I was just about to reply with the same comment. There were clear goals expounded throughout almost a decade of vaporware announcements of NT, Chicago, and then Longhorn. The problem was that they couldn't get most of it to work properly, while the landscape of real innovation kept changing around them. To "adapt", they kept adding more and more items to their extensive promised features list, and it all came crumbling down eventually when they realized that six years have gone by from their last major release and the world was not holding its breath anymore.
Then Vista was put together by salvaging some parts and adding some shiny chrome, just to fill up the gaping void in their product line. No wonder it seems inconsistent and lacking of a coherent vision or direction--it barely had any of either.
There is still some controversy over the amount of influence that Xerox's PARC work, as opposed to previous academic research, had on the GUIs of Apple's Lisa and Macintosh, but it is clear that the influence was extensive, because first versions of Lisa GUIs even lacked icons. [...] However, the Apple work extended PARC's considerably, adding manipulatable icons, a fixed drop-down menu bar and drag&drop manipulation of objects in the file system (see Macintosh Finder) for example.
Part of this is the fact that the Apple engineers received a demonstration of the technologies, but no actual implementation details. Most of these concepts had to be re-imagined and implemented from scratch by Apple engineers. Also, a lot of Xerox PARC engineers later joined Apple and the Macintosh team, and continued the natural progression of their original--and some new--ideas.
As for the blatant theft, Apple bought this demonstration and access to the technologies with cash and stock, and later hired the engineers and paid them for their work.
You are correct about iPhone users and their investment. But I wouldn't call the number of iPhone users as being enough to be called an average smartphone user yet.
Irrelevant. I mentioned "any smartphone", for most offer nowadays the same type of lock-in with regards to apps, and proprietary interfaces. Notice that I am not including here "phone-ish" phones, just "smart" phones.
The majority of the phone use still appears to be email, twitter, sms, and browsing the web. Not to mention music from iTunes is not longer DRM and consequently not locked to the iPhone.
True for the regular-phone crowd. Again, we're talking about smart-phone users, which I admit is a much smaller market share. Smart-phone users, by contrast, use and download a large share of apps, free and paid-for. By the way, the point about DRM is irrelevant: you may not be locked-into the AAC file format, but most users won't bother transcoding, nor know what it is. Furthermore, I was talking about a user feeling comfortable and getting used to iTunes as a music library manager and syncing vehicle. Someone who knows and likes iTunes may not automatically switch to a different media player in order to sync with their new phone. I know geeks like to think this is common, but it is not.
Also, Rhapsody, Amazon, Walmart and others do provide similar services and other handset manufactures are still able to make it easier for the consumer to use these competitors and offset any advantage iTunes may have.
This may be true, but it still falls under my general point: those other services you mentioned will entrench their users within them, in exactly the same way that I suggest for iPhones.
In any case, it is again irrelevant. It is for the very same reasons that people get entrenched in their "Mac vs. PC" lifestyles: a financial, emotional, and personal investment in the platform, which makes it a large effort to switch. iTunes may not be the best tool, but I seriously doubt that any user who is accustomed to it will just decide to switch away from it, especially when it means forfeiting its deep integration with the Apple ecosystem. Likewise with Android Marketplace, or any other smart-phone integrated ecosystem.
The larger point I'm trying to make is regarding "smart-phones" in general, not just iPhones. I am saying that people will pick their smart-phone platforms and stick to them, in the same way they do for personal computers.
Right, because Microsoft stranglehold on the industry is unwavering, and still controls every single aspect of the personal computer experience. This is precisely why Microsoft has continued to control all standards, such as media delivery, online content, online search, and even smartphones and tablets. And all the while, little Apple keeps on getting closer to the brink of imminent death, without being able to make a single cent from their overpriced toys. And because of this, Apple--with its tiny market share--has absolutely no say in developing technologies and standards, and will never be able to set trends in the industry.
The phone market is not the same as the computer market. When you buy a computer you think about what OS it will run and if it will run your current programs. When the average consumer buys a phone they think about if the phone call quality is good, and how connected that phone is. Unlike traditional computers the activities performed on a phone is not usually tied to a specific OS.
You seem to misunderstand how people use their iPhones--and any smartphone--nowadays. And I'm talking about regular consumers, not geeks. If they have invested in their dozens of $1.99 apps, and purchased their music through iTunes Music Store, and gotten used to syncing the device with iTunes, they will certainly consider all of this when their two-year contract is up and they are contemplating buying a new phone. Should I throw away all my favorite, paid for apps and games? Does it even connect to my iTunes to sync my playlists? Or should I get the new iPhone model with even more shiny goodness?
In this regard, the choice of smartphone is very much like the choice of personal computers.
I read about iTunes complaints all the time in online fora and blogs, but I rarely see any specific grievances. I'm not saying it is not true, but I am very curious to know what specifically makes iTunes "suck so bad"? I ask because I use iTunes all the time as my primary music library manager and player, and find it easy to use and very powerful.
It's an honest question, I'm not trying to start a flamewar.
