Yes...I know...Pascal..Ugh (it's a shame so many people under rate Delphi's Object Pascal). But, Embarcadero Delphi will enable you to build FireMonkey based apps that can run on Mac, Windows and iOS. FireMonkey still has a ways to go. However, if you look at the whitepapers posted on the Embarcadero.com website, you will see some interesting stuff. FireMonkey is evolving. Once of the nice things is that it can use the GPU vs the CPU for rendering. This makes 2D and 3D rendering a piece of cake. Additionally, FireMonkey controls can (and should be) stylized. The number of effects one can achieve for a simple button is amazing. Imagine what one can do in terms of designing new UI paradigms.
Are are some blog on using FireMonkey to render functions and demonstrate wave interference (in 3D). http://blogs.embarcadero.com/ao/2012/02/02/39215/ http://blogs.embarcadero.com/ao/2012/01/30/39208/ http://blogs.embarcadero.com/ao/2012/01/27/39206/
and, for a commercial product by TMS Software http://blogs.embarcadero.com/davidi/2012/02/07/41510/
FreePascal w/ Lazarus is another way to experiment (and, get Linux and ARM as target environments as well). FireMonkey for iOS depends on the ARM compiler to bring the apps to iOS (at least until Embarcadero writes their own ARM compiler).
Granted, the tool isn't cheap. But, if you have the budget, it's worth adding to your tool bag.
Another alternative is getting intimately family with JQuery and the DOM. There is a lot you can do to experiment with new UIs.
A company here in the US, TruePosition, has been offering the capability to law enforcement and military to identify the location of all active cell phones in a specific area and time. This technology has implications that go beyond simple surveillance - Here is a link: http://www.trueposition.com/national-security/
Basically, if you have a cellphone or mobile device and it is on...you can't hide. And, the profiles that can be developed from when and where a mobile device is used can be used to prevent and solve crimes and terrorist activity.
While it's not exactly as shown in the TV show "Person of Interest", had similar technology been deployed in the hills of Iraq, Afghanistan and over Pakistan, the whereabouts of OBL probably would have been known to our forces much sooner. And, for other "would-be terrorists", you should think twice before making that telephone call for your next goat sex appointment - Little Miss Molly might be bringing more than just a good time. How baaaaaaad is that?
I just spent six weeks in a cast after breaking my right arm Christmas Night (no...no rogue or drunk reindeer involved). There is now a titanium plate and six screws in my arm. My other wrist is broken also (yes...I fell and had a hell of hard time getting up). Now, I have to endure painful PT to regain full use of my arm again and have a 5 inch scar too (no...it is NOT cool).
How I would have loved to have this stuff injected into the fractures and have it immobilized for a few days while it took action and fuzed the bones. I do hope this comes to fruition...cool stuff. Who said war wasn't useful?
For starters, it's not the OS that crashes...it's the apps. Let's look at how many app crashes take out the OS and make it crash...not studied.
As for the apps - Android is Java based - As such, it is afforded the memory protection that garbage collection entails - at the expense of speed. iOS apps tend to be natively compiled code. Memory management is based on reference counter - in the past, that was a manual process. Now, it's a little easier with the new XCode 4, but still and iffy proposition.
iOS throws an exception when a memory allocation fails. Too many developers fail to properly handle that exception and clean up memory where possible. The default behavior is that the app will just terminate.
Bottom line is that is easier to write code that won't crash on these platforms using Java than a native code compiler. What would be more interesting and of value is to examine:
1. Why, exactly, do these apps crash? 2. What tools were used to write them? 3. Did the crash take out the OS also? While an app that just closes pisses me off - one that crashes the OS REALLY pisses me off - like my Blackberry Storm that would just reboot in the middle of a call.
I have to wonder if anybody here actuall "read" the claims of the patent. Doesn't sound like it to me - sounds like Apple smashing.
You can receive a patent on an extension of another patent. Recall that Apple has 3D accelerometers. That's not innovative - so what, right? Their patent is on the heuristically algorithms that determine how to flip the image based on this information. It's not about deter ing up or down, it's about doing it correctly regardless of the orientation of the device. My iPad orients itself correctly even if i hold it upside down over my head and slightly tilted.
This isn't about putting two pieces of HW together - it's about the software parts that make it work right.
