Many people (both here in the U.S. and without) looked upon Obama with an almost quasi-religious fervor prior to his being elected. That hasn't lasted... I suppose that's because their expectations were not in line with the reality of his being a politician.
Of course, when you think about it, when was the last time that the appearance of a Messiah actually fixed anything?
Feel free to pen a comment on all the issues that you really don't care about.
It is funny, these people who don't care about a particular issue, but really feel the need to let you know that, at every opportunity.
There are plenty of people who really didn't care, you know how you can tell them, they didn't click on the link, and they didn't submit a comment.
I didn't bother to RTFA, if that helps. I just come here for some entertainment, a lighthearted effort attempting to deprogram those who abase themselves at the altar of All Things Apple(tm.) Granted, you have to catch them early before their attitudes have completely set in concrete. After that, they are One with the Jobs: getting them to understand that there is a world of technology beyond that offered by Apple is almost impossible at that point.
It's rather like poking a stick at an anthill. Fanboys come boiling out of their beautifully polished Apple-branded tunnels, all ready to attack the perceived threat. It's amazing how gnarly and irritable they get when their patented belief system is questioned.
One can almost pity their behavior, given that they've been thoroughly fleeced by the expert mental pickpockets of Apple's marketing department. But contrary to popular belief, however, petulance is not actually a virtue.
The point of all this is that you have to consider the character of the man who is being stuck. In this case, he's a bloodsucking money vampire who deserves everything he is getting and more.
So I'm flamebait for pointing out that the content industry is run by some of the most unenlightened businesspeople on the planet? Somebody works for the MPAA, that's all I have to say.
The point of all this is that you have to consider the character of the man who is being stuck. In this case, he's a bloodsucking money vampire who deserves everything he is getting and more.
I think I get what you're saying here, but the flip-side of this is that the technology itself is not sufficiently advanced so as to be indistinguishable from magic.
You're assuming that merely knowing something was built by Man makes any difference. It doesn't.
To 99.999% of the population, modern technology might as well be magic! What makes something magical is when you have a complete and total lack of understanding about a phenomenon or an artifact that you encounter. Most people have no idea what makes their car run, other than the knowledge that gasoline is consumed inside and a vague awareness that some contrivance called a "piston" moves back and forth, or something. Whether it was built by hardworking assemblers in a manufacturing plant, or whisked out of thin air by a tall man in wizard's robes, or for that matter by equally hardworking gnomes in a cave deep underground makes no practical difference. They don't understand it, and that lack of understanding induces the same feelings of fear and inadequacy that our native Americans must have felt when they first encountered Europeans with boomsticks.
Why do you think the bulk of people are so upset when their electromechanical "magic" doesn't work? It's because they don't understand it, will never make the effort to understand it even if they're capable, and when you get right down to it, are at the mercy of those who do!
How do you think the average ancient Egyptian felt towards the priesthood? Pretty much how most people feel when they have to ask IT to fix their computer. They simply pray that the magic can be restored without too much damage.
And too many Windows users are like the peasants from the same film crying, "Help! Help! I'm being oppressed!"
No, not at all. Windows users have been beaten down so flat over the past couple decades that most of them don't even care anymore. I'll give Apple fanboys that much credit: at least they care. Now if they can learn to honestly evaluate their pet computer company's behavior, I might find myself actually impressed. But I don't see it happening soon.
All this is based on what you want to do and you can opt-in (notice not opt-out) of any of these features.
Notice that everyone here that is defending Apple's position is doing so from the perspective that whatever is good for Apple must also be good for its customers.
They did this by ignoring the little bit were the purpose of google voice is to replace your existing phone service.
Actually, not. Well, okay... I have GV on a non-Apple phone, so I can't really comment on how Google Voice works on the iPhone, but it does not in any way replace my existing phone service. It can't, unless it were true VoIP and so far as I'm aware, it's not. It still has to dial out to an intermediate number, which then routes your call to the desired destination from there. Matter of fact, it integrates smoothly with the existing dialer app, and simply asks if you want to use Google voice for the call. If I click No, the phone works like it always did. So no matter how you look at it, AT&T is still getting their minutes out of Google Voice customers, which probably explains why they had no particular interest in disputing the addition of Google Voice to the App Store (or so they say.) Apple, on the other hand, doesn't like the fact that another program not controlled by Apple is performing a service to which Apple feels it has an exclusive right, to wit, dialing your phone.
