Well, according to your profile, you have a history of angrily accusing people of being shills and astroturfers (in fact, it seems to be your favorite topic), so I guess I'm joining the elite ranks of the accused.
Wow, Galestar, not only do you anonymously troll every post even remotely critical of Google, but then you use your main account to mod yourself Underrated. Speaking of shills.
No, it's not. The Apple artwork was used in a Centro Sicilia store in Catania, Italy. Samsung scrambled to replace the artwork after it was pointed out.
Hi, Galestar! I'm enjoying them immensely. No matter how many downmods I get, my karma somehow goes back up to excellent. Could be all the +5 comments. Did you know my posts receive the most moderations on Slashdot?
Actually, it's a huge tired talking point for the anti-Android contingent. Ask Stacy Valley-girl how much Android "fragmentation" effects her life and she will look at you like you've grown another neck. Why? Because she as well as 95 percent of Android users either don't freaking care or they don't want upgrades.
She'll care when she sees that her friends have iPhones that can do things that the version of Android on her phone can't do, or when she can't run an app that needs so-and-so version (and possibly so-and-so hardware feature). You're acting as if fragmentation isn't already an issue for both developers and users. The iPhone tops Android smartphones in every customer satisfaction survey. Seamless experiences always win out in the end.
Why should they go to sleep with one version and then wake up with something completely different? They are getting to understand their phone and actually feeling kind of cool and you want to pull the rug from beneath them? Why? So the less than 5 percent of nerds that care will stop whining? NEWS FLASH: Normal users don't care and normal users are who buy all the phones.
I'm sorry, but this is dumb. You're making an argument against operating systems upgrades. Android 4.0 is supposed to deliver major performance enhancements and features that improve the performance of the devices it runs on. But heaven forbid we "pull the rug from beneath them" when they're "actually feeling kind of cool."
It's bizarre for anyone to accuse Apple of deprecating perfectly working hardware/software (note that you don't give a single example) when there are about 150 Android handset models released per year, and phones that are only months old and won't get Android 4.0. Meanwhile the 2 1/2 year old iPhone 3GS can run iOS 4.0, yet you're accusing Apple of the worst planned obsolescence? So what if iOS 4.0 doesn't perform as well on the 3GS--it still runs on it if the customer chooses to install it. The carriers' business model is dependent on new phone models, so they don't want you to get upgrades.
Citing Cyanogen as a legitimate solution is absurd. Normal people shouldn't have to root their phones. Also, I don't care who you think I am or if you don't like to see Google get bashed. What does Google have to do with this?
It's possible but unlikely. The Android phone business model guarantees that updates will be a mess. Putting Android updates on older phones decreases the likelihood that people will buy new phones, and it costs them support and engineering to put out an update.
Carriers don't want you to buy a new phone; they want you to pay a monthly bill. Android gives the carriers control over your phone. This is part of the problem with the argument that Android is about freedom and choice. For contrast, note that the 2 1/2 year old iPhone 3GS can run the latest version of iOS because Apple maintains strict control over the hardware platform to the benefit of the customer, and Microsoft has similar control over Windows Phones to align third-party devices with an OS roadmap.
Android has greater total marketshare due to an abundance of budget phones, but marketshare isn't what drives business; it's profits and customer satisfaction, and the iPhone is the top-selling handset because of the control Apple enforces on its platform as well as the one making the most profit. The narrative is not Android versus Apple, as if Android is some big company--it's Apple versus Samsung versus HTC versus Motorola versus Acer versus Asus verus Coby versus Coby vs. Sony-Ericsson versus Fusion Garage versus RIM versus HP versus Archos.
Seamless experiences always win out over time. We saw it when gaming shifted from PCs to consoles, and now the industry is shifting from desktops to mobile devices. Fragmentation is a huge for users.
P.S. Android phones used to look like this. After the iPhone, they coincidentally and miraculously all adopted the exact same shiny black front and chrome frame. Funny how that works, huh?
Do you have any evidence to back that up? Remember that this all started when Apple decided that it owned the smartphone concept and the related rounded rectangle shape.
That's a complete straw man and typical rhetoric from pro-Google Slashdot. Apple didn't sue over a "rounded rectangle shape" or "the smartphone concept."