What's probably bothering most of the people here is that Apple now holds a patent on a feature used by 99.9% of Android phones and tablets. If upheld, Google has to either pay royalties or work around the patent as do all the Android device suppliers. That's what people can't stomach - acknowledging that Apple was smart enough to patent such an "obvious" patent when clearly nobody else in the industry thought of it or presented real prior art to stop it. And, this will affect the cost of future Android devices or prevent their introduction into our market altogether until a workaround is devised.
Actually, I don't think Reese are patented but rather trademarked and copyrighted. Process making them might be.
Did he actually demonstrate SPOOFING a message from an arbitrary Zoombak device (i.e. one he did not have physical control of) OR did he send a message from one who's SIM he removed?
Unless he demonstrated that he can SPOOF any Zoombak device at any time, all he did was capture a request to the device, figure out what the response looks like, and send back a bogus response to their server. And, he destroyed the device in the process to get the SIM out. So much for his warranty.
So, where is the insecurity, exactly?
Now, if he actually demonstrated the ability to locate arbitrary Zoombak devices using this technique or spoof arbitrary Zoombak devices, it's clear this "expert" is creating FUD for his 15 minutes of fame. I would love to read his paper or see his presentation if the former were the case because then it becomes relevant.
While I would say you could be correct, I would suspect most people use their devices to track their vehicles or suspected cheating spouses and boyfriend/girlfriends and errant teenagers. The original Zoombak's were designed for tracking pets - dogs - not people. Though, what people use them for is their own business.
This guy is trying to drum up business for his consulting firm. This isn't to say his attack isn't real or represent a real threat to the industry. But, for the common thief or sexual predator to be able to locate a specific device and spoof it is probably not economically feasible right now. I would have to doubt that Zoombak would let a device attach to anything other than a specific server and port. He might be able to spoof one specific device, but he probably didn't much further than that.
And, I suspect that Zoombak and their new parent company, Securus, will close the hole this guy identified rather quickly.
This also clearly demonstrates why the little guy can't ahead in this world. Large corporations with deep pockets will suck you dry and keep on infringing long after you have lost everything - even if you are right.
Patents were designed for ideas that can be constructed and touched - aka inventions - not just ideas.
Couldn't agree with you more. While it is legal to offshore the work, with a 9-10% unemployment rate in this country, it's not ethical or moral. Sadly, when you deal with stockholders and what is right for them, it's about the almighty dollar (or whatever your currency is) and their returns. Nobody ever said capitalism is necessarily or moral. But, once upon a time, people trusted the companies they worked for - companies very often took great care of their employees - now, we have to look out for ourselves.
I am very aware of the ideas behind the original Mac. I am one of the individuals that founded the FIRST Macintosh Users Group in the country - the DUsers. I developed my first software on it using an Apple Lisa and cross compiling because no native tools yet existed.
The Mac was designed to be the computer for "the rest of us" - hence, an appliance. That was it's primary goal. To develop for it, you not only had to have the right tools, but also obtain copies of the any "Inside Macintosh" books that detailed the OS and ROM calls.
The Mac II opened things up and offered NUBus slots. I never owned one of those. But, I did up grade my original Mac 128 to it's capacity. Finally sold it at a flea market for $50.
Somebody mentioned that Jobs stated that the Macintosh was meant to be an "appliance". He meant it then as something common in every home or business - easy to use - not needing to be a genius to operate (back in 1984, that was the case for most people). I had a Apple DU - the Macintosh 128K as it was called before general release. I went to Drexel where we were forced to buy Macs (and, I fought it and I had just purchased an IBM PC with 64K of memory and a single floppy disk a year earlier using my own money).
iOS apps are restricted to the App Store. That is true - unless you jailbreak your device. If that negatively affects Apple's revenue, they will alter course as they have done in the past.
Java - I'd love to see Java apps accepted. But, a decision has been made and Apple is providing the tools to make it happen. There is nothing that precludes Mac apps from being sold by independents - and, that includes Java apps. Could it change? Possibly. Don't expect to see Java on the iPhone or iPad, though.
If iOS becomes the OS for Macs....and we see a closed environment... that WILL piss people off... including me. But, right now, I have a choice. I can choose to develop for Apple OSX and iOS or I can choose to develop for Android or both. And, I can continue to develop for Windows (I prefer Java and Delphi). The linux environment, while a great OS, still hasn't reached a point where its consumer friendly. Businesses will embrace it, though. It took Apple and Google to make *nix environments friendly. Why is that?
