android because they wanted Android, but because they wanted a comparable smartphone, didn't want AT&T, and because the Verizon / Sprint / T-Mobile salesperson told them that the Droid-X-Whatever was just as good.
So selling more smartphones from multiple manufacturers on the #1, #3, and #4 carriers combined? Duh.
As to why there's not a Android "iPod"? Good question. Apple has sold just as many iPod Touch units as iPhones, which is why combined sales of iPhone and Touch and iPad combind beat out Android combined devices by 59%.
I'd argue that including the Touch is valid, since I know several people who bought a Touch to get "smartphone" capabilities while keeping a dumbphone that doesn't require an expensive data plan. It means that they haven't bought iPhone, and it also means that they haven't bought Android, but they do have apps, games, and many of the benefits of owning a smartphone.
So the rich are free to speed as much as they want, only because they can afford to do so?
There was, however, an electrical diagram in the red book....
DavidTC did a great job responding to your other comments, so I'll just hit one minor thing...
"Littoral combat vessels aren't getting much real world use because they're small, agile ships mainly for freshwater use, while we are fighting countries that are either deserts or landlocked."
Littoral Combat Ships are also designed to support costal operations. As such, we debated sending two of our new Littoral Combat Ships, that we have in fact received, to support operations in Libya. Libya, as you may or may not know, is in fact on the Med and not landlocked. Tripoli and Banghazi, both places where serious fighting is occurring, are on the Med, and also not landlocked. Both are, instead, either sitting in, or proceeding to... San Diego. [http://bit.ly/ig55tR]
Why bother with transmissions, crankshafts, axels, and so on? Just extra weight to haul around. Hubless eletric motors on all wheels.
"Right now most of a politician's time is spent trying to thwart the efforts of half the government."
Exactly, in fact the current crop of idiot Republicans have made things even worse. (I'm bipartisan, Democrats are idiots too.)
Where was I? Oh, yeah. It's bad enough when they spend their time hacking at each other when trying to solve problems, but now the Rebuplicans are spending half their time trying to figure out how to "undo" everything done during the previous session when the Dem's had control.
Which is now taking the game to a whole new level, 'cause you just know they're going to scream their silly little heads off the next time the Democrats regain control, and start spending all of THEIR time dismantling everything the Republicans did during their term.
I'd laugh, except the whole thing is too depressing...
A smokescreen. Planned Parenthood was already prohitbited from spending federal money on abortion.
Besides, cutting birth control options for low-income groups just means more mouths to feed later on... stupid.