Actually, this has kinda reached a breaking point for me. This is something I was looking forward to, and now it has fallen though. If a Andriod phone gets released for verizon or att then I will be all over it. My 3GS can go to my wife.
Honestly, the push method works great for IM. I see no need to run that in the background. But there are apps I wish could be ran in the background. For example, I would like the ability to swap back and forth between browser and twitter without waiting for the browser to load every time I click a link, then waiting for twitter to load every time I go back. Some twitter clients now have built in browsers, but none of them work "right".
Things like google latitude is another thing I would like to play with, but is worthless in it's current webapp implementation.
But it's my phone, and if I want 3 hours of battery life that should be my decision. They could even make an app for predicting an applications effect on battery life. Maybe I don't want to lose the level of my game because I got a phone call, or maybe I just want to look at google maps for a new route and leave mapmyrun open.
They better do a job so well on the next iphone that it blows my mind. I'm a current iphone 3GS user, my wife has a iphone 3G (my old phone). When I first got the phone it was heaven. The best thing I had ever used.
Before the iPhone I had never had a "smart phone" before. I never used my phone for anything but phone calls. Now it handles calendar, mail, web, gaming, etc. However, I'm hitting limitations and noticing my friends with other phones do not have these limitations. The only thing keeping me from switching is the lack of good 3g in my area by anyone but att. If any other carrier gets their act together and releases a good 3g network, the iphone (and att) may lose my business. If att picks up a google phone or something similar then apple alone may lose my business.
I migrated from linux to OSX because of my iphone. I bought a nice setup of macbook pro and a apple monitor (the new 24inch one). I like the UI and I like the feel of the OS. But there is nothing so great I couldn't go back to linux. The main reason I have this computer is for iPhone development. If I'm not using an iphone, then I my next PC upgrade will not be an apple.
In closing, I want a phone that lets me run the applications I want to run, to write the applications I want to write, and to have a sleek interface. If I want to run apps in the background and slow my device down, that should be my decision. If I want to replace the browser with a different one, again my decision. I like the idea of an app store to protect non-power users. But for people with intelligence to know what they want, they should be able to just install anything. These rules put in place for idiots should be easily bypassed.
Oh well, I'm not due for a new phone for a year or two, we will see what happens then.
I would select (if I was them) IE8 safari (the first release for windows not the most recent) firefox 2 or maybe even a pre firefox name chanage release elinks and konq
I love the whole idea of long distance calling. Send telephone signal to the house next door..oh that's free. Send it to the house across town? Oh thats 8 cents a minute. Send it to japan, oh that's 15 cents a minute.
Send a voip signal over the internet to japan..oh that's free. See a little known fact that data is more expensive when sent by phone.
If the OS has it's own app store you don't need to go to the store and buy a box.
In fact, the software sections of stores have been shrinking very rapidly in the last 3 or 4 years. For example, at the local gamestop in town you can no longer even buy windows games. The only place it town to do that is target or walmart, and it's down to a handful of game stuck next to a bunch of other crap. In terms of non-games there is even less.
It's a change in mindset, but one that apple and google have already begun teaching people. Phone after phone is getting it's own 'app store' now and people are learning to use and enjoy this method of buying software. It is safe, secure, and easy. I think everyday people would embrace that quite quickly.
yea, it looks like you would have to pay 299 for any kind of local large scale distribution (Enterprise SDK)
With support for custom-designed enterprise applications, iPhone becomes a must-have mobile device for businesses. Using the iPhone SDK, an enterprise can easily create applications customized to its business needs and even take advantage of key iPhone technologies such as Multi-Touch, the accelerometer, fast wireless connectivity, and GPS. To deploy their in-house applications, companies can securely sync the applications via iTunes to authorized iPhones. Once installed, enterprise applications live side by side with all the other applications that come with every iPhone.
But for your own personal phone, 100 bucks a year should cut it. I wouldn't do it, but it's an option.
