Option 1: Clippy pops up and says "Hi, you appear to be trying to use a plunger to unblock your toilet while still sitting on it. Would you like some help?"
Option 2: It searches the system to see if a Wank-n-wipe compatible Kleenex dispenser is connected to the system.
Option 3: if ( location=="Lower Merion School District" ) WebCam.activate();
Option 4: If you are running Flight Simulator 2010 then it activates the ejector seat (beware: may result in prematiure ejection!)
but it doesn't answer how it helps if an intruder is getting into Apps through a lost or stolen phone.
Nor does it help if your employees are disclosing your secrets at gunpoint while simultaneously receiving the oral attentions of Halle Berry.
But what it does do is what it says on the tin: prevents people getting in to your apps by guessing a user's password is "swordfish" (or "joshua" or "kronos" or "peekaboo" or the cat's birthday) or otherwise fishing or sniffing it.
This is an argument for backups not larger storage devices.
Its also about data security - lose your phone and someone has physical access to all your data. Yes, you can encrypt - but unless you're happy typing in a strong password every time you wake up your phone that's not foolproof. If you lose physical data then you pretty much have to assume that it is compromised. Keep it "in the cloud*" and you can log in, de-authorize the device and check the logs to see who's read what.
...and even if your data is safely backed up, you can't do anything with it if you've just left your main and only computing device on the train.
A terminal looks the same on both,
Look at some of the better iOS/Android terminal apps sometime. They're designed for small/touchscreen devices. Anyway, if a terminal is the only software you need then kudos, but you're pushing a minority view.
and you should be backing up every computing device. Rsync can do that automagically.
...it can also automagically sync the contents of your phone to the "Phone" folder on your desktop PC, from whence it gets backed up along with all your other data.
(*which could be a "private cloud" on a home server if you don't trust Google with your data).
But your same argument can be made for any software anywhere.
Software is licensed, not sold (yeah, I know, but sadly the law seems to allow this stupid end-run around the clear intent of copyright law) - this sort of thing is, in effect, extending the same licensing blight to hardware.
This gets interesting when the inevitable free alternative appears and Intel try to stop it. Then I guess it will come down to whether the "unlock" software is substantial enough to be copyrightable and/or whether the DMCA applies.
It was all rather clearer in the mainframe case where customers would have a proper contract with the vendor (rather than some take-it-or-leave-it EULA).
I suppose the "price above all else" PC vendors will like this. If they can load up machines with demo software, why not have demo hardware to match?
...and that's the real problem with this idea: its anti-consumer because it creates more opportunities for vendors to offer misleading sticker prices and cash in on "hidden extras".
Its rather different in the old mainframe world where the price was as much about service and support and the whole arrangement was probably closer to leasing than buying.
Apple is already in the habit of charging small amounts for what would often be considered just "good will" on the side of the company
ISTR with the iPod Touch update (the one that magically endowed the Touch with Bluetooth) a few years back, Apple claimed that "the accountant made us do it" (and I think it was around the time they were having trouble with the SEC). Sadly, I find that completely believable (the accountant didn't even have to be right).
This is a pretty intriguing idea. It's interesting to see how mobile phones are not only starting to encroach on netbooks/laptops, but also now on e-readers. How long until they encroach on home PCs?
I think they started to encroach on home PCs as soon as they could read email, browse the web and play games.
Dedicated e-readers only exist because current e-ink screens are brilliant for prolonged reading but utterly useless for anything that moves (games, movies, multitouch UIs...) meaning that they're no good for phones and tablets. Once display technology comes up with something that combines the clarity of e-ink with LCD response times, bye-bye e-readers.
I would actually really like it if my phone was my computer, and when I went home it just linked to my keyboard, mouse and monitors and used them. And when I left, it's back to its normal interface.
The problem with that is that you're carrying all your data around on your phone - so (a) if you lose your phone you're really screwed and (b) so far, 3.5" hard drives are still offering the best bytes-per-buck.
The other issue is that software designed for a shirt pocket sized phone may not be the ideal software for your 30" home PC screen and keyboard, nor does your phone need a graphics processor that can play <latest game> at 1080p. So if you're not running the same software, and have to keep backing up your phone anyway, why try to combine the two in one?
