Android isn't 100% open either, contrary to popular belief, there are aspects of the devices to which you can't modify in the 'standard' way when it comes to Android. Which is the same as Windows Mobile, mostly open to anything except some very specific important bits that are critical to making the device play well with others.
The main difference is that Android (and WinMo) has one less barrier protecting that code. Both devices are most certainly capable of taking down cellular service over their cell given a little bit of effort.
It is FUD as its true for any phone really, its just a matter of how difficult it is to accomplish and how effective its going to be. But its also a true possibility. Still FUD though.
So you bought it so you could replace the software on it because you didn't like any of it?
Seems to me like a smarter idea would have been to buy a phone that suited your requirements rather than buying something else, then bitching about how it wasn't what you wanted.
I know this is going to seem like a troll but it isn't, mark it as one and move on anyway since if you have to start a post with 'this isn't a troll', it clearly is.
The problem here is that you didn't buy him OO.org. OO.org is like a hammer for roofing, except the handle is only 5 inchs long, the head weighs about a half an ounce and its made from pot metal, because its designed by a bunch of guys who can't agree on anything, no one wants to address its usability because they'd rather work on its color scheme, but its free...
Yes, you can use the hammer to put new shingles on a house and save yourself the price of a hammer. Or... you can buy a hammer from the store that was made for building a house and save yourself a shitload of time rather than dealing with the clunky bearly out of the stone age, free pile of crap you were handed earlier.
Spend less time dealing with charting and more time making OO.org feel like a professional application, not some sluggish, ugly as sin collection of code called an office suite that feels more like a bunch command line scripts with some tk and postscript thrown in as an afterthought.
Your handyman may not care about what his hammer looks like because he doesn't look at it all day long, but he still keeps it clean and properly working.
Your desk jockey on the other hand DOES care what his/her tools look like because they ARE looking at it all day. Your software can't look like shit and get respected. Period. You may not want to admit it, but thats reality. People will pay for a pretty cherry desk with working drawers, even if they can get a crappy beat up metal one for free.
Whats worse, if we continue the OpenOffice is a hammer analogy, OO.org is like a hammer missing the claw used to pull nails. Its only redeeming quality is its price, and that price isn't enough to justify the benefits the expensive alternatives provide.
No this wasn't meant to be a troll, OO.org is just a VERY VERY easy target. I don't like Linux, I prefer FBSD, but the list of reasons that I don't like Linux is pretty short. I can come up with many places I'd use Linux if I had to do that particular task.
OO.org does not have that value. Given the choice of starving for 3 days to buy MS office, or using OO.org for a week and eating like a king for those days, I'll take MS Office just to avoid the pain that its using OO.org.
Any who thinks their gradma or grandpa like OO.org doesn't realize they've been lying to you for years, telling you the like OO.org to boost your ego a little and make you think they care so you keep coming back and fixing their PC is well worth it since they don't use it very often anyway. They secretly just use Google Docs and don't tell you so they don't listen to you rant about Google seeing their data.
Fuck 4chan and the horse they road in on, pissing off Verizon is a little different than going after CoS.
Verizon has FAR money, FarFar more knowledge about finding people on the Internet, and won't have a problem bringing in government backing to find the attackers globally.
They would be attacking the very people that make it so they can perform the attacks. When you piss of one major arms dealer cause you are a retard, the others aren't going to sit around at wait to be next.
Let them attack Verizon, the sooner they do the sooner they'll disapper, and nothing of value will be lost.
Its open source. You're more than welcome to branch it and maintain a 'security fix only' release for yourself and share that with others.
The problem is, no one wants to do that. They'd rather just use the new version since everyone capable of doing that has newer hardware anyway so it doesn't effect them.
Considering I don't know of anyone who would ever call x86 anything 'big iron', I find it hard to believe a guy who started writing a kernel for himself at home on a 386 PC would say something like that.