You do realize how ridiculous you sound, right? Apple had the option of paying for those licenses at the time, making Motorola and Google to be the bad guys in all of this because they've refused to completely lie down to some rather ridiculous patent abuse suits is pretty pathetic.
Do you realize how ridiculous you sound? "Apple had the option of paying another company for patent licenses! How dare you make them out to be bad guys abusing the system!"
The hope was that Google buying Motorola would create enough balance between the portfolio's of Google, MS, and Apple that it would be in all of their interests to return to some form of truce.
The defensive patents argument was only a "hope" on pro-Google Slashdot; everyone else in the world knew that Google was just after patents like everyone else, and that was proven correct when Google-owned Motorola won a preliminary injunction to block sales of iPhones and iPads in Germany.
Businesses make people sign release forms all the time that dissolve them of legal culpability, and those releases are legally upheld in court. For instance, a tattoo shop can make it so you can't sue them if your tattoo gets infected, as long as you sign a release form which says they're not responsible for infections, because infections are a possibility with tattoos.
Sony is not asking you to give up your first-born son, so that's just a meaningless strawman.
According to the court papers, filed in opposition to Google, Microsoft is not lying here.
FTFY.
Hello, anonymous Google supporter who shows up in every article. The information is in a statement from the Department of Justice in the court briefing. It's not an allegation or statement of opinion; Google really doesn't have the FISMA certification they claimed they did. Microsoft further made the point in the linked article that if the FISMA certification for Google Apps Premier applied to Google Apps for Government, Google wouldn't be applying for another certification specifically for Google Apps for Government.
According to the court papers, Microsoft is not lying here. Google Apps for Government really doesn't have FISMA certification, even though Google said it did.
This place has become a community of Google cheerleaders, so of course the summary is going to make Google out to be anti-software patents in some exaggerated fashion.
The biggest problem with Slashdot is that it's abandoned all nuance in perceiving Google. Everything is exaggerated and absolutist. Google uses open source? It must be a benevolent open source company fighting for freedom. Google gives out free services like Gmail? They must love technology and their users and aren't simply out to get their data indexed for advertisers.
There's been a major controversy going on the last two weeks about Google withholding the source code to Honeycomb from its non-privileged partners as well as making Android licensees sign non-fragmentation clauses that give Google approval over all source changes. There are even accusations that Google is intentionally obstructing Android phones modified to use Bing. Yet if you visit Slashdot, not a word of any of this has been mentioned. If it was Apple or Microsoft, it would get posted on day one.
No kidding. Can this site be any more insufferably pro-Google? I love the throwaway accusation in the submission that "Microsoft, Apple, and others are abusing software patents" without any citations. I guess we're supposed to forget that they're a multi-billion dollar advertising company with a history of violating privacy rights because they publicly took a stance that makes Slashdot feel warm and fuzzy.
A large number of anonymous posts on Slashdot are pro-Google, including the submitter of this story. Doesn't anyone else wonder if there's an astroturfing PR campaign going on around here, or is Google considered above such things?
Anyone else tired of some people acting as if Slashdot posts nothing but Apple posts? The front page every day is dominated by Google and Linux, yet there are always these weird posts crying about "yet another" Apple article. Seriously, what are you talking about?
What the hell are you talking about? No corporations are getting together or controlling the market here. The Canadian government via the CRTC approved these usage-based billing rates. You're bashing capitalism in typical goofy Slashdot fashion without even acknowledging that it's the government that told them to go forward with it.
Besides, Internet access isn't some right or necessity. You're paying for an IP on someone's private network. They can charge what they want for that network service, and their sysadmins can regulate the traffic however they wish.
How the hell did your comment get +5 Insightful when the original article has nothing at all to do with corporations controlling the market, and, in fact, it is the CRTC that approved the usage-based billing? Are you some kind of kooky socialist or something? The computer you used to type your comment is a product of capitalism.
Wikipedia says: "Apple brought the concept of Light Peak, an interoperable standard which could handle large amounts of data and replace the multitudinous connector types with a single universal connector, to Intel in 2007 with the intention of Intel producing and developing the technology."
