Thanks Apple. I really needed yet another device to want to buy, especially given that I've just bought myself an iPad and my girlfriend an iPod Touch. This really seems like an Apple TV-on-steroids that I'd love to have. Thanks.
Let's See What Happens When Corporations Become Publishers.
Hate to break it to you but most major publishers are corporations. I know you were trying to be witty and make a point but you might want to try harder next time.
Anyone writing an app that takes more than 1 person two weeks to create... aren't going to waste their time with a company as inconsistent as Apple when they have other platforms to develop for.
Ok, seriously, how do people even remotely believe this? Go have a look at the app store and browse through the thousands and thousands and thousands and thousands of apps that are available. Take a moment to pay attention to the development studios involved in many of those apps. Take a moment to contemplate the development time involved with many of those apps. Now, take a look back at your quote and see just how utterly fallacious it is. There are apparently plenty of developers "wasting" their time developing for the iPhone/iPad.
Especially when there's reason to believe that Android is beginning to exceed the iPhone.
As to your claim that Android is exceeding the iPhone, you are utterly wrong. The iPhone OS outstrips Android by a wide margin. A very, very wide margin. Three times larger, in fact.
You might want to read up on the subject a bit more because you are entirely wrong, in every way possible.
I suggest that killing people when it accomplishes nothing is murder.
You suggested no such thing. You suggested, and I quote: "those who support the death penalty are accessories to murder, and some people like to murder."
In your second post, you provide a reasoned argument against the death penalty ("killing people when it accomplishes nothing is murder") which is an opinion that can be discussed and debated. Your first point, however, was a personal attack on the character of anyone who disagrees with you ("some people like to murder").
If you don't see the similarity to a "think of the children" tactic to debate than you are not as smart as you believe you are. It is a tactic that doesn't challenge the _topic_ of a discussion - it is a tactic that challenges the _character_ of those on the other side of the topic. It has nothing to do with whether the topic is to stop one action or force another action - it is about it being a tactic of failing to discuss whatever the topic is and choosing to instead attack those arguing against you.
The fact that you so quickly end your reply with "Try harder next time, troll" shows that you aren't willing to discuss a topic and would instead dismiss and insult those who have differing opinions than you. Rather than discuss my points you attempt to paint me as a troll who likes to murder.
In free and democratic societies, an individual deciding on his or her own to leak classified information is a subversion of that very democratic process. In the US, we have collectively decided, as a society, that some information should be kept secret, even from The People, and we have empowered and entrusted the government with the power to do so.
For that quote alone your post deserves to be rated 5. If I could, you'd certainly get a +1 Insightful from me.
Or, in simpler terms, those who support the death penalty are accessories to murder, and some people like to murder.
And some people think that those who commit certain heinous crimes no longer have a right to enjoy their lives any more. But, hey, let's make a broad generalization that paints the other side of this philosophical debate as happy murderers.
Or, in simpler terms, your comment amounted to nothing more than a "think of the children" argument designed to make anyone arguing the other side of the topic look like they don't care about the children and thus they're bad people, even if they have intelligent, well-thought-out reasons for their opinion. But, hey, I'm sure you won't see the similarity and I'm also willing to bet you get outraged when you hear a politician drop a "think of the children" when they're pushing their agenda.
I understand Slashdot's desire for "information wants to be free" mixed with a healthy dose of "don't trust the government" lead you to make that comment and lead others to mod you up but that was the dumbest shit I've ever read on Slashdot in about... eight(?) years of reading this site.
Releasing this classified information could result in people being embarrassed. Big deal, right? It could result in international relations degrading or outright collapsing. Big deal, right? It could result in operatives being uncovered. Big deal, right? It could result in operatives being killed. Big deal, right? It could result in soldiers and civilians being killed. Big deal, right?
Right. It is a big deal. Just because this one person with a cavalier attitude towards security and classified information thought his "information wants to be free" attitude was more important than the military's "this information needs to be kept from outside eyes because it's important" does NOT mean it's is right to release the information to the public. I'm going to trust the brain trust of those behind the documents a HELL of a lot more than I'm going to trust the judgment of one man who broke laws to steal information.
I know I'll get modded down hard for this. I really don't give a fuck. If this information does get posted to wikileaks, there will be bad consequences and, if those bad consequences include 1 person being killed than it is a big deal that the information has been leaked.
Wikileaks serves a valuable purpose and I hope it is able to continue for many years to come but it has to be balanced with good judgment and it is incredibly bad judgment to release this volume of classified information because you _know_ that revealing something in there will lead to something decidedly bad - something beyond someone just being embarrassed.