So, it doesn't matter. If Apple wants to stay relevant, they will need to give the customer what they ultimately want or another ecosystem will evolve and endanger them. So far, the Apple ecosystem and Android/Google ecosystem (and even MS Windows) ecosystems can co-exist.
Does it really matter? These sound so much like religious or political argument wars - its crazy. Next, we'll see people getting shot over them like what happened in Tuscon yesterday. Stupid.
Android is on more phones because there are more manufacturers selling phones with Android on them. Why? It's free.
iOS is simply for Apple devices for the foreseeable future. It's not free and closed. The closure means, theoretically, that Apple is trying to maintain some control over quality and market saturatation of a given app type. Verizon did that with BREW. Symbian apps required approval also.
Tablet wise, until Android 3 is actually out there, the iPad is the King of the Hill. And, when Android 3 tablets become available, there will still be a market for both.
The consumers of a particular device, Apple or Android are two different types of consumers. I have an Incredible - I like it (no-I haven't rooted it yet). It behaves differently from my iPhone and is taking some getting used to. I have an iPhone and I love it. I have an iPad and an iPod Touch. I love the iPad - it goes everywhere with me. Why? Because I can do what I need to with it and it's not bulky like my laptop. If I need more power, I'll work on it at home or in the office on a desktop or laptop.
For me, I see a bright new world out there waiting to be explored. Lots of opportunities. And, if Android 3 takes off - and, I hope it does - it potentially means more money in my pocket.
If you want Open do as you please - go with Android. If you want a market that's a little more conservative but likes cool toys, go with Apple. Or, go for both.
Once upon a time, we looked to our astronauts as heroes - bigger than life - people who we greatly admired and respected for their bravery, courage and dedication to duty.
We remember Neil Armstrong, Alan Sheppard, John Glenn and Cmd Jim Lovell, Apollo 1, the Challenger and Columbia crews (just to name a few). To be an astronaut meant you above such trivial things as lawsuits over "publicity" rights.
Having the knowledge to develop for both platforms is a wise idea. There are some who think that Apple's proprietary-ness will lead them to their doom. I don't think that's the case at all. I know that with "walled garden" of iOS, my apps are checked for proper behavior before being placed in the wild. And, there is a system in place to sell apps and collect revenue. Granted, Apple takes a nice slice for the privilege - but its a thriving environment.
The language you need to learn is currently Objective-C. Apple has recently changed their development tool policy - so, expect other languages to become available that cross compile down to Objective-C. We'll see. Documentation is very good and there are plenty of 3rd party books out there also.
Android requires Java and knowledge of the Android SKD. It also has a large community following. Gartner groups predicts that by 2014, Android based phones will outsell iOS phones - simply because it will be on more platforms.
Android has a hidden danger - malware has already been found in the wild that attack Android phones. And, if the code keeps forking for each device type out there, you will have to know all the nuances of a given platform. This is something you don't have to worry about too much with iOS. I am not familiar with the selling of Android apps - how that ecosystem works - maybe, somebody else can expound on that.
A third contender will be Microsoft with Windows Phone 7. We'll have to see if their system catches on - the first devices are due out in October. It may be too late for them.
Blackberry? Well, they have too many devices and versions of their OS. Testing our app for Blackberry required the hiring of service to provide access to test devices and separate builds for each device type. I would discourage Blackberry development.
If you plan to sell to your services to the business world, learn both environments. There's where the money is to be made - the days of the "big app" making your a zillionaire are pretty much gone.
I learned the basics of computer programming, initially on a MITS Altair 8800 in, 1976-77. It was an exciting time - computer kits sprung up like weeds. And, we computer geeks were born.
We know that when you have a large number of competitors you get better products. The eReaders are a perfect example. First the Kindle and now about 10 competitors all showing that the competition has created a much greater choice for consumers as well as better features. Further netbooks and tablet PCs as well as touch capabilities in phones and the tablets are perfect examples of what happens when there's no technology to lock you in thus propping up the monopoly.
The problem with this argument is that with the Kindle there are now 10 competitors with 10 different document specifications. Netbooks and tablet PCs are based on a few operating systems - Windows being the primary OS. The manufacturers of those devices, while diverse, are based on a common hardware architecture.
The argument of superiority, while it may be true, won't matter if there isn't a significant adoption. Look at Betamax vs VHS. Betamax was clearly the superior technology, yet it lost out to the sheer marketing power put behind VHS. Borland had superior development tools to Microsoft in every way DESPITE Microsoft owning the technology. Yet, Borland blew it.
