Not dithering -- just cumulative addition. The more reflecting elements there are, the more color you get. So each pixel is a series of imod elements, arrays of R, G and B. Black is all off; dark color is just a few on... medium color is half of 'em on... bright color is all of 'em on.
Mechanical parts that are very small tend to be very robust. Look at the moving mirror technology in projectors (it's called DLP); those things seem to last forever, I've not heard about any of them losing pixels -- I've got a 1080p Optoma with about 9000 hours of lamp time, and the display looks as good as it did on day one when you slap a fresh bulb in it (the bulbs dim over time... but that doesn't mean the mirrors are implicated at all in the gradual reduction of quality.)
Also, the arrays in the tech we're talking about here have basically binary states; on or off. They develop brightness by more or less cells reflecting at once, not by incremental positioning.
That 80bn cash pile that Apple has built up is good for something
Is it? Ever since Jobs got sick, basically since Leopard, which is really pretty decent, Apple's been producing poorer and poorer OSX and IOS releases. IOS5 has many, many problems, and also, apparently intentionally, inflicts a rather wicked planned obsolescence on Leopard users -- wifi sync doesn't work. And then there's the *way* they implemented wifi sync. Previously, you had to connect to your PC/mac, and it would sync via USB. Now (assuming you're not using Leopard), you (a) have to plug the iDevice into power, (b) you have to start iTunes, and then it'll sync. This isn't any more convenient from plugging it into the computer to sync in the first place. What were they thinking? Snow Leopard broke quite a few drivers and applications. Lion dumped the PPC emulator for no particular reason. There is a fairly pervasive rumor they're thinking of dropping the Mac Pro, and there is this "sandboxing" thing they're planning on doing to apps from the Mac app store (goodbye programs that talk to one another.) There's still no midrange tower. The mini lost its optical drive. Then there's this batshit idea of "fullscreen apps" that basically crap all over multiple monitor setups (yeah, you guessed it, I have multiple monitors.)
Maybe it'll work out -- but right now, to me, at least, it seems like things are changing in a new direction: decisions I can't get behind, one after another.
"Flex" is a disk operating system for 6800 microprocessors. Flex09 is Flex for the 6809 microprocessor, but was also generally just referred to as "Flex." Both were produced by Technical Systems Consultants (logo: TSC.) Flex initially ran on the SWTPC, GIMIX, SSB and similar SS-50 bus boxes; later versions ran on Radio Shack's "Color Computer", which was based on the 6809 processor. Aside from this, Flex (both versions) was also made available by TSC in a "driverless" version that let you write your own I/O routines, essentially making it wholly fit for just about any configuration imaginable.
Flex, along with CP/m, constituted one of the two original disk operating systems we had to choose from in those early days. We're not talking about a minor issue or a bit player; there were magazines dedicated to the subject, many clubs and companies involved... this is our history.
Adobe really screwed up here. There was absolutely no need to go trampling on the memories and touchstones of our craft.
We *have* a Kindle, and it lasts about 15 hours (radios off.) That's what made me go look it up -- the difference between the fanboi claims and my actual experience. And Amazon confirmed exactly what I'm seeing -- they're not making any false claims, that's fanboi territory. Lithium-ion batteries don't have self-discharge issues over 30 day periods, either, just FYI.
See, I can -- in fact, I can, and do, read on my iPad for much longer than that -- many nights I read two books, occasionally three. Not saying you don't have problems, but I am saying those problems are yours, not those of the LCD screen. And the Kindle e-ink's sluggishness frustrates me. I'm ready to read, my eyes are in the right place, and... the content simply isn't there, and isn't going to be for enough time to consume a good portion of a paragraph.
With the Fire you aren't paying for 3G if you don't want to (pay a monthly fee for very slow internet access). You aren't paying for a bunch of storage that you don't need. You aren't paying for a camera and a microphone, which most people don't care about in a tablet. Apple packs all these features in that are little-used by most in order to maintain the high price point.
