There's also a big question of "why?" for Firefox.
We're supposed to be in an era of standards. If Safari complies with the standards, what possible difference does it make if the web engine in use is WebKit or Gecko? Why bother with Firefox, especially given that it's core "must have" feature, plugins, wouldn't be available?
Sorry, I wasn't trying to accuse you of intentionally spreading bad information. But at the same time, there's so much of it that I think some must be. That's what the "malign" referred to.
The mail program you're thinking of was called MailWrangler. Everyone calls it "duplicate functionality," but it wasn't just those two words: "without providing sufficient differentiation or added functionality, which will lead to user confusion." That was just part of the rejection letter, there were other reasons: bugs, missing features.
The developer seems to have taken this as a cue to stop working on the product, but I doubt this was intended as a final rejection. Fixing the visual style to not be similar to Mail and fixing some of the more glaring bugs and missing features (such as the ability to edit an account) would probably have got it approved.
And I sort of wonder if Apple these days would just approve it.
I suspect we could see a browser based on Mozilla's HTML rendering engine, but it would have to use Apple's JavaScript engine. Not gonna happen.
Apple has said that applications that provide duplicate functionality without differentiation won't be allowed. People keep glossing over the second part of that and assuming it means nothing, but why not take them at their word considering their actions reflect it?
I assume Firefox would in some way act differently and that Mozilla would make it look different, too.
The only exception we seem to have to that is Apple refusing a product that duplicated a featuring coming in their next update, which is arguably protecting customers from buying something they'll regret... and, more importantly, ask for a refund for later.
The App Store is DEFINITELY not all sugar and space, but it's been maligned a lot for problems it doesn't have.
No, Firefox won't be authorized because it allows application behavior to be modified via downloads (makes it impossible to evaluate the program as a whole) and it runs bytecode through an interpret other than Apple's (which Apple considers, rightly or wrongly, a security problem).
It's easy enough to install an up-to-date Perl in another location and use it instead of updating the Apple-placed Perl files and relying on them never changing.
Disk space is cheap. If it might change, don't rely on it not changing.
Yes, exactly! Competition for ideas is dysfunctional. The company I work for has been through a couple cycles of dysfunction and cooperation, and it took me until this time through to realize what was going on. The next time it goes into serious dysfunction I'm going to point it out, try to fix it, and if I can't I'm getting out. Life is too short.:)
Without knowing the size of your company, I'm going to assume you're not a Microsoft or Adobe-size company.
A corporation shows appreciation by rewarding it in a real way. Having a prize for the most innovation does the opposite. You're being fake, and you'll be disliked for it. Drop the game show approach IMMEDIATELY. I'd even go so far as to call it a bad idea apologize for it. If the prize is significant enough that people will care, come up with a better way to award it.
Making a company survive in a time of economic crisis is a time for cooperation. If people like working for you, they'll come up with ways to help. Be open to new ideas: your description of how the idea is processed makes me think you're not really open, and your culture probably reflects that. And make it perfectly clear that once survival is assured, some of the money will go into employee pockets. This isn't just to motivate them, and it isn't something to skip or wriggle out of later. You do this because it's the right thing to do to people who are helping you.
Let's be perfectly clear here: You are NOT rewarding revolutionary good ideas. You are rewarding optimization, whether it comes through revolutionary good ideas (unlikely) or several generations of evolutionary tuning of what you're already doing. You are NOT on the lookout for the brilliant idea that will double your efficiency. You are looking for the dozens of ideas that will each shave add few percentage points.
Be patient, because you are where you are because of what you've done in the past. Corporate cultures are not changed overnight. You need to become less dysfunctional one day at a time.
Season 8 had a really weak opening, as they tried to explain all of the changes -- deliberately or accidentally incoherently, and with as little humor as possible -- instead of just embrace them. And yeah, the last episode's "cliffhanger" was just stupid.
But for the episodes in the middle, I thought it was one of the stronger seasons.
Sadly, I think Roxanne is the best results I've heard from Songsmith. It's horrible, and yet the bridges and other transitions are in reasonable places.
My cell carrier has me under contract until June 2010. I've been with them since 2001, and have never hard problems with them before.
But lately, they changed their branding and plans around. And for some reason, they decided to contract a company to call all their users.
That company is an incompetent bunch of assholes.
