Obama's done absolutely nothing to pull out of Iraq, so I don't see how he's less bad than Hillary.
I don't support Obama, not anymore anyways, but he opposed the invasion of Iraq whereas Hillary supported it.
And I don't care about politicians having mistresses; that's perfectly normal in other countries. Only in America do people get their panties in a bind about their leaders' sex lives.
It's not that a certain politician had an extra-martial affair, but that he had it while his wife was fighting breast cancer and then he lied about it.
What I think is going on here, is that Obama is being called awful simply because he's not a savior.
Obama voted to give immunity to telcom companies for their help in spying on Americans. He also signed a bill creating larger government and denying liberty, ie the Health care Bill.
I wish Obama were continuing none, but at least now the economy has been pulled back from the cliff.
Like the economy wouldn't have improved without Obama and it never runs in cycles.
Sorry I already know how government health care is, unfortunately I am on it and it, Medicare, sucks. Instead what he, and congress, could have done was to give everybody the same tax breaks employers get for offering health insurance. If that weren't enough then give those unable to afford insurance a check for, say $4000, then let them buy insurance in a relatively free and open market. With millions of people shopping for insurance policy issuers would compeat with each other to sell insurance.
Any of the other Democrats running would have been better than Obama.
HillaryCare anyone? How about the midnight call on the red phone? Let's not forget the one who cheated on his wife while she had breast cancer then lied about it.
I've completely lost all hope that the American public is able to pick any type of decent leader.
Same here, but my decent leader is probably different than yours.
It still scares me to see how badly the Bush administration has damaged democracy and the American constitution. It will take years, but this is another step away from the proto-fascist path that our country had started down when the far right-wing neocons came to power.
Except the Obama admin has been doing the same. "'Until merchandise has cleared customs, it may not enter the United States,' assistant U.S. attorney Owen Martikan argued. 'The laptop never cleared customs and was maintained in government custody until it was searched...'"
Obama ran on a platform of change, the only change was in the party in power. And the 2 main parties are opposite sides of the same coin, they both want big government. They just disagree with what part of government is bigger. Heck Obama even voted to give ATT immunity for helping the Bush admin spy on Americans.
Blair Witch Project was a pile of crap, and it caused moviegoers to get violently ill because of the horrible camera work. The only reason it was successful was because of the hype they generated before release. To borrow a term from the music industry, it was a one-hit wonder. Anyone making a similar movie now wouldn't make any money at all.
If The Blair Witch Project was a pile of crap, it was successful only because of hype generated before it's release, and was a one hit wonder explain Book of Shadows: Blair Witch 2 which has had revenue of more than 3 tymes it's cost of $15 million, and explain The Blair Witch Project 3. According to The Blair Witch Project 3: Interview the "Book of Shadows" wasn't that good because it "was prepped without" the team that made the first movie. It however still made more than its cost.
Also, I don't know where you got your numbers, but I remember reading that the whole pile of crap cost about $40k to make, which is surprising since they just used some shitty consumer handheld camera that you could buy at any electronics store.
Obviously you didn't even read links I provided so I see no reason to continue. You are not arguing based on data but on what you make up.
Compared to the iPhone, Android phones are catching up.
And you obviously read a previous post of mine. The market share of iPhones increased from 30.3% to 32.8% while that of Androids only increased 5.3% to 6.2%. iPhones grew twice as fast as Androids.
If you're going to compare the iPad to anything, compare it to netbooks - which still kick the iPad's butt in sales.
No, I didn't say netbooks run crippled OSes but I did say the iPad does, it runs the iPhone OS which is crippled.
If you're going to compare the iPod Touch to anything
No where in my post you replied to did I say anything about any iPod what so ever. The closest I came was where I included the part of your post where you say, and I included the quote, "Yeah, all told, worldwide, there were more iPhones, iPod Touches, and iPads sold than Android phones." I did not compare it to anything.
As to Android tablets: I don't think it's fair to say Android is a crippled OS.
Again I did not say anything like that. I'll repeat what I did say, "If Android tablets are anything like iPads, ie running a crippled OS", iPads run a crippled, but if Android tablet do too then I don't care about them either. I even gave an example of what I wanted in the iPad, the Modbook Pro.
What is so hard to understand and comprehend any of about that?
many works these days aren't the work of individuals, but corporations, and cost a LOT of money to make (i.e., movies).