Apple offers an iPad without 3g. In terms of storage, mine has 8gb; same as the Kindle. The new ones (iPad2) have 16GB. Mine has no camera, the 2's do. There is a microphone -- and turns out, it's very handy. I'll see how the Fire compares shortly; we have a pre-order in, and Amazon says we'll have it the 17th. But I will say, in terms of "storage you don't need", on the iPad... you do need it. The fact that you don't on the Kindle seems to be more a reflection of what it can't do for you than anything else. At least at this early date.
We also looked at the iPad2, but it really didn't offer what we were looking for in order to stimulate an upgrade -- higher resolution was the #1 thing we were looking for so you could at least have true 720p display, with an IR port being #2 (so it could be used as a remote for the A/V stuff, etc.) Maybe when the 3 comes out, we'll see. I do expect the iPad3 to pretty much wipe the floor with the Fire, but... no sign of it yet.
We've got an e-ink Kindle, my SO uses it constantly, and I wasn't unusually impressed by the battery life, so I went and looked it up: The battery life of the e-ink Kindle is, according to Amazon, 30 days with 1/2 hour of reading every day, or a total of 15 hours, with the radios off. My iPad hits 15 hours no problem at all with the radios (both 3G and wifi) off when I'm reading. Static text display with occasional page turns aren't very tough on the hardware. Of course the iPad has much more battery capacity in order to accomplish this. We have ordered the Fire, and it'll be very interesting to see how long it holds up, reading. Since it's smaller than an iPad, the foregone conclusion is that the battery capacity is less. The question is, what's the power consumption of that smaller backlight? Proportionally less, enough to keep it in that 15 hour range, or... ???
As for the usability of an LCD display for reading, it's very high indeed. I don't even use our e-ink Kindle, because mostly, I read in bed. I laugh every time I see people dissing LCDs for reading. It's either confirmation bias or outright nonsense. Both e-ink and LCD are fine for many hours of reading. There's no flicker on an LCD screen, they can be turned down to extremely dim for comfortable use in darkness, they're *way* faster than e-ink, and they're usable in situations where the e-ink fails, such as in the bedroom with someone who is trying to sleep -- and while e-ink is indeed readable in full sunlight, if I actually try to read in full sunlight, I suffer some serious eyestrain in very short order, so that's of little use to me.
If you rely on ancident(sic) software, don't upgrade to the latest and greatest hardware. Just doesn't seem like that big a deal!
But Apple intentionally made it easy, and desirable, to upgrade to the Intel hardware... they did it by making sure you could run your PPC software, and bring it forward. So there was little reason not to upgrade (barring incompatible apps as the one you mention... hadn't heard of anything that failed to run, previously.) On the contrary, PPC apps kept working and that was *great*, as it meant you *could* upgrade.
But that door has been closed with Lion. And, like you say -- if it matters to you, you're better off not to upgrade any longer. And that's precisely why I'll be staying with Leopard. That, and driver issues that Snow Leopard brought into scope.
Speaking as a developer, knowing that some Apple users will need to stay with Leopard, and not particularly interested in limiting who I can sell my software to, I'll be using Leopard as the target OS in terms of APIs, while testing to make sure those APIs still work under later OSs. I definitely won't be using APIs from 10.6 or.7
We have one computer at work that runs Leopard and still has an ancient PPC version of an early Photoshop CS. But really, for most mac users, is this even remotely relevant?
It's relevant for those Mac users who have PPC apps they want to keep using, and particularly so for those than have no upgrade path. And then there's this question: Why drop the PPC emulation at all? Wasn't broke. Didn't need fixing. But now it's gone. And your "ancient PPC version of an early Photoshop" just went from useful to zero if you upgrade. As does Mame, Appleworks, etc.
I think -- and we're both guessing here -- that those tablets failed because (a) they were WAY too expensive, and (b) no one had really worked out how a touch interface should work (a stylus sucks, trust me, been there, bloody hated that.) Leopard is a lot less fragile than Windows circa ten years ago, or Linux, which still isn't mature enough or stable enough to consider as of today, IMHO -- it still doesn't even have a decent set of non-encumbered/poisoned/costly GUI widgets.