Apple's position is clearly that by letting google extend their platform to the iphone they would clearly gain converts to it, but without letting apple control that environment they lose the ability to provide distinction, and maintain their competitive advantage.
Yes, and therein lies the logical fallacy. If Apple's products were as unquestionably superior as they (and their more rabid fans) claim, they'd have no worries about users "replacing" the "core functionality" of the iPhone. The reality is that a. nobody is replacing any core functionality and b. Apple is very much afraid that their solution is not as superior as they would have everyone believe, and that users would switch to Google Voice in droves. The irony is that Google Voice just makes the iPhone that much more useful to existing users. On the other hand, it makes the phone potentially less appealing to those who haven't yet been brought into the fold.
Truly, if Apple really wanted to compete with Google in this area, rather than simply exhibit the usual corporate dick attitude, they would exhort their partner in crime (e.g., AT&T) to come up with something comparable, if not superior, to Google Voice and put that out as an iPhone exclusive. Let the customer make the choice.
Any way you slice it, Apple Computer, Inc. needs to get over itself.
That said, AT&T should have the right to block my use of the network if they don't like what I'm doing on it, but at no point should Apple even slightly get involved. This 'walled garden' concept is harmful to consumers and developers alike.
Should they? I'd say even that is very much open to debate. Phone companies have always been heavily regulated (less so since the breakup, and even less so since they got into the Internet business) and have never really had one hundred percent say in how their networks are used by the public. That's because it was recognized that they are, in fact, public carriers and that the right of the public to unobstructed communications was more important than a corporation's desire to increase profits by any means necessary.
People, Apple has approved over 60,000 applications. The issue is that Google us exteacting your entire contacts list from the iPhone to their application
No, that's not the issue. Go back and re-read the summary, and if you don't trust Google don't run Google Voice. Don't try to shift the topic of discussion onto Google: they're not the ones being investigated here.
Furthermore, I don't like the idea of a hardware vendor being a gatekeeper to what specific applications can even be executed on what is, after all, a portable computing platform. That really goes against the grain of the entire personal computer revolution, of which the smartphone is just the latest extension. Apple has, rather remarkably I believe, managed to convince (apparently, the majority of) its user base that by restricting what programs said users are allowed to run, they are actually freeing them. I suppose you could argue that they're trying to weed out defective applications, but even that doesn't really hold water given Apple's capricious and often wholly unjustified rejection of many apps. As a developer myself, I'd agree that Apple has a slick product with a cool development environment... but I still picked a G1 because I didn't want Apple standing between me and my pocket computer.
This is all really funny coming from the company that put out that wonderful 1984 commercial all those years ago.
Apple, and companies like them, should be applauded for the incredible achievements they have made, and the value they provide to people.
Quit it. More excuses. Yes, Apple (and companies like them) should be applauded for their legitimate accomplishments, and should be called out when they negate much of their technical achievements by being corporate pricks.
It is very strange, isn't it? The unashamed Apple bashing continues in true Slashdot style.
Not really. A lot of us (myself included) don't like Apple very much. Others (myself included) don't really like Microsoft very much. Regardless, when Microsoft is being correctly slammed for yet another gaffe, you don't see legions of Windows users rising up to defend them. So... is Apple is being bashed unfairly? No, not really. See, Apple needs to ride on its merits (and sink on its failures) just as much as Microsoft or any other company does. The difference here is that pretty much nobody spends an incredible amount of effort defending Microsoft from its numerous detractors and point-blank denying their many screwups.
Put it this way: Microsoft is a fucked up company in many ways. Nobody with half a brain would argue otherwise. Realistically though, so is Apple is its own inimitable way. Can't hardly be anything else, this being America and given the way publicly-held corporations are required to behave under U.S. law. The fact that Apple's fanbase is so irrational on the subject is more an indication of defects in their character and/or critical thinking skills than those who are doing the bashing.