More sensible would be to have all your data on your "home server" or out in the cloud, shared between your PC, phone and tablet via the series of tubes - maybe with some intelligent caching on the phone to smooth over those reception black spots.
Group A is group B. Netbooks have always been cheap, low powered "mini-laptops".
Ever look at the original eeePC or its contemporaries? The Linux-based ones? There a far cry from the modern windows-based netbook.
I dont get why you make this distinction, naturally they've become a little more powerful with a growing market (more demand == more R&D).
The distinction is not purely in the hardware - its what software you run on them. The original netbooks came with a minimal linux-based software suite and limited choice of other software (unless you were a/. type, crossed your fingers and added the regular Debian repository). Later netbooks were Windows-based and could run "all your favorite software".
The main reason they became more powerful (and expensive) was to cater for Windows. The defining event was Microsoft dumping cheap XP licenses on the netbook market.
Right, I'll just plug my camera into an Ipad and...
...your new photos will appear in the "Photos" app on the iPad, ready to view, and next time you plug they'll be synced to your desktop machine.
Of course, you'll need a 25 quid adaptor from Apple, but then I did concede that the iPad was only "cheap" cf. other designer label gear.
and I see USB Host mode going into Android in the near future, but [not] on IOS.
No, its not going into iOS in the near future because its already in iOS - for 25 quid you get a SD card reader and a USB adaptor which is sold as a "camera adaptor" but has been reported as working with other USB devices (see e.g. here).
...but we're usually talking the price of a beer. Not a big deal.
Watch how many for pay print apps make money after November.
Well, they've had six months of (hopefully) making money, and their job now is to think of new features that will make people continue to choose their app over Apple's offering. Otherwise, they can hop on the waaahmbulance along with the writers of media players, CD burners, anti-virus, text editors and other applications which have been incorporated into DOS, Windows, MacOS and even Android* over time.
Anyway, a lot of these Apps are GUIs onto existing OS services anyway (so its not as if all the PDF viewer developers had to write their own PDF rendering engines) and its not as if (e.g.) the GoodReader guys invented the concept of a PDF reader. Others already have USPs (e.g. DropBox offers cross-platform PC, Mac, iOS, Android + any web browser support).
...and hang on: first your complaining about having to pay for Apps, and Apple not including functionality as standard, now you are deeply concerned about App developers' profitability?
The one to watch is whether, once iOS 4.2 is out, Apple start kicking established Apps off the store because they now "duplicate OS functionality". That would be naughty (and stupid).
the iPad has a long way to go before it becomes a netbook killer
But what do you mean by "netbook"?
I see two types of device going under the name "netbook":
(A) First, we have the "original" netbook concept - small, lightweight, cheap devices with small screens and modest SD-based storage - intended mainly for web browsing, email, media playing, "casual gaming" and maybe some light WP (sometimes running Linux rather than windows) and note-taking. E.g. the original EEE PC.
(B) Then we have what the "netbooks" seemed to turn into: cheap, ultracompact but basically full-featured laptops running (usually) Windows.
In my experience, the iPad absolutely blows away "type A" in terms of usability as a web/email terminal: its great for web browsing while sitting in a comfy chair, perfect for quick email checks and short replies and actually rather good for note-taking in meetings etc. (I've even used it to give a PowerPoint). The iPad's killer feature there is its running an OS and Apps designed for small touch-input devices, rather than standard desktop apps. Where it doesn't match up is on price (unless you look at price relative to other "designer label" hardware such as MacBooks and Sony Vaios - and the iPad certainly feels like a quality product).
However, If what you really want is a small-but-perfectly-formed laptop then the iPad isn't really a viable alternative. Its designed for consumption, not creation.
My prediction: once there are some viable, cheap, Android tablets on the shelves to compete with the cheapest netbooks, the "type A" netbook will go the way of the dodo (its already an endangered species) and "netbook" will just become a synonym for "subnotebook".
