With HTML5 local storage, you can download and store the HTML, CSS, Javascript, images and other associated files, and they run "like an app" on the iOS device. That's always been the case. I didn't know that WebOS also supported C/C++ frameworks; thanks for the info. But WRT WP7, even if they're on the phone itself, they've got to have been downloaded from somewhere, most likely over HTTP, so unless they have some other native component, local storage doesn't differentiate them at all from iOS web-apps.
I think calling Steve a defender of people's rights might be going too far, but I'm sure there are a lot of defensive patents in their portfolio; some of those defensive patents may not only defend Apple's core business, but also the general public against things that Steve would find offensive for himself or his family and friends.
Re:Impermanence of Sacrifice Bores Me
on
Review: Green Lantern
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
You are absolutely not alone. One of the things that stuck out for me about I am Legend was the hero's ongoing sacrifices. He lost his family. He lost his dog, the last vestiges of his humanity, and finally his life. The story goes on after the movie, but there's no hint of a Legend 2: Zombie Will Smith Fights Back.
Even Black Swan was great in that way. NP gives her all--she gives her very life--to be the perfect white+black swan.
...Apple is patenting this not to implement it, but to make it prohibitively expensive for anyone else to.
It would definitely suck if this went into a product, and it's definitely ripe for abuse. But if they had the idea, so could someone else; them patenting it just means that they own the right to make or license it. It may be a very good idea that they filed the patent instead of, say, Blackwater Security.
They make the great majority of their money on hardware. So the question is, will Facebook's HTML5-based apps take away from hardware sales? If they're going to be focused on making those apps for mobile Safari, there won't be any of that, "It runs great on my X device, but sucks on Apple hardware" thing, so probably not.
The thing that I think that the FB folks will find is that if they create the same thing twice--once as a native iOS app and once as a HTML5 app that comes out of their own store--and sell them both for the same price, the great majority of people will still buy it from the main iTunes app store. I'm not saying that they won't sell anything; I'm simply suggesting that their store may enhance their revenues, but not enough for them to want to completely abandon native apps.
I'm totally with you. Remember when the iPhone launched and met with groans because the app development environment was HTML5 and that was it? No native SDK? What Facebook is apparently doing is doing is following guidelines that everyone else rejected four years ago. Funny thing is that Windows 7 Phone is doing the same thing. And I think WebOS isn't far off. I'm constantly amazed at how some people can see anything as bad news for Apple.
You know what I'd pay for in a set of headphones? Robust enough soldering and case/wire engineering that after a few months of normal use, one of the speakers doesn't start to become intermittent. I can't tell you how many frickin' headphones I've bought that went bad on me the moment I did anything more than sit quietly while listening.
The most expensive pair I've bought were an approximately $150 pair of Sennheisers, and they were GREAT! For about a year. Then the left speaker would go out unless I pinched the wire where it entered the headset, and even then, there was no guarantee. If I could be guaranteed of lasting quality, I'd spend more, but if a $150 name-brand pair doesn't last five years, then I don't have confidence in anything else.
Also, I'd like a pair of cans that allows me to be a tiny bit sweaty and not have the padding peel or crumble to bits. Again, even the Sennheisers weren't much better than cheap-ass Sonys.
As far as sound quality and convenience, I'm OK with Apple-style earbuds. But I feel like I should have a subscription even for those. I find myself buying a new set every few months as one of the earpieces starts to buzz or lose volume. Yes, I know they're $20, but there's no excuse for them to fall apart so quickly: in the five years an iPod stays in use, that means I'm spending $200 on headphones to listen to them, or putting up with broken headphones for some significant portion of the device's life. It's ridiculous.
I'm with you on the App Store thing, although to be fair, if you look at Google Trends for the terms 'app' and 'app store' you can see that while the term "app" was certainly in use before the iPhone, indication is that its use, and the use of the term 'app store' took off significantly after Apple announced that they'd be opening the App Store via iTunes. While I think an 'app store' is just a store for apps, I can see why Apple's legal team feels they have a leg to stand on.
Hypocrisy cuts both ways. The people who reacted most strongly to the Apple vs. Amazon thing are likely the people who are doing their best to call out Apple for this "theft".
How surprising that someone who doesn't understand trademark law would post AC.
The first thing looked at by any judge in a trademark case is the "strength" of the trademark. That is, whether it is unique and enough to be defensible. After that, they look into the likelihood that the use of a mark by a second party will confuse the customers or potential customers of the first company.
"Kodak" is an example of a strong trademark; it was chosen because at the time the company was created, they hired linguists to come up with a word that didn't mean anything in any language. You can say "Kodak" anywhere in the world and people know that you're talking about that company.
Naming a product after the primary technologies it uses is effectively making it a generic product. Think "Kleenex" vs. "Facial Tissue". The name isn't defensible.