I was thinking about this last night. You can install any software you want on your phone by buying a iphone dev account (enterprise or personal). It skips the app store and you don't need apple to approve it.
They take at MAX 20 minutes 3 to 4 days a week and they work. They are hard as fuck but scalable. You can do them in your home with a little bit of cash and some creativity.
We train fighters with these workouts, it will train you.
Which is why I left verizon. When the iphone was first released I was deciding if I should get one. the verizon rep and news media told me that by 2008 verizon would let any phone run on their network.
So i renewed up with them in hopes of using a good phone by the end of 2008. That came and went so I moved on to a carrier with the phones I wanted to use.
I've bought two iphones, basically for their functionality.
I've tried backberries and windows mobile phones and found them too flaky or annoying to use. I have to support blackberries all the time and have never liked them.
The iphone is simple and does what I want a phone to do in a sleek way. In fact I look at not being able to run background tasks as a feature.
"Why can't I reach you by IM?"
"Oh, sorry the iphone won't let me keep my IM on 24/7"
"Oh, your phone sucks, you should get a blackberry."
"Yea, maybe you should call our help desk and report the issue to them rather then me the admin."
What if you want to buy an unlimited minutes plan and disable 900 numbers.
My texting is unlimited, my minutes are unlimited, I have 900 blocking turned on. I have an iphone so my purchases are on my credit card, not my phone bill, why would they need to do a credit check?
I recently purchased a firearm and noticed that the Federal background check form states that the SSN is optional but will help speed up the process of identifying you.
I didn't fill it out and still got the weapon the same day.
So Apple can't choose which market to develop for? For example if they decided not to make a CDMA phone, would you rather the government force them to?
I think locking a phone out of contract should be illegal. But locking a phone to a carrier while in contract is fine with me. They are subsidizing my phone, so they should have rights to keep me using it on their service only until I "pay it off".
Don't get me wrong, I'd love to have an G1 with AT&T. But I think it's the phone manufactures right to make exclusive agreements with carriers as long as I can take the phone to any network compatible provider after my contract has been for-filled.
I do think the line "wireless carriers would have less incentive to develop and promote innovative handsets" is a bunch of bullshit though. I can't see AT&T putting a huge budget into developing phones. I would suspect LG, apple, etc are using their own R&D money then recouping it with exclusive contracts.
There are other ways to compete besides phones. You could stop charing for text messaging, stop the per minute billing, start providing features that all US carriers are currently hating on (tethering?). Hell you could of jumped on the open source bandwagon and backed something like open moko.
It seems to me they don't want to compete, they want to bitch and make the competition less competitive.
If i was Microsoft I'd probably abandon IE and just ship firefox with some extensions for compatibility. Why bother with R&D on a browser when so many others are doing the work for you for free.
Of course knowing MS, they would ship IE and firefox, but it would be firefox version 1.5 and buggy as shit. Or they would provide some special hooks to IE to make it 3 times faster or something.
Of course in the physical world eventually your patents expire and other people could make your widgits and undercut your profits forcing you to compete.
Both browsers are technically free, so I don't see how it's a big fucking deal. But I'm with you in the fact that the I feel what the EU is doing is wrong and I don't even use any Microsoft products.
Link me a sun download of java. Apple has a contract with sun where they develop and distribute all java updates for OS X. So when apple decided to freeze java at 1.4 then you are screwed.
Case in point OSX 10.3 is stuck at java 1.4. When apple decides it's done with an OS it's done. They don't give much warning. They just announce it like it's a feature.
I am an apple user and I love OSX 10.5. But I hate apple.
Slashdot Mirror
Actually, this has kinda reached a breaking point for me. This is something I was looking forward to, and now it has fallen though. If a Andriod phone gets released for verizon or att then I will be all over it. My 3GS can go to my wife.
Honestly, the push method works great for IM. I see no need to run that in the background. But there are apps I wish could be ran in the background. For example, I would like the ability to swap back and forth between browser and twitter without waiting for the browser to load every time I click a link, then waiting for twitter to load every time I go back. Some twitter clients now have built in browsers, but none of them work "right".
