Flash isn't on the iPhone because it would be a piece of software bundled with the OS that isn't updatable by Apple. So if Apple decides to go from 32 to 64 bit chips, what would they do? Wait for Adobe to get their act together (there still isn't a 64 bit version of flash for snow leopard which is why Apple had to completely change Safari's plugin architecture). And flash is buggy (the number one cause of application crashes on OS X is Flash--see Gruber's post). Why would any company want to be so dependent on another company without any monetary compensation?
That's true. Flash does have other uses. But a lot of the loud complaints center around video. I am personally not showing advertising presentations to people and I think most people aren't (not to mention the fact that if there is a market for it, there will be an app for that). Apple doesn't want this device to be all things to all people. It seems like Apple sees this as a media device for consumers, not a presentation tool for advertisers. It makes sense to leave out flash because flash is buggy and isn't updatable by Apple (see Gruber's post for why this is such an important point).
Fair enough, but point still stands. Apple knows users want this type of functionality, and they don't want another company to have control of it, so they'll support HTML 5--who cares what they "Why?" is?
Sure Quicktime has had problems, but then I'm only depending on one company for security fixes. If you have flash and safari you are depending on two which means less security.
And what are you talking about saying that Apple won't support HTML 5. It already does, at least it supports enough HTML 5 that every flash app I use can (and has) been replaced by iPhone ready HTML 5 apps.
The iPhone supports HTML 5 (at least video tag and Google is using it for voice), and this is running the iPhone OS, so yes it supports HTML 5. Maybe not fully, but for the things you reference it works. Vimeo and YouTube work fine sans Flash on the iPhone. Seriously, why do we still want Flash? It's buggy and a security problem, the browsers should (and increasingly do) just handle those sorts of things internally.
Because most users aren't geeks. My parents/wife/grandmother/friends/baristas/local-coffee-shop-attenders could care less about a closed or open OS. They want something that is simple to use, does what they want to do, is portable, and gives them easy access to facebook, music, movies and now books.
Apple isn't marketing to the geeks, they are marketing to the masses. Similarly the iPhone and iPod Touch have the same closed OS and Android has the open OS. Which one is selling better with non-geeks?
Unfortunately the telcos have some kind of oligopoly here and they aren't looking at giving us better service OR better prices any time soon. $29.99 is pretty good for unlimited. The real catch is that in 6 months AT&T will say that there Unlimited users are using too much bandwidth and its unfair to poor AT&T and will try to charge them more.
I think people generally refer to their iPod Nanos as iPods (not iPod Nanos). iPod Nanos aren't significantly different than other iPods. iTouch differentiates between the iPod Touch and other iPods which makes sense because it really is a different class of device--there really isn't a need to verbally differentiate between iPod 120GB and iPod Nano--it's simply your apple music player, or iPod. That's why I think most people use iTouch (and b/c iPod Touch is too many syllables to use every time you want to talk about your device).
I want this far more than I want a Kindle. I would love to take my research PDFs on the road with me on a large device with office products built in (not to mention all the other media I use). I tend to carry my ipod touch around as a reading/media device but a larger screen will be MUCH better for 90% of the things I do with it, and the size will make it a lot more portable than even my 13" macbook pro which I prefer to only take with me when I actually need the horsepower.
Flash and Silverlight won't see the inside of this box because they are both proprietary and HTML 5 can do everything flash or silverlight can do in a standards based way (just ask google voice). Also Flash and Silverlight are good attack vectors--why would Apple want a 3rd party responsible for the security of the product when HTML 5 is going to replace the other technologies anyway.
It's also a bit riskier for the person writing the app it if he has to have verified bank accounts before he's allowed to post an app to the marketplace. Which, of course, is the case with the app store. You'd be crazy to send a malicious app in for review because A.) they do check the source, or at least a list of all methods called and B.) your bank account is verified with them so they should be able to find you without too much trouble.
I wish we were making 40k.
The average at my university (which is a large state school) is something like 14k, and a minimum of 13k negotiated by a graduate student union, which means that most people are making fairly close to the average. Also, we happen to have a union, many universities don't, so I would expect it to be lower.