So far, though, the Android options look a bit uninspiring usually with some flaw such as a resistive touchscreen, prehistoric version of Android and no (proper) Flash player (which would be a selling point over iPhone). Plus, Android will remain useless for many people until it properly supports proxies over WiFi.
the alternative being digging out a cable, launching iTunes (kill me now) and syncing (and just sync the PDF if you want to get on with things, instead of waiting for EVERYTHING to sync). There is no wireless file transfer option.
I think you've put your finger on the iPad's biggest flaw, there - or, more precisely, the biggest flaw in Apple's own-brand applications (Pages/Keynote/iBooks/Safari) - it does need better file sharing, plus that's where the wheels really fall off iTunes.
However, there are plenty of Apps in the (official - no jailbreaking required) App Store that address your problem, including alternative PDF viewers* (e.g. GoodReader) with their own download capability, cloud-based file syncing systems (e.g. DropBox, plus office Apps that support DropBox) and alternative web browsers (e.g. iCab Mobile - which I haven't tried but which offers a download facility). That somewhat refutes the idea that iPad is too closed to be useful.
(* Most of which are better for reading PDFs than the tacked-on PDF functionality in iBooks anyway)
Yeah, but in the early days of flat-screen we weren't bombarded with images of pancakes and documentaries on the unfortunate victims of steamroller accidents. The problem with 3d is the bloody eye-pokers put in when people realise that 3d doesnt actually add much.
At least colour, sound, stereo, surround etc. were actually NEW and not 60+ year old gimmicks which people have already got bored of three or four times.
Also - very bad timimg, with HD just going mainstream and the grass just starting to grow on the grave of the CRT.
It's only 2 days so the jury is out on Ping, but personally I've not run into huge problems in iTunes resulting from crufty code in my history working with iTunes. i know that's anecdotal, but so are all the anti-iTunes rants here.
Methinks maybe there is a differece between iTunes for Mac and iTunes for PC? I use it as a media ripper/player/syncer on the Mac and really can't see what all the vilification is about.
However, where the wheels start to come off, even on the Mac, is when you try to use it for file exchange for iOS Apps like Pages and Keynote. Bleh. (and, I guess, syncing photos if you don't want to/can't use iPhoto).
So, I'd say that the real thing Apple needs to fix is file sharing/streaming/clouding between iOS and the desktop. Currently that's a mess (with lots of 3rd-party Apps that address bits of the problem - like Dropbox for cloud-based file sharing, AirVideo for streaming, and PDF readers with their own built-in http-based file fetching) - but some joined-up thinking would be helpful here (e.g. Dropbox is great for getting stuff into Pages/Keyote but there's no way back apart from iTunes or email).
Netbooks were only popular because the economy sucked and people didn't want to pay a lot for a computer
Plus, this was when most (consumer oriented) "proper" computers came with the crock known as Vista and were left in the dust by the less powerful netbooks running XP or Linux.
Also, I suspect lots of people bought their kids EEE PCs that particular xmas because they couldn't get their hands on a Wii...
Why is the iPad consistently compared to netbooks, when it is priced like a notebook
Because it is designed for the same use as the original netbook concept: a small, stripped-down portable device for media playback, web browsing, casual gaming, email and light note-taking, aimed at people who probably already had access to a full-featured PC.
...but the original netbooks sucked at that because they were made from shite remaindered PC components, drank batteries and tried to run off-the-shelf applications designed for more powerful computers with full-size screens, mice and keyboards. Even the linux-based ones just used a customised "launcher" screen in place of the desktop, over the top of the usual Mozilla/Open Office suite. But they sold enough to panic Microsoft (at a time when Vista was tanking) who started dumping cheap XP licenses for netbooks, with which the netbooks morphed into full-featured entry level notebooks.
The iPad gets back to the original "second system" netbook concept. Of course, since its Apple its only cheap c.f. the rest of the Mac range. There'll be cheaper non-Apple tablets (that have proper capacitive touch screens instead of resistive crap, run an up-to-date-version of Android, can access the Android market) sold by vendors that you'd be prepared to trust with your credit card number on the market real soon now. Just wait. Any time now. Just a while longer...
Yes, it's great that it's cheap and runs linux, but if you need an external hard drive to get any real use out of it, what's the point in making it so small?