OpenGL will survive in niche circles and won't make it make stream unless a concerted effort is made to promote it and it gains a foothold in established development houses. This article did nothing to make me want to jump on the bandwagon (I am not a game developer...but, the argument wasn't persuasive enough for me).
is having a version that can work on either GSM or CDMA based on an inter-changable carrier module.
That would unlease the iPhone from AT&T and permit it to be used on a network that can support the load.
I still get irritated that AT&T tries to counter Verizon with that stupid Post-card covered coverage map. Verizon doesn't say anything about AT&T's voice coverage... they only remark on the piss poor 3G coverage (needed for data). AT&T is trying to compare Apples to Aston Martins.
This is what I was taught as a naval officer. If I asked my men to stay late because the regular duty section couldn't get it the work done, I stayed. And, if it were left to the duty section and I wasn't on duty, my men always knew how to get in touch with me.
It isn't about helping them do the work (we're not necessarily the technical experts-although at times I was)- it's not about moral support - it's about making sure they have what they need to get the job done - and, when the work's done, it's about making sure they, not I, get the credit for a job well done.
As a manager today, I still think this is the way it should be done.
Saw much the same thing - our office was a smoker's office and the worst culprits was the owner and his wife. When we installed a server rack (next to his office) and asked for air filtration. He refused. We lost two servers in 6 months due to the smoke - tar and dust buildup beyond belief. The saving grace came when summer arrived and the servers started to shut down due to excessive heat. We installed window air conditioners that brought fresh air into the room and created a positive pressure gradient that kept the smoke out of the room.
Staff meetings were held in a closed room with people smoking all the time. They had little concern for those of us who didn't smoke. I got up and walked out of more than one meeting because I couldn't breath and my eyes teared.
Having worked in that place for several years before the company grew large enough to have to be compliant with OSHA regulations that banned smoking in the office place, I hate to think what condition my lungs were in from the second hand smoke.
I doubt this happened given that "at the time of the first iPhone release" and, just like now, the iPhone is a GSM based phone. Verizon is CDMA. These negotiations would have had to occur when Apple was designing the iPhone.
This doesn't invalidate the rest of the terms you describe. But, the iPhone would have needed to be designed for CDMA - you just can't swap out cellular systems like we can with a hard drive. The entire circuit board would need to be redesigned so that it would pass FCC certification (and carrier requirements). Not something you do over night.
Yes, I served during Desert Storm. I was a Naval Officer and, as gunnery officer with a combat station on the signal bridge, my estimated time of survival in an attack was 30 seconds. $250K bonus? Last I checked, it was $25K and is for specialty ratings.
Cops, like most people who served in the military, do so out of a need to support and defend this country. I took an oath to defend this country against all enemies, foreign and domestic. Our police take a different, but similar oath. What oath did you take?
No, cops are not allowed to beat people. And, when they do or cross the line, they ARE punished. I worked with cops. 99.9% of them are pretty decent folk. They don't violate the law - they uphold it. If you don't like the law, work to change it in a peaceful manner.
And, it is well known that Freedom of Speech is for political speech and, for the most part, Freedom of the Press. Yet, there are clauses that can be invoked to make it illegal for the press to publish certain stories - case in point - not being allowed to photograph our fallen soldiers on their return. That ban was recently overturned. Another is the case where Cheeney and crew were accused of outing of a CIA operative. That disclosure put Valerie Plume in danger - the fact that nobody was prosecuted is amazing as it violated her privacy and her right to pursue life, liberty and happiness. It is also illegal to speak ill of a certain allied country in the US. Why? Because it is a national security. Bet you didn't know that? You are also not allowed to make threats against the POTUS or speak of overthrowing the gov't to name a few.
Beyond that, what is considered free speech is still at the discretion of the courts-your speech is not always free.
If an officer were harmed in this case or a major case was impeded - she will get charged with obstruction of justice.
The filed the charge "identifying a police officer with intent to harass" to hold her and begin building a real case against her if deemed necessary. She may also learn her lesson and go away. If not, they will nail her.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes...I know...Pascal..Ugh (it's a shame so many people under rate Delphi's Object Pascal). But, Embarcadero Delphi will enable you to build FireMonkey based apps that can run on Mac, Windows and iOS. FireMonkey still has a ways to go. However, if you look at the whitepapers posted on the Embarcadero.com website, you will see some interesting stuff. FireMonkey is evolving. Once of the nice things is that it can use the GPU vs the CPU for rendering. This makes 2D and 3D rendering a piece of cake. Additionally, FireMonkey controls can (and should be) stylized. The number of effects one can achieve for a simple button is amazing. Imagine what one can do in terms of designing new UI paradigms.