Agreed, but much fewer graduate students receive government funding--most are supported by their universities, or in my field directly by their advisors, and also lots of government funding requires citizenship.
The university doesn't assume this. In fact, if you receive a PhD from a university, you basically can't get a job there until you have left and proven yourself elsewhere (apart from your adviser). The university pays graduate students because without us it couldn't operate (there is a reason, for instance, that a single project in polymer science could have 20 underpaid graduate students led by one faculty member, instead of 20 faculty members). The bottom line is that without graduate students a research university could not financially afford to operate.
Thank you, Trepidity. I got all fired up about the OP and was going to say roughly the same thing. As a graduate student in the sciences, I can tell you that my stipend is not even remotely out of altruism. I get payed by the university for 20 hours of work a week to work on research and do TA duties. I can tell you that I'm currently working about 60 hours a week on research alone. Many of the chinese graduate students that I know put in at least as much, they tend to be very hard working. And we don't do it simply because we love the material. There is a lot of pressure from above to be working this hard.
Wait, why, exactly, would giving tips to the media unofficially and generating traffic to rumor sites and news stories "get doors slammed in its face at media outlets pretty fast."
It seems that it doesn't really matter the size of the company--if there is a juicy rumor that will increase readership and therefore ad revenue, the media will take it. How does apple's size matter? It seems like what really matters is that apple has things to leak that people want to read in blogs/articles/etc. That is all that matters to the media. No way a door will be shut in someones face for something like that.
Do you really think that this is what its about? MS isn't stupid. They are out to make money and they aren't looking to heap shame on their users. They will probably end up marketing it as "your xbox the accountability partner" which will create rewards for meeting exercise goals. It seems a mountain is being made out of this molehill.
Slashdot Mirror
Flash isn't on the iPhone because it would be a piece of software bundled with the OS that isn't updatable by Apple. So if Apple decides to go from 32 to 64 bit chips, what would they do? Wait for Adobe to get their act together (there still isn't a 64 bit version of flash for snow leopard which is why Apple had to completely change Safari's plugin architecture). And flash is buggy (the number one cause of application crashes on OS X is Flash--see Gruber's post). Why would any company want to be so dependent on another company without any monetary compensation?
That is true, you can't do DRM with it. Your sarcasm is a bit overblown, however.
That's true. Flash does have other uses. But a lot of the loud complaints center around video. I am personally not showing advertising presentations to people and I think most people aren't (not to mention the fact that if there is a market for it, there will be an app for that). Apple doesn't want this device to be all things to all people. It seems like Apple sees this as a media device for consumers, not a presentation tool for advertisers. It makes sense to leave out flash because flash is buggy and isn't updatable by Apple (see Gruber's post for why this is such an important point).
I just came across a really good discussion by John Gruber about this: http://daringfireball.net/2010/01/apple_adobe_flash
Fair enough, but point still stands. Apple knows users want this type of functionality, and they don't want another company to have control of it, so they'll support HTML 5--who cares what they "Why?" is?
Sure Quicktime has had problems, but then I'm only depending on one company for security fixes. If you have flash and safari you are depending on two which means less security.
And what are you talking about saying that Apple won't support HTML 5. It already does, at least it supports enough HTML 5 that every flash app I use can (and has) been replaced by iPhone ready HTML 5 apps.
The iPhone supports HTML 5 (at least video tag and Google is using it for voice), and this is running the iPhone OS, so yes it supports HTML 5. Maybe not fully, but for the things you reference it works. Vimeo and YouTube work fine sans Flash on the iPhone. Seriously, why do we still want Flash? It's buggy and a security problem, the browsers should (and increasingly do) just handle those sorts of things internally.
And by "there Unlimited" I meant "their Unlimited." *sighs*
Because most users aren't geeks. My parents/wife/grandmother/friends/baristas/local-coffee-shop-attenders could care less about a closed or open OS. They want something that is simple to use, does what they want to do, is portable, and gives them easy access to facebook, music, movies and now books.
Apple isn't marketing to the geeks, they are marketing to the masses. Similarly the iPhone and iPod Touch have the same closed OS and Android has the open OS. Which one is selling better with non-geeks?
Or it will fly like the iPod touch did.