The obvious use seems to be apps like Firewall, proxy, SSH/VPN gateway etc. that just need a computer, minimal local storage and ethernet and need to be always on.
Think of using one of these in a product which provided a self-contained appliance to provide a secure tunnel from work into your home broadband connection... Of course, it would be more efficient to hack that functionality into your router/modem and save a plug - but with one of these you could produce a plug-n-drool appliance you could give to Joe Luser without them risking bricking their router (although they'd still have to set up a port-forward).
Or a DHCP server/DNS proxy if (like many) your router only had crippled version of these (stick dnsmasq on there and you've got a useful box).
But I agree - its a fairly narrow range of apps that don't require plugging in an external device via the (only) USB port - at which point these lose their all-in-one appeal and a NAS box with space for a drive and more connectivity options becomes a more sensible option. Even on a firewall, having more than one ethernet port, for example, would be useful.
They might also make sense if you had a USB-powered peripheral - but then so many things like webcams are now available with built-in ethernet, so why do you need "local" processing?
A "proper" mini server - which can still be low power - may cost more, but with decent storage and better connectivity it can do so much more (file serving, email server, spam filtering, web/database sever).
What the world really needs is a Mac Mini without the Apple premium - but then, they can charge that because there isn't anything comparable around off-the-shelf (please don't point me at something three times the size from Dell or something from Asus with half the power and compulsory MS Windows).
However if you evaluate the world as a whole it turns out they are rather useful, even necessary.
Yeah, because the third world farmers are just queuing up to buy expensive GM seeds tailored to specific patent weedkillers. Well, they might, but only so they can grow high-value crops like coffee for the West on the land that they're supposed to be using to feed themselves.
PS: have they engineered the landmine-eating potato or the contraceptive yam - and other crops that might actually help the developing world - yet?
2) We've always been modifying plants for a long time.
By selective breeding. Not by directly grafting in genes from other species.
Whether selective breeding is automatically safer "because it is natural" may be dubious but it is inherently slow and incremental.
Bananas and pigs took many, many years to breed to their current state - now we can splice banana genes into pigs overnight just because we think it should be easier to get the rind off bacon..
No, it is not 100% risk free.
...but unless you're a Monsanto shareholder you get 100% of that risk and 0% of any benefit.
<sentence>you <contraction>should not</contraction> be mixing content with layout</sentence>
<sentence>use an <acronym>extended markup language</acronym> schema that removes the ambiguity and allows the viewer to determine <alternative-list><item>his</item><item>her</item></alternative-list> preferred layout and punctuation <aside>or even see it presented in <abbrev>text message</abbrev>format allowing accessibility by teenage people</aside> </sentence>
That's what I said when they wanted to add sound to pictures! Heresy, I say, heresy!
Heh. But sound and colour both caught on rapidly as soon as the techniques were discovered.
3D, on the other hand, has been around for 60 years without really taking off: They had 3D films (proper, polarised light ones too, not crappy red/green) at the Festival of Britain in 1951. There's a revival every 10 years or so since, but its always flash-in-the-pan.
So maybe, just maybe, there are good reasons for the skepticism, like the fact that only one person in the cinema is sitting in the right place to get the correct experience (and its migraine time for everybody else) the problem of clipping 3D objects to the screen (more migraine) and all of the "cinematographic language" using depth of field and focal length that has evolved over 100 years but which just doesn't make physical sense with 3D.
I suppose that the only difference this time round is that now home TV is seriously threatening cinema in terms of picture and sound quality (and the cinema chains are doing a good job of fucking up the social advantages) so the cinema is desperate for a gimmick, because we'll never have 3D on our home TVs (Oh, wait...)
Slashdot Mirror
shutdown -h now
"...I'm afraid i can't let you do that, Dave..."
Darn. It read your lips while you were talking about wiping it and installing Debian...
Option 1: Clippy pops up and says "Hi, you appear to be trying to use a plunger to unblock your toilet while still sitting on it. Would you like some help?"
Option 2: It searches the system to see if a Wank-n-wipe compatible Kleenex dispenser is connected to the system.
