They only included the USB2 protocol and connector on the iPod when they made it Windows compatible. It was originally Firewire only, then had both for a while (it was always better with firewire on the Mac, and charged much faster too), then they dropped firewire and went USB only to make them cheaper to manufacture - only one controller to support, and you can cut out some hardware and make it smaller.
Flash can be played on Macs. You just have to install the plugin if you want it now, rather than having a (potentially out of date, with security holes) one preinstalled. You know, just like the way it is done with Windows - if you want it, go and download it. Apple doesn't want to be responsible for shipping a plugin that you're going to have to update when you first use it anyway.
Not shipping it by default (to come into line with other OS vendors) is not the same as "can't be played [...] if Apple had their way".
It *is* common to *all* antennas - it is the physics of antennas. It's just accentuated by a design that is sensitive to detuning. There are examples of other manufacturers' manuals warning against "holding in a specific way" or more usually, to avoid touching the phone in a specific area while making calls.
As with any issue, the legal climate pretty much enforces a "don't admit anything publicly until we have something in place with legal, and a solution". It's not the first product to have had engineering decisions overruled in favour of aesthetics, costs or timescale. It's far, far from unique in that respect.
It's not so much "benefit of the doubt" as much as "this is the reality of large companies that make consumer products" and treating them all equally. Overhyping this "antennagate" thing has done more to expose peoples' bias against apple than almost any other story.
They're certainly no immaculate white knights, but they are a long way from the picture people have been painting of them.
The hilarious thing, is if they had intentionally crippled the phone so that it only had the same range as the 3GS it replaced, and didn't even try to hold a signal in weak areas and just reported 'no service' (which is the only time the detuning causes call drops) then no one would have ever noticed and slashdot would only have the walled garden to moan about.
This is why Apple doesn't write any free software, right? Like LLVM, libdispatch, contributions to Webkit (and the initial selection of a GPL project for their HTML engine in the first place over a closed one)... (all of these happened under Jobs' leadership)
Don't let facts get in the way of a good rant. There's GPL-licenced software in use in iOS 4 even, so it seems "Libre software" is alive and well - they wanted to use some!
They run a closed-ecosystem phone/tablet/music player, but it is not the only thing they do. Their contribution to free software is *considerable*, and by no means all of it (in fact most of it) is not "mandatory compliance" as some like to claim as a counter argument.
So, far from "not allowable" in Jobs' world, free software is not only ok, but actively developed and encouraged at Apple. Just because the iOS ecosystem has rules does not enable you to throw out blanket statements like your comment that are demonstrably false.
He was at NeXT when AppleScript came out, so that's a moot point, but on the point of development of OS X, you don't *just* need coders to create a large project and have it be successful. Sure, you need them, but you also need people with other skills too - sometimes these might also be coders, sometimes not. Just because he didn't (as far as we know) contribute any literal keystrokes of code into OS X does not mean his contribution is trivial to the process.
Or people who want to make lots and lots of money - at least right now.
If that potential drops away (through marketshare or other factors) then people will stop jumping through hoops to join a well-known-controlled ecosystem.
The reason why developers target the platform and "deal with the bullshit" is very simple economics. It's profitable for them to do so.
Note that this does not exclude them from developing for other platforms too, which is also prudent as an income source. The income capability from the iOS ecosystem is very very non-trivial and really can't just be dismissed on a whim because the owner of the store has house rules.
You mean the "debacle" where the antenna was better than the previous version on the 3G and was providing signal at the extreme edge reception (where the 3G could not) that it subsequently dropped if the user detuned it by holding it in a specific way (a fact not unique to the iPhone 4, just exaggerated due to the design), that subsequently spawned an investigation from Apple that they published, along with a free case program for all iPhone 4 users to correct the design flaw?
That one?
Yeah, real shady business practices there... Oh wait, the other thing: good response to a design flaw.
You just described hosting, which is pretty much what the web is based on. People have been doing this for a long time, it just sounds like Apple (and everyone else who is doing it, eg Google) are just making a more convenient way to access the sort of ability that nerds have had for a long time.
As with any data, if you let it out of your control (ie, entrust it to someone else) then you are taking a risk. If you want to keep it more secure, store it locally.
Good God. Is the level of Apple hate so high that this has to be twisted into some sort of conspiracy about Apple?
Of all places, slashdot should be the sort of place that understands the nature of security exploits - which is exactly what the jailbreak takes advantage of. Colour me *utterly unsurprised* that the same exploit (and any tools created to make use of it) can be changed to do things that you really don't want.
Apple has nothing to do with this (apart from shipping software with a security flaw, but they are not unique in that respect).
It's an ultra-portable. What do you expect? 16 wide open RAM slots with a door in the bottom for easy access?
The "paltry" 1.4Ghz CD2 *is* better than most of the other offerings at this size and weight, and is the very low voltage variant from Intel designed with battery life and heat management in mind.
