Sure, but his comment is about green house gas emissions, not the price($) of anything.
It's obvious *why* they use it, but it's still somewhat ironic......that is, assuming that using fuel that does produce green house gases (rocket fuel?) would actually not affect contribute to the green house effect.
Are we sure that it wouldn't? It's a fair assumption, I guess, but I wonder...
> > So the one place where greenhouse gas emissions don't matter uses renewable energy? > > If you think that the price of gas is expensive at the boat dock, you should see the bill for > delivering a tankful 200 miles in the sky.
What does his comment have to do with the price of gas[sic]?
In any case, I was pointing out how, contrary to what many USians think, the US isn't really any better than China. You went one further and claimed that China is actually better in this respect. I've no problem with that...
What you say is true. I missed that it was a traffic cop......but try that with a regular police man, and you'll not get a nice reaction. Having said that, it's only what I've heard, since I've not actually tried it myself, nor seen anyone try it. YMMV.
> apple has already announced that there will be no sdk and there will be no support for third party apps.
which, is, frankly, incredible. I have to assume that this situation will change sometime in the future.
Having said that, Nokia have been pushing their widgets pretty strongly, with the line that it increases the number of developers significantly, so perhaps they're thinking similarly to Apple.
Interestingly enough, I saw a whole bunch of these in Beijing the other day being used to attact attention for some marketing thing. I forget what they were trying to push, so I guess it didn't work...
> And if they run on donations, they are doing work they think will net them the most donations
Not so. Some non-profits are there for a purpose, not just to self-perpetuate. If the purpose is no longer there, then they stop doing what they were doing...
In any case, this is far off-topic and wrt what is on-topic we are actually agreeing with each other. Apple isn't doing this out of the goodness of it's heart, which explains people's expectation that it should be something of some quality and not complete crap, to suggest two extremes (not to say it is either).
If it isn't of the quality people have come to expect from Apple, then people will (probably) be put off Apple products overall and Apple will be doing themselves (and, more importantly, their stock holders) a disservice. Some people (rightly IMO) don't consider this to be freeware, since there are several obvious possible reasons why they would release this software.
Are you seriously claiming there are companies that don't do things for free? There are millions of them.
Apple is a public company - they only do things for profit, whether that be now or in the future.
Perhaps this is something to do with the definition of 'company'. How about using the term 'non-profit' instead? I believe that's the term that is used in the US; I'm assuming people in this threadette are from there.
Nothing apple does is for free. Everything they do is designed to make you want to give them more of your money. That might be now, it might be later, but none of it is free. It's a US public company, so what else would you expect?
Slashdot Mirror
I don't use the word gas when referring to a liquid (unless I also use the word 'not').
Sure, but his comment is about green house gas emissions, not the price($) of anything.
...that is, assuming that using fuel that does produce green house gases (rocket fuel?) would actually not affect contribute to the green house effect.
It's obvious *why* they use it, but it's still somewhat ironic...
Are we sure that it wouldn't? It's a fair assumption, I guess, but I wonder...
> > So the one place where greenhouse gas emissions don't matter uses renewable energy?
>
> If you think that the price of gas is expensive at the boat dock, you should see the bill for
> delivering a tankful 200 miles in the sky.
What does his comment have to do with the price of gas[sic]?
Max.
Yeah, makes me want to throw up a few hours later. Reminds me of McDonald's too.
In any case, I was pointing out how, contrary to what many USians think, the US isn't really any better than China. You went one further and claimed that China is actually better in this respect. I've no problem with that...
> Max have you ever even been to China?
Yes, I live here. I've lived here for the past several years.
Like I said, it's only hear-say - I've never actually seen it happen. I wouldn't want to test it though.
What you say is true. I missed that it was a traffic cop... ...but try that with a regular police man, and you'll not get a nice reaction. Having said that, it's only what I've heard, since I've not actually tried it myself, nor seen anyone try it. YMMV.
...it's the same in China.
http://www.forum.nokia.com/main/resources/technolo gies/browsing/widgets.html
> apple has already announced that there will be no sdk and there will be no support for third party apps.
which, is, frankly, incredible. I have to assume that this situation will change sometime in the future.
Having said that, Nokia have been pushing their widgets pretty strongly, with the line that it increases the number of developers significantly, so perhaps they're thinking similarly to Apple.
> Like the iPod, the iPhone does stuff that the other players on the market do not
..., or it does it better.
I'm not sure what the iPod of iPhone did that none of the other players didn't.
>
That is a definite maybe. There's also the whole 'marketing' card - Apple are pretty good at that, I think.
> ...segway
Interestingly enough, I saw a whole bunch of these in Beijing the other day being used to attact attention for some marketing thing. I forget what they were trying to push, so I guess it didn't work...
You missed out the most populous phone operating system, S60 :
d ks/index.html
http://forum.nokia.com/main/resources/tools_and_s
> With (real) GPS, no less.
Eh? Did I miss this feature? I thought it didn't have GPS?
> ...And screw those on a bus or train
or in a Rolls Royce (chauffeured, of course).
> a handset so powerful and compelling that people fall all over themselves to try and get one
Well, I would have thought that was the Nokia N95 - it seems to be in other parts of the world - but people in the US 'think different'[sic].
Is that really 'troll'? I would have thought 'funny' would have been better. The post obviously wasn't serious...
I guess I couldn't see your point then, or I had too many other 'points' to think about from the other replies. ...or was it this :
"Do you do this for free, or do you get paid?"
In which case, I do it for free.
true, but the end goal is their own profit.
> And if they run on donations, they are doing work they think will net them the most donations
Not so. Some non-profits are there for a purpose, not just to self-perpetuate. If the purpose is no longer there, then they stop doing what they were doing...
In any case, this is far off-topic and wrt what is on-topic we are actually agreeing with each other. Apple isn't doing this out of the goodness of it's heart, which explains people's expectation that it should be something of some quality and not complete crap, to suggest two extremes (not to say it is either).
If it isn't of the quality people have come to expect from Apple, then people will (probably) be put off Apple products overall and Apple will be doing themselves (and, more importantly, their stock holders) a disservice. Some people (rightly IMO) don't consider this to be freeware, since there are several obvious possible reasons why they would release this software.
Are you seriously claiming there are companies that don't do things for free? There are millions of them.
Apple is a public company - they only do things for profit, whether that be now or in the future.
Perhaps this is something to do with the definition of 'company'. How about using the term 'non-profit' instead? I believe that's the term that is used in the US; I'm assuming people in this threadette are from there.
> I would like to see a list of companies...
That's nice. It's not going to be me that spends the time compiling such a list. It wouldn't be an empty list, for sure.
In any case, it's 100% clear that Apple wouldn't be on it, which is the point.
I would agree with you, if you weren't talking bollocks.
Plenty of people (and companies, for that matter), do things without expecting (or getting) anything in return.
Nothing apple does is for free. Everything they do is designed to make you want to give them more of your money. That might be now, it might be later, but none of it is free. It's a US public company, so what else would you expect?
> Between Safari on the iPhone and Opera on a huge number of other phones and PDAs,
Note that Safari* runs on all Nokia S60 3rd edition phones and that is a *lot* of phones - infinitely more than the number of iPhones in the market.
* ok, not Safari, but Nokia Web Browser, which, like Safari, is based on webkit.