You mean... like the iPhone... with a single core, low power CPU, with 128M of ram, and a flash storage based 'hard disk'...
Hrmm, in that case there are millions of machines that Adobe wants to put flash on that are actually lower in spec than what you're talking about.
Adobe is in fact, complaining that Apple won't let them put it on those lower spec'd devices and calling it Apples problem that their software sucks ass.
Adobe IS LAZY and rapidly becoming worthless. How many years has OSX been out and they STILL haven't fixed their products to install on a case sensitive file system, WHAT THE FUCK.
Apple needs to help Adobe, a large powerful software company, fix its flash player for OS X... even though countless other 3rd party apps run fine in OS X and are more than happy to play video with practically no CPU usage at all?
I don't think you actually understand the difference between political posturing and bullshit, and the realities of writing software.
NO ONE GIVES A SHIT as long as what they want works for them.
People don't care about the technical way things do or don't work, they care that they can click/touch a button and watch a damn video. They could give a shit about open, they want 'works' first.
But to answer your question, yes, the way it works on the iPhone with video is an xml file on a web server describing what the URL is to the various available streams and describing the properties of those streams so the device can auto select.
Its all very well documented and easy to understand. The iPhone (and probably OS X though I didn't look into it) has an advantage in that it has a nice library that only needs to see the xml file and it'll do the rest for you. You'd need to reimplement that library else where, but its a fairly trivial XML file on the server to read to get at the rest of the streams.
Mozilla: Theora for Firefox. There is no way they can use H.264 because of countless amount of open source forks. Could only possible support it in main binary Firefox, other users left without.
Yea, except... Mozilla supports plugins... which... could be closed source... and will work in the open source forks... kind of like flash does now, which you point out.
The only reason Firefox can't have h.264 support is because they are 'making a stand', are retarded one considering its clear to just about everyone they've utterly lost this war.
Firefox is in control of its own destiny here, if it goes away because of this, it doesn't deserve to live in the first place.
I don't use software to prop up someone elses retarded agenda, regardless of whos it is or what it is. I use software to prop up MY AGENDA.
This is typical in the FOSS world, pushing your agenda on someone else at the cost of features, performance or usability and then being utterly awed and in shock when no one gives a shit about the FOSS package and uses something commercial for a fee instead.
Dear Mozilla-
People don't give a shit about your agenda, they care about theirs and facilitating theirs, not yours. You lost. Suck it up, throw in h.264 and you'll continue to be someone that matters. Or don't, continue playing in your own back yard and watch while everyone else leaves to go hang out with the kids who actually have the new, better toys.
Your math is unlike my math. I have concluded that your math sounds like something a statistician would produce to justify something completely ass backwards.
Ironically, the same is true for the Apple AppStore, minus the FOSS part. Apps are either Hobbyist (sometimes turned professional thanks to AppStore sales) or big-name corporations.
Yet seems its doing fine.
Perhaps the App Store is only part of the equation? Perhaps target audience, actual value of the store to that audience, and value of the items on the store have a little bit to do with it as well?
Perhaps the fact that this is the first time I've ever heard of it has something to do with it, I heard about the Apple store before it even opened, and the Redhat store I didn't know existed till it closed.
Perhaps you're spending too much time coming up with excuses for failure that you can blame on something/someone else rather than fixing the problem.
On think FOSS people never seem to have a problem with is faith in themselves. At some point, you might want to consider breaking down and coming to the conclusion that while you think its 'perfect in every way' that you are part of an amazingly small minority and that you need to target the majority.
Or, better yet, stop dicking around and trying to half assed act like a commercial/proprietary software eco system. Either jump on the train, learn the rules and compete, or stop trying to take over the world by being a shitty copy of what people want and thinking you'll when on technical superiority.
Technically superior products and ideas NEVER WIN because thats not ALL PEOPLE WANT out of a product.
So I can transmit energy or I can not transmit energy.