Are are some blog on using FireMonkey to render functions and demonstrate wave interference (in 3D).
http://blogs.embarcadero.com/ao/2012/02/02/39215/
http://blogs.embarcadero.com/ao/2012/01/30/39208/
http://blogs.embarcadero.com/ao/2012/01/27/39206/
and, for a commercial product by TMS Software http://blogs.embarcadero.com/davidi/2012/02/07/41510/
FreePascal w/ Lazarus is another way to experiment (and, get Linux and ARM as target environments as well). FireMonkey for iOS depends on the ARM compiler to bring the apps to iOS (at least until Embarcadero writes their own ARM compiler).
Granted, the tool isn't cheap. But, if you have the budget, it's worth adding to your tool bag.
Another alternative is getting intimately family with JQuery and the DOM. There is a lot you can do to experiment with new UIs.
A company here in the US, TruePosition, has been offering the capability to law enforcement and military to identify the location of all active cell phones in a specific area and time. This technology has implications that go beyond simple surveillance - Here is a link: http://www.trueposition.com/national-security/
Basically, if you have a cellphone or mobile device and it is on...you can't hide. And, the profiles that can be developed from when and where a mobile device is used can be used to prevent and solve crimes and terrorist activity.
While it's not exactly as shown in the TV show "Person of Interest", had similar technology been deployed in the hills of Iraq, Afghanistan and over Pakistan, the whereabouts of OBL probably would have been known to our forces much sooner. And, for other "would-be terrorists", you should think twice before making that telephone call for your next goat sex appointment - Little Miss Molly might be bringing more than just a good time. How baaaaaaad is that?
Said it was developed from stem cells - but, it is a gell containing a bone generating protein.
I think you mean "boning sheep".
I just spent six weeks in a cast after breaking my right arm Christmas Night (no...no rogue or drunk reindeer involved). There is now a titanium plate and six screws in my arm. My other wrist is broken also (yes...I fell and had a hell of hard time getting up). Now, I have to endure painful PT to regain full use of my arm again and have a 5 inch scar too (no...it is NOT cool).
How I would have loved to have this stuff injected into the fractures and have it immobilized for a few days while it took action and fuzed the bones. I do hope this comes to fruition...cool stuff. Who said war wasn't useful?
For starters, it's not the OS that crashes...it's the apps. Let's look at how many app crashes take out the OS and make it crash...not studied.
As for the apps - Android is Java based - As such, it is afforded the memory protection that garbage collection entails - at the expense of speed. iOS apps tend to be natively compiled code. Memory management is based on reference counter - in the past, that was a manual process. Now, it's a little easier with the new XCode 4, but still and iffy proposition.
iOS throws an exception when a memory allocation fails. Too many developers fail to properly handle that exception and clean up memory where possible. The default behavior is that the app will just terminate.
Bottom line is that is easier to write code that won't crash on these platforms using Java than a native code compiler. What would be more interesting and of value is to examine:
1. Why, exactly, do these apps crash?
2. What tools were used to write them?
3. Did the crash take out the OS also? While an app that just closes pisses me off - one that crashes the OS REALLY pisses me off - like my Blackberry Storm that would just reboot in the middle of a call.
I have to wonder if anybody here actuall "read" the claims of the patent. Doesn't sound like it to me - sounds like Apple smashing.
You can receive a patent on an extension of another patent. Recall that Apple has 3D accelerometers. That's not innovative - so what, right? Their patent is on the heuristically algorithms that determine how to flip the image based on this information. It's not about deter ing up or down, it's about doing it correctly regardless of the orientation of the device. My iPad orients itself correctly even if i hold it upside down over my head and slightly tilted.
This isn't about putting two pieces of HW together - it's about the software parts that make it work right.
What's probably bothering most of the people here is that Apple now holds a patent on a feature used by 99.9% of Android phones and tablets. If upheld, Google has to either pay royalties or work around the patent as do all the Android device suppliers. That's what people can't stomach - acknowledging that Apple was smart enough to patent such an "obvious" patent when clearly nobody else in the industry thought of it or presented real prior art to stop it. And, this will affect the cost of future Android devices or prevent their introduction into our market altogether until a workaround is devised.