So after about 15 days of being called twice per day by the assholes, who would hang up as soon as I answered, and multiple complaints back to my carrier, I signed up on the DNC list on their suggestion.
My phone calls are now down from two a day to one or two a week. They're the super annoying foghorn one mentioned elsewhere, but at least I can hang up as soon as I hear the horn.
(Aside: My incoming calls are free. So this isn't hurting me financially, it's just pissing me off.)
I'll accept that the number that have been denied is not "small" compared to that if you can provide more than 1,000 apps that have been rejected permanently. That would be about 6%. I think that's a fair "small."
I think it's hyperthyroidism. It not only matches the symptoms, but it also matches his statements and explains why he didn't know he needed a chunk of tine off until this week. He's probably on a therapy to burn out his thyroid entirely now.
My 13.3" MacBook (the latest model) is 5 seconds from power key for the screen to light up, 13 seconds from power key to logo (which is when I can select the OS by holding down the option key), and 44 seconds from power key to show the login screen.
Measuring the way the article measures (grub->login), this looks like about 30 seconds.
That's a big chunk of work to schedule yourself to return to. But he could probably do a recap and introduce Bertrand Serlet to do the Mac stuff, then Scott Forstall to do the iPhone stuff.
You're absolutely right they're not doing anything new (although wrong, I think, about them being inferior).
But you're also wrong: it isn't just marketing. Sure, that's part of it, but it's also about doing the right subset of features in the right way. And you either get it or you don't, but the masses do get it and react accordingly.
If you can only view these products through the eyes of a person who refuses to be inspired by intuitive design and a more zen experience, your success will forever be limited to those people. They're not as common as you think.
Slashdot Mirror
I believe Nitro is SquirrelFish Extreme, rather than SquirrelFish.
What's the difference? Three months and a factor of two from SquirrelFish at the time to SquirrelFish Extreme. Probably some more gains since.
There's also a big question of "why?" for Firefox.
We're supposed to be in an era of standards. If Safari complies with the standards, what possible difference does it make if the web engine in use is WebKit or Gecko? Why bother with Firefox, especially given that it's core "must have" feature, plugins, wouldn't be available?
Sorry, I wasn't trying to accuse you of intentionally spreading bad information. But at the same time, there's so much of it that I think some must be. That's what the "malign" referred to.
The mail program you're thinking of was called MailWrangler. Everyone calls it "duplicate functionality," but it wasn't just those two words: "without providing sufficient differentiation or added functionality, which will lead to user confusion." That was just part of the rejection letter, there were other reasons: bugs, missing features.
The developer seems to have taken this as a cue to stop working on the product, but I doubt this was intended as a final rejection. Fixing the visual style to not be similar to Mail and fixing some of the more glaring bugs and missing features (such as the ability to edit an account) would probably have got it approved.
And I sort of wonder if Apple these days would just approve it.
I suspect we could see a browser based on Mozilla's HTML rendering engine, but it would have to use Apple's JavaScript engine. Not gonna happen.
Apple has said that applications that provide duplicate functionality without differentiation won't be allowed. People keep glossing over the second part of that and assuming it means nothing, but why not take them at their word considering their actions reflect it?
I assume Firefox would in some way act differently and that Mozilla would make it look different, too.
The only exception we seem to have to that is Apple refusing a product that duplicated a featuring coming in their next update, which is arguably protecting customers from buying something they'll regret... and, more importantly, ask for a refund for later.
The App Store is DEFINITELY not all sugar and space, but it's been maligned a lot for problems it doesn't have.
No, Firefox won't be authorized because it allows application behavior to be modified via downloads (makes it impossible to evaluate the program as a whole) and it runs bytecode through an interpret other than Apple's (which Apple considers, rightly or wrongly, a security problem).
It's easy enough to install an up-to-date Perl in another location and use it instead of updating the Apple-placed Perl files and relying on them never changing.
Disk space is cheap. If it might change, don't rely on it not changing.
Differently-lifed Americans?
Before you know it, being dead won't be nearly the handicap it is now.
What's that? I missed the point?
(Total tangent: Really glad you posted this. I was starting to think I was the only sane person here.)