By turning the energy off and on, I could create a... lets call it a Bit Stream... which could be used to build larger blocks of data, lets call them bytes... which could represent letters and other data...
Seems to me that if you're transmitting energy and you can control the energy you can transmit information.
And on top of it, it is full of nerds that tend to love to go into this kind of obscure detail.
Which is why it has multiple tags, not one. Its also why there are a bunch of posts to this story stating/arguing/comparing the various features and possible ways that it might go bad. The tag didn't change anything from happening, it just provides additional, potentially useful metadata for the future.
The metadata is human provided and human re-enforced metadata that even when its wrong, almost always turns out more useful than anything machine generated. People often search for the wrong then only to be educated along the way as to what they really should be looking to find. 'bad' meta data like this has helped me find more on search engines than anything else, when a tag shows on the front page its because its popular with the people viewing the content, meaning that if I'm looking for that type of content, I'm more likely to use that term (maybe not in this specific case I'll admit) for my search, even though it is clearly incorrect for what I'm looking for.
The art of searching, with the help of metadata is more often than you would imagine facilitated by 'incorrect' or 'bad', plain and simple. This particular bit is entirely unlikely to hurt anyones search anyway.
I know I've searched for 'aren't that important' and 'isn't important' in direct relation to cryptography, this tag may actually have helped me.
And then tag it "you aren't that important" implying "what are you worried about", or with a little further stretch "you have nothing to hide, so don't bother". This is quite ridiculous.
It implies a 'from a practical standpoint, it doesn't matter what you do'. He isn't that important, if he was, he wouldn't be asking. Yes, thats an annoying way to look at it, but thats reality. Now he may be asking for purely informative reasons, in which case, everyone is still giving him the answer, so the tag doesn't matter.
It's denigrating at best.
I guess I'm stupid, but what? Okay, so I looked it up, but really, are you going out of your way to use rarely used words?
It's stupid, and shows lack of respect for other people.
Yes, calling someone stupid and disrespectful for being stupid and disrespectful makes perfect sense, you are truely my hero.
I'm all for calling people stupid, retarded, not that important or whatever when the shoe fits, but in most cases (and I'm making an exception here) I try not to do the exact same thing as the guy I'm calling stupid WHILE I'm calling him stupid. I like you though, so... god your post was stupid.
Apple's desire to have Windows applications running on OSX [apple.com]
Except... the link... is to run Windows on your Mac, not Windows apps in Mac OS X.
You push the little guys around [wikipedia.org] when you're the big man on campus
So in 4 years, they've come from no device on the market, to essentially owning the market... They couldn't have used their 'monopoly' to do it since they couldn't have had one being the new comer. Maybe they actually have a better product or maybe they don't, but they have a marketing system that actually gets customers the info that makes them buy a product.
Either way, I'm fairly sure that Apple is far better selling products than Google, the guy who submitted the story, and yourself. It might be time to pay attention and figure out WHY they are kicking the shit out of everyone else rather than sit around and whine about it while making up bullshit excuses for the most trivial problems you can find.
Remember the time... when people didn't just use the word censor to garner attention? You know back when it was actually used for real issues, not trivial marketing BS that could easily be explained off by the simple fact that the statement in reference is irrelevant to all those looking at it, and potentially confusing the less sophisticated users of what was designed to be a consumer device, not techie toy?
When you use that word this way, you do nothing but lower its impact and make yourself sound irrational.
basically that's like Microsoft telling an app vendor that their app will be erased from all Windows users' PCs if the app's packaging contains a "compatible with Mac" logo.
No, it would be like Microsoft telling you can't put the App on Windows Marketplace for saying '2010 award that no one knows about for Macs!' on software that was only going to work on Windows.
The store doesn't sell Android apps, the blurb could most certainly confuse people who have no idea what Android is, which is most of the iPhone users of the world.