Option 3: if ( location=="Lower Merion School District" ) WebCam.activate();
Option 4: If you are running Flight Simulator 2010 then it activates the ejector seat (beware: may result in prematiure ejection!)
but it doesn't answer how it helps if an intruder is getting into Apps through a lost or stolen phone.
Nor does it help if your employees are disclosing your secrets at gunpoint while simultaneously receiving the oral attentions of Halle Berry.
But what it does do is what it says on the tin: prevents people getting in to your apps by guessing a user's password is "swordfish" (or "joshua" or "kronos" or "peekaboo" or the cat's birthday) or otherwise fishing or sniffing it.
This is an argument for backups not larger storage devices.
Its also about data security - lose your phone and someone has physical access to all your data. Yes, you can encrypt - but unless you're happy typing in a strong password every time you wake up your phone that's not foolproof. If you lose physical data then you pretty much have to assume that it is compromised. Keep it "in the cloud*" and you can log in, de-authorize the device and check the logs to see who's read what.
...and even if your data is safely backed up, you can't do anything with it if you've just left your main and only computing device on the train.
A terminal looks the same on both,
Look at some of the better iOS/Android terminal apps sometime. They're designed for small/touchscreen devices. Anyway, if a terminal is the only software you need then kudos, but you're pushing a minority view.
and you should be backing up every computing device. Rsync can do that automagically.
...it can also automagically sync the contents of your phone to the "Phone" folder on your desktop PC, from whence it gets backed up along with all your other data.
(*which could be a "private cloud" on a home server if you don't trust Google with your data).
But your same argument can be made for any software anywhere.
Software is licensed, not sold (yeah, I know, but sadly the law seems to allow this stupid end-run around the clear intent of copyright law) - this sort of thing is, in effect, extending the same licensing blight to hardware.
This gets interesting when the inevitable free alternative appears and Intel try to stop it. Then I guess it will come down to whether the "unlock" software is substantial enough to be copyrightable and/or whether the DMCA applies.
It was all rather clearer in the mainframe case where customers would have a proper contract with the vendor (rather than some take-it-or-leave-it EULA).
I suppose the "price above all else" PC vendors will like this. If they can load up machines with demo software, why not have demo hardware to match?
...and that's the real problem with this idea: its anti-consumer because it creates more opportunities for vendors to offer misleading sticker prices and cash in on "hidden extras".
Its rather different in the old mainframe world where the price was as much about service and support and the whole arrangement was probably closer to leasing than buying.
Apple is already in the habit of charging small amounts for what would often be considered just "good will" on the side of the company
ISTR with the iPod Touch update (the one that magically endowed the Touch with Bluetooth) a few years back, Apple claimed that "the accountant made us do it" (and I think it was around the time they were having trouble with the SEC). Sadly, I find that completely believable (the accountant didn't even have to be right).
This is a pretty intriguing idea. It's interesting to see how mobile phones are not only starting to encroach on netbooks/laptops, but also now on e-readers. How long until they encroach on home PCs?
I think they started to encroach on home PCs as soon as they could read email, browse the web and play games.
Dedicated e-readers only exist because current e-ink screens are brilliant for prolonged reading but utterly useless for anything that moves (games, movies, multitouch UIs...) meaning that they're no good for phones and tablets. Once display technology comes up with something that combines the clarity of e-ink with LCD response times, bye-bye e-readers.
I would actually really like it if my phone was my computer, and when I went home it just linked to my keyboard, mouse and monitors and used them. And when I left, it's back to its normal interface.
The problem with that is that you're carrying all your data around on your phone - so (a) if you lose your phone you're really screwed and (b) so far, 3.5" hard drives are still offering the best bytes-per-buck.
The other issue is that software designed for a shirt pocket sized phone may not be the ideal software for your 30" home PC screen and keyboard, nor does your phone need a graphics processor that can play <latest game> at 1080p. So if you're not running the same software, and have to keep backing up your phone anyway, why try to combine the two in one?
More sensible would be to have all your data on your "home server" or out in the cloud, shared between your PC, phone and tablet via the series of tubes - maybe with some intelligent caching on the phone to smooth over those reception black spots.
Group A is group B. Netbooks have always been cheap, low powered "mini-laptops".