I agree about maintainance heavy OS's... that's why I use Leopard. Went 192 days between reboots last time, and I use the everloving **** out of my computer.:) That's what I want to see in my tablet: stays up basically forever, runs *anything*, has tons of ram and long term storage, a great display and a mean GPU, USB and bluetooth and NF and Wifi connectivity, an IR port and a good SDR radio TX/RX unit, memory card slots, cameras (visible, IR and UV, very high native ISO, at least full HD), docks on both edges so I can sit it right ON a keyboard in portrait or landscape, a GPS, a compass, air pressure, radiation, and humidity sensors, accelerometers, and an ultracap-based power system with both direct and inductive recharge. And I think I'm going to get most of that, too. Just not yet.
Personally, I'd be more worried as to whether MS is going to push UEFI secure boot onto every OEM, making it hard to buy any hardware that let you choose which OS to run.
1. Would breach EU laws on monopolies, market abuses etc
It would? How come they let Apple sell IOS apps only from the app store, then? In other words, I can't make an IOS app myself, and sell it to you myself. I have to use the app store. And the EU clearly allows this. How does that fit in with your assertion?
I get my scanner drivers from the manufacturer, don't see the problem.
And if the scanner manufacturer made your driver a while back, and it worked fine, but won't under Lion or Snow Leopard... and there is no update for it (and why should there be? It was working fine, and can continue to work fine as long as you don't install Apple's broken OS)... What then?
Too bad Mac devs were all so eager to go Intel only. Leopard is still useful, but your just frozen in time, unable to use newer applications.
Well, no, actually.
You're unable to use applications that use later OS's as a target. You can, however, use many, many brand new apps (and many, including ours, that aren't even out yet will be usable as well), because it is 100% practical and reasonable to target Leopard and work just fine on Snow Leopard and Lion at the same time -- you can even do it by intelligently checking for the existence of more advanced APIs. That is entirely in the developer's hands. Any app that will *only* work on Lion was aimed, at best, at (right now) about 16% of the users out there, because that's the current Lion adoption. Twice that many users are still on Leopard.
God forbid your stuck with a PPC machine/boot anchor. My sexy mini sits there way underutilized because of God dam bloated Flash and lazy devs who can't figure out how to write apps that run quickly on a 1.42GHz G4. That's just a sad end to a fine architecture that should be allowed to be far more useful today then it currently is.
Sorry? Look, I've got an 8-core, 3 GHz, mucho RAM + multiple TB class HD system on my desk, but I've also got two PPC minis; one serves just fine as a media machine, the other does useful duty in my music studio, displaying tabs, playing cuts from iTunes, hunting down lyrics, allowing me to compose, etc. And then there's Mame. How else are you going to play accurate versions of Omega Race, etc.? Seriously, the PPC machines can be as useful as you let them be. As for Flash... I guess I never really cared. Never saw it on IOS, either, never missed anything I considered important. And now, Adobe has quit mobile flash... RIP.
Lion's 16% installed base is NOT bad after only 4 months.
No? $29.95 for all your machines? Sounds like a bloody bargain to me -- seriously, it does. Saving a measly $29.95 as compared to 250 new features for your Mac? Some of which, like resizing windows from every edge, and improved gestures, and better networking, to name just a few, are highly desirable. Also, you don't even need media -- you can just download the thing. Instant access, amazingly low price, extremely generous licensing, lots of new features. Sounds awesome. So why not upgrade?
How about because.... Lion breaks a whole lotta stuff (like, every PPC app and driver anyone ever owned) on top of what Snow Leopard broke? Oh yeah. That would be why.:o)
Also, that's why there are nearly twice as many people still using Leopard (10.5.8), at about 30%. Because Lion is a lousy release on top of another lousy release: Snow Leopard. This is true even though if they upgraded today, they'd get those 250 Lion features plus the Snow Leopard features.
Look, both Snow Leopard and Lion are fine: if you're a new user and you will only buy new, compatible software. And that, no particular surprise, is the demographic that will make Apple the most money. But if you've been with them for a while, as I have, then you may have quite an investment in software. And that can change the picture quite a bit.
All the rest is just opinions and conjecture on your part, how about some figures ?
Why is it that Apple isn't doing sufficient testing prior to release?
[[citation needed]]
if apps are crashing and drivers don't work and features don't work and data is being lost and batteries are being consumed too fast at release time... they're not doing enough testing. Or is that too complex an idea for you to wrap your head around? Go read the apple support forums, for FSM's sake. Your profound ignorance is annoying.