Its not like you're buying a app from the AppStore that will run on Android, it won't. And its unlikely that an iPhone user will have an Android device, highly unlikely. Even so they'd have to buy another copy from somewhere else. You won't find a Windows only boxed application that says compatible with Mac. You won't see 'compatible with mac' on the box for Office 2007, even though you can buy Office 2008 for a Mac.
Uhm, you realize they try to do this all the time right? With their own unique, not willing to license to anyone else extensions to the x86 architecture?
You realize the 'pentium' name was EXACTLY that? You realize that switching to a 'slotted' CPU sockets was done entirely to make it so you couldn't have an AMD processor drop into a intel motherboard?
Intel 64 bit extensions, latest SSE revisions, virtualization specs, all of that stuff doesn't just work on an AMD processor. AMD has its own stuff to do basically the same thing, only its a little different and uses different op codes. An OS written entirely based on an intel reference for 64 bit, SSE or virtualization will hard fault on an AMD processor if it tries to use these features. Every OS that supports them just uses different code to accomplish the same things between the processors because they are basically close enough from a high level, even if the op codes and registers are different.
Drop an AMD processor into an intel motherboard.
Go ahead, I'll wait for you to tell me how well it works. Please send me the pictures after you get it into the socket, we'll go from there on how well it works since you've already run into incompatibilities since they want even share sockets.
You could not have picked a better example of a company intentionally making things incompatible to hurt its competition.
I'm sick of seeing app descriptions like the one used for this app before the change.
Telling people that its great for Android is of no value what so ever to an iPhone user.
Its just a wasted fluff piece that takes up space for what should be a real app description.
Listing off the reasons why other people think your app is awesome BEFORE you actually tell anyone what your app does is fucking annoying for those of us looking for apps.
Most of us don't give a shit what awards you've one, awards are generally politically based and rarely a direct relation to how good something is, regardless of the award.
I don't want to read about 10 different awards you got, I want to know what the app does and what features its got that make it worth my money and/or time.
Everyone here is bitching about Apple being so controlling and 'censoring' and you guys STILL DON'T GET IT. You keep going on about how Apple is wrong all the while ignoring that they have a growth rate thats off the charts.
I appreciate that Apple wants this pointless bit of information removed from the description, it does nothing useful to me. I don't use android, and if I'm buying a flashcard app for my iPhone I'm probably not also going to carry it around on my Android phone since having both would be retarded in and of itself.
You might be wise to listen to their marketing department. They've always been the smaller company that could. People like Apple (outside of the fanboys of geekdom, we all have our own things that we love, we don't count) for a reason, maybe its cause they are trendy, but I think its more than that, and this is an example of one of those reasons.
When you go to the store and buy a boxed application that runs on OS X and Windows, and it says so on the box, its because it runs on both. They don't put the OSX version in the box and advertise that you can go buy a Windows version if you want also. Nor do Windows only versions of software tell you about the Mac version. This App is sold in a store for software that when you buy/download it, it will only work on the iPhone (barring some hacked device that runs iPhone OS or a vm or simulator), so theres no reason to mention Android, it will just confuse all the people who have NO FREAKING IDEA what Android is, which is pretty much everyone outside this community. They may know that Google has the Nexus One, or that you can buy a Droid, but they have no clue what Android OS is.
Wrong, because 80k of those hits actually come during a 8-12 portion of the day, sometimes much smaller depending on the focus of the site.
Yes, its fine if you're never going to get anywhere near that kind of load, but load planning doesn't work in 'days' it works in hourly peaks and valleys if you want to look at it from a real rough perspective.
Ask some sites that get slashdotted how well capacity planning works when you get 120k hits in the first hour its on slashdot, and 10k for the rest of the day after it has moved down the list on the main page. Sure they could have easily handled the load with a little delay if they had built an app that loads in 1 second, IF the load was perfectly timed to send one request per second, which simply isn't the way it works.