You may think he deserves a Nobel Prize - I think he deserves to be tried for treason.
This is the now third 'potential' investigation into their business practices of various issues and markets.
It's the third potential investigation because some of Apple's competitors (well, one key one in particular but others have jumped on the band wagon) have decided that a good business model is to run to the government and complain every time Apple twitches (yes, the image of a child running to mommy and daddy was intentional) rather than just shutting the hell up and focusing on making great products. And it's ironic because that company has made some really good products over the years but, now that they've grown in size to be the behemoth that they are, they're becoming everything they claimed to stand against - they are no different from the other mega corps out there now.
Apple isn't perfect, by any stretch, and they do tend to push the bounds of what is acceptable (in many, many ways) but claims that they are abusing a monopoly or depriving consumers of choice or any of the other claims that other corporation have levied against them are absolutely, without question, laughable when one considers how much of the market the other company owns in their primary business sector. If one turns the accusations around and redirects them back at the company, one will see they are not only similarly applicable, they are overwhelmingly applicable. In other words, the hypocrisy is staggering.
Amusingly, one could easily assume I'm referring to Microsoft when I vaguely refer to another company being a hypocrite in leveling accusations of abuse of monopoly but I'm not.:)
Between those printing dots are the background white of the paper. Grab a magnifying glass and look at a printed page and you will see coloured dots on a white pattern. Same thing.
Yes. 300 dps color, 600 dpi greyscale, 1200 dpi bitmap. I believe, however, that most people involved in this sort of discussion recognize we're talking about full colour material but you are correct - pure black and white at 300 dpi looks like crap but I'd image the iPhone 4 screen would look like shit if it was only presenting one colour rather than millions of colours.
Did you read anything that has been written on this subject? Apple does not have a "ridiculous marketing point". The vast number of people (and, by vast, we're talking 98%+ of the population) will look at the screen and not see pixels. That isn't a "ridiculous marketing point" - it's a bold leap forward in display technology that deserves to be highlighted. Try paying attention to the details of the discussion before simply hating on Apple. This isn't marketing mumbo jumbo - this is a display that is capable of print quality graphics. If you don't realize why that is an important leap forward in display technology, then you shouldn't involve yourself in the discussion.
And, unless you look at a magazine and think "oh my gawd, so many dots - they need to deal with this" you're NOT GOING TO SEE THE PIXELS when you look at an iPhone 4 screen.
The only people who are going to look at the screen and think "hey, they said I wouldn't be able to see the pixels but I can!" are people who look at printed magazines and think "wow, when are they going to get rid of all these dots?" The screen has print level resolution and, as a graphic designer, that simply blows my mind. As has been mentioned in that other thread, graphic designers do digital work in 300 dpi for print work and 72 dpi for online work. If this screen technology becomes the new norm, we'll be doing all work at 300 dpi, which is damn, damn, damn impressive to look at. At that point, the technology bottleneck will be the pipes (a 72 dpi image is quite a bit smaller than a 300 dpi image, after all...). I do hope this tech spreads to lots of other devices and computer displays.
But, yes, anyone who claims that Apple was lying about it being a "retinal" display is simply attempting to pick a needless fight. Ignore them and move on.
If this isn't as clear an example of how the RIAA is making shit up as they go along, I don't know what it will take. They keep coming up with outrageous numbers and nobody blinks. So they come up with bigger numbers, and get away with it. And bigger numbers, and they get paid. And bigger numbers, and laws change. And now they are saying one company owes them $1.5 TRILLION. This has got to be the point where sane people around the world finally say "What? That's a joke, right? Please say that's a joke."
Given that they've paid out one BILLION dollars to developers thus far (and, no, that isn't a Mike Myers comedy sketch), I'd say that deciding to not develop for the iPhone is a decidedly stupid decision. Say whatever you want but thousands and thousands and thousands of apps have been developed for the platform, without issue, and developers have been paid a rather sizable amount of money for their work. But, hey, feel free to avoid the platform because there's a slim chance that you might do something you're not supposed to and thus have your app be rejected. There are 100 developers behind you in line, so to speak, that are more than willing to fill the void your absence will create.
The government was willing to bail out banks and auto makers so they are clearly willing to do something. We will see if they _also_ do something for newspaper publishers.