Actually, I don't think Reese are patented but rather trademarked and copyrighted. Process making them might be.
Did he actually demonstrate SPOOFING a message from an arbitrary Zoombak device (i.e. one he did not have physical control of) OR did he send a message from one who's SIM he removed?
Unless he demonstrated that he can SPOOF any Zoombak device at any time, all he did was capture a request to the device, figure out what the response looks like, and send back a bogus response to their server. And, he destroyed the device in the process to get the SIM out. So much for his warranty.
So, where is the insecurity, exactly?
Now, if he actually demonstrated the ability to locate arbitrary Zoombak devices using this technique or spoof arbitrary Zoombak devices, it's clear this "expert" is creating FUD for his 15 minutes of fame. I would love to read his paper or see his presentation if the former were the case because then it becomes relevant.
While I would say you could be correct, I would suspect most people use their devices to track their vehicles or suspected cheating spouses and boyfriend/girlfriends and errant teenagers. The original Zoombak's were designed for tracking pets - dogs - not people. Though, what people use them for is their own business.
This guy is trying to drum up business for his consulting firm. This isn't to say his attack isn't real or represent a real threat to the industry. But, for the common thief or sexual predator to be able to locate a specific device and spoof it is probably not economically feasible right now. I would have to doubt that Zoombak would let a device attach to anything other than a specific server and port. He might be able to spoof one specific device, but he probably didn't much further than that.
And, I suspect that Zoombak and their new parent company, Securus, will close the hole this guy identified rather quickly.
I suspect Zoombak will close the hole fairly quickly. Fear not.
I would love to read more on his methods.
The question is which Zoombak devices did he compromise? Was it their Zoombak 520, 521 or the Securus eClick (Zoombak was acquired by them) series?
This also clearly demonstrates why the little guy can't ahead in this world. Large corporations with deep pockets will suck you dry and keep on infringing long after you have lost everything - even if you are right.
Patents were designed for ideas that can be constructed and touched - aka inventions - not just ideas.
Software patents should not be allowed. Period.
Couldn't agree with you more. While it is legal to offshore the work, with a 9-10% unemployment rate in this country, it's not ethical or moral. Sadly, when you deal with stockholders and what is right for them, it's about the almighty dollar (or whatever your currency is) and their returns. Nobody ever said capitalism is necessarily or moral. But, once upon a time, people trusted the companies they worked for - companies very often took great care of their employees - now, we have to look out for ourselves.
I am very aware of the ideas behind the original Mac. I am one of the individuals that founded the FIRST Macintosh Users Group in the country - the DUsers. I developed my first software on it using an Apple Lisa and cross compiling because no native tools yet existed.
The Mac was designed to be the computer for "the rest of us" - hence, an appliance. That was it's primary goal. To develop for it, you not only had to have the right tools, but also obtain copies of the any "Inside Macintosh" books that detailed the OS and ROM calls.
The Mac II opened things up and offered NUBus slots. I never owned one of those. But, I did up grade my original Mac 128 to it's capacity. Finally sold it at a flea market for $50.
Somebody mentioned that Jobs stated that the Macintosh was meant to be an "appliance". He meant it then as something common in every home or business - easy to use - not needing to be a genius to operate (back in 1984, that was the case for most people). I had a Apple DU - the Macintosh 128K as it was called before general release. I went to Drexel where we were forced to buy Macs (and, I fought it and I had just purchased an IBM PC with 64K of memory and a single floppy disk a year earlier using my own money).
iOS apps are restricted to the App Store. That is true - unless you jailbreak your device. If that negatively affects Apple's revenue, they will alter course as they have done in the past.
Java - I'd love to see Java apps accepted. But, a decision has been made and Apple is providing the tools to make it happen. There is nothing that precludes Mac apps from being sold by independents - and, that includes Java apps. Could it change? Possibly. Don't expect to see Java on the iPhone or iPad, though.
If iOS becomes the OS for Macs....and we see a closed environment ... that WILL piss people off ... including me. But, right now, I have a choice. I can choose to develop for Apple OSX and iOS or I can choose to develop for Android or both. And, I can continue to develop for Windows (I prefer Java and Delphi). The linux environment, while a great OS, still hasn't reached a point where its consumer friendly. Businesses will embrace it, though. It took Apple and Google to make *nix environments friendly. Why is that?
So, it doesn't matter. If Apple wants to stay relevant, they will need to give the customer what they ultimately want or another ecosystem will evolve and endanger them. So far, the Apple ecosystem and Android/Google ecosystem (and even MS Windows) ecosystems can co-exist.
