Apple will be thrilled. Many executives who are still using Windows mobile 6.5 phones because of pocket office or blackberries can not leave these platforms and buy Ipads and Iphones.
If Apple was struggling to sell iPads and iPhones then that might be the case. But they're actually flying off the shelves at an ever accelerating rate. Apple has their own office apps. I think they are quite happy with that as their solution for those moving from MS Office platforms.
If Microsoft want to put MS Office mobile apps on the iOS App Store, then Apple will of course accept them - subject to the same rules as everyone else, which means no document based scripting.
Would Apple allow apps with such scripting support on it's app store?
No, that's definitely against the rules. And there's no way Apple would make an exception for Microsoft. Apple won the fight with Adobe and killed Flash as a platform for mobile. They're big enough not to have to make concessions to Microsoft either.
Would Apple allow the iDevice Office version access MS online services? Unless they've changed pretty recently, I'm under impression that anything like that is a big no-no with Apple, apps which even hint at having that kind of functionality simply rejected.
I have no idea what you're talking about there. It's common place for apps to work with online services.
One source says there are less then 1200 roundabouts in the UK.
A slide in some American organisation's powerpoint presentation. It's ridiculously wrong.
There are 66 cities in the UK. That figure would mean just 18 roundabouts per city. If you forgot about all of the ones on the motorways and A roads in the countryside and towns. Which anyone who knows the UK can see is stupidly low.
Heck Milton Keynes alone has around 300 roundabouts, and thats only a town, not a city.
There doesn't appear to be any count of the number of roundabouts in the UK. There are far too many to count.
There's not really any reason to second guess why that powerpoint slide has it so wrong. But just for the hell of it... I guess they asked the UK Highways Agency. Which only maintains motorways and major trunk roads. Most roads and therefore roundabouts are under the jurisdiction of local councils. It's kind of like the difference between the US federal government and individual states and counties.
That doesn't follow. Apple is such a big customer, with such deep pockets, they often tie up the first year's production of the latest spec components.
We've already been through this with the doubling of the iPhone to a "Retina Display". So we already know for sure it substantially improves the quality of the graphics. Your gut feel is irrelevant.
Well since posting what I did, I've seen Will Shipley tweeting that a $99 is required for a Developer ID to sign apps for Gatekeeper. And that revocation will mean another $99 and a wait of a week. And as he's the most experienced and well connected Mac developer I know, I'm sure he's right.
School kids with no income at all don't need a certificate. Remember that even if code isn't signed, it still doesn't mean software can't be run on a Mac. It just means that the Gatekeeper option will need to be set to the most open option to use it. Which seems about right for software coming from penniless school kids.
You might be able to make a plea for penniless schoolkids to not be treated as suspect. But really that consideration is so fringe it's far less important than the effectiveness for everyone of Gatekeeper doing it's job properly: reducing the potential for malware.
If you'd actually tried to run apps in the development emulator, you wouldn't think this was such as good idea. iPhone apps are designed for touch, they work really badly with a mouse/trackpad.
You need to give the duplicate a name at some stage. Personally I would have gone for the Duplicate command asking for the name for the duplicate. But that would no doubt have got even more complaints from those who have been doing the same thing for 20 years and don't want to change.
Oh my. So much fanboi-ness in such a short sentence. Plus the condescending attitude of the True Believer in All Things Fruity.
He just understands something you don't. If that makes you angry... meh.
You can have a versioned filesystem underneath, and retain exactly the old semantics for saving and copying. There is *zero* reason to alter this.
You're wrong. You're just confirming that you haven't got your head around what's changed. Save as... is not a suitable branching command for a system that is constantly saved. Because it's used after editing, and branching should be done before editing.
Theres no need to do a Duplicate-Save combo. Just Duplicate before you edit.
I agree, but they still should give the user the option to revert to old habits if they want to.
The new way is an essential repercussion of iCloud. Because apps don't just save when you ask them to any more. They effectively save constantly. You have an open doc on one computer, and any changes you make will be reflected in the same open doc in on another computer within a couple of seconds.
If you mean to branch a document into two, then you have to make that clear before you start editing. Not wait until it's time to save the document as used to happen.
No you don't need to be connected. The revocation list is downloaded to the Mac once a day. If you don't connect to the internet, then your revocation list is going to go out of date, but certs will still be checked against it locally.
And it's not every time you run an app. It's only the first time an app is run. Once the user has allowed it to run the first time, there are no longer any checks done. So there would be no benefit for malware to block the download of the revocation list.
Slashdot Mirror
No one with an actual job is relying solely on post-pc devices to do their "real work".
Except of course the many that do.
Of course that doesn't mean that they don't also have a Mac or PC. Just that for at least part of their job, an iPad or an iPhone is the better tool.
Microsoft sell Office:Mac shrinkwrap through the Apple Store (online + cricks and mortar). And Apple will be getting a lot more than 30% of that.
Apple will be thrilled. Many executives who are still using Windows mobile 6.5 phones because of pocket office or blackberries can not leave these platforms and buy Ipads and Iphones.
If Apple was struggling to sell iPads and iPhones then that might be the case. But they're actually flying off the shelves at an ever accelerating rate. Apple has their own office apps. I think they are quite happy with that as their solution for those moving from MS Office platforms.
If Microsoft want to put MS Office mobile apps on the iOS App Store, then Apple will of course accept them - subject to the same rules as everyone else, which means no document based scripting.
