I agree, the OSX Launchpad is essentially their version of the start screen, it's just that they don't put it front and center, in fact I'd say probably nobody ever uses it...in that case it's just the windows key + "application name" + enter
I use OSX Launchpad in exactly that way. I've got a hotkey for it, and I type enough of the app name to identify it (not necessarily the first letters) and hit enter.
I'm not saying Launchpad is good. I hate the way it has to be reordered manually, one icon at a time. But it's OK to actually use it you use the keyboard.
And Visa and Mastercard make far more money per transaction than Apple does.
The average cost of an iPhone app is $1.47. The average transaction for credit card is a lot more. Plus you're only mentioning the cost that merchants pay. Visa and Mastercard are also benefiting from interest on the debt they build up by enabling easy credit.
Anyone who thinks Apple's 30% is too much just doesn't know what they are talking about. Google has exactly the same. And going back before Apple launched a store, the existing mobile stores charged more. I was paying 43% on Symbian apps if I remember rightly. And even that was good. In the days when software was mostly sold as shrink wraps, after publisher, various levels of distributor, and vendor all took their cut, the developer was lucky to keep 5%.
Borderline? Shouldn't the user get to decide if they want to use it or not?
Malware - shouldn't the user get to decide if they have it or not.
Spam - shouldn't the user get to decide if they want to receive it or not.
People choose to use services that reduce their exposure to crap, rather than do the work of filtering through the crap themselves. The App Store is one of those services.
If people were downloading it and using it and were getting good use of it, it was of value to them correct?
That's a big if. The company's business model isn't in having satisfied customers that buy the app. It's in other app developers paying them to promote their apps. They're not quite at the level of spammers, but they're in that arena.
You got to see this in context of Apple's policies. They've been known to exclude journalists from events because they've said things Apple didn't like.
Every tech company invites friendly journalists to it's events. When there's a limitation on space, as there certainly is at Apple events as they are so in demand, then of course hostile journalists are not going to be the ones to be invited in.
Similarly they send review units to friendly journalists and not hostile ones.
Most every tech company would (and does if they are in demand enough) do the same thing. I can think of one that hasn't... Tesla. And look what the result of that has been.
You don't get to judge the entirety of the App Store based on a single app. If you did, I could write off Android a hundred thousand times over, where specific apps are either of poorer quality or not available on Android.
So, you can only narrow the question question is weather ebook readers on iOS are as good or better than on Android.
Amazon choosing not to take part in Apple's in-app purchase scheme is neither here nor there, other ebook apps do. Indeed Apple has a good one built in.
This isn't a quality app. It's an app that essentially does paid recommendations, and nags people. Part of the reason why Apple's store does have better quality apps in it is because apps do get stopped when they overstep the mark of obnoxiousness.
Well I think the artists and writers of the comic would argue that what they produce is not pornography
And they're probably right. But that particular image is pornographic.
I don't care one way or another. And Apple may finally be coming around to supporting gay marriage now that the winds have changed.
It sounds like you care, because you're taking every opportunity to distort this. Apple isn't coming around now. Apple has always been a supporter of gay rights, at whatever level they were currently being pushed. You can find examples throughout their history of it. If you don't care about that, and are attacking Apple anyway, then obviously your motives are not about gay rights.
Not only that but you can buy it from Apple's iBook Store. I've just checked, it's there. So accusations of censorship by Apple fail. It's simply that the App Store has a rule of no porn.
But that won't stop the Apple haters acting hysterical like a bunch of screaming nancy boys, hurling accusations of homophobia.
Pornography is banned in the app store. If other images got through before, then they were simply overlooked. That's no reason not to uphold the rules now.
If you are hit from the side it might be your fault. But he said he was rear ended. That's never your fault....unless you were reversing.
People are supposed to drive at a speed where you can stop in the distance you can see to be clear. If you hit someone who is driving away from you or is stationary (as they must be if you hit them in the rear) then you were driving too fast.
Insurance companies won't even give the case a second look. The guy who hit the back of someone's car with the front of his is at fault. Unless there was reversing involved.
Curious... have you deleted all other accounts from other web services? Yahoo? MSN? AOL?
