Yes, the bright ones are developing for the iPhone cause while you can either write for the iPhone or 'everything else'... the iPhone is about 10-20 times more profitable by itself than 'everything else' is.
I realize you're trying to say people should ignore the iPhone as a development platform but the only people doing don't actually want to make any money...
Thats fine if you're just putzing around with your phone making some silly apps.
It makes you retarded if your intend on selling your wares to pay the bills.
I could in Java for 'every other platform' if you mean I have to write it once, then basically retweak everything again to deal with the 'same java' on a 'different platform... and by the time I got done... it'd be just like porting from phone to phone to phone. Its not really anything like the fantasy world you think it is where you write the app once and it runs on all other devices. Hell Android has version issues already and there are what 4 devices out there?
You write for everything else out there and pretend your doing something different than me that makes you better.
I'll keep dealing with the pain of watching my bank account grow.
I can't manage it in a corporate/enterprise environment. Push out updates? Not as a limited user. Push out configuration? Not simply. Push out plugins, or plugin updates? Not simple.
I hear/see this alot... but its such bullshit.
If you aren't using Windows, auto updating is simply a matter of a good script.
If you're using Windows, auto updating is simply a matter of a good batch file controlled by ActiveDirectory.
Really, this argument just indicates your a shitty admin, nothing more.
Yes, they could make it easier, but its really not hard if you have a clue.
There are plenty of reasons firefox sucks in a large company to maintain, but updates aren't one of them unless... well, if updating firefox is your issue, I'd suggest looking for a new job outside the admin area, its not for you.
Interestingly enough both Chrome and IE can and do support the extensions you speak of. IE has for ages, and of course chrome much more recently added support for extensions.
Firefox is hardly unique in its 'extensions' ability. What do you think an IE 'toolbar' is? Other than requiring C (or any langauge capable of sourcing a COM object) creating extensions for IE is rather easy.
What I still find amazing is that so many people can't browse the web with any thing other than ad block+ and noscript in firefox.
I do a lot of web browsing and I can find very few places I visit where I would notice a change. Either you guys tend to visit a lot of shady sites or you're REALLY over blowing the need for adb+ and noscript.
What programmers start talking about making an app 'skinable' or 'themeable' its a good sign you need to run as they've stopped working on the goal and instead are fucking around with code for fun.
Mozilla is slightly different in this respect as it needs some 'skin'ability since it is recreating the widget set for the OS it runs on. However, when you jump to the point that users should be able to reskin your application... and you invest a bunch of effort into 'making it easier' to skin the application... you've clearly left your stated mission and again wondered off into that area that is full of OSS programmers who have no focus thanks to the lack of paycheck... or in this case, because they work for mozilla.
When an app starts adding skinning support, its time to find an alternative. This was true of Mozilla eons ago, this is just a reminder.
Really? Ad Block Plus is that important too you? Seriously?
What websites do you visit that are so bad that you have to block the adds for them to be useful? How many websites do you visit that are slower to load because of the ads?
They are so bad that you'll continue to use what has rapidly became a pretty shitty fucking browser just to keep the ability to block them (and ignoring the fact that you can do th exact same thing in both Chrome and IE). Seriously?
How many websites do you actually notice the difference because of Ad Block Plus?
I find it difficult to believe that you care for Ad Block Plus as much as you seem to think you do. There just aren't THAT many ads on websites to justify the irrational fear of not having Ad Block Plus that seems to abound in so many firefox users.
The only logical conclusion I can then draw is that people who say 'OMG MUST HAVE AD BLOCK AND NO SCRIPT' are just irrational fanatics who shouldn't be taken seriously anyway since they are clearly disconnected from reality.
No, the problem is that Google thinks it can just violate the copyrights
Citation needed. The lawsuit is over what can happen because of the Google book settlement, not what they have online.
What they have online is public domain or they have permission for already.
Imagine the uproar if a GPLed program had its codebase relic
I imagine it would be much like yours, an irrational overblown reaction to a problem that doesn't actually exist.
You're not supposed to sue people based on 'imagine what could happen'. Its supposed to be based on 'look what happened!'.
As each group 'negotiates' its place in the deal they effectively give up rights they weren't giving up before. This is in fact nothing more than greed getting in the way of greed. These groups are negotiating away their leveraging power before Google even comes to the table because their in a big hurry to get money from Google before someone points out they are well within the realm of fair use as long as they don't give you the whole book.