Slashdot Mirror
Android isn't 100% open either, contrary to popular belief, there are aspects of the devices to which you can't modify in the 'standard' way when it comes to Android. Which is the same as Windows Mobile, mostly open to anything except some very specific important bits that are critical to making the device play well with others.
The main difference is that Android (and WinMo) has one less barrier protecting that code. Both devices are most certainly capable of taking down cellular service over their cell given a little bit of effort.
It is FUD as its true for any phone really, its just a matter of how difficult it is to accomplish and how effective its going to be. But its also a true possibility. Still FUD though.
So you bought it so you could replace the software on it because you didn't like any of it?
Seems to me like a smarter idea would have been to buy a phone that suited your requirements rather than buying something else, then bitching about how it wasn't what you wanted.
If your worried about one big filesystem going south then I suggest you start using a modern filesystem without those concerns.
We've got well past the point where that should be an issue on any modern system.
Your acting like it's still the 70s, it's not, we've learned a few things since then.
Its generally recognized that if you need this many columns, you are doing it wrong.
There is almost certainly a better way to handle the data than opening it in a spreadsheet with more than 256 columns.
There are rare exceptions, but the instant you say 'frequently', red flags go off.
I know this is going to seem like a troll but it isn't, mark it as one and move on anyway since if you have to start a post with 'this isn't a troll', it clearly is.
The problem here is that you didn't buy him OO.org. OO.org is like a hammer for roofing, except the handle is only 5 inchs long, the head weighs about a half an ounce and its made from pot metal, because its designed by a bunch of guys who can't agree on anything, no one wants to address its usability because they'd rather work on its color scheme, but its free ...
Yes, you can use the hammer to put new shingles on a house and save yourself the price of a hammer. Or ... you can buy a hammer from the store that was made for building a house and save yourself a shitload of time rather than dealing with the clunky bearly out of the stone age, free pile of crap you were handed earlier.
Spend less time dealing with charting and more time making OO.org feel like a professional application, not some sluggish, ugly as sin collection of code called an office suite that feels more like a bunch command line scripts with some tk and postscript thrown in as an afterthought.
Your handyman may not care about what his hammer looks like because he doesn't look at it all day long, but he still keeps it clean and properly working.
Your desk jockey on the other hand DOES care what his/her tools look like because they ARE looking at it all day. Your software can't look like shit and get respected. Period. You may not want to admit it, but thats reality. People will pay for a pretty cherry desk with working drawers, even if they can get a crappy beat up metal one for free.
Whats worse, if we continue the OpenOffice is a hammer analogy, OO.org is like a hammer missing the claw used to pull nails. Its only redeeming quality is its price, and that price isn't enough to justify the benefits the expensive alternatives provide.
No this wasn't meant to be a troll, OO.org is just a VERY VERY easy target. I don't like Linux, I prefer FBSD, but the list of reasons that I don't like Linux is pretty short. I can come up with many places I'd use Linux if I had to do that particular task.
OO.org does not have that value. Given the choice of starving for 3 days to buy MS office, or using OO.org for a week and eating like a king for those days, I'll take MS Office just to avoid the pain that its using OO.org.
Any who thinks their gradma or grandpa like OO.org doesn't realize they've been lying to you for years, telling you the like OO.org to boost your ego a little and make you think they care so you keep coming back and fixing their PC is well worth it since they don't use it very often anyway. They secretly just use Google Docs and don't tell you so they don't listen to you rant about Google seeing their data.
Story posted by kdawson, nuff said.
Ah, so you feel the terrorists will when then?
Fuck 4chan and the horse they road in on, pissing off Verizon is a little different than going after CoS.
Verizon has FAR money, FarFar more knowledge about finding people on the Internet, and won't have a problem bringing in government backing to find the attackers globally.
They would be attacking the very people that make it so they can perform the attacks. When you piss of one major arms dealer cause you are a retard, the others aren't going to sit around at wait to be next.
Let them attack Verizon, the sooner they do the sooner they'll disapper, and nothing of value will be lost.