I never had accounts for those in the first place. But this isn't a general issue that I have. It's specifically Google that I feel has gone way over the line in invading my privacy. For me, way further over the line than Facebook has.
I'm with you on most of what you say. And top marks for referencing the Gini index. A couple of things:
Yes, I didn't even mention the privatisations which were even more of a windfall that she had. I was just referring to all the tax and employment from that North Sea oil.
Yes the privatisations were a big mistake.
I can't agree with you on the closed shops though. It sounds OK in theory to get rid of them, but in practice it can be a mistake. Take Equity as an example. At one time acting was a profession, for which you had to be an Equity member. That meant limited numbers, and those people could consistently get work, and earn a liveable wage due to negotiated standard rates. Since the criminalisation of closed shops, anyone can and does have a go, there are far more people then jobs. As a result many "employers" are now taking on people for acting jobs without paying them any money at all. Just the promise that "It'll look good on your CV". The majority of actors are now simply living on benefits for the vast majority of their time. And no, it wasn't always so. The run of the mill actor was never very well paid. But it was a job which provided work most of the year, and a livable wage, for a limited number of professional people - thanks to the Equity closed shop.
I know you're just being flip. But it's a good opportunity to point out that blinking isn't just a means to lubricate/clean the eye. It actually plays a positive function in vision. You blink in between looking at one thing and looking at another, then the eye move is significant. The flash of black seems to clear the context of the image for the brain's image analysis. So much so, that in experiments, significant items can be removed from your field of vision during blinks, and you won't even notice they've gone.
It is of course possible to consciously keep your eyelids open as you make a significant move with the eyes from one thing to another. But you'll probably feel like it's a bit weird and the kind of thing that would lead to a headache if you did it a lot.
There's nothing wrong with having a touch screen per-se. Obviously it has the Sat-Nav on there, and touchscreen is the best way to operate a sat-nav when the car isn't moving.
So the question is, do Tesla put functions on the touchscreen that you need to do whilst driving? If yes, then they are in the wrong. If no, then no problem.
Which is it? What particular functions on the Tesla are you making your case over?
Right. And the laws are there to protect us from the people who suck at it, and end up having collisions, sometimes killing people. And this isn't in theory - people are dying on the roads every day because drivers are distracted or impaired.
it is not possible to come up with one rule to cover all circumstances.
Of course not. But you can cover the big, easy to define cases, such as not using hand held phones. And you can have generic laws that can apply based on judgement - such as the UK "Driving without due care and attention" law.
You can't either. You're kidding yourself that you can. You're not some special snowflake.
When you try, your attention is simply skipping between one and the other. It's not taking in both. You'll find that you either have no idea what that page you just read was about, or you don't know what happened for the last minute on the TV.
The point about "easy" is that if the reading material and TV programme are non-demanding enough, it doesn't matter if you miss chunks of it. You still get the gist of both. That doesn't mean you actually took them both in at the same time.
The point is of course having the other hand instantly available when needed. Try holding something with your other hand. Something you can't just drop. Not so easy now, is it.
One armed people can drive. But they need modifications to the car.
Of course this isn't relevant to operating fixed phones, GPSs or stereos, because those can be "dropped" to make the hand available.
as if it would be impossible for anyone but the driver to be in a vehicle.
With built in sat navs, this can be dealt with. There is technology that means that the same screen can offer different images to people viewing from different angles. So, for an in-dash display it would be possible to have the sat-nav show only the map to the driver whilst the car is in motion, yet allow the passenger to see the UI for interacting.
Slashdot Mirror
I agree, the OSX Launchpad is essentially their version of the start screen, it's just that they don't put it front and center, in fact I'd say probably nobody ever uses it...in that case it's just the windows key + "application name" + enter
I use OSX Launchpad in exactly that way. I've got a hotkey for it, and I type enough of the app name to identify it (not necessarily the first letters) and hit enter.
I'm not saying Launchpad is good. I hate the way it has to be reordered manually, one icon at a time. But it's OK to actually use it you use the keyboard.
And Visa and Mastercard make far more money per transaction than Apple does.