Maybe it wasn't the anti-social bit... perhaps you were just incompetent, or even an asshole?
I've worked on a few companies where I have eaten by myself, and people respected me and even regarded me with a sense of "mystery." Sure, there were those that thought that I was just being a snob for not hanging out with them, but these perceptions were defused eventually, when work needed to get done and I showed that I could work well with everyone.
There's a difference between not "hanging out" or avoiding "small talk," and being an asshole to others.
No. He's probably implying that, generally, electronics tend to break down *after* their warranty period expired. Such is modern life, Murphy's Law and all.
Once upon a time, I used to skydive for fun. I remember being asked constantly by my friends about the risk and the dangers of it, and I always answered in the same way: yes, it is very dangerous and has a high potential for death, but the risk of dying are statistically minimal, compared to other more common activities like, say, driving a car on the highway. It is, thus, safer than most people think.
The reasons for this, I imagine, is because the risk of death is so high and so obvious, that everybody involved in the activity takes every single facet of it very seriously, and every single potential point of failure is checked and double-checked, with various redundant mechanisms and procedures. In essence, precisely because it is so dangerous, extreme care is taken at every step, with the overall result of a reduced incidence of mortality. Conversely, driving a car is such a humdrum, common occurrence that a lot of people take it for granted, which invariably results in careless or even negligent behaviour, ultimately resulting in a rather high incidence of death or injury.
So it is with programming languages--and any other human activity. A language such as C, with facilities to manipulate memory directly and other such volatile features, induces experienced programmers to take greater care in making sure that all code paths are considered and that vulnerabilities are not introduced; while a more forgiving language will often result in a more relaxed attitude towards security.
Almost right. It is only every year that you want access to the distribution channel. If you developed your own app and installed it in your devices one time, there is no need to continue paying the yearly developer license fee to use the installed app; unless you want to continue distributing it or need to deploy a new version.
Slashdot Mirror
Oh HAI!
Muz be ur frist time heer!
Welcom to /. I hope u liek it.
KTHXBAI
I was just about to reply with the same comment. There were clear goals expounded throughout almost a decade of vaporware announcements of NT, Chicago, and then Longhorn. The problem was that they couldn't get most of it to work properly, while the landscape of real innovation kept changing around them. To "adapt", they kept adding more and more items to their extensive promised features list, and it all came crumbling down eventually when they realized that six years have gone by from their last major release and the world was not holding its breath anymore.
Then Vista was put together by salvaging some parts and adding some shiny chrome, just to fill up the gaping void in their product line. No wonder it seems inconsistent and lacking of a coherent vision or direction--it barely had any of either.
-dZ.
When we actually learned the facts.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_graphical_user_interface
Part of this is the fact that the Apple engineers received a demonstration of the technologies, but no actual implementation details. Most of these concepts had to be re-imagined and implemented from scratch by Apple engineers. Also, a lot of Xerox PARC engineers later joined Apple and the Macintosh team, and continued the natural progression of their original--and some new--ideas.
As for the blatant theft, Apple bought this demonstration and access to the technologies with cash and stock, and later hired the engineers and paid them for their work.
-dZ.
Irrelevant. I mentioned "any smartphone", for most offer nowadays the same type of lock-in with regards to apps, and proprietary interfaces. Notice that I am not including here "phone-ish" phones, just "smart" phones.
True for the regular-phone crowd. Again, we're talking about smart-phone users, which I admit is a much smaller market share. Smart-phone users, by contrast, use and download a large share of apps, free and paid-for. By the way, the point about DRM is irrelevant: you may not be locked-into the AAC file format, but most users won't bother transcoding, nor know what it is. Furthermore, I was talking about a user feeling comfortable and getting used to iTunes as a music library manager and syncing vehicle. Someone who knows and likes iTunes may not automatically switch to a different media player in order to sync with their new phone. I know geeks like to think this is common, but it is not.
This may be true, but it still falls under my general point: those other services you mentioned will entrench their users within them, in exactly the same way that I suggest for iPhones.
In any case, it is again irrelevant. It is for the very same reasons that people get entrenched in their "Mac vs. PC" lifestyles: a financial, emotional, and personal investment in the platform, which makes it a large effort to switch. iTunes may not be the best tool, but I seriously doubt that any user who is accustomed to it will just decide to switch away from it, especially when it means forfeiting its deep integration with the Apple ecosystem. Likewise with Android Marketplace, or any other smart-phone integrated ecosystem.
The larger point I'm trying to make is regarding "smart-phones" in general, not just iPhones. I am saying that people will pick their smart-phone platforms and stick to them, in the same way they do for personal computers.
-dZ.
Right, because Microsoft stranglehold on the industry is unwavering, and still controls every single aspect of the personal computer experience. This is precisely why Microsoft has continued to control all standards, such as media delivery, online content, online search, and even smartphones and tablets. And all the while, little Apple keeps on getting closer to the brink of imminent death, without being able to make a single cent from their overpriced toys. And because of this, Apple--with its tiny market share--has absolutely no say in developing technologies and standards, and will never be able to set trends in the industry.