Ever look at the original eeePC or its contemporaries? The Linux-based ones? There a far cry from the modern windows-based netbook.
I dont get why you make this distinction, naturally they've become a little more powerful with a growing market (more demand == more R&D).
The distinction is not purely in the hardware - its what software you run on them. The original netbooks came with a minimal linux-based software suite and limited choice of other software (unless you were a /. type, crossed your fingers and added the regular Debian repository). Later netbooks were Windows-based and could run "all your favorite software".
The main reason they became more powerful (and expensive) was to cater for Windows. The defining event was Microsoft dumping cheap XP licenses on the netbook market.
Right, I'll just plug my camera into an Ipad and ...
...your new photos will appear in the "Photos" app on the iPad, ready to view, and next time you plug they'll be synced to your desktop machine.
Of course, you'll need a 25 quid adaptor from Apple, but then I did concede that the iPad was only "cheap" cf. other designer label gear.
and I see USB Host mode going into Android in the near future, but [not] on IOS.
No, its not going into iOS in the near future because its already in iOS - for 25 quid you get a SD card reader and a USB adaptor which is sold as a "camera adaptor" but has been reported as working with other USB devices (see e.g. here).
1) some are pay (especially the better ones)
...but we're usually talking the price of a beer. Not a big deal.
Watch how many for pay print apps make money after November.
Well, they've had six months of (hopefully) making money, and their job now is to think of new features that will make people continue to choose their app over Apple's offering. Otherwise, they can hop on the waaahmbulance along with the writers of media players, CD burners, anti-virus, text editors and other applications which have been incorporated into DOS, Windows, MacOS and even Android* over time.
Anyway, a lot of these Apps are GUIs onto existing OS services anyway (so its not as if all the PDF viewer developers had to write their own PDF rendering engines) and its not as if (e.g.) the GoodReader guys invented the concept of a PDF reader. Others already have USPs (e.g. DropBox offers cross-platform PC, Mac, iOS, Android + any web browser support).
...and hang on: first your complaining about having to pay for Apps, and Apple not including functionality as standard, now you are deeply concerned about App developers' profitability?
The one to watch is whether, once iOS 4.2 is out, Apple start kicking established Apps off the store because they now "duplicate OS functionality". That would be naughty (and stupid).
(* turn-by-turn GPS navigation, anybody?)
the iPad has a long way to go before it becomes a netbook killer
But what do you mean by "netbook"?
I see two types of device going under the name "netbook":
(A) First, we have the "original" netbook concept - small, lightweight, cheap devices with small screens and modest SD-based storage - intended mainly for web browsing, email, media playing, "casual gaming" and maybe some light WP (sometimes running Linux rather than windows) and note-taking. E.g. the original EEE PC.
(B) Then we have what the "netbooks" seemed to turn into: cheap, ultracompact but basically full-featured laptops running (usually) Windows.
In my experience, the iPad absolutely blows away "type A" in terms of usability as a web/email terminal: its great for web browsing while sitting in a comfy chair, perfect for quick email checks and short replies and actually rather good for note-taking in meetings etc. (I've even used it to give a PowerPoint). The iPad's killer feature there is its running an OS and Apps designed for small touch-input devices, rather than standard desktop apps. Where it doesn't match up is on price (unless you look at price relative to other "designer label" hardware such as MacBooks and Sony Vaios - and the iPad certainly feels like a quality product).
However, If what you really want is a small-but-perfectly-formed laptop then the iPad isn't really a viable alternative. Its designed for consumption, not creation.
My prediction: once there are some viable, cheap, Android tablets on the shelves to compete with the cheapest netbooks, the "type A" netbook will go the way of the dodo (its already an endangered species) and "netbook" will just become a synonym for "subnotebook".
So far, though, the Android options look a bit uninspiring usually with some flaw such as a resistive touchscreen, prehistoric version of Android and no (proper) Flash player (which would be a selling point over iPhone). Plus, Android will remain useless for many people until it properly supports proxies over WiFi.
the alternative being digging out a cable, launching iTunes (kill me now) and syncing (and just sync the PDF if you want to get on with things, instead of waiting for EVERYTHING to sync). There is no wireless file transfer option.