The opt out part is very intelligent. It requires you actively put effort into protecting your work, which helps stop trolling for money after something gets popular. It helps prevent copyright trolling, you can't wait for them to make a whole bunch of money and then suddenly jump up and say 'thats our money!'. Copyright shouldn't even been effective anymore if the work is no longer published or available or in use.
Please point out where Google actually broke the law before being sued.
Only if someone told society that it was gone. The stock market effects a few select people drastically, but really has little influence on our daily lives in and of itself.
The panic and fear generated as a result of a market failure as people start hording for no reason other than CNN or FOX said the world was coming to an end are what causes problems.
If it simply ceased to exist the world would change very little. Stocks are based on what someone thinks a stock is worth, its precieved value.
Lets face it, I own more than a few shares of Apple, but until I sell them they are barely useful for starting a fire. If the stock market ceased to exist, their actual value would be identical to what it is now.
Funny, our ability to use tools puts a big gap between our species and the rest.
Yet... here you are... pointing out how its unfair that someone uses a tool that you don't have, yet I'm sure you'd be okay with using the tools you have at your disposal for making decisions.
If you have a problem with their tools then either get their tools or make it fair on everyone by not allowing any tools.
Of course... if you don't allow any tools then the only way to play is to actually stand on the trading floor, which is once again going to cut you out.
Lifes not fair, stop pretending it is or that it should be and you'll get a lot further in life.
The stock market is one massive money laundering scam anyway, you're an idiot if you think of it as anything more than gambling, its far too disconnected from reality to be anything else. Due to the panicky nature of people and the ability for CNN to control that panic, I'd wager there is more entropy in the stock market when its 'stable' than there is in most lotto machines.
Since most computing power is needed during the business day, during the same time that they need their processing power... it would seem they have little value in what they have to offer.
What do you do during the peak time when they don't offer you processing time?
This pretty much limits the data that can be handled on these servers to batch processing of data that doesn't have constraints on how long it can wait.
Basically its useful for low budget scientific research. Thats not saying its not very useful in that sense. Just recouping wasted CPU cycles could be great for science in general. I just don't see there being enough of a market for a stock exchange to justify the expense of running the business.
GEnie is still around, owned by another company under some other name doing EDI for some companies that refuse to join the Internet and just use SMTP to accomplish the same thing. Its still around never the less.
How did they remove it? Did you click OK and agree to the update?
I'm pretty sure Sony is reasonably safe when they say 'here, take this update if you want but it turns off X' and then you come back the next day and say 'this update turned off X, now I'm pissed off!@!$!@'.
You can hope, but I definitely wouldn't hold my breath.
The PSN network wasn't there at launch, and if you bothered to read the agreements that you agreed to, they reserve the right to stop providing it to you, at any time, for any reason.
You get what you pay for with 'free' updates and 'free' networking. Not that its not the same way on xbox live mind you, but if you bought the PS3 because of the 'other os' functionality, you really were an idiot from the word go. There were, was and are better alternatives for anything other than 'just because'.
You shouldn't assume that just because life we've found on Earth has anything like DNA, RNA and amino acids.
It is entirely possible that life elsewhere, even on our own planet, can look entirely unlike anything we've ever seen.
Contrary to what many scientists seem to think or at least project, we do not know everything. In the grand scheme of things, we know very very little about the way stuff works in general, even if from our perspective it seems we know a great deal. We barely understand a tiny fraction of the way the universe works on the confines of our own planet, let alone every where else in the universe.
Assumptions do nothing but hold you back. If you can't prove it, don't assume it.
The instant facebook is mentioned you simply assume its retarded. Its a big graffiti wall that people post crap to, then get pissed off because someone they didn't want saw it or someone said something mean about them.
Any news story relating to facebook that doesn't involve its last servers being turned off or some sort of airplane flying into all of their datacenters at one time is worthless and should be written off as something 'another one of those facebook/twitter/attentionwhores is being an idiot again'.
Thats where it should end. I don't really care what happened here, everyone involved is an idiot, possibly including the reporter who reported it. I can safely make that assumption without reading the story because its true for every story about facebook/twitter. Prove me wrong if you think you can, but I'm not going to sit around and wait for something to happen you can use as a reference.