The logos are just stylized versions of the common logos for wifi and synching. Also not defensible.
Now, if Apple used any of this guy's code, they should be held responsible. But it sounds like this guy had an idea (that everyone had) a product name (which was obvious) and a logo (that was obvious) and none of those elements of this case are at all defensible.
What do you mean no competition. Android is totally killing iOS in sales. Aren't they? Aren't they? So your metaphor is totally wrong. It's more like this.
I run a small and successful store. Megamart opened up next door, and they sell everything I do and more. They franchise their brand to anyone who meets their terms (for free!), and although the franchisees aren't always the most agreeable to this, they pretty much allow any vendor to put their stuff on the shelves. Sometimes the quality is not good, but suddenly they're getting 10% more customers than I am every day. For unrelated reasons, I decide to stop selling beans. People who wouldn't have shopped at my little store anyway because they like the more "open" nature of Megamart froth at the mouth at the thought that I would ever stop selling beans.
There. I can make up ideologically-slanted metaphors as well! Yay!
VueScan is awesome. I'm not the greenest guy in the world--hell, I drive two Humvees at once, one tied to each foot--but in addition to allowing me to avoid buying a new scanner when my old drivers wouldn't work anymore, it allowed me to keep a perfectly serviceable scanner out of some third-world landfill.
Stallone's had a couple of gems. First Blood was great. Rocky was great. Copland wasn't bad. It seems to me there was another one, too; I was hoping for something a little different.
And don't forget about Mickey Rourke. Sigh. You're right. I should have just skipped it. The thing is, trashy violent action movies aren't the problem. It's ones that take the cheapest thrills from all the other action movies you've ever seen and redo them with bigger explosions that I don't like. It's possible to make an original, exciting action flick. I swear it!
Well, normally I'm not bothered, but when your "cloud" consists of one server--even if it's multi-core--it's not a frickin' cloud!! I know that "cloud" has many meanings, but to my mind, if you can't power down one physical device and replace it with another without interrupting your service for all users, it's not a cloud.
The real crime was making that movie. It was terrible. Predictable, trite, and itself a stitched-together copy of all the "hottest" moments of dozens of other successful action films.
The studio should be prosecuted for making such a bad movie. The people sharing it only committed the crime of making people think it was worth sharing. If there were 22,000 people sharing it, that means millions watched it, and thus the equivalent of at least a handful of human lifetimes evaporated in a puff of wasted time. Poof.
The essential irony is that the title of the movie should be a dead give-away. The whole thing was expendable.
Well, if the video had been shot using an iPhone, it's reality distortion field would have portrayed the situation as happy elves dancing around and spreading pixie dust among a crowd of unicorns.
Well, even smashing the phone, unless you do a real bang-up job, isn't going to kill the content that's stored on a flash card. I remember after the tsunami a couple of years back, there was a flurry of sites where people were posting images from cameras that they had found in the wreckage. One heartbreaking set was apparently from a couple on their 50th anniversary in Bali. Lots of pictures of them being happy on vacation, and the last few pics were of the wall of water approaching their hotel. Their bodies were never found, but thrashed around, submerged in saltwater, the camera and the flash card survived.
Some idiot boot-heeling your screen isn't going to be worse than a tsunami.
I think what the GP poster is saying is that they are targeting iP*d retailers who get the things at wholesale through distribution agreements and then give them away in order to attract customers. Basically, Apple is saying, "If you want to sell our products, you have to *sell* them."
But even if that's what the GP meant, that doesn't cover everything. In your example, sure, the bank could go ahead and buy and give away iP*ds. That in and of itself isn't something that Apple is all that concerned about. They're concerned about the promotional aspect. They don't want to have their brand diluted as a "free give-away". And while they can't stop a bank from buying them and giving them away, the iP*d names are indeed trademarks of Apple's, so any commercial/promotional use could see action from Apple. If you put up TV ad in three states saying, "Open an account at my bank and get a free iPad!", Apple's going to hear about it and you're going to get a C&D.
And if you can't do the promotion, there's really no point in doing the give-away. That is, unless you do some amazing guerilla marketing and let your customers spread the word that if you do x, y and z, you'll get an iPad... I guess there'd be a way to fly under the radar. But for any standard marketing process, like it or not, Apple can likely find a legal precedent to shut it down.
So I could swear that I had a situation not that long ago where my MacBook's battery died. When I replaced it and plugged the machine in, it booted to a snap-shot state with all my programs running as I'd left them when the battery went south. Is the new Resume feature different from the state-save already built in?
Slashdot Mirror
With HTML5 local storage, you can download and store the HTML, CSS, Javascript, images and other associated files, and they run "like an app" on the iOS device. That's always been the case. I didn't know that WebOS also supported C/C++ frameworks; thanks for the info. But WRT WP7, even if they're on the phone itself, they've got to have been downloaded from somewhere, most likely over HTTP, so unless they have some other native component, local storage doesn't differentiate them at all from iOS web-apps.