I think you've put your finger on the iPad's biggest flaw, there - or, more precisely, the biggest flaw in Apple's own-brand applications (Pages/Keynote/iBooks/Safari) - it does need better file sharing, plus that's where the wheels really fall off iTunes.
However, there are plenty of Apps in the (official - no jailbreaking required) App Store that address your problem, including alternative PDF viewers* (e.g. GoodReader) with their own download capability, cloud-based file syncing systems (e.g. DropBox, plus office Apps that support DropBox) and alternative web browsers (e.g. iCab Mobile - which I haven't tried but which offers a download facility). That somewhat refutes the idea that iPad is too closed to be useful.
(* Most of which are better for reading PDFs than the tacked-on PDF functionality in iBooks anyway)
Yeah, but in the early days of flat-screen we weren't bombarded with images of pancakes and documentaries on the unfortunate victims of steamroller accidents. The problem with 3d is the bloody eye-pokers put in when people realise that 3d doesnt actually add much.
At least colour, sound, stereo, surround etc. were actually NEW and not 60+ year old gimmicks which people have already got bored of three or four times.
Also - very bad timimg, with HD just going mainstream and the grass just starting to grow on the grave of the CRT.
It's only 2 days so the jury is out on Ping, but personally I've not run into huge problems in iTunes resulting from crufty code in my history working with iTunes. i know that's anecdotal, but so are all the anti-iTunes rants here.
Methinks maybe there is a differece between iTunes for Mac and iTunes for PC? I use it as a media ripper/player/syncer on the Mac and really can't see what all the vilification is about.
However, where the wheels start to come off, even on the Mac, is when you try to use it for file exchange for iOS Apps like Pages and Keynote. Bleh. (and, I guess, syncing photos if you don't want to/can't use iPhoto).
So, I'd say that the real thing Apple needs to fix is file sharing/streaming/clouding between iOS and the desktop. Currently that's a mess (with lots of 3rd-party Apps that address bits of the problem - like Dropbox for cloud-based file sharing, AirVideo for streaming, and PDF readers with their own built-in http-based file fetching) - but some joined-up thinking would be helpful here (e.g. Dropbox is great for getting stuff into Pages/Keyote but there's no way back apart from iTunes or email).
Netbooks were only popular because the economy sucked and people didn't want to pay a lot for a computer
Plus, this was when most (consumer oriented) "proper" computers came with the crock known as Vista and were left in the dust by the less powerful netbooks running XP or Linux.
Also, I suspect lots of people bought their kids EEE PCs that particular xmas because they couldn't get their hands on a Wii...
Why is the iPad consistently compared to netbooks, when it is priced like a notebook
Because it is designed for the same use as the original netbook concept: a small, stripped-down portable device for media playback, web browsing, casual gaming, email and light note-taking, aimed at people who probably already had access to a full-featured PC.
...but the original netbooks sucked at that because they were made from shite remaindered PC components, drank batteries and tried to run off-the-shelf applications designed for more powerful computers with full-size screens, mice and keyboards. Even the linux-based ones just used a customised "launcher" screen in place of the desktop, over the top of the usual Mozilla/Open Office suite. But they sold enough to panic Microsoft (at a time when Vista was tanking) who started dumping cheap XP licenses for netbooks, with which the netbooks morphed into full-featured entry level notebooks.
The iPad gets back to the original "second system" netbook concept. Of course, since its Apple its only cheap c.f. the rest of the Mac range. There'll be cheaper non-Apple tablets (that have proper capacitive touch screens instead of resistive crap, run an up-to-date-version of Android, can access the Android market) sold by vendors that you'd be prepared to trust with your credit card number on the market real soon now. Just wait. Any time now. Just a while longer...
Yes, it's great that it's cheap and runs linux, but if you need an external hard drive to get any real use out of it, what's the point in making it so small?
The obvious use seems to be apps like Firewall, proxy, SSH/VPN gateway etc. that just need a computer, minimal local storage and ethernet and need to be always on.