Its pretty easy to make a rootkit for any PC based OS... the real problem is getting it loaded before the main OS. Contrary to popular belief, even with the advent of hardware virtualization helpers, boot viruses that hid themself away from the main OS are nothing new and have been around probably longer than you've owned your own computer.
The rootkit simply has to be first, after that theres nothing anyone can do.
Great... another 'OS' that has its own new set of problems... plus before its actually useful in the real world you'll have to come up with ways to give it all the speed power and flexibility of the OSes we use now, which it doesn't have... by the time you add it back you'll end up right back where you are now.
Apps and data is useless on an island. When you're on an island you're safe from attackers.
To actually do something useful however, data needs to move on and off the island, at which point, you're right back to square one more or less. The only difference is now you've got an OS... that loads another OS... that loads (in a virtual process space) an application.
I realize that abstraction can be a good thing, but considering that all thats being done here is literally adding another layer of abstraction with no additional benefits... it would seem the right thing to do was just make a few tiny mods to the existing OSes rather than create a whole new one which is basically a copy of existing ones with a ever so slightly different core.
Lets face is, 'hardware virtualization support' is nothing more than a newer/slightly different implementation of what we've already had in processors for years. We've already had 'hardware virtualization' for years, this is just one more layer on top of the already existing support that does the same thing.
Why the hell would you be so retarded to assume its going to be different now, just because we've added more abstraction and code, its going to be safer? My experiences show the exact inverse to be true when you add code and complexity:/
Stop calling them 'hypervisors' its a freaking OS, except unlike what we normally think of as an OS with a kernel and a software defined API to get something done, you have an OS with a kernel and a software that emulates a hardware interface so it can run software with a kernel and a software defined API to get something done. Perhaps just fix the software defined API to isolate properly cause by the time you make your hypervisor OS useful like the traditional OS, its not going to be so isolated.
Contrary to what their marketing would have you believe it isn't anything like that. Infact, its more like firing up Windows 7 and replacing explorer with the hyperv manager.
The problem is they can't fix Windows so their coming up with a unique and non-obvious way to start from scratch without telling everyone they are starting from scratch.
They aren't actually doing anything new. Its just a different way to implement EXACTLY what we have in OSes now.
The REAL problem is... when you have all these systems interacting with each other, they ALL have to be secure or it falls apart. Rewriting it isn't going to change that. I mean, sure it will in theory, and it will in practice right up until the point where the OS actually becomes useful for something. Why? Because to actually be useful you have to interact with something else. Notepad is useless if it can't take keyboard input/display output. Its worth is questionable at best if it can't print. Saving and loading are rather important. Even in a simple app like notepad there are many interactions between components of differing levels of access. By the time 'Midori' becomes useful, all these things will be back.
Applications within the OS are already supposed to be 'virtualized' and 'isolated'... you know... thats what the OS is supposed to do already.
All we're doing is making the shared portion of our computers smaller and smaller, which means bloat bloat bloat and issues with updating all the various bits multiple times.
It really bothers me that people thing vmware/hyper-v/virtualbox are acceptable. If the OS actually did its job right, these wouldn't be needed. When you use these tools you're just running multiple OSes. You've solved nothing and added more bloat and bugs.
Re:CmdrTaco drags big brass ones along the ground
on
iPad Review
·
· Score: 1
Typing on it really isn't that bad once you get used to it. Is it a keyboard? No, but I assure you grandma and her one word every 3 minutes rate is going to function equally well on an iPad, as are most non-technical people.
Fancy graphic designers aren't replacing their PCs with iPads to design... no, thats true. As I work with designers one a semi-regular basis, and my company works with many design firms daily for our customers, I can also assure you that graphics designers do far more than 'make flash' crap. As a matter of fact, while Flash is one of our accepted input formats (and used directly internally), I can't remember the last time someone sent us a flash file. They'd rather send us individual components and let us build the flash or svg to do the job, paying through the nose for it.
I don't care if its got MS Office, I prefer Google docs for my stuff. Its just easier to communicate with the rest of my family using Apps for my domain than it is to use file shares and office. I can use Google docs truely from anywhere, including my iPhone.