Thanks, I'm convinced!
-dZ.
You seem to misunderstand how people use their iPhones--and any smartphone--nowadays. And I'm talking about regular consumers, not geeks. If they have invested in their dozens of $1.99 apps, and purchased their music through iTunes Music Store, and gotten used to syncing the device with iTunes, they will certainly consider all of this when their two-year contract is up and they are contemplating buying a new phone. Should I throw away all my favorite, paid for apps and games? Does it even connect to my iTunes to sync my playlists? Or should I get the new iPhone model with even more shiny goodness?
In this regard, the choice of smartphone is very much like the choice of personal computers.
-dZ.
Wow! Troll, uh?
I still think it is a reasonable question. The trolls are those who just scream "iTunes sucks!" without giving any indication as to why.
-dZ.
I read about iTunes complaints all the time in online fora and blogs, but I rarely see any specific grievances. I'm not saying it is not true, but I am very curious to know what specifically makes iTunes "suck so bad"? I ask because I use iTunes all the time as my primary music library manager and player, and find it easy to use and very powerful.
It's an honest question, I'm not trying to start a flamewar.
-dZ.
Maybe it wasn't the anti-social bit... perhaps you were just incompetent, or even an asshole?
I've worked on a few companies where I have eaten by myself, and people respected me and even regarded me with a sense of "mystery." Sure, there were those that thought that I was just being a snob for not hanging out with them, but these perceptions were defused eventually, when work needed to get done and I showed that I could work well with everyone.
There's a difference between not "hanging out" or avoiding "small talk," and being an asshole to others.
-dZ.
Gosh, I pity the poor soul who decides to take social advice from Slashdot. Heh.
-dZ.
"Be true to your own Elf" is some of the best marriage advice I give my friends.
-dZ.
>> SAVE MONEY!! Once you can afford to, buy a house. Marry someone sensible and like yourself.
I would imagine that you should like yourself first, and then marry someone sensible.
-dZ.
First and foremost, avoid slapping your boss on the ass, especially on your first day there. They seem to frown on this.
Oh, and if your boss is female, do not--ever--compliment her boobs, nice and firm as they may be.
Remember these points, and you'll probably do well.
-dZ.
No. He's probably implying that, generally, electronics tend to break down *after* their warranty period expired. Such is modern life, Murphy's Law and all.
-dZ.
Duh! I meant "dynamite".
-dZ.
Where are the dynamic sticks, the coiled wires, and the ticking timer?
-dZ.
Lewis Page, of The Register, said it better, and more eloquently:
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/01/08/mutallab_comment/
Check out the second page of the article, entitled "OMG - why aren't we all already dead?"
-dZ.
Once upon a time, I used to skydive for fun. I remember being asked constantly by my friends about the risk and the dangers of it, and I always answered in the same way: yes, it is very dangerous and has a high potential for death, but the risk of dying are statistically minimal, compared to other more common activities like, say, driving a car on the highway. It is, thus, safer than most people think.
The reasons for this, I imagine, is because the risk of death is so high and so obvious, that everybody involved in the activity takes every single facet of it very seriously, and every single potential point of failure is checked and double-checked, with various redundant mechanisms and procedures. In essence, precisely because it is so dangerous, extreme care is taken at every step, with the overall result of a reduced incidence of mortality. Conversely, driving a car is such a humdrum, common occurrence that a lot of people take it for granted, which invariably results in careless or even negligent behaviour, ultimately resulting in a rather high incidence of death or injury.
So it is with programming languages--and any other human activity. A language such as C, with facilities to manipulate memory directly and other such volatile features, induces experienced programmers to take greater care in making sure that all code paths are considered and that vulnerabilities are not introduced; while a more forgiving language will often result in a more relaxed attitude towards security.
-dZ.
Welcome to the seemingly exclusive club of those who got the point!
It's nice to have you here. Once our numbers grow to greater than 5, we'll probably chip in for a clubhouse.
Cheers!
-dZ.
I wish I could.
+1 Fsck yeah!
He probably meant "resources" as in time and money spent on maintaining the platform, not as in CPU and component specifications.
-dZ.
Almost right. It is only every year that you want access to the distribution channel. If you developed your own app and installed it in your devices one time, there is no need to continue paying the yearly developer license fee to use the installed app; unless you want to continue distributing it or need to deploy a new version.
-dZ.
Fuck you! Fuck you! FUUUUUUUUUUUUCK!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I'm going to be late for work now.
-dZ.
You do know that the market share for those most common touchscreen phones in existence is rather small, right?
-dZ.
>> On any other system you could use a layer that provides a standardized API.
This is true for other systems, and as you imply, not on the iPhone OS. If this is a feature you require, feel free to not develop for the latter.
>> One of the anti-competitive measures Apple is attempting is to prevent the development of such a layer for the smartphone market.
You mean, the smartphone market of devices running iPhone OS right? This is a very narrow definition of their monopoly.
-dZ.