That's true of movies but not other art work, and it is not necessary for movies to cost a lot to make, even in recent history. Made in 1999 The Blair Witch Project the "final budget was somewhere between $500,000 and $750,000." Yet it's world wide gross was almost $250 Million. The cost to write a book or write and compose music is even cheaper. It's not expensive to paint either. People with pocket cameras costing only a few hundred dollars make hundreds of dollars a week, well maybe not now but before the recession. With the recession now, pro photographers complain those amateurs taking away their clients. Microstock agencies like iStockphoto as well as photo sharing websites like Flickr are even taking sales away from venerable stock agencies.
They're not going to make as many blockbuster movies if their distribution rights disappear after only 5 years.
One, if they want money to keep coming in they'll make even more. But two, even if so so what? People can go back to how it used to be, and still is in some local scenes, producing art for local consumption. Almost every hit artist now started small. I recall years ago going to parties where people would bring their own instruments, get together, and play music. Others may stage a skit. Though it was too long ago for me, I used to dance on stage as well as work behind the scenes on plays. I have a flute from David Nighteagle I want to learn to play. I used to play the clarinet but that was more than 30 years ago.
Many companies would gladly pay a few million to secure distribution rights for another decade, and then this money would finance the system, so that the government doesn't need to tax anyone.
If government were small it wouldn't need much taxes.
You're no liberal if you believe in small government (if you're in the USA). That's a libertarian viewpoint.
Again you're wrong, you didn't even read the wiki article I linked to: "Classical liberalism is a political ideology that developed in the 19th century in England, Western Europe, and the Americas. It is committed to the ideal of limited government and liberty of individuals including freedom of religion, speech, press, assembly, and free markets." Notice "and the Americas". In the USA two of those liberals were ThomasJefferson and his friend JamesMadison. Today's libertarian is yesteryear's liberal.
I don't care how small the government is, it still needs money to administer the copyright office (not to mention the patent and trademark office). Why not fund it from companies wanting longer copyright terms on their works?
As I hinted at in the post above I'd abolish the patent office. It already costs money to register trademarks and it's the responsibility of the holder to defend it not the government. The same with copyrights. All the copyright and trademark offices need do is put them in the registery, for what's copyrighted in the Library of Congress (LoC) and for trademarks I don't know where those go, perhaps they can be put in the LoC too.
Yeah, all told, worldwide, there were more iPhones, iPod Touches, and iPads sold than Android phones. However, when you compare oranges and oranges.... Apple skews the numbers by including the non-phone variants in with the phones.
iPhone is still selling better, but that's probably got something to do with being in the market longer.
Being the New Hot Thing[TM] Androids should be selling fast.
Give it another year and see what the picture looks like, especially with all the cheap tablets coming out. Who needs a Kindle or Nook when you can get an Android tablet for less than $200?
If Android tablets are anything like iPads, ie running a crippled OS, then I don't care. When Apple announced the iPad I was hoping for a tablet more like the Modbook Pro, with the LCD of MacBooks/MacBook Pros being replaced by a tablet. Axiotron replaces the LCDs with a Wacom Penabled® digitizer. Any software that runs on Macs will run on it too.
Apple doesn't have a monopoly in the smartphone market. Symbian phones account for 3 times the market share Apple has, and Blackberry phones account for 1.25 times the market share.
You're right, I gave similar figures to the responder above you in my response to him. Apple's iPhone is growing in marketshare though, in May the market share of the iPhone increased from 30.3% to 32.8%, and Androids increased theirs from 5.3% to 6.2%. I've made mistakes in this thread but this is a big one I didn't make: Android Stealing Symbian & WinMo Market Share, but that's from last year, ie old. Looking for recent data I found 2 articles of interest, April 2010 Mobile Metrics Report and Apple iPad Catching Up On Android In OS Market. And the iPad uses the same OS as the iPhone does. However it's not a phone.
Another idea is this: a very short term of perhaps 5 years I think would be good, but with multiple extensions allowed, for increasingly large amounts of money.
The only reason copyrights are supposed to be granted is as an incentive for creation of art and literature. Anything over 5 or 7 year terms almost takes the economic incentive away. If someone creates something they then make millions of dollars in a few years then there's no economic incentive to create more. If however artists have to keep creating new things to keep money coming in then there's plenty of incentive. I believe this yet I hope to start a photography business. While it is a hobby of mine, I am disabled and don't work so I want to be able to make some money from photography too. Hopefully I'll make enough to get back to college and get my degree.