Why is it that they are leaving so many existing, recent customers out in the cold?
[[citation needed]]
Seriously? Ok, starting with Snow Leopard, there's a huge list. With Lion, I'm just going to point at them dropping the PPC emulator and see if you get it (keeping mind that there are many additional issues similar to those at the above Snow Leopard incompatibility monitor. But, you know, Google it.)
They're aiming at the middle of the Gaussian now... and that isn't, historically speaking, their Mac customer base.
[[citation needed]]
Oh, Jeez, low-hanging fruit. I'm sorry (well, not very): [says nothing, points finger straight at you]
...and so on. Google. It's useful, if you learn how to use it. You just put the question you have in the little box, then press the little magnifying glass picture. You can do it.
PS: Nothing I said was in the least an exaggeration or hyperbole: I'm an active Mac and IOS user and an OS X developer, and in these matters, I am reasonably well informed.
Apple built their business on good decision making, no question. But also no question, they've made grave errors recently. Why do you think Lion has such a low adoption? Why do you think the Apple fora are full of complaints? Why do you think so many IOS apps are crashing, and why the advertised features of IOS5 don't work? Why is it that Apple isn't doing sufficient testing prior to release? Why is it that they are leaving so many existing, recent customers out in the cold? Why is it that they are dumbing down OS X applications? They're aiming at the middle of the Gaussian now... and that isn't, historically speaking, their Mac customer base.
As the financial dweebs say: past history is no guarantee of future performance. But past history is what gets a company to wherever they are, today.
As soon as you learn to distinguish these two concepts, you'll begin to understand what is happening.
You need to re-read article V; you didn't understand it.
Short version: congress can't pass an amendment: there are only two ways to do that. First is ratification by the legislatures of 3/4ths of the states, second is via constitutional conventions in 3/4ths of the states. Congress is powerless to make any authorized, legitimate changes to the constitution -- it's not their decision to make.
And when they step out of line and do so anyway (as they quite often do), the supreme court can overrule them. So they don't even have final authority when they violate their oaths.
It is truly unfortunate that most of the judges on the supreme court are just as likely to fail to understand and/or obey the constitution as any congressman, hence the many bill of rights violations, the inversion of the commerce clause, the ex post facto laws, use of torture, the blatant misinterpretation of article 3, and so on that have made it into "settled law."
From where I sit, the biggest mistake of the authors of the constitution was not to set out severe penalties for violation of the constitution. The constitution, while on one hand called "the highest law in the land", is completely toothless, and consequently. none of the three branches of government take their oaths to it seriously. If they violate it... absolutely nothing can happen to them. So they do. Constantly.
Slashdot Mirror
Not dithering -- just cumulative addition. The more reflecting elements there are, the more color you get. So each pixel is a series of imod elements, arrays of R, G and B. Black is all off; dark color is just a few on... medium color is half of 'em on... bright color is all of 'em on.
no.
Mechanical parts that are very small tend to be very robust. Look at the moving mirror technology in projectors (it's called DLP); those things seem to last forever, I've not heard about any of them losing pixels -- I've got a 1080p Optoma with about 9000 hours of lamp time, and the display looks as good as it did on day one when you slap a fresh bulb in it (the bulbs dim over time... but that doesn't mean the mirrors are implicated at all in the gradual reduction of quality.)
Also, the arrays in the tech we're talking about here have basically binary states; on or off. They develop brightness by more or less cells reflecting at once, not by incremental positioning.
I'm inclined to think it'll work out ok.
Is it? Ever since Jobs got sick, basically since Leopard, which is really pretty decent, Apple's been producing poorer and poorer OSX and IOS releases. IOS5 has many, many problems, and also, apparently intentionally, inflicts a rather wicked planned obsolescence on Leopard users -- wifi sync doesn't work. And then there's the *way* they implemented wifi sync. Previously, you had to connect to your PC/mac, and it would sync via USB. Now (assuming you're not using Leopard), you (a) have to plug the iDevice into power, (b) you have to start iTunes, and then it'll sync. This isn't any more convenient from plugging it into the computer to sync in the first place. What were they thinking? Snow Leopard broke quite a few drivers and applications. Lion dumped the PPC emulator for no particular reason. There is a fairly pervasive rumor they're thinking of dropping the Mac Pro, and there is this "sandboxing" thing they're planning on doing to apps from the Mac app store (goodbye programs that talk to one another.) There's still no midrange tower. The mini lost its optical drive. Then there's this batshit idea of "fullscreen apps" that basically crap all over multiple monitor setups (yeah, you guessed it, I have multiple monitors.)