Except as soon as anyone finds out that he accepted money for expressing his opinion, people will value his opinion a whole hell of a lot less.
Its open source. You're more than welcome to branch it and maintain a 'security fix only' release for yourself and share that with others.
The problem is, no one wants to do that. They'd rather just use the new version since everyone capable of doing that has newer hardware anyway so it doesn't effect them.
Citation Needed
Considering I don't know of anyone who would ever call x86 anything 'big iron', I find it hard to believe a guy who started writing a kernel for himself at home on a 386 PC would say something like that.
You mean ... like the iPhone ... with a single core, low power CPU, with 128M of ram, and a flash storage based 'hard disk' ...
Hrmm, in that case there are millions of machines that Adobe wants to put flash on that are actually lower in spec than what you're talking about.
Adobe is in fact, complaining that Apple won't let them put it on those lower spec'd devices and calling it Apples problem that their software sucks ass.
Adobe IS LAZY and rapidly becoming worthless. How many years has OSX been out and they STILL haven't fixed their products to install on a case sensitive file system, WHAT THE FUCK.
So let me get this straight ...
Apple needs to help Adobe, a large powerful software company, fix its flash player for OS X ... even though countless other 3rd party apps run fine in OS X and are more than happy to play video with practically no CPU usage at all?
I don't think you actually understand the difference between political posturing and bullshit, and the realities of writing software.
And this is where you fail.
NO ONE GIVES A SHIT as long as what they want works for them.
People don't care about the technical way things do or don't work, they care that they can click/touch a button and watch a damn video. They could give a shit about open, they want 'works' first.
But to answer your question, yes, the way it works on the iPhone with video is an xml file on a web server describing what the URL is to the various available streams and describing the properties of those streams so the device can auto select.
Its all very well documented and easy to understand. The iPhone (and probably OS X though I didn't look into it) has an advantage in that it has a nice library that only needs to see the xml file and it'll do the rest for you. You'd need to reimplement that library else where, but its a fairly trivial XML file on the server to read to get at the rest of the streams.
Yea, except ... Mozilla supports plugins ... which ... could be closed source ... and will work in the open source forks ... kind of like flash does now, which you point out.
The only reason Firefox can't have h.264 support is because they are 'making a stand', are retarded one considering its clear to just about everyone they've utterly lost this war.
Firefox is in control of its own destiny here, if it goes away because of this, it doesn't deserve to live in the first place.
I don't use software to prop up someone elses retarded agenda, regardless of whos it is or what it is. I use software to prop up MY AGENDA.
This is typical in the FOSS world, pushing your agenda on someone else at the cost of features, performance or usability and then being utterly awed and in shock when no one gives a shit about the FOSS package and uses something commercial for a fee instead.
Dear Mozilla-
People don't give a shit about your agenda, they care about theirs and facilitating theirs, not yours. You lost. Suck it up, throw in h.264 and you'll continue to be someone that matters. Or don't, continue playing in your own back yard and watch while everyone else leaves to go hang out with the kids who actually have the new, better toys.
Dear poster,
Your math is unlike my math. I have concluded that your math sounds like something a statistician would produce to justify something completely ass backwards.
Sincerely,
John Q Public
Ironically, the same is true for the Apple AppStore, minus the FOSS part. Apps are either Hobbyist (sometimes turned professional thanks to AppStore sales) or big-name corporations.
Yet seems its doing fine.
Perhaps the App Store is only part of the equation? Perhaps target audience, actual value of the store to that audience, and value of the items on the store have a little bit to do with it as well?
Perhaps the fact that this is the first time I've ever heard of it has something to do with it, I heard about the Apple store before it even opened, and the Redhat store I didn't know existed till it closed.
Perhaps you're spending too much time coming up with excuses for failure that you can blame on something/someone else rather than fixing the problem.