Big companies like Disney will happily pay huge fees to extend their copyrights to the maximum, thereby pumping money into the government in return for this protection
I personally believe in small government, and liberty so I'm a real liberal and not one of today's fake ones, and believe a small limited government wouldn't need much revenue.
More Android handsets were activated Q1 2010 than iPhones.
Really? In May the market share for Android increased from 5.3% to 6.2% whereas the iPhone's market share increased 30.3% to 32.8%. Even with it's larger market share the iPhone increased its market share more than Androids did.
Android is making its way in to all kinds of devices, not just phones and PMP's.
And iPhone's OS is in more than just iPhones. Two million iPads, with the same OS, was sold in less than 60 days. How many Androids were sold? According to Garder while 314.7 million smart phones were sold in the first quarter of 2010 the iPhone had the 3rd largest market share with Androids coming in 4th. iPhones increased from 10.5 percent to 15.4 percent whereas Androids increased only 1.6 percent to 9.6 percent.
Actually, he clarifies this in his comments on the blog post: Australians can't sell paid apps on the android marketplace yet. This obviously makes it hard to make money and pay rent.
So don't sell a paid app on the marketplace. Give away a trial app for free on marketplace and take users who want to upgrade to paypal (via the browser) where they can purchase an unlock code. Or any other tried and tested mechanism for selling software online.
So there are ways users can install apps on iPhones without using Apple's store? Let's see what Apple's iPhone OS Reference Library says about "Installing on a Device":
"If you have a suitable device connected to your computer via its 30-pin USB cable, and you have a valid certificate from the iPhone Developer Program, set the active SDK for your project to "iPhone OS" (instead of 'iPhone OS Simulator') and build and run the project. Assuming your code compiles successfully, Xcode then automatically uploads your application to your device."
Even developers can't simply install apps they're developing for the iPhone, notice a "valid certificate" is needed. Now maybe I missed something but I doubt simple users can install software without Apple's approval.
but I didn't think Apple had a monopoly at all. They still have competition from RIM, WinMo, and growing competition from the Android phones.
The iPhone has some competition but it has the largest market share. Another version of the iPhone / Android market share figures has some statistics on the market share of the competition. In May the iPhone market share increased 2.5% from 30.3% to 32.8% while the Androids, with more than one company making handsets, increased from 5.3% to 6.2%. Even though iPhones have leads in both being on the market and in market share, it's markets share increased more than 2 tymes as mush as Androids did. But because its market share is so small Android increased the percentage of handsets sold as a total. TFA I link to says of Android, "Its share growing by 17% in May, while the iPhone's share only grew by 8.25%" Think about it, Android handsets are being released pretty frequently whereas it's been months since the last iPhone update came out, so being the latest it should have better uptake figures but it doesn't.
I was talking about MS and their monopoly on desktop OSes and office software when I was talking about monopolies.
I agree MS has a monopoly in desktop OSes and in office suites but there are others. I'm typing this on a MacBook Pro and for my office suite I use NeoOffice, the native Mac port of OpenOffice.org. Under the desk I have 2 tower PCs, an NT4 and a Linux PC. In storage there's more Windows PCs. I have MS Office on one of them and OpenOffice on others.
Yes, patents severely distort the market. They were a good idea at one time, but they've been completely abused and mutated beyond their original intentions. Software patents in particular are a very bad idea.
I agree. Patents may of served a good purpose at one tyme but they've out lived the good and now hinder progress. And I believe software patents are among the worst ideas economically and for progress.
Falcon
Oh, BTW perhaps using "monopoly" is the wrong word describing iPhones market share, it's nothing like MS's market share of OSes and Office suites. It is however dominate. And while I believe in ending patents I'm not sure about ending copyrights. The duplication and copying of art and literature is easy and cheap whereas duplicating hardware can be expensive. I however believe copyright terms need to be shortened, not lengthened like they have been. The original copyright term was 14 years with one 14 year extension possible. I'd make it 7 years at most with no extension.
I say, Better a hundred valid and useful and killer apps get rejected from the AppStore, than have one worthless, thoughtless, uninspired app be approved.
You would then restrict others' choices just because you don't like them. Me, I want freedom of choice so I will not waste my money on an iPhone! Or an iPad!
when there's a monopoly (e.g., one company controlling 95% of the market), then a free market no longer exists, and it's the government's job to ensure a more level playing field so that smaller competitors have a fair chance to succeed if their product/service is better than the monopoly's.
