Don't be surprised that there are so many Slashdotters who don't get the iPad. When you look at a feature matrix, the iPad seems lame. No usb port, no flash, no camera, it doesn't run existing programs, integrated battery and multitasking is a joke.
It's hard to fit the qualities that the iPad gets right into the chart. Instant-on is key is a big deal and multi-touch is pretty sweet but the qualitative features are harder to define. I'm talking about how the device feels in your hands or how it responds when you use the touch screen or rotate it. Very subjective qualities. Android does all this stuff, but it just doesn't feel as refined.
We have an iPad in our house and it's just more fun to use than the netbook, laptop, or desktop. Perhaps the novelty will wear off, but for now it's still novel and gets a lot of use.
You're complaining that the iPad/iPhone isn't your computer. Well no shit. If that's what you want, then the iPad isn't for you.
If, on the other hand, you want a web tablet with insane battery life that you can watch movies on, listen to music, read ebooks, or browse (part of) the web, an i device might be worth it for you.
World of Warcraft isn't there, but Plants vs Zombies is a pretty nifty experience on the iPad. If 90% of everything is crap, that still leaves thousands of non-crap applications that these things can run.
Basically, I would say it comes down to the form factor and the applications. Either one could be the killer feature that makes the device worth the money. If it didn't require a computer to set it up, it's the device I would be telling my parents to get when they call me and say they want a computer.
Plus, it's only $500 or so. It's a pretty nice piece of technology for that much money. Lots of programmers (including me) love programming and this is a very interesting platform.
Would you want to debate Larry Lessig? I sure as hell wouldn't regardless of the subject or the positions taken. Williams may not be stupid but Lessig could sure make him look like he is.
It's been around since at least 2001, but it wasn't approved for use by the FCC until sometime in 2004.
BTW, if you have a non-hdcp set, I think you will be limited to analog signals by hdcp-enabled devices that limit digital output. There are hdcp strippers out there, but I think they tend to get their certificates revoked, so they stop working on newer content.
Is a traffic violation a crime? Isn't traffic court an entirely different thing than criminal or civil court? If it isn't a crime, then there was never a presumption of innocence in the first place.
For a large number of people, BluRay is a waste of time and money. As more people get broadband, I think even DVD may become a waste of time and money.
I've been watching a lot of steaming video from Netflix lately and I'm very impressed. The only thing it's missing for me are subtitles.
There is still a market of people who want very high quality audio and video or who want to collect physical disks. I think that market will grow a bit more, before it collapses in the same way that the market for music on physical media has collapsed.
Just because it hasn't hindered you, doesn't mean it hasn't for anybody.
A lot of HDTV early adopters have been burned because the first generation sets don't support HDCP. So, even though your TV can do 1080p, your PS3 won't.
You can argue if that's really hindering anything since it will still play at a lower resolution, but I still think it sucks. It certainly curbed my urge to be an early adopter of anything now.
And it certainly did make piracy more difficult. Without HDCP, it would be almost trivial to make a signal capture device to capture the unencrypted video stream. As far as I know, BluRay has only been broken because of software players.
I've heard that their upcoming phone OS is very good. Unfortunately, it's saddled with "Microsoft" and "Windows". If I were Microsoft and wanted to give this division the best chance to succeed, I would spin off the mobile OS division into it's own company and be the majority (only?) shareholder. Part of the spin off agreement would be that Microsoft has perpetual rights to build products around the mobile OS.
Microsoft should then concentrate on enterprisey products (ie, take on RIM) and cede consumer oriented devices to the new company.
This would let Microsoft succeed where they have their best chance and would give the phone OS a better chance of attracting talented developers. Face it, if you are under 30, Microsoft is about as cool as Oracle. And like it or not, cool matters with something like a phone which is an accessory as much as it is a device.
This would only work iff the new phone OS is better in many respects than iOS and Android. Is it? If it isn't, it's going to be WinCE part deux.
A mass market paperback from today is printed on lower quality paper than one from 50 years ago. Ground wood paper is a relatively recent innovation.
The race to the bottom is accelerating. Somebody posted elsewhere in this thread that the decline of newspapers is leading to a glut of ultra-low cost (and quality) paper. You're nuts if you don't think publishers will be tempted by it.