On think FOSS people never seem to have a problem with is faith in themselves. At some point, you might want to consider breaking down and coming to the conclusion that while you think its 'perfect in every way' that you are part of an amazingly small minority and that you need to target the majority.
Or, better yet, stop dicking around and trying to half assed act like a commercial/proprietary software eco system. Either jump on the train, learn the rules and compete, or stop trying to take over the world by being a shitty copy of what people want and thinking you'll when on technical superiority.
Technically superior products and ideas NEVER WIN because thats not ALL PEOPLE WANT out of a product.
'Standards' come and go in 6 years on the Internet, its really not that big of a deal.
So I can transmit energy or I can not transmit energy.
By turning the energy off and on, I could create a ... lets call it a Bit Stream ... which could be used to build larger blocks of data, lets call them bytes ... which could represent letters and other data ...
Seems to me that if you're transmitting energy and you can control the energy you can transmit information.
Really? My url shows http:/// for slashdot.
Which is why it has multiple tags, not one. Its also why there are a bunch of posts to this story stating/arguing/comparing the various features and possible ways that it might go bad. The tag didn't change anything from happening, it just provides additional, potentially useful metadata for the future.
The metadata is human provided and human re-enforced metadata that even when its wrong, almost always turns out more useful than anything machine generated. People often search for the wrong then only to be educated along the way as to what they really should be looking to find. 'bad' meta data like this has helped me find more on search engines than anything else, when a tag shows on the front page its because its popular with the people viewing the content, meaning that if I'm looking for that type of content, I'm more likely to use that term (maybe not in this specific case I'll admit) for my search, even though it is clearly incorrect for what I'm looking for.
The art of searching, with the help of metadata is more often than you would imagine facilitated by 'incorrect' or 'bad', plain and simple. This particular bit is entirely unlikely to hurt anyones search anyway.
I know I've searched for 'aren't that important' and 'isn't important' in direct relation to cryptography, this tag may actually have helped me.
It implies a 'from a practical standpoint, it doesn't matter what you do'. He isn't that important, if he was, he wouldn't be asking. Yes, thats an annoying way to look at it, but thats reality. Now he may be asking for purely informative reasons, in which case, everyone is still giving him the answer, so the tag doesn't matter.
I guess I'm stupid, but what? Okay, so I looked it up, but really, are you going out of your way to use rarely used words?
Yes, calling someone stupid and disrespectful for being stupid and disrespectful makes perfect sense, you are truely my hero.
I'm all for calling people stupid, retarded, not that important or whatever when the shoe fits, but in most cases (and I'm making an exception here) I try not to do the exact same thing as the guy I'm calling stupid WHILE I'm calling him stupid. I like you though, so ... god your post was stupid.
Except ... the link ... is to run Windows on your Mac, not Windows apps in Mac OS X.
So in 4 years, they've come from no device on the market, to essentially owning the market ... They couldn't have used their 'monopoly' to do it since they couldn't have had one being the new comer. Maybe they actually have a better product or maybe they don't, but they have a marketing system that actually gets customers the info that makes them buy a product.
Either way, I'm fairly sure that Apple is far better selling products than Google, the guy who submitted the story, and yourself. It might be time to pay attention and figure out WHY they are kicking the shit out of everyone else rather than sit around and whine about it while making up bullshit excuses for the most trivial problems you can find.
Remember the time ... when people didn't just use the word censor to garner attention? You know back when it was actually used for real issues, not trivial marketing BS that could easily be explained off by the simple fact that the statement in reference is irrelevant to all those looking at it, and potentially confusing the less sophisticated users of what was designed to be a consumer device, not techie toy?
When you use that word this way, you do nothing but lower its impact and make yourself sound irrational.
No, it would be like Microsoft telling you can't put the App on Windows Marketplace for saying '2010 award that no one knows about for Macs!' on software that was only going to work on Windows.
The store doesn't sell Android apps, the blurb could most certainly confuse people who have no idea what Android is, which is most of the iPhone users of the world.