Does it really matter? These sound so much like religious or political argument wars - its crazy. Next, we'll see people getting shot over them like what happened in Tuscon yesterday. Stupid.
Android is on more phones because there are more manufacturers selling phones with Android on them. Why? It's free.
iOS is simply for Apple devices for the foreseeable future. It's not free and closed. The closure means, theoretically, that Apple is trying to maintain some control over quality and market saturatation of a given app type. Verizon did that with BREW. Symbian apps required approval also.
Tablet wise, until Android 3 is actually out there, the iPad is the King of the Hill. And, when Android 3 tablets become available, there will still be a market for both.
The consumers of a particular device, Apple or Android are two different types of consumers. I have an Incredible - I like it (no-I haven't rooted it yet). It behaves differently from my iPhone and is taking some getting used to. I have an iPhone and I love it. I have an iPad and an iPod Touch. I love the iPad - it goes everywhere with me. Why? Because I can do what I need to with it and it's not bulky like my laptop. If I need more power, I'll work on it at home or in the office on a desktop or laptop.
For me, I see a bright new world out there waiting to be explored. Lots of opportunities. And, if Android 3 takes off - and, I hope it does - it potentially means more money in my pocket.
If you want Open do as you please - go with Android. If you want a market that's a little more conservative but likes cool toys, go with Apple. Or, go for both.
Once upon a time, we looked to our astronauts as heroes - bigger than life - people who we greatly admired and respected for their bravery, courage and dedication to duty.
We remember Neil Armstrong, Alan Sheppard, John Glenn and Cmd Jim Lovell, Apollo 1, the Challenger and Columbia crews (just to name a few). To be an astronaut meant you above such trivial things as lawsuits over "publicity" rights.
Sad.
Having the knowledge to develop for both platforms is a wise idea. There are some who think that Apple's proprietary-ness will lead them to their doom. I don't think that's the case at all. I know that with "walled garden" of iOS, my apps are checked for proper behavior before being placed in the wild. And, there is a system in place to sell apps and collect revenue. Granted, Apple takes a nice slice for the privilege - but its a thriving environment.
The language you need to learn is currently Objective-C. Apple has recently changed their development tool policy - so, expect other languages to become available that cross compile down to Objective-C. We'll see. Documentation is very good and there are plenty of 3rd party books out there also.
Android requires Java and knowledge of the Android SKD. It also has a large community following. Gartner groups predicts that by 2014, Android based phones will outsell iOS phones - simply because it will be on more platforms.
Android has a hidden danger - malware has already been found in the wild that attack Android phones. And, if the code keeps forking for each device type out there, you will have to know all the nuances of a given platform. This is something you don't have to worry about too much with iOS. I am not familiar with the selling of Android apps - how that ecosystem works - maybe, somebody else can expound on that.
A third contender will be Microsoft with Windows Phone 7. We'll have to see if their system catches on - the first devices are due out in October. It may be too late for them.
Blackberry? Well, they have too many devices and versions of their OS. Testing our app for Blackberry required the hiring of service to provide access to test devices and separate builds for each device type. I would discourage Blackberry development.
If you plan to sell to your services to the business world, learn both environments. There's where the money is to be made - the days of the "big app" making your a zillionaire are pretty much gone.
I learned the basics of computer programming, initially on a MITS Altair 8800 in, 1976-77. It was an exciting time - computer kits sprung up like weeds. And, we computer geeks were born.
May he rest in peace.
We know that when you have a large number of competitors you get better products. The eReaders are a perfect example. First the Kindle and now about 10 competitors all showing that the competition has created a much greater choice for consumers as well as better features. Further netbooks and tablet PCs as well as touch capabilities in phones and the tablets are perfect examples of what happens when there's no technology to lock you in thus propping up the monopoly.
The problem with this argument is that with the Kindle there are now 10 competitors with 10 different document specifications. Netbooks and tablet PCs are based on a few operating systems - Windows being the primary OS. The manufacturers of those devices, while diverse, are based on a common hardware architecture.
The argument of superiority, while it may be true, won't matter if there isn't a significant adoption. Look at Betamax vs VHS. Betamax was clearly the superior technology, yet it lost out to the sheer marketing power put behind VHS. Borland had superior development tools to Microsoft in every way DESPITE Microsoft owning the technology. Yet, Borland blew it.