I'm afraid that phone makers are going to follow Motorola's lead and start refusing to boot except from a signed image. This could be quite difficult to defeat and as far as I know, hasn't been defeated yet.
I really disappointed that Google is going to stop selling handsets. I was waiting for a Nexus Two.
I want a phone that has a pure (plain?) Android experience. I don't want the layers that Motorola and HTC add to differentiate themselves, not to mention all the bloatware. It wouldn't bother me so much if I was able to reformat a phone in the same way I can reformat a Dell or HP machine to clear off all the crap, but as far as I know, I can't.
I don't have a Kindle. I read on my iPod touch. It seems crazy, but I actually like reading on the small screen (have been doing it since the days of my Handera 330).
I do have some actual books lying around, but they never get read. I tend to read in the little bits of downtime I have throughout my day. I almost always have my iPod with me and so I always have a bunch of books available. If nothing I have looks interesting at that particular moment, I can buy something right then and there. I don't have to plan ahead, or cart books around with me.
The other place I read is in bed and since the iPod is back-lit, I don't need a light, don't have to turn pages, and it's small. Win, win, win.
I wouldn't assume that any books you buy today will still be holding together in 20 years time. If this is something you are worried about, I hope you are buying library editions of books (and those can be $100 per copy).
My problem with physical books is that cost of getting them. I either have to place an order and wait a few days or drive to a book store. With a Kindle or similar device, I can get the book in a few clicks. It's part of the reason I'm reading so much more these days and I'm happy about that.
Secondly, even when I do buy books, I tend to either throw or give them away when I'm done with them. I'm not interested in collecting things.
Why people willingly go for locked down technologies like Kindle and iTunes, I'll never understand.
Then I'll explain it: convenience. Kindle and iTunes work and are affordable.
The Kindle software group has done a decent job getting their reader software on a bunch of different platforms. Install the software and your library shows up.
iTunes is mostly selling MP3's these days and it doesn't get much safer than that.
Once upon a time, books were expensive and well made. These days, they are cheap and start yellowing before you are done reading them. Many publishers have even started using crappy paper for hard covers. As a result, I've started looking at books about the same way as I do a magazine. Read and toss. eBooks hang around longer on my hard drive (or in my Kindle library), but I don't have any real attachment to them.
I can see if you are a physical book collector or like to maintain a collection, eBooks will seem stupid. To each his own.
I think the difference though is that iTunes isn't third party and it is actively maintained by the same company that designed the phone. If you don't like iTunes though, I can see how would be a total deal breaker.
My problem with this is security. Every single one of those pre-installed applications have bugs in them that could be exploited by malware. For me, that's what makes it so irritating. An app, that I don't want, is taking up space, and makes my data less secure.
It's sad how the open platform gets saddled with crap you can't remove and the closed platform (iPhone) is kept clean by a CEO who gives a shit about aesthetics and user experience.
In 2010, threatpost.com reported that "A group of cryptographers has developed a new attack that has broken Kasumi, the encryption algorithm used to secure traffic on 3G GSM wireless networks. The technique enables them to recover a full key by using a tactic known as a related-key attack, but experts say it is not the end of the world for Kasumi."[17] Kasumi is the name for the A5/3 algorithm, used to secure most 3G traffic.
I have a hard time understanding why they are using the Windows brand for their phone OS. Does it share anything with their desktop OS? At this point (especially on a phone), the Windows brand has negative value. At least they didn't tack on a.net or live.
I'm afraid that function lost in the form-vs-function antenna war.
If somebody made a phone with an old-school pull out antenna, I might actually buy one. I liked how the act of pulling out the antenna also answered an incoming call.
OTOH, the iPhone is a piece of art. I have a hard time saying aesthetics don't matter in something like an iPhone where the phone part isn't the majority use of the phone.
Slashdot Mirror
Don't be surprised that there are so many Slashdotters who don't get the iPad. When you look at a feature matrix, the iPad seems lame. No usb port, no flash, no camera, it doesn't run existing programs, integrated battery and multitasking is a joke.
It's hard to fit the qualities that the iPad gets right into the chart. Instant-on is key is a big deal and multi-touch is pretty sweet but the qualitative features are harder to define. I'm talking about how the device feels in your hands or how it responds when you use the touch screen or rotate it. Very subjective qualities. Android does all this stuff, but it just doesn't feel as refined.