Maybe it'll work out -- but right now, to me, at least, it seems like things are changing in a new direction: decisions I can't get behind, one after another.
"Flex" is a disk operating system for 6800 microprocessors. Flex09 is Flex for the 6809 microprocessor, but was also generally just referred to as "Flex." Both were produced by Technical Systems Consultants (logo: TSC.) Flex initially ran on the SWTPC, GIMIX, SSB and similar SS-50 bus boxes; later versions ran on Radio Shack's "Color Computer", which was based on the 6809 processor. Aside from this, Flex (both versions) was also made available by TSC in a "driverless" version that let you write your own I/O routines, essentially making it wholly fit for just about any configuration imaginable.
Flex, along with CP/m, constituted one of the two original disk operating systems we had to choose from in those early days. We're not talking about a minor issue or a bit player; there were magazines dedicated to the subject, many clubs and companies involved... this is our history.
Adobe really screwed up here. There was absolutely no need to go trampling on the memories and touchstones of our craft.
Yes, we do have the $79 version. And we're both fast readers. Thanks -- that makes some sense.
Try doing DSLR image editing with Lightroom or Aperture. Those cores make one hell of a difference.
We *have* a Kindle, and it lasts about 15 hours (radios off.) That's what made me go look it up -- the difference between the fanboi claims and my actual experience. And Amazon confirmed exactly what I'm seeing -- they're not making any false claims, that's fanboi territory. Lithium-ion batteries don't have self-discharge issues over 30 day periods, either, just FYI.
The Fire's browser can be used either way. It's a user-controllable switch.
See, I can -- in fact, I can, and do, read on my iPad for much longer than that -- many nights I read two books, occasionally three. Not saying you don't have problems, but I am saying those problems are yours, not those of the LCD screen. And the Kindle e-ink's sluggishness frustrates me. I'm ready to read, my eyes are in the right place, and... the content simply isn't there, and isn't going to be for enough time to consume a good portion of a paragraph.
Apple offers an iPad without 3g. In terms of storage, mine has 8gb; same as the Kindle. The new ones (iPad2) have 16GB. Mine has no camera, the 2's do. There is a microphone -- and turns out, it's very handy. I'll see how the Fire compares shortly; we have a pre-order in, and Amazon says we'll have it the 17th. But I will say, in terms of "storage you don't need", on the iPad... you do need it. The fact that you don't on the Kindle seems to be more a reflection of what it can't do for you than anything else. At least at this early date.
We also looked at the iPad2, but it really didn't offer what we were looking for in order to stimulate an upgrade -- higher resolution was the #1 thing we were looking for so you could at least have true 720p display, with an IR port being #2 (so it could be used as a remote for the A/V stuff, etc.) Maybe when the 3 comes out, we'll see. I do expect the iPad3 to pretty much wipe the floor with the Fire, but... no sign of it yet.
Are you blinking enough? My SO was having that problem, and that's what it was. Just a thought.
Here you go. Or this.
We've got an e-ink Kindle, my SO uses it constantly, and I wasn't unusually impressed by the battery life, so I went and looked it up: The battery life of the e-ink Kindle is, according to Amazon, 30 days with 1/2 hour of reading every day, or a total of 15 hours, with the radios off. My iPad hits 15 hours no problem at all with the radios (both 3G and wifi) off when I'm reading. Static text display with occasional page turns aren't very tough on the hardware. Of course the iPad has much more battery capacity in order to accomplish this. We have ordered the Fire, and it'll be very interesting to see how long it holds up, reading. Since it's smaller than an iPad, the foregone conclusion is that the battery capacity is less. The question is, what's the power consumption of that smaller backlight? Proportionally less, enough to keep it in that 15 hour range, or... ???