I partially agree but also disagree with this. Yes, Apple has a monopoly in the smart-phone market but there is a relatively free market. If you don't want Apple's iPhone then don't buy one. If you want a smart-phone but not the iPhone then get an Android based phone. While I like some Apple products, the MacBook Pro I'm typing this can only be taken away from me when my hands are cold or to replace it with a new one, others I have no interest in getting. When I finally get a smart-phone myself, as it is now, it will probably be an Android. Or earlier this year when the iPad was announced I said I'd like to be in line to get one if it offered what I wanted, something like the Modbook Pro, but as it's tablet is too small, there is not enough RAM or storage, and it runs the crippled iPhone OS and not OS X, I will not get one.
What's worse is that the government grants patents. Yes grants, patents are granted and not a right. And right now Apple is trying to use its patents to block competition.
you can abuse your customers all you want and get away with it.
Yes legally you get away with it but you may lose market share.
comparing Apple and MS really is apples and oranges.
True enough.
I don't have a smartphone yet, but when I do get around to getting one, it'll probably be an Android phone, the way things are looking.
Neither do I and like you when I do get one it will probably an Android, I want choices as to what apps I run. That's why after waiting in anticipation for months for the iPad to come out I decided I didn't want one myself. Wanting to use one for photography I fully expected it to have the full OS X OS, higher hardware specs, and be able to install the same software on it as I can install on my Mac. Something like the Modbook Pro with it's Wacom digitizer. Now, I'll wait for Linux tablets.
It's time to retire the Bill Gates Borg photo and replace it with a Steve Jobs Borg photo for Apple stories.
That doesn't work though, whereas Bill Gatus of Borg assimilated Steve Jobs simply kills.
Falcon
BTW, I went to an Apple store today for tech support for my MacBook Pro. There, seeing my hard disk drive has 3 partitions, OS X, User Home, and Ubuntu, the tech asked what version of Linux I had installed. I said I didn't have it installed but I was planning on installing Ubuntu. I'm not sure when I will install it but it won't be until I install Snow Leopard. I may install both on an external drive first for testing.
Combine this with feminism's known class and race issues, and things start to look interesting...
I partially agreed with what you said, until I got here. Perhaps you mean feminism in the so called west but there are feminists all over the world. There are even African, Chinese, Muslim, and South American feminists.
I'm confused. "It is not legal to grow AND sell marijuana anywhere" was my statement. You respond "Wrong, it's illegal to grow and sell marijuana in Alaska, but you can possess it."
You're confused because you've combined 2 things, the possession and the sale of marijuana. In Alaska possession of small amounts is legal but sales is illegal.
I know what the law in Alaska is better than some outsider that gets his news from blogs.
Oh, it would have been nice if you had included a link for this: Then respond to this comment in November.
That's almost like if they catch you with a coffee, right? Another drug that is legal. I had two bags of fresh ground on me the other day, good thing I didn't get caught or I'd be spending 10 years in prison.
Now I think you're trolling. First you make stuff up saying people oppose it when anti-prohibition votes comes up. They have not come up until now in CA and it's likely voters in CA will make it legal. Next you say troopers report those they catch to federal officials even if they can't arrest the person themselves, yet you ignored the list of law enforcement officials who support legalization I posted. Then you say "If that's the case, then we get what we deserve" as regards J Edgar Hoover. However most Americans never did have the opportunity to decide if he would head the FBI. Now you make up stuff about coffee.
However, in case you're not I invite you to prove the people have had the opportunity to make hemp, aka marijuana illegal then to make it legal again. And saying people could vote for politicians who opposed prohibition or support legalization now does not work, very few people vote for candidates based on the position of one issue only, unless it's abortion. Show me when and where a vote came up to make hemp illegal and where and when a vote came up to make legal again. That is in the US.
Slashdot Mirror
Obama's done absolutely nothing to pull out of Iraq, so I don't see how he's less bad than Hillary.
I don't support Obama, not anymore anyways, but he opposed the invasion of Iraq whereas Hillary supported it.
And I don't care about politicians having mistresses; that's perfectly normal in other countries. Only in America do people get their panties in a bind about their leaders' sex lives.
It's not that a certain politician had an extra-martial affair, but that he had it while his wife was fighting breast cancer and then he lied about it.
Falcon
What I think is going on here, is that Obama is being called awful simply because he's not a savior.