Things like google latitude is another thing I would like to play with, but is worthless in it's current webapp implementation.
But it's my phone, and if I want 3 hours of battery life that should be my decision. They could even make an app for predicting an applications effect on battery life. Maybe I don't want to lose the level of my game because I got a phone call, or maybe I just want to look at google maps for a new route and leave mapmyrun open.
They better do a job so well on the next iphone that it blows my mind. I'm a current iphone 3GS user, my wife has a iphone 3G (my old phone). When I first got the phone it was heaven. The best thing I had ever used.
Before the iPhone I had never had a "smart phone" before. I never used my phone for anything but phone calls. Now it handles calendar, mail, web, gaming, etc. However, I'm hitting limitations and noticing my friends with other phones do not have these limitations. The only thing keeping me from switching is the lack of good 3g in my area by anyone but att. If any other carrier gets their act together and releases a good 3g network, the iphone (and att) may lose my business. If att picks up a google phone or something similar then apple alone may lose my business.
I migrated from linux to OSX because of my iphone. I bought a nice setup of macbook pro and a apple monitor (the new 24inch one). I like the UI and I like the feel of the OS. But there is nothing so great I couldn't go back to linux. The main reason I have this computer is for iPhone development. If I'm not using an iphone, then I my next PC upgrade will not be an apple.
In closing, I want a phone that lets me run the applications I want to run, to write the applications I want to write, and to have a sleek interface. If I want to run apps in the background and slow my device down, that should be my decision. If I want to replace the browser with a different one, again my decision. I like the idea of an app store to protect non-power users. But for people with intelligence to know what they want, they should be able to just install anything. These rules put in place for idiots should be easily bypassed.
Oh well, I'm not due for a new phone for a year or two, we will see what happens then.
I would select (if I was them)
IE8
safari (the first release for windows not the most recent)
firefox 2 or maybe even a pre firefox name chanage release
elinks
and konq
I love the whole idea of long distance calling. Send telephone signal to the house next door..oh that's free. Send it to the house across town? Oh thats 8 cents a minute. Send it to japan, oh that's 15 cents a minute.
Send a voip signal over the internet to japan..oh that's free. See a little known fact that data is more expensive when sent by phone.
If the OS has it's own app store you don't need to go to the store and buy a box.
In fact, the software sections of stores have been shrinking very rapidly in the last 3 or 4 years. For example, at the local gamestop in town you can no longer even buy windows games. The only place it town to do that is target or walmart, and it's down to a handful of game stuck next to a bunch of other crap. In terms of non-games there is even less.
It's a change in mindset, but one that apple and google have already begun teaching people. Phone after phone is getting it's own 'app store' now and people are learning to use and enjoy this method of buying software. It is safe, secure, and easy. I think everyday people would embrace that quite quickly.
I get your point. But hey, nothing more open then being forced to compile it yourself right? :-p
yea, it looks like you would have to pay 299 for any kind of local large scale distribution (Enterprise SDK)
With support for custom-designed enterprise applications, iPhone becomes a must-have mobile device for businesses. Using the iPhone SDK, an enterprise can easily create applications customized to its business needs and even take advantage of key iPhone technologies such as Multi-Touch, the accelerometer, fast wireless connectivity, and GPS. To deploy their in-house applications, companies can securely sync the applications via iTunes to authorized iPhones. Once installed, enterprise applications live side by side with all the other applications that come with every iPhone.
But for your own personal phone, 100 bucks a year should cut it. I wouldn't do it, but it's an option.
The USA's DHS has no jurisdiction in Europe....
YET!
As long as you don't want the next OS update or firmware release, or to backup your phone, or sync your contacts, or any number of other things.
And in most of the country you don't have to worry about getting any network connections. Because T-Mobile's 3g network is pathetic.
I was thinking about this last night. You can install any software you want on your phone by buying a iphone dev account (enterprise or personal). It skips the app store and you don't need apple to approve it.