Yes, exactly! Competition for ideas is dysfunctional. The company I work for has been through a couple cycles of dysfunction and cooperation, and it took me until this time through to realize what was going on. The next time it goes into serious dysfunction I'm going to point it out, try to fix it, and if I can't I'm getting out. Life is too short. :)
Without knowing the size of your company, I'm going to assume you're not a Microsoft or Adobe-size company.
A corporation shows appreciation by rewarding it in a real way. Having a prize for the most innovation does the opposite. You're being fake, and you'll be disliked for it. Drop the game show approach IMMEDIATELY. I'd even go so far as to call it a bad idea apologize for it. If the prize is significant enough that people will care, come up with a better way to award it.
Making a company survive in a time of economic crisis is a time for cooperation. If people like working for you, they'll come up with ways to help. Be open to new ideas: your description of how the idea is processed makes me think you're not really open, and your culture probably reflects that. And make it perfectly clear that once survival is assured, some of the money will go into employee pockets. This isn't just to motivate them, and it isn't something to skip or wriggle out of later. You do this because it's the right thing to do to people who are helping you.
Let's be perfectly clear here: You are NOT rewarding revolutionary good ideas. You are rewarding optimization, whether it comes through revolutionary good ideas (unlikely) or several generations of evolutionary tuning of what you're already doing. You are NOT on the lookout for the brilliant idea that will double your efficiency. You are looking for the dozens of ideas that will each shave add few percentage points.
Be patient, because you are where you are because of what you've done in the past. Corporate cultures are not changed overnight. You need to become less dysfunctional one day at a time.
I'll drink to that!
Season 8 had a really weak opening, as they tried to explain all of the changes -- deliberately or accidentally incoherently, and with as little humor as possible -- instead of just embrace them. And yeah, the last episode's "cliffhanger" was just stupid.
But for the episodes in the middle, I thought it was one of the stronger seasons.
Yes. Kennedy killed him a barr when he was only three.
Sadly, I think Roxanne is the best results I've heard from Songsmith. It's horrible, and yet the bridges and other transitions are in reasonable places.
The DNC list was the Liberal government, wasn't it?
But I certainly think it falls on the new government to fix it, and fast. It's already been too long for them to look good on it.
My cell carrier has me under contract until June 2010. I've been with them since 2001, and have never hard problems with them before.
But lately, they changed their branding and plans around. And for some reason, they decided to contract a company to call all their users.
That company is an incompetent bunch of assholes.
So after about 15 days of being called twice per day by the assholes, who would hang up as soon as I answered, and multiple complaints back to my carrier, I signed up on the DNC list on their suggestion.
My phone calls are now down from two a day to one or two a week. They're the super annoying foghorn one mentioned elsewhere, but at least I can hang up as soon as I hear the horn.
(Aside: My incoming calls are free. So this isn't hurting me financially, it's just pissing me off.)
Well, personally, as a Canadian citizen I expected the Canadian government to do something other than let anyone download the full list of numbers.
According to CNBC, there are over 15,000 applications in the iPhone store: http://www.cnbc.com/id/28691281/site/14081545
I'll accept that the number that have been denied is not "small" compared to that if you can provide more than 1,000 apps that have been rejected permanently. That would be about 6%. I think that's a fair "small."
No wireless. Less space than a Nomad. La---
*thwick!*
As a long time user of Belkin products, not all of them are crap. Most merely suck a little.
I think it's hyperthyroidism. It not only matches the symptoms, but it also matches his statements and explains why he didn't know he needed a chunk of tine off until this week. He's probably on a therapy to burn out his thyroid entirely now.
My 13.3" MacBook (the latest model) is 5 seconds from power key for the screen to light up, 13 seconds from power key to logo (which is when I can select the OS by holding down the option key), and 44 seconds from power key to show the login screen.
Measuring the way the article measures (grub->login), this looks like about 30 seconds.
That's a big chunk of work to schedule yourself to return to. But he could probably do a recap and introduce Bertrand Serlet to do the Mac stuff, then Scott Forstall to do the iPhone stuff.
You're absolutely right they're not doing anything new (although wrong, I think, about them being inferior).
But you're also wrong: it isn't just marketing. Sure, that's part of it, but it's also about doing the right subset of features in the right way. And you either get it or you don't, but the masses do get it and react accordingly.
If you can only view these products through the eyes of a person who refuses to be inspired by intuitive design and a more zen experience, your success will forever be limited to those people. They're not as common as you think.