Its not like you're buying a app from the AppStore that will run on Android, it won't. And its unlikely that an iPhone user will have an Android device, highly unlikely. Even so they'd have to buy another copy from somewhere else. You won't find a Windows only boxed application that says compatible with Mac. You won't see 'compatible with mac' on the box for Office 2007, even though you can buy Office 2008 for a Mac.
Uhm, you realize they try to do this all the time right? With their own unique, not willing to license to anyone else extensions to the x86 architecture?
You realize the 'pentium' name was EXACTLY that? You realize that switching to a 'slotted' CPU sockets was done entirely to make it so you couldn't have an AMD processor drop into a intel motherboard?
Intel 64 bit extensions, latest SSE revisions, virtualization specs, all of that stuff doesn't just work on an AMD processor. AMD has its own stuff to do basically the same thing, only its a little different and uses different op codes. An OS written entirely based on an intel reference for 64 bit, SSE or virtualization will hard fault on an AMD processor if it tries to use these features. Every OS that supports them just uses different code to accomplish the same things between the processors because they are basically close enough from a high level, even if the op codes and registers are different.
Drop an AMD processor into an intel motherboard.
Go ahead, I'll wait for you to tell me how well it works. Please send me the pictures after you get it into the socket, we'll go from there on how well it works since you've already run into incompatibilities since they want even share sockets.
You could not have picked a better example of a company intentionally making things incompatible to hurt its competition.
I'm sick of seeing app descriptions like the one used for this app before the change.
Telling people that its great for Android is of no value what so ever to an iPhone user.
Its just a wasted fluff piece that takes up space for what should be a real app description.
Listing off the reasons why other people think your app is awesome BEFORE you actually tell anyone what your app does is fucking annoying for those of us looking for apps.
Most of us don't give a shit what awards you've one, awards are generally politically based and rarely a direct relation to how good something is, regardless of the award.
I don't want to read about 10 different awards you got, I want to know what the app does and what features its got that make it worth my money and/or time.
Everyone here is bitching about Apple being so controlling and 'censoring' and you guys STILL DON'T GET IT. You keep going on about how Apple is wrong all the while ignoring that they have a growth rate thats off the charts.
I appreciate that Apple wants this pointless bit of information removed from the description, it does nothing useful to me. I don't use android, and if I'm buying a flashcard app for my iPhone I'm probably not also going to carry it around on my Android phone since having both would be retarded in and of itself.
You might be wise to listen to their marketing department. They've always been the smaller company that could. People like Apple (outside of the fanboys of geekdom, we all have our own things that we love, we don't count) for a reason, maybe its cause they are trendy, but I think its more than that, and this is an example of one of those reasons.
When you go to the store and buy a boxed application that runs on OS X and Windows, and it says so on the box, its because it runs on both. They don't put the OSX version in the box and advertise that you can go buy a Windows version if you want also. Nor do Windows only versions of software tell you about the Mac version. This App is sold in a store for software that when you buy/download it, it will only work on the iPhone (barring some hacked device that runs iPhone OS or a vm or simulator), so theres no reason to mention Android, it will just confuse all the people who have NO FREAKING IDEA what Android is, which is pretty much everyone outside this community. They may know that Google has the Nexus One, or that you can buy a Droid, but they have no clue what Android OS is.
Wrong, because 80k of those hits actually come during a 8-12 portion of the day, sometimes much smaller depending on the focus of the site.
Yes, its fine if you're never going to get anywhere near that kind of load, but load planning doesn't work in 'days' it works in hourly peaks and valleys if you want to look at it from a real rough perspective.
Ask some sites that get slashdotted how well capacity planning works when you get 120k hits in the first hour its on slashdot, and 10k for the rest of the day after it has moved down the list on the main page. Sure they could have easily handled the load with a little delay if they had built an app that loads in 1 second, IF the load was perfectly timed to send one request per second, which simply isn't the way it works.