Probably different with an iPad, but I really don't care about background IM programs on my phone. I did at first, but then I realized... its a phone... I can be called if someone needs to get hold of me. I also have email, which in my case works just as fast as IM as far as message delivery for anyone that doesn't use some asstastic web mail crap like Yahoo.
If you're going for the multitasking aspect, then thats just silly. The iPhone/iPad hides the 'app exits if not in the foreground' nature of OS pretty much flawlessly unless you don't bother to write your app properly. Works pretty much identical to the way PalmOS used to work back in the day and results in far more battery life than would be the case otherwise.
There aren't multiple user accounts because its not meant to be a shared device. Its a personal datapad, its meant to be used by one person. Apple wants you to buy one for each person that uses it. Its that type of device anyway, if you need to share, thats what a PC is for. The iPad is a personal gadget. How many people do you know that 'share' their iPod (or whatever music player). How many people share their cell phones?
I don't see myself buying an iPad, but I could name probably a thousand other devices you wouldn't buy for the exact same reasons you listed above (even in cases where they are valid concerns, unlike here where most of them are wrong) which are making money hand over fist.
You named 3 or 4 entirely unrelated target demographics and preceeded to describe trivial or non-existent problems with targeting those demographics while completely ignoring everything else.
This isn't an insightful post, its just silly, and utterly ignores examples that directly contradict its own statements... considering its just a bigger iPhone...
You don't want one... we get it, not everyone shares your opinion or short sightedness. Some people have the ability to look beyond their immediate and personal position in the universe and understand that other people may have a different perspective on the universe and they may actually have a use for this device...
I can clearly say that the iPad is not aimed at you... at least until next week when you've bought one because your tech-jealousy finally got the best of you and you ran out and got one instead of raging against the machine.
Slashdot Mirror
Citation needed.
I can't think of an app that performs equally 'fine' across all 3 of those platforms, which I use daily.
And thats the problem. Some people have higher standards than you.
They are, and they are just documenting one of the reasons you get denied.
Everyone bitches because of arbitrary rules, then you get pissed off when they start telling you the rules.
Yes, the bright ones are developing for the iPhone cause while you can either write for the iPhone or 'everything else' ... the iPhone is about 10-20 times more profitable by itself than 'everything else' is.
I realize you're trying to say people should ignore the iPhone as a development platform but the only people doing don't actually want to make any money ...
Thats fine if you're just putzing around with your phone making some silly apps.
It makes you retarded if your intend on selling your wares to pay the bills.
I could in Java for 'every other platform' if you mean I have to write it once, then basically retweak everything again to deal with the 'same java' on a 'different platform ... and by the time I got done ... it'd be just like porting from phone to phone to phone. Its not really anything like the fantasy world you think it is where you write the app once and it runs on all other devices. Hell Android has version issues already and there are what 4 devices out there?
You write for everything else out there and pretend your doing something different than me that makes you better.
I'll keep dealing with the pain of watching my bank account grow.
I hear/see this alot ... but its such bullshit.
If you aren't using Windows, auto updating is simply a matter of a good script.
If you're using Windows, auto updating is simply a matter of a good batch file controlled by ActiveDirectory.
Really, this argument just indicates your a shitty admin, nothing more.
Yes, they could make it easier, but its really not hard if you have a clue.
There are plenty of reasons firefox sucks in a large company to maintain, but updates aren't one of them unless ... well, if updating firefox is your issue, I'd suggest looking for a new job outside the admin area, its not for you.
Interestingly enough both Chrome and IE can and do support the extensions you speak of. IE has for ages, and of course chrome much more recently added support for extensions.
Firefox is hardly unique in its 'extensions' ability. What do you think an IE 'toolbar' is? Other than requiring C (or any langauge capable of sourcing a COM object) creating extensions for IE is rather easy.
What I still find amazing is that so many people can't browse the web with any thing other than ad block+ and noscript in firefox.
I do a lot of web browsing and I can find very few places I visit where I would notice a change. Either you guys tend to visit a lot of shady sites or you're REALLY over blowing the need for adb+ and noscript.
I'm going to assume its not the former.
What programmers start talking about making an app 'skinable' or 'themeable' its a good sign you need to run as they've stopped working on the goal and instead are fucking around with code for fun.