Obama voted to give immunity to telcom companies for their help in spying on Americans. He also signed a bill creating larger government and denying liberty, ie the Health care Bill.
I wish Obama were continuing none, but at least now the economy has been pulled back from the cliff.
Like the economy wouldn't have improved without Obama and it never runs in cycles.
Sorry I already know how government health care is, unfortunately I am on it and it, Medicare, sucks. Instead what he, and congress, could have done was to give everybody the same tax breaks employers get for offering health insurance. If that weren't enough then give those unable to afford insurance a check for, say $4000, then let them buy insurance in a relatively free and open market. With millions of people shopping for insurance policy issuers would compeat with each other to sell insurance.
Falcon
Fake liberal not real ones.
Any of the other Democrats running would have been better than Obama.
HillaryCare anyone? How about the midnight call on the red phone? Let's not forget the one who cheated on his wife while she had breast cancer then lied about it.
I've completely lost all hope that the American public is able to pick any type of decent leader.
Same here, but my decent leader is probably different than yours.
Falcon
Thank goodness Obama has done so much to fix all that.
Say what? Like what?
Falcon
It still scares me to see how badly the Bush administration has damaged democracy and the American constitution. It will take years, but this is another step away from the proto-fascist path that our country had started down when the far right-wing neocons came to power.
Except the Obama admin has been doing the same. "'Until merchandise has cleared customs, it may not enter the United States,' assistant U.S. attorney Owen Martikan argued. 'The laptop never cleared customs and was maintained in government custody until it was searched...'"
Obama ran on a platform of change, the only change was in the party in power. And the 2 main parties are opposite sides of the same coin, they both want big government. They just disagree with what part of government is bigger. Heck Obama even voted to give ATT immunity for helping the Bush admin spy on Americans.
Falcon
SCO also have contract disputes they will try and persue, the whole fallout over Project "Legend". They're not dead yet
They're not dead bu8t they don't have money. Unless another devil, versus angel, investor gives them more money the bankruptcy court can shutter SCO.
Falcon
Blair Witch Project was a pile of crap, and it caused moviegoers to get violently ill because of the horrible camera work. The only reason it was successful was because of the hype they generated before release. To borrow a term from the music industry, it was a one-hit wonder. Anyone making a similar movie now wouldn't make any money at all.
If The Blair Witch Project was a pile of crap, it was successful only because of hype generated before it's release, and was a one hit wonder explain Book of Shadows: Blair Witch 2 which has had revenue of more than 3 tymes it's cost of $15 million, and explain The Blair Witch Project 3. According to The Blair Witch Project 3: Interview the "Book of Shadows" wasn't that good because it "was prepped without" the team that made the first movie. It however still made more than its cost.
Also, I don't know where you got your numbers, but I remember reading that the whole pile of crap cost about $40k to make, which is surprising since they just used some shitty consumer handheld camera that you could buy at any electronics store.
Obviously you didn't even read links I provided so I see no reason to continue. You are not arguing based on data but on what you make up.
Falcon
Compared to the iPhone, Android phones are catching up.
And you obviously read a previous post of mine. The market share of iPhones increased from 30.3% to 32.8% while that of Androids only increased 5.3% to 6.2%. iPhones grew twice as fast as Androids.
If you're going to compare the iPad to anything, compare it to netbooks - which still kick the iPad's butt in sales.
No, I didn't say netbooks run crippled OSes but I did say the iPad does, it runs the iPhone OS which is crippled.
If you're going to compare the iPod Touch to anything
No where in my post you replied to did I say anything about any iPod what so ever. The closest I came was where I included the part of your post where you say, and I included the quote, "Yeah, all told, worldwide, there were more iPhones, iPod Touches, and iPads sold than Android phones." I did not compare it to anything.
As to Android tablets: I don't think it's fair to say Android is a crippled OS.
Again I did not say anything like that. I'll repeat what I did say, "If Android tablets are anything like iPads, ie running a crippled OS", iPads run a crippled, but if Android tablet do too then I don't care about them either. I even gave an example of what I wanted in the iPad, the Modbook Pro.
What is so hard to understand and comprehend any of about that?
Falcon
many works these days aren't the work of individuals, but corporations, and cost a LOT of money to make (i.e., movies).