We have an iPad in our house and it's just more fun to use than the netbook, laptop, or desktop. Perhaps the novelty will wear off, but for now it's still novel and gets a lot of use.
You're complaining that the iPad/iPhone isn't your computer. Well no shit. If that's what you want, then the iPad isn't for you.
If, on the other hand, you want a web tablet with insane battery life that you can watch movies on, listen to music, read ebooks, or browse (part of) the web, an i device might be worth it for you.
World of Warcraft isn't there, but Plants vs Zombies is a pretty nifty experience on the iPad. If 90% of everything is crap, that still leaves thousands of non-crap applications that these things can run.
Basically, I would say it comes down to the form factor and the applications. Either one could be the killer feature that makes the device worth the money. If it didn't require a computer to set it up, it's the device I would be telling my parents to get when they call me and say they want a computer.
Plus, it's only $500 or so. It's a pretty nice piece of technology for that much money. Lots of programmers (including me) love programming and this is a very interesting platform.
Would you want to debate Larry Lessig? I sure as hell wouldn't regardless of the subject or the positions taken. Williams may not be stupid but Lessig could sure make him look like he is.
It's been around since at least 2001, but it wasn't approved for use by the FCC until sometime in 2004.
BTW, if you have a non-hdcp set, I think you will be limited to analog signals by hdcp-enabled devices that limit digital output. There are hdcp strippers out there, but I think they tend to get their certificates revoked, so they stop working on newer content.
Is a traffic violation a crime? Isn't traffic court an entirely different thing than criminal or civil court? If it isn't a crime, then there was never a presumption of innocence in the first place.
For a large number of people, BluRay is a waste of time and money. As more people get broadband, I think even DVD may become a waste of time and money.
I've been watching a lot of steaming video from Netflix lately and I'm very impressed. The only thing it's missing for me are subtitles.
There is still a market of people who want very high quality audio and video or who want to collect physical disks. I think that market will grow a bit more, before it collapses in the same way that the market for music on physical media has collapsed.
Just because it hasn't hindered you, doesn't mean it hasn't for anybody.
A lot of HDTV early adopters have been burned because the first generation sets don't support HDCP. So, even though your TV can do 1080p, your PS3 won't.
You can argue if that's really hindering anything since it will still play at a lower resolution, but I still think it sucks. It certainly curbed my urge to be an early adopter of anything now.
And it certainly did make piracy more difficult. Without HDCP, it would be almost trivial to make a signal capture device to capture the unencrypted video stream. As far as I know, BluRay has only been broken because of software players.
I've heard that their upcoming phone OS is very good. Unfortunately, it's saddled with "Microsoft" and "Windows". If I were Microsoft and wanted to give this division the best chance to succeed, I would spin off the mobile OS division into it's own company and be the majority (only?) shareholder. Part of the spin off agreement would be that Microsoft has perpetual rights to build products around the mobile OS.
Microsoft should then concentrate on enterprisey products (ie, take on RIM) and cede consumer oriented devices to the new company.
This would let Microsoft succeed where they have their best chance and would give the phone OS a better chance of attracting talented developers. Face it, if you are under 30, Microsoft is about as cool as Oracle. And like it or not, cool matters with something like a phone which is an accessory as much as it is a device.
This would only work iff the new phone OS is better in many respects than iOS and Android. Is it? If it isn't, it's going to be WinCE part deux.
A mass market paperback from today is printed on lower quality paper than one from 50 years ago. Ground wood paper is a relatively recent innovation.
The race to the bottom is accelerating. Somebody posted elsewhere in this thread that the decline of newspapers is leading to a glut of ultra-low cost (and quality) paper. You're nuts if you don't think publishers will be tempted by it.
I'm afraid that phone makers are going to follow Motorola's lead and start refusing to boot except from a signed image. This could be quite difficult to defeat and as far as I know, hasn't been defeated yet.
I'm not the only person concerned about publishers cutting costs by using crappy paper.
http://www.permanencematters.com/
I really disappointed that Google is going to stop selling handsets. I was waiting for a Nexus Two.