OpenGL will survive in niche circles and won't make it make stream unless a concerted effort is made to promote it and it gains a foothold in established development houses. This article did nothing to make me want to jump on the bandwagon (I am not a game developer...but, the argument wasn't persuasive enough for me).
is having a version that can work on either GSM or CDMA based on an inter-changable carrier module.
That would unlease the iPhone from AT&T and permit it to be used on a network that can support the load.
I still get irritated that AT&T tries to counter Verizon with that stupid Post-card covered coverage map. Verizon doesn't say anything about AT&T's voice coverage ... they only remark on the piss poor 3G coverage (needed for data). AT&T is trying to compare Apples to Aston Martins.
This is what I was taught as a naval officer. If I asked my men to stay late because the regular duty section couldn't get it the work done, I stayed. And, if it were left to the duty section and I wasn't on duty, my men always knew how to get in touch with me.
It isn't about helping them do the work (we're not necessarily the technical experts-although at times I was)- it's not about moral support - it's about making sure they have what they need to get the job done - and, when the work's done, it's about making sure they, not I, get the credit for a job well done.
As a manager today, I still think this is the way it should be done.
Saw much the same thing - our office was a smoker's office and the worst culprits was the owner and his wife. When we installed a server rack (next to his office) and asked for air filtration. He refused. We lost two servers in 6 months due to the smoke - tar and dust buildup beyond belief. The saving grace came when summer arrived and the servers started to shut down due to excessive heat. We installed window air conditioners that brought fresh air into the room and created a positive pressure gradient that kept the smoke out of the room.
Staff meetings were held in a closed room with people smoking all the time. They had little concern for those of us who didn't smoke. I got up and walked out of more than one meeting because I couldn't breath and my eyes teared.
Having worked in that place for several years before the company grew large enough to have to be compliant with OSHA regulations that banned smoking in the office place, I hate to think what condition my lungs were in from the second hand smoke.
I doubt this happened given that "at the time of the first iPhone release" and, just like now, the iPhone is a GSM based phone. Verizon is CDMA. These negotiations would have had to occur when Apple was designing the iPhone.
This doesn't invalidate the rest of the terms you describe. But, the iPhone would have needed to be designed for CDMA - you just can't swap out cellular systems like we can with a hard drive. The entire circuit board would need to be redesigned so that it would pass FCC certification (and carrier requirements). Not something you do over night.
Yes, I served during Desert Storm. I was a Naval Officer and, as gunnery officer with a combat station on the signal bridge, my estimated time of survival in an attack was 30 seconds. $250K bonus? Last I checked, it was $25K and is for specialty ratings.
Cops, like most people who served in the military, do so out of a need to support and defend this country. I took an oath to defend this country against all enemies, foreign and domestic. Our police take a different, but similar oath. What oath did you take?
No, cops are not allowed to beat people. And, when they do or cross the line, they ARE punished. I worked with cops. 99.9% of them are pretty decent folk. They don't violate the law - they uphold it. If you don't like the law, work to change it in a peaceful manner.
And, it is well known that Freedom of Speech is for political speech and, for the most part, Freedom of the Press. Yet, there are clauses that can be invoked to make it illegal for the press to publish certain stories - case in point - not being allowed to photograph our fallen soldiers on their return. That ban was recently overturned. Another is the case where Cheeney and crew were accused of outing of a CIA operative. That disclosure put Valerie Plume in danger - the fact that nobody was prosecuted is amazing as it violated her privacy and her right to pursue life, liberty and happiness. It is also illegal to speak ill of a certain allied country in the US. Why? Because it is a national security. Bet you didn't know that? You are also not allowed to make threats against the POTUS or speak of overthrowing the gov't to name a few.
Beyond that, what is considered free speech is still at the discretion of the courts-your speech is not always free.
If an officer were harmed in this case or a major case was impeded - she will get charged with obstruction of justice.
The filed the charge "identifying a police officer with intent to harass" to hold her and begin building a real case against her if deemed necessary. She may also learn her lesson and go away. If not, they will nail her.
Amazing. Advocate the police and their safety, and you get marked a troll.
Advocate a nut job with stalker tendencies and you get marked up as being insightful. WTF.
When you cite the constitution, please know the intent and how the courts have interpreted this clause.
Public figure != public servant.
Just because you "pay" their salary does not give you the right to harass and endanger them. This is not the meaning of "transparency" in government.
Shit, this attitude of entitlement and ownership sounds like my last employer.