That's true of movies but not other art work, and it is not necessary for movies to cost a lot to make, even in recent history. Made in 1999 The Blair Witch Project the "final budget was somewhere between $500,000 and $750,000." Yet it's world wide gross was almost $250 Million. The cost to write a book or write and compose music is even cheaper. It's not expensive to paint either. People with pocket cameras costing only a few hundred dollars make hundreds of dollars a week, well maybe not now but before the recession. With the recession now, pro photographers complain those amateurs taking away their clients. Microstock agencies like iStockphoto as well as photo sharing websites like Flickr are even taking sales away from venerable stock agencies.
They're not going to make as many blockbuster movies if their distribution rights disappear after only 5 years.
One, if they want money to keep coming in they'll make even more. But two, even if so so what? People can go back to how it used to be, and still is in some local scenes, producing art for local consumption. Almost every hit artist now started small. I recall years ago going to parties where people would bring their own instruments, get together, and play music. Others may stage a skit. Though it was too long ago for me, I used to dance on stage as well as work behind the scenes on plays. I have a flute from David Nighteagle I want to learn to play. I used to play the clarinet but that was more than 30 years ago.
Many companies would gladly pay a few million to secure distribution rights for another decade, and then this money would finance the system, so that the government doesn't need to tax anyone.
If government were small it wouldn't need much taxes.
You're no liberal if you believe in small government (if you're in the USA). That's a libertarian viewpoint.
Again you're wrong, you didn't even read the wiki article I linked to: "Classical liberalism is a political ideology that developed in the 19th century in England, Western Europe, and the Americas. It is committed to the ideal of limited government and liberty of individuals including freedom of religion, speech, press, assembly, and free markets." Notice "and the Americas". In the USA two of those liberals were Thomas Jefferson and his friend James Madison. Today's libertarian is yesteryear's liberal.
I don't care how small the government is, it still needs money to administer the copyright office (not to mention the patent and trademark office). Why not fund it from companies wanting longer copyright terms on their works?
As I hinted at in the post above I'd abolish the patent office. It already costs money to register trademarks and it's the responsibility of the holder to defend it not the government. The same with copyrights. All the copyright and trademark offices need do is put them in the registery, for what's copyrighted in the Library of Congress (LoC) and for trademarks I don't know where those go, perhaps they can be put in the LoC too.
Falcon
Now, I'll wait for Linux tablets.
You might be interested in these guys
Nah, I prefer the Modbook Pro. That's what I, and a bunch of other photographers, were hoping for.
Falcon
My mistake then.
Falcon
Yeah, all told, worldwide, there were more iPhones, iPod Touches, and iPads sold than Android phones. However, when you compare oranges and oranges.... Apple skews the numbers by including the non-phone variants in with the phones.
But how about this: Apple iPad Catching Up On Android In OS Market? If true then iPhone OS is ahead of Android, iPads use the same OS.
iPhone is still selling better, but that's probably got something to do with being in the market longer.
Being the New Hot Thing[TM] Androids should be selling fast.
Give it another year and see what the picture looks like, especially with all the cheap tablets coming out. Who needs a Kindle or Nook when you can get an Android tablet for less than $200?
If Android tablets are anything like iPads, ie running a crippled OS, then I don't care. When Apple announced the iPad I was hoping for a tablet more like the Modbook Pro, with the LCD of MacBooks/MacBook Pros being replaced by a tablet. Axiotron replaces the LCDs with a Wacom Penabled® digitizer. Any software that runs on Macs will run on it too.
Falcon
Apple doesn't have a monopoly in the smartphone market. Symbian phones account for 3 times the market share Apple has, and Blackberry phones account for 1.25 times the market share.
You're right, I gave similar figures to the responder above you in my response to him. Apple's iPhone is growing in marketshare though, in May the market share of the iPhone increased from 30.3% to 32.8%, and Androids increased theirs from 5.3% to 6.2%. I've made mistakes in this thread but this is a big one I didn't make: Android Stealing Symbian & WinMo Market Share, but that's from last year, ie old. Looking for recent data I found 2 articles of interest, April 2010 Mobile Metrics Report and Apple iPad Catching Up On Android In OS Market. And the iPad uses the same OS as the iPhone does. However it's not a phone.
Falcon
Another idea is this: a very short term of perhaps 5 years I think would be good, but with multiple extensions allowed, for increasingly large amounts of money.
The only reason copyrights are supposed to be granted is as an incentive for creation of art and literature. Anything over 5 or 7 year terms almost takes the economic incentive away. If someone creates something they then make millions of dollars in a few years then there's no economic incentive to create more. If however artists have to keep creating new things to keep money coming in then there's plenty of incentive. I believe this yet I hope to start a photography business. While it is a hobby of mine, I am disabled and don't work so I want to be able to make some money from photography too. Hopefully I'll make enough to get back to college and get my degree.