Your complaints seem to stem from "it's not as upgradable as a full size laptop, or as powerful! It needs to have all the benefits of a laptop, but also be really tiny and have all the benefits of an ultra-portbale at the same time".
It's not a TARDIS. Compromises were made when it was designed, to make it small. The other SSD offerings from Apple (and RAM) are in more standard configurations (SATA connectors, standard slots, etc) because they have the room to do that.
The comment is from a poster who compared the cost effectiveness of Windows and OS X machines by using a Mac Pro specced with dual graphics cards to drive two 27" cinema displays (when one card will do, and the screens are optional anyway) in order to skew the results to make the price comparison more exaggerated.
Take anything he says with a pinch of salt so large, you need a truck to move it.
Yes, this pretty much guarantees that the Wizard will now be hopeless, since to make it good enough to work in PvE, it will be overpowered for PvP and people will whine that they can't kill them in one hit with their warrior.
That would be utterly, utterly alien to Apple - the biggest thing I can see with that setup that would make Apple say "no way" would be server availability.
If the remote server that the files point to is down for any reason, while the rest of Apple's own infrastructure is up, the update will fail and it will look like Apple's systems are down.
There is no way they are going to lump their availability stats up with random third party servers on the net, even if they have statistically good availability.
There is absolutely no evidence that LaunchPad is restricted to App Store apps only - in fact, the inference from Apple's literature is quite the opposite. However, no one can actually confirm one way or the other.
Drawing conclusions on this evidence is... questionable.
Also, it should surprise no one that autoupdating from an Apple-hosted repository would perhaps be a service that costs money to run (thus, if you want in [as a developer], you need to pay for it).
Slashdot Mirror
They only included the USB2 protocol and connector on the iPod when they made it Windows compatible. It was originally Firewire only, then had both for a while (it was always better with firewire on the Mac, and charged much faster too), then they dropped firewire and went USB only to make them cheaper to manufacture - only one controller to support, and you can cut out some hardware and make it smaller.
Flash can be played on Macs. You just have to install the plugin if you want it now, rather than having a (potentially out of date, with security holes) one preinstalled. You know, just like the way it is done with Windows - if you want it, go and download it. Apple doesn't want to be responsible for shipping a plugin that you're going to have to update when you first use it anyway.
Not shipping it by default (to come into line with other OS vendors) is not the same as "can't be played [...] if Apple had their way".
This is how FUD starts.
It *is* common to *all* antennas - it is the physics of antennas. It's just accentuated by a design that is sensitive to detuning. There are examples of other manufacturers' manuals warning against "holding in a specific way" or more usually, to avoid touching the phone in a specific area while making calls.
As with any issue, the legal climate pretty much enforces a "don't admit anything publicly until we have something in place with legal, and a solution". It's not the first product to have had engineering decisions overruled in favour of aesthetics, costs or timescale. It's far, far from unique in that respect.
It's not so much "benefit of the doubt" as much as "this is the reality of large companies that make consumer products" and treating them all equally. Overhyping this "antennagate" thing has done more to expose peoples' bias against apple than almost any other story.
They're certainly no immaculate white knights, but they are a long way from the picture people have been painting of them.
The hilarious thing, is if they had intentionally crippled the phone so that it only had the same range as the 3GS it replaced, and didn't even try to hold a signal in weak areas and just reported 'no service' (which is the only time the detuning causes call drops) then no one would have ever noticed and slashdot would only have the walled garden to moan about.
It's being sold in the UK, where we don't really "do" halloween like the USA does. Sure, we have the event, but it's nowhere near as big.
It's entirely a coincidence that it's being sold just after halloween I think.
This is why Apple doesn't write any free software, right? Like LLVM, libdispatch, contributions to Webkit (and the initial selection of a GPL project for their HTML engine in the first place over a closed one)... (all of these happened under Jobs' leadership)
Don't let facts get in the way of a good rant. There's GPL-licenced software in use in iOS 4 even, so it seems "Libre software" is alive and well - they wanted to use some!
They run a closed-ecosystem phone/tablet/music player, but it is not the only thing they do. Their contribution to free software is *considerable*, and by no means all of it (in fact most of it) is not "mandatory compliance" as some like to claim as a counter argument.
So, far from "not allowable" in Jobs' world, free software is not only ok, but actively developed and encouraged at Apple. Just because the iOS ecosystem has rules does not enable you to throw out blanket statements like your comment that are demonstrably false.
He was at NeXT when AppleScript came out, so that's a moot point, but on the point of development of OS X, you don't *just* need coders to create a large project and have it be successful. Sure, you need them, but you also need people with other skills too - sometimes these might also be coders, sometimes not. Just because he didn't (as far as we know) contribute any literal keystrokes of code into OS X does not mean his contribution is trivial to the process.
Or people who want to make lots and lots of money - at least right now.