I want a phone that has a pure (plain?) Android experience. I don't want the layers that Motorola and HTC add to differentiate themselves, not to mention all the bloatware. It wouldn't bother me so much if I was able to reformat a phone in the same way I can reformat a Dell or HP machine to clear off all the crap, but as far as I know, I can't.
Do you really think OpenOffice from Oracle has a brighter future than Office from Microsoft?
How much training do you think people actually get for running office apps? Perhaps 10 years ago people would get training, but not so much anymore.
Have you ever received formal training for running Office or any other productivity app?
I would wager text books are probably printed on acid-free paper. For what you pay for them, they better be.
I'll just leave this here:
http://www.permanencematters.com/the-issue/
High quality paper costs the publishers about ten cents more per book (95 cents vs 85 cents). Sad, isn't it?
I don't have a Kindle. I read on my iPod touch. It seems crazy, but I actually like reading on the small screen (have been doing it since the days of my Handera 330).
I do have some actual books lying around, but they never get read. I tend to read in the little bits of downtime I have throughout my day. I almost always have my iPod with me and so I always have a bunch of books available. If nothing I have looks interesting at that particular moment, I can buy something right then and there. I don't have to plan ahead, or cart books around with me.
The other place I read is in bed and since the iPod is back-lit, I don't need a light, don't have to turn pages, and it's small. Win, win, win.
At least it works well for me. YMMV.
It's clear that ebooks aren't for you.
I wouldn't assume that any books you buy today will still be holding together in 20 years time. If this is something you are worried about, I hope you are buying library editions of books (and those can be $100 per copy).
My problem with physical books is that cost of getting them. I either have to place an order and wait a few days or drive to a book store. With a Kindle or similar device, I can get the book in a few clicks. It's part of the reason I'm reading so much more these days and I'm happy about that.
Secondly, even when I do buy books, I tend to either throw or give them away when I'm done with them. I'm not interested in collecting things.
No they're not. They are AAC files and AAC is an ISO standardized format.
Does it matter? I respect people whose actions align with their ideals.
Ack! I said MP3s and I really meant to say unencumbered files. I guess in my mind the two are equivalent.
Then I'll explain it: convenience. Kindle and iTunes work and are affordable.
The Kindle software group has done a decent job getting their reader software on a bunch of different platforms. Install the software and your library shows up.
iTunes is mostly selling MP3's these days and it doesn't get much safer than that.
Once upon a time, books were expensive and well made. These days, they are cheap and start yellowing before you are done reading them. Many publishers have even started using crappy paper for hard covers. As a result, I've started looking at books about the same way as I do a magazine. Read and toss. eBooks hang around longer on my hard drive (or in my Kindle library), but I don't have any real attachment to them.
I can see if you are a physical book collector or like to maintain a collection, eBooks will seem stupid. To each his own.
Good point.
I think the difference though is that iTunes isn't third party and it is actively maintained by the same company that designed the phone. If you don't like iTunes though, I can see how would be a total deal breaker.
My problem with this is security. Every single one of those pre-installed applications have bugs in them that could be exploited by malware. For me, that's what makes it so irritating. An app, that I don't want, is taking up space, and makes my data less secure.
It's sad how the open platform gets saddled with crap you can't remove and the closed platform (iPhone) is kept clean by a CEO who gives a shit about aesthetics and user experience.
From the GSM wikipedia page:
In 2010, threatpost.com reported that "A group of cryptographers has developed a new attack that has broken Kasumi, the encryption algorithm used to secure traffic on 3G GSM wireless networks. The technique enables them to recover a full key by using a tactic known as a related-key attack, but experts say it is not the end of the world for Kasumi."[17] Kasumi is the name for the A5/3 algorithm, used to secure most 3G traffic.
I have a hard time understanding why they are using the Windows brand for their phone OS. Does it share anything with their desktop OS? At this point (especially on a phone), the Windows brand has negative value. At least they didn't tack on a .net or live.
I'm afraid that function lost in the form-vs-function antenna war.
If somebody made a phone with an old-school pull out antenna, I might actually buy one. I liked how the act of pulling out the antenna also answered an incoming call.
OTOH, the iPhone is a piece of art. I have a hard time saying aesthetics don't matter in something like an iPhone where the phone part isn't the majority use of the phone.