Matter of fact, if Apple's user base wasn't so goddamn hypocritical about the whole thing, us non-Apple people wouldn't give Apple a damn. But this eternal state of denial just gets old after a while. Too many Apple users are like the Black Knight from Monty Python and the Holy Grail:
King Arthur: Your bloody arm's off!
Black Knight: No it's not.
Truth is, they keep the flames alive because they just won't admit when Apple is wrong.
Yes, this is a classic example of why native applications are often superior to Web applications in certain areas. On my G1, using Google's integrated app, it really is seamless. I optionally have the choice to make my calls using GV, or not, which is pretty cool, on a call-by-call basis if I want. It's integrated right into the base dialer. It takes an extra two seconds or so to dial (presumably because it's calling Google's intermediate number first) and then the call goes through.
If you're on T-Mobile, you can get free calling by setting your own number and the GV outgoing number in your MyFaves, and then making a couple of adjustments to your Google Voice settings. Works very well. I'm on the minimum 300 minute plan, and frankly I rarely get close to that anyway. Actually, since I've been regularly using Google Voice I've found my cell phone voice usage going down, not up. Anyway, it is nice to know that I'll never go over and get screwed on extra minutes (or, like one of my Sprint using friends, be unable to use my phone until the minutes roll over.)
I really enjoy the way Google Voice lets me determine how my calls get routed based upon incoming Caller ID. Truly, it's the kind of thing the phone companies should have offered years ago, but couldn't be bothered to do. The voice transcription service is still a bit weak (speaker-independent voice recognition is non-trivial) but I'm sure that will improve over time. As of right now, the service is extremely useful, and I hope it comes out of the invitation-only stage soon as a lot of people could really benefit from it.
In fact, they don't care so much that they're making slashdot posts about it!
Well, this is Slashdot. I don't have to care to post on something, especially in a forum where anything remotely anti-Apple generates so many entertaining responses.
Okay, fanboys, stop modding reasonable comments like the above as flamebait... your bias is showing. Matter of fact, his reasoning is some of the same that I used in deciding to buy an Android phone over an iPhone, as slick as Apple's product happens to be. Personally, I don't care about Apple's endless pursuit of the perfect UI. I just wanted a powerful smartphone that would do what I (yes, I, the customer) want it to do, without having my options limited by a company I don't particularly trust. Fortunately, Apple's not a monopoly and I was perfectly free to choose something else, so I don't really care. It is interesting, though, that it appears that AT&T was not, in fact, trying to suppress an application/service that might cost it money as many first assumed. Not that I believe anything any corporate mouthpiece has to say, just on principle.
In the end, I suspect that iPhone users will get access to Google Voice: Apple's just taking a little too much heat on this one, and GV is just too cool. Sorry, fanboys, Apple does not have a monopoly on being way-cool. Alternatively, of course, AT&T could offer something functionally identical to Google Voice... theoretically it would be much easier for them to do it, given that they own so much of the network in this country. If Google achieves nothing else by this, they'll have raised the bar on what millions of people expect from their telephone company. That's a damned good thing: those bloodsuckers have been holding us back for a long, long time.
The irony there being that the old AT&T was originally broken up, in part, because they weren't offering consumers enough new products and services. It took a Google to come along and start shaking things up, and not for the first time I might add.
Honestly, it sounds like you should have taken that higher up the food chain. You did the right thing, and the system burned you for it. If nothing else, that sort of abuse should have been made public at the time: a quick call to a local reporter might have earned you a public apology.
Slashdot Mirror
I feel like experiencing Bush Part 2.
Many people (both here in the U.S. and without) looked upon Obama with an almost quasi-religious fervor prior to his being elected. That hasn't lasted ... I suppose that's because their expectations were not in line with the reality of his being a politician.
Of course, when you think about it, when was the last time that the appearance of a Messiah actually fixed anything?
Feel free to pen a comment on all the issues that you really don't care about.
It is funny, these people who don't care about a particular issue, but really feel the need to let you know that, at every opportunity.
There are plenty of people who really didn't care, you know how you can tell them, they didn't click on the link, and they didn't submit a comment.