I think calling Steve a defender of people's rights might be going too far, but I'm sure there are a lot of defensive patents in their portfolio; some of those defensive patents may not only defend Apple's core business, but also the general public against things that Steve would find offensive for himself or his family and friends.
You are absolutely not alone. One of the things that stuck out for me about I am Legend was the hero's ongoing sacrifices. He lost his family. He lost his dog, the last vestiges of his humanity, and finally his life. The story goes on after the movie, but there's no hint of a Legend 2: Zombie Will Smith Fights Back.
Even Black Swan was great in that way. NP gives her all--she gives her very life--to be the perfect white+black swan.
I hate it when movies don't commit.
Didn't notice that was AC. Long time since I've been Rick Rolled!
What's a floppy?
Wish I had mod points. That video was pretty funny.
...Apple is patenting this not to implement it, but to make it prohibitively expensive for anyone else to.
It would definitely suck if this went into a product, and it's definitely ripe for abuse. But if they had the idea, so could someone else; them patenting it just means that they own the right to make or license it. It may be a very good idea that they filed the patent instead of, say, Blackwater Security.
They make the great majority of their money on hardware. So the question is, will Facebook's HTML5-based apps take away from hardware sales? If they're going to be focused on making those apps for mobile Safari, there won't be any of that, "It runs great on my X device, but sucks on Apple hardware" thing, so probably not.
The thing that I think that the FB folks will find is that if they create the same thing twice--once as a native iOS app and once as a HTML5 app that comes out of their own store--and sell them both for the same price, the great majority of people will still buy it from the main iTunes app store. I'm not saying that they won't sell anything; I'm simply suggesting that their store may enhance their revenues, but not enough for them to want to completely abandon native apps.
After all, they are in this for money, too.
I'm totally with you. Remember when the iPhone launched and met with groans because the app development environment was HTML5 and that was it? No native SDK? What Facebook is apparently doing is doing is following guidelines that everyone else rejected four years ago. Funny thing is that Windows 7 Phone is doing the same thing. And I think WebOS isn't far off. I'm constantly amazed at how some people can see anything as bad news for Apple.
You know what I'd pay for in a set of headphones? Robust enough soldering and case/wire engineering that after a few months of normal use, one of the speakers doesn't start to become intermittent. I can't tell you how many frickin' headphones I've bought that went bad on me the moment I did anything more than sit quietly while listening.
The most expensive pair I've bought were an approximately $150 pair of Sennheisers, and they were GREAT! For about a year. Then the left speaker would go out unless I pinched the wire where it entered the headset, and even then, there was no guarantee. If I could be guaranteed of lasting quality, I'd spend more, but if a $150 name-brand pair doesn't last five years, then I don't have confidence in anything else.
Also, I'd like a pair of cans that allows me to be a tiny bit sweaty and not have the padding peel or crumble to bits. Again, even the Sennheisers weren't much better than cheap-ass Sonys.
As far as sound quality and convenience, I'm OK with Apple-style earbuds. But I feel like I should have a subscription even for those. I find myself buying a new set every few months as one of the earpieces starts to buzz or lose volume. Yes, I know they're $20, but there's no excuse for them to fall apart so quickly: in the five years an iPod stays in use, that means I'm spending $200 on headphones to listen to them, or putting up with broken headphones for some significant portion of the device's life. It's ridiculous.
I'm with you on the App Store thing, although to be fair, if you look at Google Trends for the terms 'app' and 'app store' you can see that while the term "app" was certainly in use before the iPhone, indication is that its use, and the use of the term 'app store' took off significantly after Apple announced that they'd be opening the App Store via iTunes. While I think an 'app store' is just a store for apps, I can see why Apple's legal team feels they have a leg to stand on.
Hypocrisy cuts both ways. The people who reacted most strongly to the Apple vs. Amazon thing are likely the people who are doing their best to call out Apple for this "theft".
How surprising that someone who doesn't understand trademark law would post AC.
The first thing looked at by any judge in a trademark case is the "strength" of the trademark. That is, whether it is unique and enough to be defensible. After that, they look into the likelihood that the use of a mark by a second party will confuse the customers or potential customers of the first company.
"Kodak" is an example of a strong trademark; it was chosen because at the time the company was created, they hired linguists to come up with a word that didn't mean anything in any language. You can say "Kodak" anywhere in the world and people know that you're talking about that company.
Naming a product after the primary technologies it uses is effectively making it a generic product. Think "Kleenex" vs. "Facial Tissue". The name isn't defensible.
The logos are just stylized versions of the common logos for wifi and synching. Also not defensible.
Now, if Apple used any of this guy's code, they should be held responsible. But it sounds like this guy had an idea (that everyone had) a product name (which was obvious) and a logo (that was obvious) and none of those elements of this case are at all defensible.