Big companies like Disney will happily pay huge fees to extend their copyrights to the maximum, thereby pumping money into the government in return for this protection
I personally believe in small government, and liberty so I'm a real liberal and not one of today's fake ones, and believe a small limited government wouldn't need much revenue.
Falcon
More Android handsets were activated Q1 2010 than iPhones.
Really? In May the market share for Android increased from 5.3% to 6.2% whereas the iPhone's market share increased 30.3% to 32.8%. Even with it's larger market share the iPhone increased its market share more than Androids did.
Android is making its way in to all kinds of devices, not just phones and PMP's.
And iPhone's OS is in more than just iPhones. Two million iPads, with the same OS, was sold in less than 60 days. How many Androids were sold? According to Garder while 314.7 million smart phones were sold in the first quarter of 2010 the iPhone had the 3rd largest market share with Androids coming in 4th. iPhones increased from 10.5 percent to 15.4 percent whereas Androids increased only 1.6 percent to 9.6 percent.
Falcon
Actually, he clarifies this in his comments on the blog post: Australians can't sell paid apps on the android marketplace yet. This obviously makes it hard to make money and pay rent.
So don't sell a paid app on the marketplace. Give away a trial app for free on marketplace and take users who want to upgrade to paypal (via the browser) where they can purchase an unlock code. Or any other tried and tested mechanism for selling software online.
So there are ways users can install apps on iPhones without using Apple's store? Let's see what Apple's iPhone OS Reference Library says about "Installing on a Device":
"If you have a suitable device connected to your computer via its 30-pin USB cable, and you have a valid certificate from the iPhone Developer Program, set the active SDK for your project to "iPhone OS" (instead of 'iPhone OS Simulator') and build and run the project. Assuming your code compiles successfully, Xcode then automatically uploads your application to your device."
Even developers can't simply install apps they're developing for the iPhone, notice a "valid certificate" is needed. Now maybe I missed something but I doubt simple users can install software without Apple's approval.
Falcon
but I didn't think Apple had a monopoly at all. They still have competition from RIM, WinMo, and growing competition from the Android phones.
The iPhone has some competition but it has the largest market share. Another version of the iPhone / Android market share figures has some statistics on the market share of the competition. In May the iPhone market share increased 2.5% from 30.3% to 32.8% while the Androids, with more than one company making handsets, increased from 5.3% to 6.2%. Even though iPhones have leads in both being on the market and in market share, it's markets share increased more than 2 tymes as mush as Androids did. But because its market share is so small Android increased the percentage of handsets sold as a total. TFA I link to says of Android, "Its share growing by 17% in May, while the iPhone's share only grew by 8.25%" Think about it, Android handsets are being released pretty frequently whereas it's been months since the last iPhone update came out, so being the latest it should have better uptake figures but it doesn't.
I was talking about MS and their monopoly on desktop OSes and office software when I was talking about monopolies.
I agree MS has a monopoly in desktop OSes and in office suites but there are others. I'm typing this on a MacBook Pro and for my office suite I use NeoOffice, the native Mac port of OpenOffice.org. Under the desk I have 2 tower PCs, an NT4 and a Linux PC. In storage there's more Windows PCs. I have MS Office on one of them and OpenOffice on others.
Yes, patents severely distort the market. They were a good idea at one time, but they've been completely abused and mutated beyond their original intentions. Software patents in particular are a very bad idea.
I agree. Patents may of served a good purpose at one tyme but they've out lived the good and now hinder progress. And I believe software patents are among the worst ideas economically and for progress.
Falcon
Oh, BTW perhaps using "monopoly" is the wrong word describing iPhones market share, it's nothing like MS's market share of OSes and Office suites. It is however dominate. And while I believe in ending patents I'm not sure about ending copyrights. The duplication and copying of art and literature is easy and cheap whereas duplicating hardware can be expensive. I however believe copyright terms need to be shortened, not lengthened like they have been. The original copyright term was 14 years with one 14 year extension possible. I'd make it 7 years at most with no extension.
I say, Better a hundred valid and useful and killer apps get rejected from the AppStore, than have one worthless, thoughtless, uninspired app be approved.
You would then restrict others' choices just because you don't like them. Me, I want freedom of choice so I will not waste my money on an iPhone! Or an iPad!