However, I know that Slashdot is packed to the bring with suspiciously anonymous Apple-bashers these days and that they won't believe anything positive about Apple whatsoever. The only good company is Google.
Yes, requesting information on child predators who are using an ISP run by a group calling itself the "Pirate Party" is watching and controlling everything you do.
Do you just read alarmist libertarian blogs all day and then go into your backyard to shoot guns?
Slashdot Mirror
Well, according to your profile, you have a history of angrily accusing people of being shills and astroturfers (in fact, it seems to be your favorite topic), so I guess I'm joining the elite ranks of the accused.
Wow, Galestar, not only do you anonymously troll every post even remotely critical of Google, but then you use your main account to mod yourself Underrated. Speaking of shills.
Really?
No, it's not. The Apple artwork was used in a Centro Sicilia store in Catania, Italy. Samsung scrambled to replace the artwork after it was pointed out.
Hi, Galestar! I'm enjoying them immensely. No matter how many downmods I get, my karma somehow goes back up to excellent. Could be all the +5 comments. Did you know my posts receive the most moderations on Slashdot?
She'll care when she sees that her friends have iPhones that can do things that the version of Android on her phone can't do, or when she can't run an app that needs so-and-so version (and possibly so-and-so hardware feature). You're acting as if fragmentation isn't already an issue for both developers and users. The iPhone tops Android smartphones in every customer satisfaction survey. Seamless experiences always win out in the end.
I'm sorry, but this is dumb. You're making an argument against operating systems upgrades. Android 4.0 is supposed to deliver major performance enhancements and features that improve the performance of the devices it runs on. But heaven forbid we "pull the rug from beneath them" when they're "actually feeling kind of cool."
It's bizarre for anyone to accuse Apple of deprecating perfectly working hardware/software (note that you don't give a single example) when there are about 150 Android handset models released per year, and phones that are only months old and won't get Android 4.0. Meanwhile the 2 1/2 year old iPhone 3GS can run iOS 4.0, yet you're accusing Apple of the worst planned obsolescence? So what if iOS 4.0 doesn't perform as well on the 3GS--it still runs on it if the customer chooses to install it. The carriers' business model is dependent on new phone models, so they don't want you to get upgrades.
Citing Cyanogen as a legitimate solution is absurd. Normal people shouldn't have to root their phones. Also, I don't care who you think I am or if you don't like to see Google get bashed. What does Google have to do with this?
It's possible but unlikely. The Android phone business model guarantees that updates will be a mess. Putting Android updates on older phones decreases the likelihood that people will buy new phones, and it costs them support and engineering to put out an update.
Carriers don't want you to buy a new phone; they want you to pay a monthly bill. Android gives the carriers control over your phone. This is part of the problem with the argument that Android is about freedom and choice. For contrast, note that the 2 1/2 year old iPhone 3GS can run the latest version of iOS because Apple maintains strict control over the hardware platform to the benefit of the customer, and Microsoft has similar control over Windows Phones to align third-party devices with an OS roadmap.
Android has greater total marketshare due to an abundance of budget phones, but marketshare isn't what drives business; it's profits and customer satisfaction, and the iPhone is the top-selling handset because of the control Apple enforces on its platform as well as the one making the most profit. The narrative is not Android versus Apple, as if Android is some big company--it's Apple versus Samsung versus HTC versus Motorola versus Acer versus Asus verus Coby versus Coby vs. Sony-Ericsson versus Fusion Garage versus RIM versus HP versus Archos.
Seamless experiences always win out over time. We saw it when gaming shifted from PCs to consoles, and now the industry is shifting from desktops to mobile devices. Fragmentation is a huge for users.
P.S. Android phones used to look like this. After the iPhone, they coincidentally and miraculously all adopted the exact same shiny black front and chrome frame. Funny how that works, huh?
That's a complete straw man and typical rhetoric from pro-Google Slashdot. Apple didn't sue over a "rounded rectangle shape" or "the smartphone concept."
Do you realize how ridiculous you sound? "Apple had the option of paying another company for patent licenses! How dare you make them out to be bad guys abusing the system!"
The defensive patents argument was only a "hope" on pro-Google Slashdot; everyone else in the world knew that Google was just after patents like everyone else, and that was proven correct when Google-owned Motorola won a preliminary injunction to block sales of iPhones and iPads in Germany.