Think of using one of these in a product which provided a self-contained appliance to provide a secure tunnel from work into your home broadband connection... Of course, it would be more efficient to hack that functionality into your router/modem and save a plug - but with one of these you could produce a plug-n-drool appliance you could give to Joe Luser without them risking bricking their router (although they'd still have to set up a port-forward).
Or a DHCP server/DNS proxy if (like many) your router only had crippled version of these (stick dnsmasq on there and you've got a useful box).
But I agree - its a fairly narrow range of apps that don't require plugging in an external device via the (only) USB port - at which point these lose their all-in-one appeal and a NAS box with space for a drive and more connectivity options becomes a more sensible option. Even on a firewall, having more than one ethernet port, for example, would be useful.
They might also make sense if you had a USB-powered peripheral - but then so many things like webcams are now available with built-in ethernet, so why do you need "local" processing?
A "proper" mini server - which can still be low power - may cost more, but with decent storage and better connectivity it can do so much more (file serving, email server, spam filtering, web/database sever).
What the world really needs is a Mac Mini without the Apple premium - but then, they can charge that because there isn't anything comparable around off-the-shelf (please don't point me at something three times the size from Dell or something from Asus with half the power and compulsory MS Windows).
Why can't I use type="text/python" or type="text/haskell" or type="text/ruby"?
How many different interpreters and VMs do you want bloating up your browser and introducing exciting new security holes?
(Although come to think of it, whatever happened to Parrot?)
6. HTML 5 still has video codec patent issues to work out.
Except the preferred video format for Flash nowadays is the same, patent encumbered h.264 that the major players are pushing for HTML5.
The other one is VP6 (is that covered by Google's acquisition of VP8?) even so, that's old.
So that's pretty much a no-score draw.
However if you evaluate the world as a whole it turns out they are rather useful, even necessary.
Yeah, because the third world farmers are just queuing up to buy expensive GM seeds tailored to specific patent weedkillers. Well, they might, but only so they can grow high-value crops like coffee for the West on the land that they're supposed to be using to feed themselves.
PS: have they engineered the landmine-eating potato or the contraceptive yam - and other crops that might actually help the developing world - yet?
2) We've always been modifying plants for a long time.
By selective breeding. Not by directly grafting in genes from other species.
Whether selective breeding is automatically safer "because it is natural" may be dubious but it is inherently slow and incremental.
Bananas and pigs took many, many years to breed to their current state - now we can splice banana genes into pigs overnight just because we think it should be easier to get the rind off bacon..
No, it is not 100% risk free.
...but unless you're a Monsanto shareholder you get 100% of that risk and 0% of any benefit.
ERR 3912: Comment ignored - missing or malformed <pedantry> tag.
I hang my head in shame. Sorry.
<posting target-moderation="funny">
<sentence tone="exclamation">silly boy</sentence>
<sentence>you <contraction>should not</contraction> be mixing content with layout</sentence>
<sentence>use an <acronym>extended markup language</acronym> schema that removes the ambiguity and allows the viewer to determine <alternative-list><item>his</item><item>her</item></alternative-list> preferred layout and punctuation <aside>or even see it presented in <abbrev>text message</abbrev>format allowing accessibility by teenage people</aside> </sentence>
</posting>
That's what I said when they wanted to add sound to pictures! Heresy, I say, heresy!
Heh. But sound and colour both caught on rapidly as soon as the techniques were discovered.
3D, on the other hand, has been around for 60 years without really taking off: They had 3D films (proper, polarised light ones too, not crappy red/green) at the Festival of Britain in 1951. There's a revival every 10 years or so since, but its always flash-in-the-pan.
So maybe, just maybe, there are good reasons for the skepticism, like the fact that only one person in the cinema is sitting in the right place to get the correct experience (and its migraine time for everybody else) the problem of clipping 3D objects to the screen (more migraine) and all of the "cinematographic language" using depth of field and focal length that has evolved over 100 years but which just doesn't make physical sense with 3D.
I suppose that the only difference this time round is that now home TV is seriously threatening cinema in terms of picture and sound quality (and the cinema chains are doing a good job of fucking up the social advantages) so the cinema is desperate for a gimmick, because we'll never have 3D on our home TVs (Oh, wait...)