Keynote runs Powerpoint presentations.
(Also edits and exports them if it comes to that.)
$9.99
Would Apple allow apps with such scripting support on it's app store?
No, that's definitely against the rules. And there's no way Apple would make an exception for Microsoft. Apple won the fight with Adobe and killed Flash as a platform for mobile. They're big enough not to have to make concessions to Microsoft either.
Would Apple allow the iDevice Office version access MS online services? Unless they've changed pretty recently, I'm under impression that anything like that is a big no-no with Apple, apps which even hint at having that kind of functionality simply rejected.
I have no idea what you're talking about there. It's common place for apps to work with online services.
One source says there are less then 1200 roundabouts in the UK.
A slide in some American organisation's powerpoint presentation. It's ridiculously wrong.
There are 66 cities in the UK. That figure would mean just 18 roundabouts per city. If you forgot about all of the ones on the motorways and A roads in the countryside and towns. Which anyone who knows the UK can see is stupidly low.
Heck Milton Keynes alone has around 300 roundabouts, and thats only a town, not a city.
There doesn't appear to be any count of the number of roundabouts in the UK. There are far too many to count.
There's not really any reason to second guess why that powerpoint slide has it so wrong. But just for the hell of it... I guess they asked the UK Highways Agency. Which only maintains motorways and major trunk roads. Most roads and therefore roundabouts are under the jurisdiction of local councils. It's kind of like the difference between the US federal government and individual states and counties.
You're just making it even more obvious you don't know what you're talking about. Traffic circles are not the same thing as roundabouts.
And it doesn't apply to roundabouts in Europe. If you think it does, then you don't know Europe.
What's a stop signal? A traffic light or a metal sign?
Either way, not as numerous as "stop signals" is not the same thing as rare. In a UK city there will be hundreds of roundabouts.
I might believe you if you didn't write like a complete cretin.
That doesn't follow. Apple is such a big customer, with such deep pockets, they often tie up the first year's production of the latest spec components.
I test out betas of people's android software on my phone all the time.
That's true. Android is from Google, and Google's software is always beta.
CRT. How quaint.
With pixel doubling there is no situation where the display will look worse. And plenty of situations where it will look a lot better.
(Provided the brightness is as good or better - and it was with the Retina display for the iPhone.)
The hardware looks good. But unfortunately it runs Android. Which means I'm just as unlikely to buy it as I am to buy a Windows PC.
We've already been through this with the doubling of the iPhone to a "Retina Display". So we already know for sure it substantially improves the quality of the graphics. Your gut feel is irrelevant.
Apple will only multiply the resolution by two. Anything less compromises the quality of artwork on existing apps.
Well since posting what I did, I've seen Will Shipley tweeting that a $99 is required for a Developer ID to sign apps for Gatekeeper. And that revocation will mean another $99 and a wait of a week. And as he's the most experienced and well connected Mac developer I know, I'm sure he's right.
School kids with no income at all don't need a certificate. Remember that even if code isn't signed, it still doesn't mean software can't be run on a Mac. It just means that the Gatekeeper option will need to be set to the most open option to use it. Which seems about right for software coming from penniless school kids.
You might be able to make a plea for penniless schoolkids to not be treated as suspect. But really that consideration is so fringe it's far less important than the effectiveness for everyone of Gatekeeper doing it's job properly: reducing the potential for malware.
If you'd actually tried to run apps in the development emulator, you wouldn't think this was such as good idea. iPhone apps are designed for touch, they work really badly with a mouse/trackpad.
You need to give the duplicate a name at some stage. Personally I would have gone for the Duplicate command asking for the name for the duplicate. But that would no doubt have got even more complaints from those who have been doing the same thing for 20 years and don't want to change.
Oh my. So much fanboi-ness in such a short sentence. Plus the condescending attitude of the True Believer in All Things Fruity.
He just understands something you don't. If that makes you angry... meh.
You can have a versioned filesystem underneath, and retain exactly the old semantics for saving and copying. There is *zero* reason to alter this.
You're wrong. You're just confirming that you haven't got your head around what's changed. Save as... is not a suitable branching command for a system that is constantly saved. Because it's used after editing, and branching should be done before editing.
Theres no need to do a Duplicate-Save combo. Just Duplicate before you edit.
So what would have been wrong with keeping "Save as...", and making that action count as a branch?
Because Save as... comes after editing. Branching should come before editing.
Remember in the age of iCloud, saving is continuous. So it matters when you change the name of the document.
iCloud does not back up your apps. Only selected user data. Rages's 1.1GB does not eat into your iCloud allocation.
I agree, but they still should give the user the option to revert to old habits if they want to.
The new way is an essential repercussion of iCloud. Because apps don't just save when you ask them to any more. They effectively save constantly. You have an open doc on one computer, and any changes you make will be reflected in the same open doc in on another computer within a couple of seconds.
If you mean to branch a document into two, then you have to make that clear before you start editing. Not wait until it's time to save the document as used to happen.
No you don't need to be connected. The revocation list is downloaded to the Mac once a day. If you don't connect to the internet, then your revocation list is going to go out of date, but certs will still be checked against it locally.
And it's not every time you run an app. It's only the first time an app is run. Once the user has allowed it to run the first time, there are no longer any checks done. So there would be no benefit for malware to block the download of the revocation list.