Video calling never worked because there was never a critical mass of devices for it to work with. The technology is obviously not new, but that doesn't mean it was possible before in any sort of realistic scale. I don't particularly care for video-calling, and haven't since the CUSeeMe days, but I'm sure my mom and her mom will ask about it now. That means something has changed.
iPad's service isn't carrier locked. T-mobile doesn't offer 3G service on the same bands as the rest of the world, so they aren't an option. Any Micro-SIM (which is an admittedly new standard: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subscriber_Identity_Module) from just about anywhere in the world besides the US works in any iPad.
The arguments against Apple definitely don't come from a consumer perspective, or they wouldn't be wildly profitable. They come from the perspective of a Slashdotter trying (and failing) to think like a consumer. e.g., "The consumer wants to browse the web with emacs instead of of Safari and they don't want to pay $99! Oh, the horror!"
Flash videos today are just wrappers for H.264 video. Adobe is paying the license fee and distributing the player for free. So the question is not Flash _or_ H.264, but whether you want Flash _and_ H.264.
If you think that Flash benefits Linux, you're fooling yourself. Do you remember when there was no Adobe Flash plugin for Linux at all? There still isn't one for FreeBSD. Flash violates the very spirit of Linux - requiring a closed source implementation of an effectively closed standard (the crappy released "standard" for Flash that is insufficient to build a real implementation doesn't count). H.264 has open implementations of an open (but patent encumbered) standard. And it's still used in Flash videos.
Nothing would stop you from building the free device in that case, because we live in a free society. Isn't that the mantra of the open source community anyway? Go build it yourself. Apple isn't stopping you.
Why should she keep her mouth shut and deal with this crap? She didn't do anything wrong at all, and didn't want to be roped in. She tried reasoning with her roommate, and didn't turn him in until he plugged the phone he took into her laptop. He should have left her out of this if he didn't want to get burned.
If Apple and Adobe were making that much money, they'd be in deep trouble. Only in the basements of slashdotters' parents is a million dollars a lot for a hardware company. In the real world, one piece of tooling is 6 or 7 figures.
Because sometimes you need to catalyze a change. Apple ditching Flash is causing a lot of people to rewrite web sites. If they kept it, there would be no incentive to change technologies. It's the same reason Apple ditched the floppy disk, ADB, analog video, etc.
Everything is more expensive in the UK than the US. Have you priced out a car there recently? 17.5% VAT is one reason, and a market that is willing to pay more is another. A third (probable) reason is that Apple would want a nice round number, not something like £437.13. Funny that Slashdotters can complain about an "Apple Tax" quicker than a real tax.
Funny how all the Linux zealots who were anti-flash prior to Adobe's release of flash player for linux are suddenly pro-flash when Apple is trying to force a move to HTML5. Don't you realize that this is good for you too? For those of you who hate Apple, Apple's move has no downsides, since you're not a customer. You will, however, reap the reward that is a Flash-free world. Why complain?
For those who are doing algorithm development, there is no substitute. It's not ideal for C or asm targets, and the old M2C converter was crap, but I challenge anybody to beat matlab (or maybe IDL) when you want to whip together an image processing algorithm and prove it out.
A web browser is not the web - it's just a viewer. The standards of communication and the content are the web. It's just like the difference between a TV and the TV signal. The philosophical point is that the signals should be open even if the TV is not.
When I worked on a defense contract, all material was expected to be in PowerPoint slides. I even had a customer reject a JPEG image because he "couldn't open it" and had me put it in a PowerPoint container. The effect was to spend time excessively distilling information into a slide format that was meaningless without context. A good presentation requires speaking to go with it and does not stand on its own. Unfortunately, people have forgotten the value of a good report with a nice abstract to start for those who want the distilled version.
Why did he call Apple and not the police? Probably because he wanted to extort money from Apple. It's not like the guy said "oh, nobody at Apple picked up to take the phone back, so I'll sell it for $5k instead".
Slashdot Mirror
Video calling never worked because there was never a critical mass of devices for it to work with. The technology is obviously not new, but that doesn't mean it was possible before in any sort of realistic scale.
I don't particularly care for video-calling, and haven't since the CUSeeMe days, but I'm sure my mom and her mom will ask about it now. That means something has changed.
iPad's service isn't carrier locked. T-mobile doesn't offer 3G service on the same bands as the rest of the world, so they aren't an option. Any Micro-SIM (which is an admittedly new standard: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subscriber_Identity_Module) from just about anywhere in the world besides the US works in any iPad.