I am utterly blown away at hoe often the government is willing to step in and save failing business models. Car companies refusing to evolve, media companies failing to evolve, and more. Last time I checked, we live in a capitalist society where companies that succeed, in one way or another, are rewarded and companies that fail, for whatever reason, are supposed to go out of business. I can understand and be empathetic towards companies that have their business destroyed because of the actions of another, such as fishermen having their livelihoods wiped out because of BP's oil leak. Those businesses deserve some intervention to help them get through the rough time that is no fault of their own. Companies that fail to innovate, however, and end up watching their balance sheets shift more and more downwards? Nah. Sorry. You tried and failed. You don't have a right to be in business, just because. You have to work hard and succeed, just like the rest of us.
Failing businesses should be allowed to fail. Someone will figure out a successful business model and will fill the void or a market that no longer needs to exist (hello buggy whips) will fade into the history books.
Seriously, when is something going to be done about these guys? Their business model is built on "it costs more in legal fees for people to fight these accusations than to settle with us out of court so they'll just pay up" which, really, amounts to extortion. I cannot, for the life of me, understand how they are being allowed to get away with this shit. In a sane, logical world, somebody (the feds, the bar, whomever) would come down on them like a ton of bricks. Sadly, I don't think we live in a sane world any more...
At this point, I think I'm just holding out hope that a competing law firm will think things through and decide they can make money by suing these vulture law firms for harassment and whatever else they can drum up. After all, if those firms can make money just suing at random, surely another law firm can also make money counter-suing, right? Well, where is our white knight law firm who's eager to make a name for themselves? If the feds won't put a stop to it, maybe a last-to-sue war between legal firms can put a stop to it.
And then they'll find out that the app is actually available on the iTunes store and the author is full of shit. Just like My Frame. No, really - do a search in iTunes for My Frame. See what shows up - version 1.2, the app that was "pulled" by the big bad Apple.
But, hey, the author certainly drummed up a lot of interest in his app and probably got some sales out of it, regardless of the fact that the story is lacking in, well, facts.
Slashdot Mirror
Tell me, is jumping off a bridge the same as a computer?
I thought the iMac was the entry point.
Thanks Apple. I really needed yet another device to want to buy, especially given that I've just bought myself an iPad and my girlfriend an iPod Touch. This really seems like an Apple TV-on-steroids that I'd love to have. Thanks.
My bank account thanks you too.
Signed, an unabashed Apple Fanboi.
Let's See What Happens When Corporations Become Publishers.
Hate to break it to you but most major publishers are corporations. I know you were trying to be witty and make a point but you might want to try harder next time.
You honestly think this was Apple's policy? Really?
Anyone writing an app that takes more than 1 person two weeks to create ... aren't going to waste their time with a company as inconsistent as Apple when they have other platforms to develop for.
Ok, seriously, how do people even remotely believe this? Go have a look at the app store and browse through the thousands and thousands and thousands and thousands of apps that are available. Take a moment to pay attention to the development studios involved in many of those apps. Take a moment to contemplate the development time involved with many of those apps. Now, take a look back at your quote and see just how utterly fallacious it is. There are apparently plenty of developers "wasting" their time developing for the iPhone/iPad.
Especially when there's reason to believe that Android is beginning to exceed the iPhone.
As to your claim that Android is exceeding the iPhone, you are utterly wrong. The iPhone OS outstrips Android by a wide margin. A very, very wide margin. Three times larger, in fact.
You might want to read up on the subject a bit more because you are entirely wrong, in every way possible.
I suggest that killing people when it accomplishes nothing is murder.
You suggested no such thing. You suggested, and I quote: "those who support the death penalty are accessories to murder, and some people like to murder." In your second post, you provide a reasoned argument against the death penalty ("killing people when it accomplishes nothing is murder") which is an opinion that can be discussed and debated. Your first point, however, was a personal attack on the character of anyone who disagrees with you ("some people like to murder").
If you don't see the similarity to a "think of the children" tactic to debate than you are not as smart as you believe you are. It is a tactic that doesn't challenge the _topic_ of a discussion - it is a tactic that challenges the _character_ of those on the other side of the topic. It has nothing to do with whether the topic is to stop one action or force another action - it is about it being a tactic of failing to discuss whatever the topic is and choosing to instead attack those arguing against you.
The fact that you so quickly end your reply with "Try harder next time, troll" shows that you aren't willing to discuss a topic and would instead dismiss and insult those who have differing opinions than you. Rather than discuss my points you attempt to paint me as a troll who likes to murder.