As for the usability of an LCD display for reading, it's very high indeed. I don't even use our e-ink Kindle, because mostly, I read in bed. I laugh every time I see people dissing LCDs for reading. It's either confirmation bias or outright nonsense. Both e-ink and LCD are fine for many hours of reading. There's no flicker on an LCD screen, they can be turned down to extremely dim for comfortable use in darkness, they're *way* faster than e-ink, and they're usable in situations where the e-ink fails, such as in the bedroom with someone who is trying to sleep -- and while e-ink is indeed readable in full sunlight, if I actually try to read in full sunlight, I suffer some serious eyestrain in very short order, so that's of little use to me.
But Apple intentionally made it easy, and desirable, to upgrade to the Intel hardware... they did it by making sure you could run your PPC software, and bring it forward. So there was little reason not to upgrade (barring incompatible apps as the one you mention... hadn't heard of anything that failed to run, previously.) On the contrary, PPC apps kept working and that was *great*, as it meant you *could* upgrade.
But that door has been closed with Lion. And, like you say -- if it matters to you, you're better off not to upgrade any longer. And that's precisely why I'll be staying with Leopard. That, and driver issues that Snow Leopard brought into scope.
Speaking as a developer, knowing that some Apple users will need to stay with Leopard, and not particularly interested in limiting who I can sell my software to, I'll be using Leopard as the target OS in terms of APIs, while testing to make sure those APIs still work under later OSs. I definitely won't be using APIs from 10.6 or .7
It's relevant for those Mac users who have PPC apps they want to keep using, and particularly so for those than have no upgrade path. And then there's this question: Why drop the PPC emulation at all? Wasn't broke. Didn't need fixing. But now it's gone. And your "ancient PPC version of an early Photoshop" just went from useful to zero if you upgrade. As does Mame, Appleworks, etc.
I think -- and we're both guessing here -- that those tablets failed because (a) they were WAY too expensive, and (b) no one had really worked out how a touch interface should work (a stylus sucks, trust me, been there, bloody hated that.) Leopard is a lot less fragile than Windows circa ten years ago, or Linux, which still isn't mature enough or stable enough to consider as of today, IMHO -- it still doesn't even have a decent set of non-encumbered/poisoned/costly GUI widgets.
I agree about maintainance heavy OS's... that's why I use Leopard. Went 192 days between reboots last time, and I use the everloving **** out of my computer. :) That's what I want to see in my tablet: stays up basically forever, runs *anything*, has tons of ram and long term storage, a great display and a mean GPU, USB and bluetooth and NF and Wifi connectivity, an IR port and a good SDR radio TX/RX unit, memory card slots, cameras (visible, IR and UV, very high native ISO, at least full HD), docks on both edges so I can sit it right ON a keyboard in portrait or landscape, a GPS, a compass, air pressure, radiation, and humidity sensors, accelerometers, and an ultracap-based power system with both direct and inductive recharge. And I think I'm going to get most of that, too. Just not yet.
VM's FTW. :)
Peak for president! (It's 1.414 times better!)
(cough) sorry.
It would? How come they let Apple sell IOS apps only from the app store, then? In other words, I can't make an IOS app myself, and sell it to you myself. I have to use the app store. And the EU clearly allows this. How does that fit in with your assertion?
And if the scanner manufacturer made your driver a while back, and it worked fine, but won't under Lion or Snow Leopard... and there is no update for it (and why should there be? It was working fine, and can continue to work fine as long as you don't install Apple's broken OS)... What then?
Well, no, actually.
You're unable to use applications that use later OS's as a target. You can, however, use many, many brand new apps (and many, including ours, that aren't even out yet will be usable as well), because it is 100% practical and reasonable to target Leopard and work just fine on Snow Leopard and Lion at the same time -- you can even do it by intelligently checking for the existence of more advanced APIs. That is entirely in the developer's hands. Any app that will *only* work on Lion was aimed, at best, at (right now) about 16% of the users out there, because that's the current Lion adoption. Twice that many users are still on Leopard.