Mozilla is slightly different in this respect as it needs some 'skin'ability since it is recreating the widget set for the OS it runs on. However, when you jump to the point that users should be able to reskin your application ... and you invest a bunch of effort into 'making it easier' to skin the application ... you've clearly left your stated mission and again wondered off into that area that is full of OSS programmers who have no focus thanks to the lack of paycheck ... or in this case, because they work for mozilla.
When an app starts adding skinning support, its time to find an alternative. This was true of Mozilla eons ago, this is just a reminder.
Really? Ad Block Plus is that important too you? Seriously?
What websites do you visit that are so bad that you have to block the adds for them to be useful? How many websites do you visit that are slower to load because of the ads?
They are so bad that you'll continue to use what has rapidly became a pretty shitty fucking browser just to keep the ability to block them (and ignoring the fact that you can do th exact same thing in both Chrome and IE). Seriously?
How many websites do you actually notice the difference because of Ad Block Plus?
I find it difficult to believe that you care for Ad Block Plus as much as you seem to think you do. There just aren't THAT many ads on websites to justify the irrational fear of not having Ad Block Plus that seems to abound in so many firefox users.
The only logical conclusion I can then draw is that people who say 'OMG MUST HAVE AD BLOCK AND NO SCRIPT' are just irrational fanatics who shouldn't be taken seriously anyway since they are clearly disconnected from reality.
Citation needed. The lawsuit is over what can happen because of the Google book settlement, not what they have online.
What they have online is public domain or they have permission for already.
I imagine it would be much like yours, an irrational overblown reaction to a problem that doesn't actually exist.
You're not supposed to sue people based on 'imagine what could happen'. Its supposed to be based on 'look what happened!'.
As each group 'negotiates' its place in the deal they effectively give up rights they weren't giving up before. This is in fact nothing more than greed getting in the way of greed. These groups are negotiating away their leveraging power before Google even comes to the table because their in a big hurry to get money from Google before someone points out they are well within the realm of fair use as long as they don't give you the whole book.
The opt out part is very intelligent. It requires you actively put effort into protecting your work, which helps stop trolling for money after something gets popular. It helps prevent copyright trolling, you can't wait for them to make a whole bunch of money and then suddenly jump up and say 'thats our money!'. Copyright shouldn't even been effective anymore if the work is no longer published or available or in use.
Please point out where Google actually broke the law before being sued.
Only if someone told society that it was gone. The stock market effects a few select people drastically, but really has little influence on our daily lives in and of itself.
The panic and fear generated as a result of a market failure as people start hording for no reason other than CNN or FOX said the world was coming to an end are what causes problems.
If it simply ceased to exist the world would change very little. Stocks are based on what someone thinks a stock is worth, its precieved value.
Lets face it, I own more than a few shares of Apple, but until I sell them they are barely useful for starting a fire. If the stock market ceased to exist, their actual value would be identical to what it is now.
Funny, our ability to use tools puts a big gap between our species and the rest.
Yet ... here you are ... pointing out how its unfair that someone uses a tool that you don't have, yet I'm sure you'd be okay with using the tools you have at your disposal for making decisions.
If you have a problem with their tools then either get their tools or make it fair on everyone by not allowing any tools.
Of course ... if you don't allow any tools then the only way to play is to actually stand on the trading floor, which is once again going to cut you out.
Lifes not fair, stop pretending it is or that it should be and you'll get a lot further in life.
The stock market is one massive money laundering scam anyway, you're an idiot if you think of it as anything more than gambling, its far too disconnected from reality to be anything else. Due to the panicky nature of people and the ability for CNN to control that panic, I'd wager there is more entropy in the stock market when its 'stable' than there is in most lotto machines.
Since most computing power is needed during the business day, during the same time that they need their processing power ... it would seem they have little value in what they have to offer.
What do you do during the peak time when they don't offer you processing time?
This pretty much limits the data that can be handled on these servers to batch processing of data that doesn't have constraints on how long it can wait.
Basically its useful for low budget scientific research. Thats not saying its not very useful in that sense. Just recouping wasted CPU cycles could be great for science in general. I just don't see there being enough of a market for a stock exchange to justify the expense of running the business.
GEnie is still around, owned by another company under some other name doing EDI for some companies that refuse to join the Internet and just use SMTP to accomplish the same thing. Its still around never the less.