In free and democratic societies, an individual deciding on his or her own to leak classified information is a subversion of that very democratic process. In the US, we have collectively decided, as a society, that some information should be kept secret, even from The People, and we have empowered and entrusted the government with the power to do so.
For that quote alone your post deserves to be rated 5. If I could, you'd certainly get a +1 Insightful from me.
Or, in simpler terms, those who support the death penalty are accessories to murder, and some people like to murder.
And some people think that those who commit certain heinous crimes no longer have a right to enjoy their lives any more. But, hey, let's make a broad generalization that paints the other side of this philosophical debate as happy murderers.
Or, in simpler terms, your comment amounted to nothing more than a "think of the children" argument designed to make anyone arguing the other side of the topic look like they don't care about the children and thus they're bad people, even if they have intelligent, well-thought-out reasons for their opinion. But, hey, I'm sure you won't see the similarity and I'm also willing to bet you get outraged when you hear a politician drop a "think of the children" when they're pushing their agenda.
I understand Slashdot's desire for "information wants to be free" mixed with a healthy dose of "don't trust the government" lead you to make that comment and lead others to mod you up but that was the dumbest shit I've ever read on Slashdot in about ... eight(?) years of reading this site.
Releasing this classified information could result in people being embarrassed. Big deal, right? It could result in international relations degrading or outright collapsing. Big deal, right? It could result in operatives being uncovered. Big deal, right? It could result in operatives being killed. Big deal, right? It could result in soldiers and civilians being killed. Big deal, right?
Right. It is a big deal. Just because this one person with a cavalier attitude towards security and classified information thought his "information wants to be free" attitude was more important than the military's "this information needs to be kept from outside eyes because it's important" does NOT mean it's is right to release the information to the public. I'm going to trust the brain trust of those behind the documents a HELL of a lot more than I'm going to trust the judgment of one man who broke laws to steal information.
I know I'll get modded down hard for this. I really don't give a fuck. If this information does get posted to wikileaks, there will be bad consequences and, if those bad consequences include 1 person being killed than it is a big deal that the information has been leaked.
Wikileaks serves a valuable purpose and I hope it is able to continue for many years to come but it has to be balanced with good judgment and it is incredibly bad judgment to release this volume of classified information because you _know_ that revealing something in there will lead to something decidedly bad - something beyond someone just being embarrassed.
You may think he deserves a Nobel Prize - I think he deserves to be tried for treason.
This is the now third 'potential' investigation into their business practices of various issues and markets.
It's the third potential investigation because some of Apple's competitors (well, one key one in particular but others have jumped on the band wagon) have decided that a good business model is to run to the government and complain every time Apple twitches (yes, the image of a child running to mommy and daddy was intentional) rather than just shutting the hell up and focusing on making great products. And it's ironic because that company has made some really good products over the years but, now that they've grown in size to be the behemoth that they are, they're becoming everything they claimed to stand against - they are no different from the other mega corps out there now.
:)
Apple isn't perfect, by any stretch, and they do tend to push the bounds of what is acceptable (in many, many ways) but claims that they are abusing a monopoly or depriving consumers of choice or any of the other claims that other corporation have levied against them are absolutely, without question, laughable when one considers how much of the market the other company owns in their primary business sector. If one turns the accusations around and redirects them back at the company, one will see they are not only similarly applicable, they are overwhelmingly applicable. In other words, the hypocrisy is staggering.
Amusingly, one could easily assume I'm referring to Microsoft when I vaguely refer to another company being a hypocrite in leveling accusations of abuse of monopoly but I'm not.
Get off my lawn.
Between those printing dots are the background white of the paper. Grab a magnifying glass and look at a printed page and you will see coloured dots on a white pattern. Same thing.
300 dpi CMYK. Most of us real designers work in colour.
And, if you're working with designers who are doing full colour work at 1200 dpi at print size then they are utterly wasting their time.
Yes. 300 dps color, 600 dpi greyscale, 1200 dpi bitmap. I believe, however, that most people involved in this sort of discussion recognize we're talking about full colour material but you are correct - pure black and white at 300 dpi looks like crap but I'd image the iPhone 4 screen would look like shit if it was only presenting one colour rather than millions of colours.
Did you read anything that has been written on this subject? Apple does not have a "ridiculous marketing point". The vast number of people (and, by vast, we're talking 98%+ of the population) will look at the screen and not see pixels. That isn't a "ridiculous marketing point" - it's a bold leap forward in display technology that deserves to be highlighted. Try paying attention to the details of the discussion before simply hating on Apple. This isn't marketing mumbo jumbo - this is a display that is capable of print quality graphics. If you don't realize why that is an important leap forward in display technology, then you shouldn't involve yourself in the discussion.