I didn't bother to RTFA, if that helps. I just come here for some entertainment, a lighthearted effort attempting to deprogram those who abase themselves at the altar of All Things Apple(tm.) Granted, you have to catch them early before their attitudes have completely set in concrete. After that, they are One with the Jobs: getting them to understand that there is a world of technology beyond that offered by Apple is almost impossible at that point.
It's rather like poking a stick at an anthill. Fanboys come boiling out of their beautifully polished Apple-branded tunnels, all ready to attack the perceived threat. It's amazing how gnarly and irritable they get when their patented belief system is questioned.
One can almost pity their behavior, given that they've been thoroughly fleeced by the expert mental pickpockets of Apple's marketing department. But contrary to popular belief, however, petulance is not actually a virtue.
just to stick it to "the man" so to speak.
The point of all this is that you have to consider the character of the man who is being stuck. In this case, he's a bloodsucking money vampire who deserves everything he is getting and more.
So I'm flamebait for pointing out that the content industry is run by some of the most unenlightened businesspeople on the planet? Somebody works for the MPAA, that's all I have to say.
just to stick it to "the man" so to speak.
The point of all this is that you have to consider the character of the man who is being stuck. In this case, he's a bloodsucking money vampire who deserves everything he is getting and more.
Not a RIAA/MPAA lawyer
Uh huh.
I do not think there are many individuals who do not think current copyright law "is wrong".
If your country is a Berne Convention signatory then yes ... there are many individuals who think current copyright law is wrong. Very wrong.
Remember, Fair Use isn't a right, it's a legal defense.
What?
I don't see anything that did wrong here.
For about 200 ms I started to take you seriously, and then I started laughing. Good job.
I compliment the guy on a bit of humor well done, and I get modded troll?
I think I get what you're saying here, but the flip-side of this is that the technology itself is not sufficiently advanced so as to be indistinguishable from magic.
You're assuming that merely knowing something was built by Man makes any difference. It doesn't.
To 99.999% of the population, modern technology might as well be magic! What makes something magical is when you have a complete and total lack of understanding about a phenomenon or an artifact that you encounter. Most people have no idea what makes their car run, other than the knowledge that gasoline is consumed inside and a vague awareness that some contrivance called a "piston" moves back and forth, or something. Whether it was built by hardworking assemblers in a manufacturing plant, or whisked out of thin air by a tall man in wizard's robes, or for that matter by equally hardworking gnomes in a cave deep underground makes no practical difference. They don't understand it, and that lack of understanding induces the same feelings of fear and inadequacy that our native Americans must have felt when they first encountered Europeans with boomsticks.
Why do you think the bulk of people are so upset when their electromechanical "magic" doesn't work? It's because they don't understand it, will never make the effort to understand it even if they're capable, and when you get right down to it, are at the mercy of those who do!
How do you think the average ancient Egyptian felt towards the priesthood? Pretty much how most people feel when they have to ask IT to fix their computer. They simply pray that the magic can be restored without too much damage.
Apple isn't perfect
Truer words were never spoken. You have my congratulations, sir.
And too many Windows users are like the peasants from the same film crying, "Help! Help! I'm being oppressed!"
No, not at all. Windows users have been beaten down so flat over the past couple decades that most of them don't even care anymore. I'll give Apple fanboys that much credit: at least they care. Now if they can learn to honestly evaluate their pet computer company's behavior, I might find myself actually impressed. But I don't see it happening soon.
All this is based on what you want to do and you can opt-in (notice not opt-out) of any of these features.
Notice that everyone here that is defending Apple's position is doing so from the perspective that whatever is good for Apple must also be good for its customers.
That, of course, isn't necessarily true.
They did this by ignoring the little bit were the purpose of google voice is to replace your existing phone service.
Actually, not. Well, okay ... I have GV on a non-Apple phone, so I can't really comment on how Google Voice works on the iPhone, but it does not in any way replace my existing phone service. It can't, unless it were true VoIP and so far as I'm aware, it's not. It still has to dial out to an intermediate number, which then routes your call to the desired destination from there. Matter of fact, it integrates smoothly with the existing dialer app, and simply asks if you want to use Google voice for the call. If I click No, the phone works like it always did. So no matter how you look at it, AT&T is still getting their minutes out of Google Voice customers, which probably explains why they had no particular interest in disputing the addition of Google Voice to the App Store (or so they say.) Apple, on the other hand, doesn't like the fact that another program not controlled by Apple is performing a service to which Apple feels it has an exclusive right, to wit, dialing your phone.