If that potential drops away (through marketshare or other factors) then people will stop jumping through hoops to join a well-known-controlled ecosystem.
The reason why developers target the platform and "deal with the bullshit" is very simple economics. It's profitable for them to do so.
Note that this does not exclude them from developing for other platforms too, which is also prudent as an income source. The income capability from the iOS ecosystem is very very non-trivial and really can't just be dismissed on a whim because the owner of the store has house rules.
America has no official language. They may speak English, but not officially.
You mean the "debacle" where the antenna was better than the previous version on the 3G and was providing signal at the extreme edge reception (where the 3G could not) that it subsequently dropped if the user detuned it by holding it in a specific way (a fact not unique to the iPhone 4, just exaggerated due to the design), that subsequently spawned an investigation from Apple that they published, along with a free case program for all iPhone 4 users to correct the design flaw?
That one?
Yeah, real shady business practices there... Oh wait, the other thing: good response to a design flaw.
You just described hosting, which is pretty much what the web is based on. People have been doing this for a long time, it just sounds like Apple (and everyone else who is doing it, eg Google) are just making a more convenient way to access the sort of ability that nerds have had for a long time.
As with any data, if you let it out of your control (ie, entrust it to someone else) then you are taking a risk. If you want to keep it more secure, store it locally.
They are based on the same kernel (much like various Linux distros) but they are not the same thing.
Surely you can understand two different systems using a common kernel?
OS X and iOS are the same in the same way that Ubuntu and Red Hat are the same.
So, "one rule for me, another rule for everyone else" is what that boils down to.
If MS or various Linux distros are not expected to roll their own Flash package and keep it up to date, why should Apple be expected to?
Good God. Is the level of Apple hate so high that this has to be twisted into some sort of conspiracy about Apple?
Of all places, slashdot should be the sort of place that understands the nature of security exploits - which is exactly what the jailbreak takes advantage of. Colour me *utterly unsurprised* that the same exploit (and any tools created to make use of it) can be changed to do things that you really don't want.
Apple has nothing to do with this (apart from shipping software with a security flaw, but they are not unique in that respect).
I thought Ubuntu had the same kernel as Red Hat.
They must be identical right? If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck...
iOS =/= OS X
Willfull ignorance or just plain stupidity?
Who knows in an Apple Bash Comment!? It's a lottery!
You cared enough to tell everyone you don't care though, on an article you supposedly "skip right past".
I reject your reality and substitute my own!
No, what you mean is "one rule for Linux, another rule for everyone else"
It's an ultra-portable. What do you expect? 16 wide open RAM slots with a door in the bottom for easy access?
The "paltry" 1.4Ghz CD2 *is* better than most of the other offerings at this size and weight, and is the very low voltage variant from Intel designed with battery life and heat management in mind.
Your complaints seem to stem from "it's not as upgradable as a full size laptop, or as powerful! It needs to have all the benefits of a laptop, but also be really tiny and have all the benefits of an ultra-portbale at the same time".
It's not a TARDIS. Compromises were made when it was designed, to make it small. The other SSD offerings from Apple (and RAM) are in more standard configurations (SATA connectors, standard slots, etc) because they have the room to do that.
It will be claimed by neckbeards that Steve Jobs claimed it was entirely down to Steve Jobs.
How much are you getting paid to shill on here?
Not much, based on the enormously obvious false information you have been spouting in this thread.
OS X server is sold on the Apple Store. I can't be arsed to disprove the rest of your post, just google it.
The comment is from a poster who compared the cost effectiveness of Windows and OS X machines by using a Mac Pro specced with dual graphics cards to drive two 27" cinema displays (when one card will do, and the screens are optional anyway) in order to skew the results to make the price comparison more exaggerated.
Take anything he says with a pinch of salt so large, you need a truck to move it.
When was the last time you drove a diesel? 1974?
They're considerably more refined these days, with very minimal turbo lag and decent all-range torque.
Yes, this pretty much guarantees that the Wizard will now be hopeless, since to make it good enough to work in PvE, it will be overpowered for PvP and people will whine that they can't kill them in one hit with their warrior.
cf. the Mage class in WoW.
That would be utterly, utterly alien to Apple - the biggest thing I can see with that setup that would make Apple say "no way" would be server availability.
If the remote server that the files point to is down for any reason, while the rest of Apple's own infrastructure is up, the update will fail and it will look like Apple's systems are down.
There is no way they are going to lump their availability stats up with random third party servers on the net, even if they have statistically good availability.
The article is enormous FUD of the highest order.
There is absolutely no evidence that LaunchPad is restricted to App Store apps only - in fact, the inference from Apple's literature is quite the opposite. However, no one can actually confirm one way or the other.
Drawing conclusions on this evidence is... questionable.
Also, it should surprise no one that autoupdating from an Apple-hosted repository would perhaps be a service that costs money to run (thus, if you want in [as a developer], you need to pay for it).