Is there an app for that?
What do you mean no competition. Android is totally killing iOS in sales. Aren't they? Aren't they? So your metaphor is totally wrong. It's more like this.
I run a small and successful store. Megamart opened up next door, and they sell everything I do and more. They franchise their brand to anyone who meets their terms (for free!), and although the franchisees aren't always the most agreeable to this, they pretty much allow any vendor to put their stuff on the shelves. Sometimes the quality is not good, but suddenly they're getting 10% more customers than I am every day. For unrelated reasons, I decide to stop selling beans. People who wouldn't have shopped at my little store anyway because they like the more "open" nature of Megamart froth at the mouth at the thought that I would ever stop selling beans.
There. I can make up ideologically-slanted metaphors as well! Yay!
VueScan is awesome. I'm not the greenest guy in the world--hell, I drive two Humvees at once, one tied to each foot--but in addition to allowing me to avoid buying a new scanner when my old drivers wouldn't work anymore, it allowed me to keep a perfectly serviceable scanner out of some third-world landfill.
Stallone's had a couple of gems. First Blood was great. Rocky was great. Copland wasn't bad. It seems to me there was another one, too; I was hoping for something a little different.
And don't forget about Mickey Rourke. Sigh. You're right. I should have just skipped it. The thing is, trashy violent action movies aren't the problem. It's ones that take the cheapest thrills from all the other action movies you've ever seen and redo them with bigger explosions that I don't like. It's possible to make an original, exciting action flick. I swear it!
Yes, I Netflix'ed it, and watched the DVD. I kept hoping it'd get better, but it just kept getting more cliched and boring.
I think I was sick at the time, which was my excuse for not getting up and doing something else.
And yes, I guess it is somewhat ironic. Sad bennomatic is sad.
Well, normally I'm not bothered, but when your "cloud" consists of one server--even if it's multi-core--it's not a frickin' cloud!! I know that "cloud" has many meanings, but to my mind, if you can't power down one physical device and replace it with another without interrupting your service for all users, it's not a cloud.
But a spaceship shaped building just fits in so perfectly with the cult-image
Yes, because so many cults have been housed in spaceship-shaped buildings.
The real crime was making that movie. It was terrible. Predictable, trite, and itself a stitched-together copy of all the "hottest" moments of dozens of other successful action films.
The studio should be prosecuted for making such a bad movie. The people sharing it only committed the crime of making people think it was worth sharing. If there were 22,000 people sharing it, that means millions watched it, and thus the equivalent of at least a handful of human lifetimes evaporated in a puff of wasted time. Poof.
The essential irony is that the title of the movie should be a dead give-away. The whole thing was expendable.
Well, if the video had been shot using an iPhone, it's reality distortion field would have portrayed the situation as happy elves dancing around and spreading pixie dust among a crowd of unicorns.
Well, even smashing the phone, unless you do a real bang-up job, isn't going to kill the content that's stored on a flash card. I remember after the tsunami a couple of years back, there was a flurry of sites where people were posting images from cameras that they had found in the wreckage. One heartbreaking set was apparently from a couple on their 50th anniversary in Bali. Lots of pictures of them being happy on vacation, and the last few pics were of the wall of water approaching their hotel. Their bodies were never found, but thrashed around, submerged in saltwater, the camera and the flash card survived.
Some idiot boot-heeling your screen isn't going to be worse than a tsunami.
Ah, OK. All I know is that it was frickin' awesome.
I think what the GP poster is saying is that they are targeting iP*d retailers who get the things at wholesale through distribution agreements and then give them away in order to attract customers. Basically, Apple is saying, "If you want to sell our products, you have to *sell* them."
But even if that's what the GP meant, that doesn't cover everything. In your example, sure, the bank could go ahead and buy and give away iP*ds. That in and of itself isn't something that Apple is all that concerned about. They're concerned about the promotional aspect. They don't want to have their brand diluted as a "free give-away". And while they can't stop a bank from buying them and giving them away, the iP*d names are indeed trademarks of Apple's, so any commercial/promotional use could see action from Apple. If you put up TV ad in three states saying, "Open an account at my bank and get a free iPad!", Apple's going to hear about it and you're going to get a C&D.
And if you can't do the promotion, there's really no point in doing the give-away. That is, unless you do some amazing guerilla marketing and let your customers spread the word that if you do x, y and z, you'll get an iPad... I guess there'd be a way to fly under the radar. But for any standard marketing process, like it or not, Apple can likely find a legal precedent to shut it down.
So I could swear that I had a situation not that long ago where my MacBook's battery died. When I replaced it and plugged the machine in, it booted to a snap-shot state with all my programs running as I'd left them when the battery went south. Is the new Resume feature different from the state-save already built in?