Apple's position is clearly that by letting google extend their platform to the iphone they would clearly gain converts to it, but without letting apple control that environment they lose the ability to provide distinction, and maintain their competitive advantage.
Yes, and therein lies the logical fallacy. If Apple's products were as unquestionably superior as they (and their more rabid fans) claim, they'd have no worries about users "replacing" the "core functionality" of the iPhone. The reality is that a. nobody is replacing any core functionality and b. Apple is very much afraid that their solution is not as superior as they would have everyone believe, and that users would switch to Google Voice in droves. The irony is that Google Voice just makes the iPhone that much more useful to existing users. On the other hand, it makes the phone potentially less appealing to those who haven't yet been brought into the fold.
Truly, if Apple really wanted to compete with Google in this area, rather than simply exhibit the usual corporate dick attitude, they would exhort their partner in crime (e.g., AT&T) to come up with something comparable, if not superior, to Google Voice and put that out as an iPhone exclusive. Let the customer make the choice.
Any way you slice it, Apple Computer, Inc. needs to get over itself.
That said, AT&T should have the right to block my use of the network if they don't like what I'm doing on it, but at no point should Apple even slightly get involved. This 'walled garden' concept is harmful to consumers and developers alike.
Should they? I'd say even that is very much open to debate. Phone companies have always been heavily regulated (less so since the breakup, and even less so since they got into the Internet business) and have never really had one hundred percent say in how their networks are used by the public. That's because it was recognized that they are, in fact, public carriers and that the right of the public to unobstructed communications was more important than a corporation's desire to increase profits by any means necessary.
Do you really need an answer to the question "How do they make money?"? Have you ever BEEN on the internet before?
I'm guessing this may be his first time.
People, Apple has approved over 60,000 applications. The issue is that Google us exteacting your entire contacts list from the iPhone to their application
No, that's not the issue. Go back and re-read the summary, and if you don't trust Google don't run Google Voice. Don't try to shift the topic of discussion onto Google: they're not the ones being investigated here.
... but I still picked a G1 because I didn't want Apple standing between me and my pocket computer.
Furthermore, I don't like the idea of a hardware vendor being a gatekeeper to what specific applications can even be executed on what is, after all, a portable computing platform. That really goes against the grain of the entire personal computer revolution, of which the smartphone is just the latest extension. Apple has, rather remarkably I believe, managed to convince (apparently, the majority of) its user base that by restricting what programs said users are allowed to run, they are actually freeing them. I suppose you could argue that they're trying to weed out defective applications, but even that doesn't really hold water given Apple's capricious and often wholly unjustified rejection of many apps. As a developer myself, I'd agree that Apple has a slick product with a cool development environment
This is all really funny coming from the company that put out that wonderful 1984 commercial all those years ago.
If you don't like it - don't use it.If you don't like it - don't use it.
Absolutely correct. I didn't ... so I don't.
Apple, and companies like them, should be applauded for the incredible achievements they have made, and the value they provide to people.
Quit it. More excuses. Yes, Apple (and companies like them) should be applauded for their legitimate accomplishments, and should be called out when they negate much of their technical achievements by being corporate pricks.
It is very strange, isn't it? The unashamed Apple bashing continues in true Slashdot style.
Not really. A lot of us (myself included) don't like Apple very much. Others (myself included) don't really like Microsoft very much. Regardless, when Microsoft is being correctly slammed for yet another gaffe, you don't see legions of Windows users rising up to defend them. So ... is Apple is being bashed unfairly? No, not really. See, Apple needs to ride on its merits (and sink on its failures) just as much as Microsoft or any other company does. The difference here is that pretty much nobody spends an incredible amount of effort defending Microsoft from its numerous detractors and point-blank denying their many screwups.