It's not free to Google's actual customers--advertisers.
Yes, it's perfectly reasonable to expect users to install and configure iptables on their cell phones. We know this because you wrote "easily" twice!
Businesses make people sign release forms all the time that dissolve them of legal culpability, and those releases are legally upheld in court. For instance, a tattoo shop can make it so you can't sue them if your tattoo gets infected, as long as you sign a release form which says they're not responsible for infections, because infections are a possibility with tattoos.
Sony is not asking you to give up your first-born son, so that's just a meaningless strawman.
That's a silly response. EB Games wouldn't accept your returned PS3 because it's years old, regardless of the EULA updating or not. Sell it used.
Wrong--in the case of a free software license, the user agreeing to the license is the developer who uses the code.
Hello, anonymous Google supporter who shows up in every article. The information is in a statement from the Department of Justice in the court briefing. It's not an allegation or statement of opinion; Google really doesn't have the FISMA certification they claimed they did. Microsoft further made the point in the linked article that if the FISMA certification for Google Apps Premier applied to Google Apps for Government, Google wouldn't be applying for another certification specifically for Google Apps for Government.
According to the court papers, Microsoft is not lying here. Google Apps for Government really doesn't have FISMA certification, even though Google said it did.
This place has become a community of Google cheerleaders, so of course the summary is going to make Google out to be anti-software patents in some exaggerated fashion.
The biggest problem with Slashdot is that it's abandoned all nuance in perceiving Google. Everything is exaggerated and absolutist. Google uses open source? It must be a benevolent open source company fighting for freedom. Google gives out free services like Gmail? They must love technology and their users and aren't simply out to get their data indexed for advertisers.
There's been a major controversy going on the last two weeks about Google withholding the source code to Honeycomb from its non-privileged partners as well as making Android licensees sign non-fragmentation clauses that give Google approval over all source changes. There are even accusations that Google is intentionally obstructing Android phones modified to use Bing. Yet if you visit Slashdot, not a word of any of this has been mentioned. If it was Apple or Microsoft, it would get posted on day one.
No kidding. Can this site be any more insufferably pro-Google? I love the throwaway accusation in the submission that "Microsoft, Apple, and others are abusing software patents" without any citations. I guess we're supposed to forget that they're a multi-billion dollar advertising company with a history of violating privacy rights because they publicly took a stance that makes Slashdot feel warm and fuzzy.
A large number of anonymous posts on Slashdot are pro-Google, including the submitter of this story. Doesn't anyone else wonder if there's an astroturfing PR campaign going on around here, or is Google considered above such things?
Anyone else tired of some people acting as if Slashdot posts nothing but Apple posts? The front page every day is dominated by Google and Linux, yet there are always these weird posts crying about "yet another" Apple article. Seriously, what are you talking about?
Android can't even send text messages without them going to random strangers.
What the hell are you talking about? No corporations are getting together or controlling the market here. The Canadian government via the CRTC approved these usage-based billing rates. You're bashing capitalism in typical goofy Slashdot fashion without even acknowledging that it's the government that told them to go forward with it.
Besides, Internet access isn't some right or necessity. You're paying for an IP on someone's private network. They can charge what they want for that network service, and their sysadmins can regulate the traffic however they wish.
How the hell did your comment get +5 Insightful when the original article has nothing at all to do with corporations controlling the market, and, in fact, it is the CRTC that approved the usage-based billing? Are you some kind of kooky socialist or something? The computer you used to type your comment is a product of capitalism.
Wikipedia says: "Apple brought the concept of Light Peak, an interoperable standard which could handle large amounts of data and replace the multitudinous connector types with a single universal connector, to Intel in 2007 with the intention of Intel producing and developing the technology."
However, I know that Slashdot is packed to the bring with suspiciously anonymous Apple-bashers these days and that they won't believe anything positive about Apple whatsoever. The only good company is Google.
Yes, requesting information on child predators who are using an ISP run by a group calling itself the "Pirate Party" is watching and controlling everything you do.
Do you just read alarmist libertarian blogs all day and then go into your backyard to shoot guns?