The average cost of an iPhone app is $1.47. The average transaction for credit card is a lot more.
Plus you're only mentioning the cost that merchants pay. Visa and Mastercard are also benefiting from interest on the debt they build up by enabling easy credit.
Anyone who thinks Apple's 30% is too much just doesn't know what they are talking about. Google has exactly the same. And going back before Apple launched a store, the existing mobile stores charged more. I was paying 43% on Symbian apps if I remember rightly. And even that was good. In the days when software was mostly sold as shrink wraps, after publisher, various levels of distributor, and vendor all took their cut, the developer was lucky to keep 5%.
And it's more than ANY of the mobile app stores were paying before Apple came along. I was getting 57% on my Symbian apps.
Borderline?
Shouldn't the user get to decide if they want to use it or not?
Malware - shouldn't the user get to decide if they have it or not.
Spam - shouldn't the user get to decide if they want to receive it or not.
People choose to use services that reduce their exposure to crap, rather than do the work of filtering through the crap themselves. The App Store is one of those services.
If people were downloading it and using it and were getting good use of it, it was of value to them correct?
That's a big if. The company's business model isn't in having satisfied customers that buy the app. It's in other app developers paying them to promote their apps. They're not quite at the level of spammers, but they're in that arena.
You got to see this in context of Apple's policies. They've been known to exclude journalists from events because they've said things Apple didn't like.
Every tech company invites friendly journalists to it's events. When there's a limitation on space, as there certainly is at Apple events as they are so in demand, then of course hostile journalists are not going to be the ones to be invited in.
Similarly they send review units to friendly journalists and not hostile ones.
Most every tech company would (and does if they are in demand enough) do the same thing. I can think of one that hasn't... Tesla. And look what the result of that has been.
You're a whiner.
You don't get to judge the entirety of the App Store based on a single app. If you did, I could write off Android a hundred thousand times over, where specific apps are either of poorer quality or not available on Android.
So, you can only narrow the question question is weather ebook readers on iOS are as good or better than on Android.
Amazon choosing not to take part in Apple's in-app purchase scheme is neither here nor there, other ebook apps do. Indeed Apple has a good one built in.
This isn't a quality app. It's an app that essentially does paid recommendations, and nags people. Part of the reason why Apple's store does have better quality apps in it is because apps do get stopped when they overstep the mark of obnoxiousness.
Well I think the artists and writers of the comic would argue that what they produce is not pornography
And they're probably right. But that particular image is pornographic.
I don't care one way or another. And Apple may finally be coming around to supporting gay marriage now that the winds have changed.
It sounds like you care, because you're taking every opportunity to distort this. Apple isn't coming around now. Apple has always been a supporter of gay rights, at whatever level they were currently being pushed. You can find examples throughout their history of it. If you don't care about that, and are attacking Apple anyway, then obviously your motives are not about gay rights.
Not only that but you can buy it from Apple's iBook Store. I've just checked, it's there. So accusations of censorship by Apple fail. It's simply that the App Store has a rule of no porn.
But that won't stop the Apple haters acting hysterical like a bunch of screaming nancy boys, hurling accusations of homophobia.
Have you seen the images? Best not to go on hearsay.
Pornography is banned in the app store. If other images got through before, then they were simply overlooked. That's no reason not to uphold the rules now.
If you're attempting to imply there's institutional homophobia at Apple, then you've got a bit of a problem, what with their history of publicly supporting gay issues. Such as this recently.
http://thenextweb.com/insider/2013/02/27/apple-joins-the-intel-facebook-microsoft-in-supporting-the-legalization-of-gay-marriage-in-the-us/
Still don't let the facts get in the way of your bigotry (against Apple).
they think you are TOO DAMN STUPID to make choices for yourself.
In your case, they're right.
If you are hit from the side it might be your fault. But he said he was rear ended. That's never your fault. ...unless you were reversing.
People are supposed to drive at a speed where you can stop in the distance you can see to be clear. If you hit someone who is driving away from you or is stationary (as they must be if you hit them in the rear) then you were driving too fast.