Put it this way: Microsoft is a fucked up company in many ways. Nobody with half a brain would argue otherwise. Realistically though, so is Apple is its own inimitable way. Can't hardly be anything else, this being America and given the way publicly-held corporations are required to behave under U.S. law. The fact that Apple's fanbase is so irrational on the subject is more an indication of defects in their character and/or critical thinking skills than those who are doing the bashing.
Matter of fact, if Apple's user base wasn't so goddamn hypocritical about the whole thing, us non-Apple people wouldn't give Apple a damn. But this eternal state of denial just gets old after a while. Too many Apple users are like the Black Knight from Monty Python and the Holy Grail:
King Arthur: Your bloody arm's off!
Black Knight: No it's not.
Truth is, they keep the flames alive because they just won't admit when Apple is wrong.
I would love it to be native functionality
Yes, this is a classic example of why native applications are often superior to Web applications in certain areas. On my G1, using Google's integrated app, it really is seamless. I optionally have the choice to make my calls using GV, or not, which is pretty cool, on a call-by-call basis if I want. It's integrated right into the base dialer. It takes an extra two seconds or so to dial (presumably because it's calling Google's intermediate number first) and then the call goes through.
If you're on T-Mobile, you can get free calling by setting your own number and the GV outgoing number in your MyFaves, and then making a couple of adjustments to your Google Voice settings. Works very well. I'm on the minimum 300 minute plan, and frankly I rarely get close to that anyway. Actually, since I've been regularly using Google Voice I've found my cell phone voice usage going down, not up. Anyway, it is nice to know that I'll never go over and get screwed on extra minutes (or, like one of my Sprint using friends, be unable to use my phone until the minutes roll over.)
I really enjoy the way Google Voice lets me determine how my calls get routed based upon incoming Caller ID. Truly, it's the kind of thing the phone companies should have offered years ago, but couldn't be bothered to do. The voice transcription service is still a bit weak (speaker-independent voice recognition is non-trivial) but I'm sure that will improve over time. As of right now, the service is extremely useful, and I hope it comes out of the invitation-only stage soon as a lot of people could really benefit from it.
I had just finished typing a reply (basically I agree with you) but my damn laptop decided to click the "cancel" button for me.
In fact, they don't care so much that they're making slashdot posts about it!
Well, this is Slashdot. I don't have to care to post on something, especially in a forum where anything remotely anti-Apple generates so many entertaining responses.
Okay, fanboys, stop modding reasonable comments like the above as flamebait ... your bias is showing. Matter of fact, his reasoning is some of the same that I used in deciding to buy an Android phone over an iPhone, as slick as Apple's product happens to be. Personally, I don't care about Apple's endless pursuit of the perfect UI. I just wanted a powerful smartphone that would do what I (yes, I, the customer) want it to do, without having my options limited by a company I don't particularly trust. Fortunately, Apple's not a monopoly and I was perfectly free to choose something else, so I don't really care. It is interesting, though, that it appears that AT&T was not, in fact, trying to suppress an application/service that might cost it money as many first assumed. Not that I believe anything any corporate mouthpiece has to say, just on principle.
... theoretically it would be much easier for them to do it, given that they own so much of the network in this country. If Google achieves nothing else by this, they'll have raised the bar on what millions of people expect from their telephone company. That's a damned good thing: those bloodsuckers have been holding us back for a long, long time.
In the end, I suspect that iPhone users will get access to Google Voice: Apple's just taking a little too much heat on this one, and GV is just too cool. Sorry, fanboys, Apple does not have a monopoly on being way-cool. Alternatively, of course, AT&T could offer something functionally identical to Google Voice
The irony there being that the old AT&T was originally broken up, in part, because they weren't offering consumers enough new products and services. It took a Google to come along and start shaking things up, and not for the first time I might add.
Android, Blackberry, and Palm owners not caring and loving Google Voice.
As a G1 owner who happily uses GV on a daily basis, I have to say you're dead on about that "not caring" part.
Honestly, it sounds like you should have taken that higher up the food chain. You did the right thing, and the system burned you for it. If nothing else, that sort of abuse should have been made public at the time: a quick call to a local reporter might have earned you a public apology.