Sorry? Look, I've got an 8-core, 3 GHz, mucho RAM + multiple TB class HD system on my desk, but I've also got two PPC minis; one serves just fine as a media machine, the other does useful duty in my music studio, displaying tabs, playing cuts from iTunes, hunting down lyrics, allowing me to compose, etc. And then there's Mame. How else are you going to play accurate versions of Omega Race, etc.? Seriously, the PPC machines can be as useful as you let them be. As for Flash... I guess I never really cared. Never saw it on IOS, either, never missed anything I considered important. And now, Adobe has quit mobile flash... RIP.
No? $29.95 for all your machines? Sounds like a bloody bargain to me -- seriously, it does. Saving a measly $29.95 as compared to 250 new features for your Mac? Some of which, like resizing windows from every edge, and improved gestures, and better networking, to name just a few, are highly desirable. Also, you don't even need media -- you can just download the thing. Instant access, amazingly low price, extremely generous licensing, lots of new features. Sounds awesome. So why not upgrade?
How about because.... Lion breaks a whole lotta stuff (like, every PPC app and driver anyone ever owned) on top of what Snow Leopard broke ? Oh yeah. That would be why. :o)
Also, that's why there are nearly twice as many people still using Leopard (10.5.8), at about 30%. Because Lion is a lousy release on top of another lousy release: Snow Leopard. This is true even though if they upgraded today, they'd get those 250 Lion features plus the Snow Leopard features.
Look, both Snow Leopard and Lion are fine: if you're a new user and you will only buy new, compatible software. And that, no particular surprise, is the demographic that will make Apple the most money. But if you've been with them for a while, as I have, then you may have quite an investment in software. And that can change the picture quite a bit.
Not so. see above for figures for the Google-impaired.
Google Lion Adoption
Google Apple fora complaints
IOS5 feature not working
IOS app crashing
if apps are crashing and drivers don't work and features don't work and data is being lost and batteries are being consumed too fast at release time... they're not doing enough testing. Or is that too complex an idea for you to wrap your head around? Go read the apple support forums, for FSM's sake. Your profound ignorance is annoying.
Seriously? Ok, starting with Snow Leopard, there's a huge list. With Lion, I'm just going to point at them dropping the PPC emulator and see if you get it (keeping mind that there are many additional issues similar to those at the above Snow Leopard incompatibility monitor. But, you know, Google it.)
Oh, Jeez, low-hanging fruit. I'm sorry (well, not very): [says nothing, points finger straight at you]
PS: Nothing I said was in the least an exaggeration or hyperbole: I'm an active Mac and IOS user and an OS X developer, and in these matters, I am reasonably well informed.
Apple built their business on good decision making, no question. But also no question, they've made grave errors recently. Why do you think Lion has such a low adoption? Why do you think the Apple fora are full of complaints? Why do you think so many IOS apps are crashing, and why the advertised features of IOS5 don't work? Why is it that Apple isn't doing sufficient testing prior to release? Why is it that they are leaving so many existing, recent customers out in the cold? Why is it that they are dumbing down OS X applications? They're aiming at the middle of the Gaussian now... and that isn't, historically speaking, their Mac customer base.
As the financial dweebs say: past history is no guarantee of future performance. But past history is what gets a company to wherever they are, today.
As soon as you learn to distinguish these two concepts, you'll begin to understand what is happening.
You need to re-read article V; you didn't understand it.
Short version: congress can't pass an amendment: there are only two ways to do that. First is ratification by the legislatures of 3/4ths of the states, second is via constitutional conventions in 3/4ths of the states. Congress is powerless to make any authorized, legitimate changes to the constitution -- it's not their decision to make.
And when they step out of line and do so anyway (as they quite often do), the supreme court can overrule them. So they don't even have final authority when they violate their oaths.
It is truly unfortunate that most of the judges on the supreme court are just as likely to fail to understand and/or obey the constitution as any congressman, hence the many bill of rights violations, the inversion of the commerce clause, the ex post facto laws, use of torture, the blatant misinterpretation of article 3, and so on that have made it into "settled law."
From where I sit, the biggest mistake of the authors of the constitution was not to set out severe penalties for violation of the constitution. The constitution, while on one hand called "the highest law in the land", is completely toothless, and consequently. none of the three branches of government take their oaths to it seriously. If they violate it... absolutely nothing can happen to them. So they do. Constantly.