Since your point one is outright false, and you're using it to make point two, your point two is outright false as well.
Except T-mobile doesn't offer 3G on standard frequencies.
The problem is that there are no other GSM carriers in the United States that use standard 3G frequencies.
The arguments against Apple definitely don't come from a consumer perspective, or they wouldn't be wildly profitable. They come from the perspective of a Slashdotter trying (and failing) to think like a consumer.
e.g.,
"The consumer wants to browse the web with emacs instead of of Safari and they don't want to pay $99! Oh, the horror!"
Flash videos today are just wrappers for H.264 video. Adobe is paying the license fee and distributing the player for free.
So the question is not Flash _or_ H.264, but whether you want Flash _and_ H.264.
If you think that Flash benefits Linux, you're fooling yourself. Do you remember when there was no Adobe Flash plugin for Linux at all? There still isn't one for FreeBSD. Flash violates the very spirit of Linux - requiring a closed source implementation of an effectively closed standard (the crappy released "standard" for Flash that is insufficient to build a real implementation doesn't count). H.264 has open implementations of an open (but patent encumbered) standard. And it's still used in Flash videos.
But what would stop you from making general purpose computers?
Nothing would stop you from building the free device in that case, because we live in a free society.
Isn't that the mantra of the open source community anyway? Go build it yourself. Apple isn't stopping you.
By your logic, all Linus Torvalds did was market a repackaged UNIX. Maybe you should try looking deeper.
Why should she keep her mouth shut and deal with this crap? She didn't do anything wrong at all, and didn't want to be roped in. She tried reasoning with her roommate, and didn't turn him in until he plugged the phone he took into her laptop.
He should have left her out of this if he didn't want to get burned.
If Apple and Adobe were making that much money, they'd be in deep trouble.
Only in the basements of slashdotters' parents is a million dollars a lot for a hardware company.
In the real world, one piece of tooling is 6 or 7 figures.
What the hell does H.264 have to do with DRM? You've basically combined a bunch of acronyms into your rant without one clue about anything.
Because sometimes you need to catalyze a change. Apple ditching Flash is causing a lot of people to rewrite web sites. If they kept it, there would be no incentive to change technologies.
It's the same reason Apple ditched the floppy disk, ADB, analog video, etc.
Everything is more expensive in the UK than the US. Have you priced out a car there recently? 17.5% VAT is one reason, and a market that is willing to pay more is another. A third (probable) reason is that Apple would want a nice round number, not something like £437.13.
Funny that Slashdotters can complain about an "Apple Tax" quicker than a real tax.
Funny how all the Linux zealots who were anti-flash prior to Adobe's release of flash player for linux are suddenly pro-flash when Apple is trying to force a move to HTML5.
Don't you realize that this is good for you too? For those of you who hate Apple, Apple's move has no downsides, since you're not a customer. You will, however, reap the reward that is a Flash-free world. Why complain?
Why don't we just use 8" floppies?
The point of MicroSIM is that it's smaller. Someone has to switch first, and pretty soon it will be commonplace.
No.
For those who are doing algorithm development, there is no substitute. It's not ideal for C or asm targets, and the old M2C converter was crap, but I challenge anybody to beat matlab (or maybe IDL) when you want to whip together an image processing algorithm and prove it out.
A web browser is not the web - it's just a viewer. The standards of communication and the content are the web. It's just like the difference between a TV and the TV signal. The philosophical point is that the signals should be open even if the TV is not.
When I worked on a defense contract, all material was expected to be in PowerPoint slides. I even had a customer reject a JPEG image because he "couldn't open it" and had me put it in a PowerPoint container. The effect was to spend time excessively distilling information into a slide format that was meaningless without context. A good presentation requires speaking to go with it and does not stand on its own. Unfortunately, people have forgotten the value of a good report with a nice abstract to start for those who want the distilled version.
Why did he call Apple and not the police? Probably because he wanted to extort money from Apple. It's not like the guy said "oh, nobody at Apple picked up to take the phone back, so I'll sell it for $5k instead".
Someone has to make the change so that things can get smaller. I'm sure most phones in a few years will be micro sim based.
Microsoft spends almost twice as much as Apple as a percentage of revenue on marketing. Apple spends about the same amount as Dell.
http://tech.fortune.cnn.com/2009/10/28/apples-2009-ad-budget-half-a-billion/
Could it be that people actually want products that you don't?
Have you tried using it outside?
Not saying you have or haven't, just curious.