How did they remove it? Did you click OK and agree to the update?
I'm pretty sure Sony is reasonably safe when they say 'here, take this update if you want but it turns off X' and then you come back the next day and say 'this update turned off X, now I'm pissed off!@!$!@'.
You can hope, but I definitely wouldn't hold my breath.
The PSN network wasn't there at launch, and if you bothered to read the agreements that you agreed to, they reserve the right to stop providing it to you, at any time, for any reason.
You get what you pay for with 'free' updates and 'free' networking. Not that its not the same way on xbox live mind you, but if you bought the PS3 because of the 'other os' functionality, you really were an idiot from the word go. There were, was and are better alternatives for anything other than 'just because'.
You were wrong before you started.
You shouldn't assume that just because life we've found on Earth has anything like DNA, RNA and amino acids.
It is entirely possible that life elsewhere, even on our own planet, can look entirely unlike anything we've ever seen.
Contrary to what many scientists seem to think or at least project, we do not know everything. In the grand scheme of things, we know very very little about the way stuff works in general, even if from our perspective it seems we know a great deal. We barely understand a tiny fraction of the way the universe works on the confines of our own planet, let alone every where else in the universe.
Assumptions do nothing but hold you back. If you can't prove it, don't assume it.
No.
The instant facebook is mentioned you simply assume its retarded. Its a big graffiti wall that people post crap to, then get pissed off because someone they didn't want saw it or someone said something mean about them.
Any news story relating to facebook that doesn't involve its last servers being turned off or some sort of airplane flying into all of their datacenters at one time is worthless and should be written off as something 'another one of those facebook/twitter/attentionwhores is being an idiot again'.
Thats where it should end. I don't really care what happened here, everyone involved is an idiot, possibly including the reporter who reported it. I can safely make that assumption without reading the story because its true for every story about facebook/twitter. Prove me wrong if you think you can, but I'm not going to sit around and wait for something to happen you can use as a reference.
Its pretty easy to make a rootkit for any PC based OS ... the real problem is getting it loaded before the main OS. Contrary to popular belief, even with the advent of hardware virtualization helpers, boot viruses that hid themself away from the main OS are nothing new and have been around probably longer than you've owned your own computer.
The rootkit simply has to be first, after that theres nothing anyone can do.
Great ... another 'OS' that has its own new set of problems ... plus before its actually useful in the real world you'll have to come up with ways to give it all the speed power and flexibility of the OSes we use now, which it doesn't have ... by the time you add it back you'll end up right back where you are now.
Apps and data is useless on an island. When you're on an island you're safe from attackers.
To actually do something useful however, data needs to move on and off the island, at which point, you're right back to square one more or less. The only difference is now you've got an OS ... that loads another OS ... that loads (in a virtual process space) an application.
I realize that abstraction can be a good thing, but considering that all thats being done here is literally adding another layer of abstraction with no additional benefits ... it would seem the right thing to do was just make a few tiny mods to the existing OSes rather than create a whole new one which is basically a copy of existing ones with a ever so slightly different core.
Lets face is, 'hardware virtualization support' is nothing more than a newer/slightly different implementation of what we've already had in processors for years. We've already had 'hardware virtualization' for years, this is just one more layer on top of the already existing support that does the same thing.
Why the hell would you be so retarded to assume its going to be different now, just because we've added more abstraction and code, its going to be safer? My experiences show the exact inverse to be true when you add code and complexity :/
Stop calling them 'hypervisors' its a freaking OS, except unlike what we normally think of as an OS with a kernel and a software defined API to get something done, you have an OS with a kernel and a software that emulates a hardware interface so it can run software with a kernel and a software defined API to get something done. Perhaps just fix the software defined API to isolate properly cause by the time you make your hypervisor OS useful like the traditional OS, its not going to be so isolated.
Its going to be exactly like we have now, except basically you'll have two layers of kernels and abstraction to go through instead of one!
Contrary to what their marketing would have you believe it isn't anything like that. Infact, its more like firing up Windows 7 and replacing explorer with the hyperv manager.
The problem is they can't fix Windows so their coming up with a unique and non-obvious way to start from scratch without telling everyone they are starting from scratch.
They aren't actually doing anything new. Its just a different way to implement EXACTLY what we have in OSes now.