Unfortunately the telcos have some kind of oligopoly here and they aren't looking at giving us better service OR better prices any time soon. $29.99 is pretty good for unlimited. The real catch is that in 6 months AT&T will say that there Unlimited users are using too much bandwidth and its unfair to poor AT&T and will try to charge them more.
"How they expect me to believe this is an adequate gaming machine is beyond me."
Because good gaming isn't all about graphics (for an extreme case, look at D&D). Sorry, but your statement is just silly.
I think people generally refer to their iPod Nanos as iPods (not iPod Nanos). iPod Nanos aren't significantly different than other iPods. iTouch differentiates between the iPod Touch and other iPods which makes sense because it really is a different class of device--there really isn't a need to verbally differentiate between iPod 120GB and iPod Nano--it's simply your apple music player, or iPod. That's why I think most people use iTouch (and b/c iPod Touch is too many syllables to use every time you want to talk about your device).
I want this far more than I want a Kindle. I would love to take my research PDFs on the road with me on a large device with office products built in (not to mention all the other media I use). I tend to carry my ipod touch around as a reading/media device but a larger screen will be MUCH better for 90% of the things I do with it, and the size will make it a lot more portable than even my 13" macbook pro which I prefer to only take with me when I actually need the horsepower.
Flash and Silverlight won't see the inside of this box because they are both proprietary and HTML 5 can do everything flash or silverlight can do in a standards based way (just ask google voice). Also Flash and Silverlight are good attack vectors--why would Apple want a 3rd party responsible for the security of the product when HTML 5 is going to replace the other technologies anyway.
Of course it has both of them.
Actually blessing of inanimate objects are prayers asking God that the objects will aid us in His service, not that they won't break.
So let the testers see the source.
It's also a bit riskier for the person writing the app it if he has to have verified bank accounts before he's allowed to post an app to the marketplace. Which, of course, is the case with the app store. You'd be crazy to send a malicious app in for review because A.) they do check the source, or at least a list of all methods called and B.) your bank account is verified with them so they should be able to find you without too much trouble.
I wish we were making 40k. The average at my university (which is a large state school) is something like 14k, and a minimum of 13k negotiated by a graduate student union, which means that most people are making fairly close to the average. Also, we happen to have a union, many universities don't, so I would expect it to be lower.
Agreed, but much fewer graduate students receive government funding--most are supported by their universities, or in my field directly by their advisors, and also lots of government funding requires citizenship.
The university doesn't assume this. In fact, if you receive a PhD from a university, you basically can't get a job there until you have left and proven yourself elsewhere (apart from your adviser). The university pays graduate students because without us it couldn't operate (there is a reason, for instance, that a single project in polymer science could have 20 underpaid graduate students led by one faculty member, instead of 20 faculty members). The bottom line is that without graduate students a research university could not financially afford to operate.
Thank you, Trepidity. I got all fired up about the OP and was going to say roughly the same thing. As a graduate student in the sciences, I can tell you that my stipend is not even remotely out of altruism. I get payed by the university for 20 hours of work a week to work on research and do TA duties. I can tell you that I'm currently working about 60 hours a week on research alone. Many of the chinese graduate students that I know put in at least as much, they tend to be very hard working. And we don't do it simply because we love the material. There is a lot of pressure from above to be working this hard.
Wait, why, exactly, would giving tips to the media unofficially and generating traffic to rumor sites and news stories "get doors slammed in its face at media outlets pretty fast."
It seems that it doesn't really matter the size of the company--if there is a juicy rumor that will increase readership and therefore ad revenue, the media will take it. How does apple's size matter? It seems like what really matters is that apple has things to leak that people want to read in blogs/articles/etc. That is all that matters to the media. No way a door will be shut in someones face for something like that.
"You could easily plot these adventurous innovators on a graph, with the X axis showing their skill and the Y axis their financial means."
Correct me if I'm wrong, but can't you "easily plot" any 2D set of related numbers on an XY graph?
Do you really think that this is what its about? MS isn't stupid. They are out to make money and they aren't looking to heap shame on their users. They will probably end up marketing it as "your xbox the accountability partner" which will create rewards for meeting exercise goals. It seems a mountain is being made out of this molehill.