Falcon
No, Jobs was basically kicked out of the company after a power struggle with the board of directors in 1983.
Falcon
when there's a monopoly (e.g., one company controlling 95% of the market), then a free market no longer exists, and it's the government's job to ensure a more level playing field so that smaller competitors have a fair chance to succeed if their product/service is better than the monopoly's.
I partially agree but also disagree with this. Yes, Apple has a monopoly in the smart-phone market but there is a relatively free market. If you don't want Apple's iPhone then don't buy one. If you want a smart-phone but not the iPhone then get an Android based phone. While I like some Apple products, the MacBook Pro I'm typing this can only be taken away from me when my hands are cold or to replace it with a new one, others I have no interest in getting. When I finally get a smart-phone myself, as it is now, it will probably be an Android. Or earlier this year when the iPad was announced I said I'd like to be in line to get one if it offered what I wanted, something like the Modbook Pro, but as it's tablet is too small, there is not enough RAM or storage, and it runs the crippled iPhone OS and not OS X, I will not get one.
What's worse is that the government grants patents. Yes grants, patents are granted and not a right. And right now Apple is trying to use its patents to block competition.
Falcon
The DoJ is investigating some of "Apple's business practices".
Falcon
you can abuse your customers all you want and get away with it.
Yes legally you get away with it but you may lose market share.
comparing Apple and MS really is apples and oranges.
True enough.
I don't have a smartphone yet, but when I do get around to getting one, it'll probably be an Android phone, the way things are looking.
Neither do I and like you when I do get one it will probably an Android, I want choices as to what apps I run. That's why after waiting in anticipation for months for the iPad to come out I decided I didn't want one myself. Wanting to use one for photography I fully expected it to have the full OS X OS, higher hardware specs, and be able to install the same software on it as I can install on my Mac. Something like the Modbook Pro with it's Wacom digitizer. Now, I'll wait for Linux tablets.
Falcon
It's time to retire the Bill Gates Borg photo and replace it with a Steve Jobs Borg photo for Apple stories.
That doesn't work though, whereas Bill Gatus of Borg assimilated Steve Jobs simply kills.
Falcon
BTW, I went to an Apple store today for tech support for my MacBook Pro. There, seeing my hard disk drive has 3 partitions, OS X, User Home, and Ubuntu, the tech asked what version of Linux I had installed. I said I didn't have it installed but I was planning on installing Ubuntu. I'm not sure when I will install it but it won't be until I install Snow Leopard. I may install both on an external drive first for testing.
Combine this with feminism's known class and race issues, and things start to look interesting...
I partially agreed with what you said, until I got here. Perhaps you mean feminism in the so called west but there are feminists all over the world. There are even African, Chinese, Muslim, and South American feminists.
Falcon
I'm confused. "It is not legal to grow AND sell marijuana anywhere" was my statement. You respond "Wrong, it's illegal to grow and sell marijuana in Alaska, but you can possess it."
You're confused because you've combined 2 things, the possession and the sale of marijuana. In Alaska possession of small amounts is legal but sales is illegal.
I know what the law in Alaska is better than some outsider that gets his news from blogs.
And I suppose Alaska's Attorney General and the Alaska Police Standards Council are wrong too.
it's still a violation of federal law
Federal law yes but not state law.
Oh, it would have been nice if you had included a link for this: Then respond to this comment in November.
That's almost like if they catch you with a coffee, right? Another drug that is legal. I had two bags of fresh ground on me the other day, good thing I didn't get caught or I'd be spending 10 years in prison.
Now I think you're trolling. First you make stuff up saying people oppose it when anti-prohibition votes comes up. They have not come up until now in CA and it's likely voters in CA will make it legal. Next you say troopers report those they catch to federal officials even if they can't arrest the person themselves, yet you ignored the list of law enforcement officials who support legalization I posted. Then you say "If that's the case, then we get what we deserve" as regards J Edgar Hoover. However most Americans never did have the opportunity to decide if he would head the FBI. Now you make up stuff about coffee.
However, in case you're not I invite you to prove the people have had the opportunity to make hemp, aka marijuana illegal then to make it legal again. And saying people could vote for politicians who opposed prohibition or support legalization now does not work, very few people vote for candidates based on the position of one issue only, unless it's abortion. Show me when and where a vote came up to make hemp illegal and where and when a vote came up to make legal again. That is in the US.