The REAL problem is ... when you have all these systems interacting with each other, they ALL have to be secure or it falls apart. Rewriting it isn't going to change that. I mean, sure it will in theory, and it will in practice right up until the point where the OS actually becomes useful for something. Why? Because to actually be useful you have to interact with something else. Notepad is useless if it can't take keyboard input/display output. Its worth is questionable at best if it can't print. Saving and loading are rather important. Even in a simple app like notepad there are many interactions between components of differing levels of access. By the time 'Midori' becomes useful, all these things will be back.
Applications within the OS are already supposed to be 'virtualized' and 'isolated' ... you know ... thats what the OS is supposed to do already.
All we're doing is making the shared portion of our computers smaller and smaller, which means bloat bloat bloat and issues with updating all the various bits multiple times.
It really bothers me that people thing vmware/hyper-v/virtualbox are acceptable. If the OS actually did its job right, these wouldn't be needed. When you use these tools you're just running multiple OSes. You've solved nothing and added more bloat and bugs.
Well, for all intents and purposes Forrester Research is just another Microsoft marketing division, so I'd say your statement was probably spot on.
Yes, and can you imagine the number of times I'm going to take your iPad away and pound you over the head for doing that shit in public.
No one wants to hear or see you video chatting with someone while your on the bus, at a bar or where ever.
http://www.bspcn.com/2008/08/14/top-10-cell-phone-etiquette-rules-people-still-break/
Please read rule #10 until you get the point.
Yea, that would be all fine except ... they've been able to do the wifi locating for years before Android came into existence.
http://www.skyhookwireless.com/ is who is telling them where your wifi is.
Your droid isn't special.
Typing on it really isn't that bad once you get used to it. Is it a keyboard? No, but I assure you grandma and her one word every 3 minutes rate is going to function equally well on an iPad, as are most non-technical people.
Fancy graphic designers aren't replacing their PCs with iPads to design ... no, thats true. As I work with designers one a semi-regular basis, and my company works with many design firms daily for our customers, I can also assure you that graphics designers do far more than 'make flash' crap. As a matter of fact, while Flash is one of our accepted input formats (and used directly internally), I can't remember the last time someone sent us a flash file. They'd rather send us individual components and let us build the flash or svg to do the job, paying through the nose for it.
I don't care if its got MS Office, I prefer Google docs for my stuff. Its just easier to communicate with the rest of my family using Apps for my domain than it is to use file shares and office. I can use Google docs truely from anywhere, including my iPhone.
Probably different with an iPad, but I really don't care about background IM programs on my phone. I did at first, but then I realized ... its a phone ... I can be called if someone needs to get hold of me. I also have email, which in my case works just as fast as IM as far as message delivery for anyone that doesn't use some asstastic web mail crap like Yahoo.
If you're going for the multitasking aspect, then thats just silly. The iPhone/iPad hides the 'app exits if not in the foreground' nature of OS pretty much flawlessly unless you don't bother to write your app properly. Works pretty much identical to the way PalmOS used to work back in the day and results in far more battery life than would be the case otherwise.
There aren't multiple user accounts because its not meant to be a shared device. Its a personal datapad, its meant to be used by one person. Apple wants you to buy one for each person that uses it. Its that type of device anyway, if you need to share, thats what a PC is for. The iPad is a personal gadget. How many people do you know that 'share' their iPod (or whatever music player). How many people share their cell phones?
I don't see myself buying an iPad, but I could name probably a thousand other devices you wouldn't buy for the exact same reasons you listed above (even in cases where they are valid concerns, unlike here where most of them are wrong) which are making money hand over fist.
You named 3 or 4 entirely unrelated target demographics and preceeded to describe trivial or non-existent problems with targeting those demographics while completely ignoring everything else.
This isn't an insightful post, its just silly, and utterly ignores examples that directly contradict its own statements ... considering its just a bigger iPhone ...
You don't want one ... we get it, not everyone shares your opinion or short sightedness. Some people have the ability to look beyond their immediate and personal position in the universe and understand that other people may have a different perspective on the universe and they may actually have a use for this device ...
I can clearly say that the iPad is not aimed at you ... at least until next week when you've bought one because your tech-jealousy finally got the best of you and you ran out and got one instead of raging against the machine.