And, unless you look at a magazine and think "oh my gawd, so many dots - they need to deal with this" you're NOT GOING TO SEE THE PIXELS when you look at an iPhone 4 screen.
The only people who are going to look at the screen and think "hey, they said I wouldn't be able to see the pixels but I can!" are people who look at printed magazines and think "wow, when are they going to get rid of all these dots?" The screen has print level resolution and, as a graphic designer, that simply blows my mind. As has been mentioned in that other thread, graphic designers do digital work in 300 dpi for print work and 72 dpi for online work. If this screen technology becomes the new norm, we'll be doing all work at 300 dpi, which is damn, damn, damn impressive to look at. At that point, the technology bottleneck will be the pipes (a 72 dpi image is quite a bit smaller than a 300 dpi image, after all...). I do hope this tech spreads to lots of other devices and computer displays.
But, yes, anyone who claims that Apple was lying about it being a "retinal" display is simply attempting to pick a needless fight. Ignore them and move on.
If this isn't as clear an example of how the RIAA is making shit up as they go along, I don't know what it will take. They keep coming up with outrageous numbers and nobody blinks. So they come up with bigger numbers, and get away with it. And bigger numbers, and they get paid. And bigger numbers, and laws change. And now they are saying one company owes them $1.5 TRILLION. This has got to be the point where sane people around the world finally say "What? That's a joke, right? Please say that's a joke."
People are going to say that, right?
Given that they've paid out one BILLION dollars to developers thus far (and, no, that isn't a Mike Myers comedy sketch), I'd say that deciding to not develop for the iPhone is a decidedly stupid decision. Say whatever you want but thousands and thousands and thousands of apps have been developed for the platform, without issue, and developers have been paid a rather sizable amount of money for their work. But, hey, feel free to avoid the platform because there's a slim chance that you might do something you're not supposed to and thus have your app be rejected. There are 100 developers behind you in line, so to speak, that are more than willing to fill the void your absence will create.
The government was willing to bail out banks and auto makers so they are clearly willing to do something. We will see if they _also_ do something for newspaper publishers.
I am utterly blown away at hoe often the government is willing to step in and save failing business models. Car companies refusing to evolve, media companies failing to evolve, and more. Last time I checked, we live in a capitalist society where companies that succeed, in one way or another, are rewarded and companies that fail, for whatever reason, are supposed to go out of business. I can understand and be empathetic towards companies that have their business destroyed because of the actions of another, such as fishermen having their livelihoods wiped out because of BP's oil leak. Those businesses deserve some intervention to help them get through the rough time that is no fault of their own. Companies that fail to innovate, however, and end up watching their balance sheets shift more and more downwards? Nah. Sorry. You tried and failed. You don't have a right to be in business, just because. You have to work hard and succeed, just like the rest of us.
Failing businesses should be allowed to fail. Someone will figure out a successful business model and will fill the void or a market that no longer needs to exist (hello buggy whips) will fade into the history books.
What's most amusing about your post is that I finished a Pepsi and tossed the can in the garbage literally a half second before reading your post... :)
Your sig amuses me given that you rant and rave about Apple abusing their customers in reply to a story about _AT&T_.
Seriously, when is something going to be done about these guys? Their business model is built on "it costs more in legal fees for people to fight these accusations than to settle with us out of court so they'll just pay up" which, really, amounts to extortion. I cannot, for the life of me, understand how they are being allowed to get away with this shit. In a sane, logical world, somebody (the feds, the bar, whomever) would come down on them like a ton of bricks. Sadly, I don't think we live in a sane world any more...
At this point, I think I'm just holding out hope that a competing law firm will think things through and decide they can make money by suing these vulture law firms for harassment and whatever else they can drum up. After all, if those firms can make money just suing at random, surely another law firm can also make money counter-suing, right? Well, where is our white knight law firm who's eager to make a name for themselves? If the feds won't put a stop to it, maybe a last-to-sue war between legal firms can put a stop to it.
And then they'll find out that the app is actually available on the iTunes store and the author is full of shit. Just like My Frame. No, really - do a search in iTunes for My Frame. See what shows up - version 1.2, the app that was "pulled" by the big bad Apple.
But, hey, the author certainly drummed up a lot of interest in his app and probably got some sales out of it, regardless of the fact that the story is lacking in, well, facts.