Insurance companies won't even give the case a second look. The guy who hit the back of someone's car with the front of his is at fault. Unless there was reversing involved.
Yes it has to be robust enough to cope with this - never mind the spoofing, there's the fact that people move and take their wifi routers with them.
Erm... How is that flamebait or a troll? It's a simple statement of fact. The Google apologism and mod abuse here is getting ridiculous.
Curious... have you deleted all other accounts from other web services? Yahoo? MSN? AOL?
I never had accounts for those in the first place. But this isn't a general issue that I have. It's specifically Google that I feel has gone way over the line in invading my privacy. For me, way further over the line than Facebook has.
I'm with you on most of what you say. And top marks for referencing the Gini index. A couple of things:
Yes, I didn't even mention the privatisations which were even more of a windfall that she had. I was just referring to all the tax and employment from that North Sea oil.
Yes the privatisations were a big mistake.
I can't agree with you on the closed shops though. It sounds OK in theory to get rid of them, but in practice it can be a mistake. Take Equity as an example. At one time acting was a profession, for which you had to be an Equity member. That meant limited numbers, and those people could consistently get work, and earn a liveable wage due to negotiated standard rates. Since the criminalisation of closed shops, anyone can and does have a go, there are far more people then jobs. As a result many "employers" are now taking on people for acting jobs without paying them any money at all. Just the promise that "It'll look good on your CV". The majority of actors are now simply living on benefits for the vast majority of their time. And no, it wasn't always so. The run of the mill actor was never very well paid. But it was a job which provided work most of the year, and a livable wage, for a limited number of professional people - thanks to the Equity closed shop.
I know you're just being flip. But it's a good opportunity to point out that blinking isn't just a means to lubricate/clean the eye. It actually plays a positive function in vision. You blink in between looking at one thing and looking at another, then the eye move is significant. The flash of black seems to clear the context of the image for the brain's image analysis. So much so, that in experiments, significant items can be removed from your field of vision during blinks, and you won't even notice they've gone.
It is of course possible to consciously keep your eyelids open as you make a significant move with the eyes from one thing to another. But you'll probably feel like it's a bit weird and the kind of thing that would lead to a headache if you did it a lot.
There's nothing wrong with having a touch screen per-se. Obviously it has the Sat-Nav on there, and touchscreen is the best way to operate a sat-nav when the car isn't moving.
So the question is, do Tesla put functions on the touchscreen that you need to do whilst driving? If yes, then they are in the wrong. If no, then no problem.
Which is it? What particular functions on the Tesla are you making your case over?
Some are better at it than others
Right. And the laws are there to protect us from the people who suck at it, and end up having collisions, sometimes killing people. And this isn't in theory - people are dying on the roads every day because drivers are distracted or impaired.
it is not possible to come up with one rule to cover all circumstances.
Of course not. But you can cover the big, easy to define cases, such as not using hand held phones. And you can have generic laws that can apply based on judgement - such as the UK "Driving without due care and attention" law.
You can't either. You're kidding yourself that you can. You're not some special snowflake.
When you try, your attention is simply skipping between one and the other. It's not taking in both. You'll find that you either have no idea what that page you just read was about, or you don't know what happened for the last minute on the TV.
The point about "easy" is that if the reading material and TV programme are non-demanding enough, it doesn't matter if you miss chunks of it. You still get the gist of both. That doesn't mean you actually took them both in at the same time.
The point is of course having the other hand instantly available when needed. Try holding something with your other hand. Something you can't just drop. Not so easy now, is it.
One armed people can drive. But they need modifications to the car.
Of course this isn't relevant to operating fixed phones, GPSs or stereos, because those can be "dropped" to make the hand available.
There's nothing wrong with following an already set GPS whilst driving. It's operating it that's the issue.
And that rape victim shouldn't have been wearing a short skirt, eh?
as if it would be impossible for anyone but the driver to be in a vehicle.
With built in sat navs, this can be dealt with. There is technology that means that the same screen can offer different images to people viewing from different angles. So, for an in-dash display it would be possible to have the sat-nav show only the map to the driver whilst the car is in motion, yet allow the passenger to see the UI for interacting.