Just do the workouts on crossfit.com
They take at MAX 20 minutes 3 to 4 days a week and they work. They are hard as fuck but scalable. You can do them in your home with a little bit of cash and some creativity.
We train fighters with these workouts, it will train you.
We use the the GPL version in our classrooms. It makes teaching technology a lot easier when the student is just one rollback away after a fuckup.
I've had 900# and international call blocking on my home phones for years.
Which is why I left verizon. When the iphone was first released I was deciding if I should get one. the verizon rep and news media told me that by 2008 verizon would let any phone run on their network.
(for example http://www.engadget.com/2007/11/27/verizon-wireless-opens-network-to-any-apps-any-device-in-2008/ )
So i renewed up with them in hopes of using a good phone by the end of 2008. That came and went so I moved on to a carrier with the phones I wanted to use.
I've bought two iphones, basically for their functionality.
I've tried backberries and windows mobile phones and found them too flaky or annoying to use. I have to support blackberries all the time and have never liked them.
The iphone is simple and does what I want a phone to do in a sleek way. In fact I look at not being able to run background tasks as a feature.
"Why can't I reach you by IM?"
"Oh, sorry the iphone won't let me keep my IM on 24/7"
"Oh, your phone sucks, you should get a blackberry."
"Yea, maybe you should call our help desk and report the issue to them rather then me the admin."
What if you want to buy an unlimited minutes plan and disable 900 numbers.
My texting is unlimited, my minutes are unlimited, I have 900 blocking turned on. I have an iphone so my purchases are on my credit card, not my phone bill, why would they need to do a credit check?
I recently purchased a firearm and noticed that the Federal background check form states that the SSN is optional but will help speed up the process of identifying you.
I didn't fill it out and still got the weapon the same day.
So Apple can't choose which market to develop for? For example if they decided not to make a CDMA phone, would you rather the government force them to?
I think locking a phone out of contract should be illegal. But locking a phone to a carrier while in contract is fine with me. They are subsidizing my phone, so they should have rights to keep me using it on their service only until I "pay it off".
Don't get me wrong, I'd love to have an G1 with AT&T. But I think it's the phone manufactures right to make exclusive agreements with carriers as long as I can take the phone to any network compatible provider after my contract has been for-filled.
I do think the line "wireless carriers would have less incentive to develop and promote innovative handsets" is a bunch of bullshit though. I can't see AT&T putting a huge budget into developing phones. I would suspect LG, apple, etc are using their own R&D money then recouping it with exclusive contracts.
There are other ways to compete besides phones. You could stop charing for text messaging, stop the per minute billing, start providing features that all US carriers are currently hating on (tethering?). Hell you could of jumped on the open source bandwagon and backed something like open moko.
It seems to me they don't want to compete, they want to bitch and make the competition less competitive.
You are either with us or against us.
As far as I know sun does not care what version of java apple ships. It would be in sun's best interest if apple ships the latest version.
So I would think that apple chooses not to update java to the latest releases in order to push sales to their latest operating systems.
If i was Microsoft I'd probably abandon IE and just ship firefox with some extensions for compatibility. Why bother with R&D on a browser when so many others are doing the work for you for free.
Of course knowing MS, they would ship IE and firefox, but it would be firefox version 1.5 and buggy as shit. Or they would provide some special hooks to IE to make it 3 times faster or something.
Of course in the physical world eventually your patents expire and other people could make your widgits and undercut your profits forcing you to compete.
Both browsers are technically free, so I don't see how it's a big fucking deal. But I'm with you in the fact that the I feel what the EU is doing is wrong and I don't even use any Microsoft products.
Link me a sun download of java. Apple has a contract with sun where they develop and distribute all java updates for OS X. So when apple decided to freeze java at 1.4 then you are screwed.
Case in point OSX 10.3 is stuck at java 1.4. When apple decides it's done with an OS it's done. They don't give much warning. They just announce it like it's a feature.
I am an apple user and I love OSX 10.5. But I hate apple.