Not quite. Windows users are free to install any application from any vendor they like, irrespective of Microsoft's wishes. By contrast, iPhone owners can only download applications available in the App Store.
Microsoft could decide to change this, and force every one to use their own Microsoft Software Store to purchase applications approved by Microsoft. I don't think they would because it would alienate most of their partners and clients. But the fact is that the can.
The difference here is that when Steve Jobs does it, people still find the devices compelling enough to continue to buy from Apple. As they say, Microsoft's mileage may vary.
>> Why are the privacy nutcases always so ready to imagine the most terrible wrongs about potential abuse of power by the government, but think it is super okay to give all control to a corporation?
Because an abusive or tyrannical government will force you to abide by its rules; and often times will require you to take action against your will. On the other hand a corporation offering consumer electronic devices hardly has such power. They can merely control the devices you buy from them.
Let's face it, owning an iPhone, iPod, or an iPad is a luxury, not a requirement; they are hardly items of first necessity. Have some perspective.
If the goverment starts mandating everyone to purchase and use an iPad for normal civic activity, then the lock-in becomes a threat--but that wouldn't be because of Apple per se.
>> It could do with a rethink of the "player dies if their friend pulls the screen too far" part
They did re-think it: Just press the "A" button and "bubble up" to your companion whenever he or she lands on a safe spot. It took my wife and I a few games before we realized that pattern (we tend to skip the instruction manuals): She would die when left behind, and I would inadvertedly press the "A" button while smashing the D-pad and turn into a bubble at the wrong moments. Fun!
Well, the problem back in the 1990s, when 3-D games started getting popular, was a matter of perception: 3-D games were the new-fangled rage, and anybody who made a plain-old 2-D scroller was thought of as being behind the times and totally uncool. The tacit understanding was that 3-D games where a priori more sophisticated and innovative than any 2-D side-scroller.
I remember this because when "Oddworld: Abe's Oddyssey" came out, some gaming magazines gave it a bad review just because it was a 2-D side-scroller and not another eye-popping 3-D game, as the rest of the industry was expected to release. And those who gave it a good review went out of their way to convince people that "even though" it was a 2-D side-scroller, it was still very innovative and a lot of fun to play.
That Oddworld game blew my mind and it was indeed better and more innovative than most of the 3-D crap of the era.
I think he meant classic-style Mario games: side-scrolling 2-D like the old Super Mario Bros. NES game.
Super Mario Sunshine, and Super Mario Galaxy are fantastic games in their own right, but they are 3-D "adventure" games, in the style of Ratchet and Clank, Spyro, etc.
At any time, whoever is lagging behind, can hit the "A" button which encloses them in a bubble. When bubbled, they can safely gravitate towards the other player when he reaches a safe spot.
That's how my wife and I play it, and it is loads of fun!
No, the Mac OS X based on NeXTStep's technology, which is in itself based on the CMU Mach micro-kernel with a sprinkle of Berkley UNIX (BSD). It does contain parts of FreeBSD and NetBSD in its userland sub-systems, but to say that it is based on it is an exaggeration. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mac_OS_X#History
But more to the point, the genius of Mac OS X is not in its discreet parts, but in the final product, which admittedly is a combination of various technologies, some of them FOSS. The high quality of these combinations, and the attention to detail in the interaction of each part and the user experience is what the article alludes to when it says that FOSS has failed to produce something of comparable quality.
Slashdot Mirror
That's amazing! That's the same combination in my luggage!
-dZ.
No, you're thinking of cheese: pouring cheese on chips is standard procedure. Acid doesn't taste as good.
I'm not sure how cheese tastes on video, though.
-dZ.
Why not? Try Python.
import acid
-dZ.
I would imagine that protecting the chip's outter casing from acid is an out-of-scope problem for encryption, too.
-dZ.
Security: http://xkcd.com/538/
-dZ.
>> Seriously, Apple is worse than Microsoft in locking down things. The whole iPad is completely locked.
Sounds to me like Apple is actually a lot better at locking down things, in that the locking is wholesale.
-dZ.
It's Linus. He's the one with the safety blanket. I always thought Snoopy was a beagle, but it turns out it was a penguin.
-dZ.
whoosh!
Here's a hint: Read the parent's subject line again, this time without the spell-checker.
-dZ.
You missed your assessment by ~5%.
-dZ.
Irrelevent [ir'-rel-e-vent] - Adjective:
The wasteful use or application of a cooling device when not strictly necessary.
USAGE: "Larry left the air conditioning unit on all throughout winter; its power consumption was irrelevent."
ORIGIN: Teh Intarwebz.
>> That is one of the primary reasons I don't use Apple products.
That is also the primary reason why a lot of people use Apple products. Such is choice.
-dZ.
Sure, they could advertise as such. But is the fact that they declined to do so a reason to demonise them?
-dZ.
>> Instead I am forced to use inferior web versions of those two apps.
Or use the phone that comes with the iPhone, which work perfectly for the general user.
-dZ.
>> This isn't that. This is advertising that you won a Fields Metal at a Nobel Consortium (with an enormous pinch of salt).
Not quite. It is advertising that a different version of your application, compiled for different platform won an award.
How is that relevant to the description blurb on another platform?
-dZ.
Not quite. Windows users are free to install any application from any vendor they like, irrespective of Microsoft's wishes. By contrast, iPhone owners can only download applications available in the App Store.
Microsoft could decide to change this, and force every one to use their own Microsoft Software Store to purchase applications approved by Microsoft. I don't think they would because it would alienate most of their partners and clients. But the fact is that the can.
The difference here is that when Steve Jobs does it, people still find the devices compelling enough to continue to buy from Apple. As they say, Microsoft's mileage may vary.
-dZ.
>> Why are the privacy nutcases always so ready to imagine the most terrible wrongs about potential abuse of power by the government, but think it is super okay to give all control to a corporation?
Because an abusive or tyrannical government will force you to abide by its rules; and often times will require you to take action against your will. On the other hand a corporation offering consumer electronic devices hardly has such power. They can merely control the devices you buy from them.
Let's face it, owning an iPhone, iPod, or an iPad is a luxury, not a requirement; they are hardly items of first necessity. Have some perspective.
If the goverment starts mandating everyone to purchase and use an iPad for normal civic activity, then the lock-in becomes a threat--but that wouldn't be because of Apple per se.
-dZ.
>> It could do with a rethink of the "player dies if their friend pulls the screen too far" part
They did re-think it: Just press the "A" button and "bubble up" to your companion whenever he or she lands on a safe spot. It took my wife and I a few games before we realized that pattern (we tend to skip the instruction manuals): She would die when left behind, and I would inadvertedly press the "A" button while smashing the D-pad and turn into a bubble at the wrong moments. Fun!
-dZ.
Well, the problem back in the 1990s, when 3-D games started getting popular, was a matter of perception: 3-D games were the new-fangled rage, and anybody who made a plain-old 2-D scroller was thought of as being behind the times and totally uncool. The tacit understanding was that 3-D games where a priori more sophisticated and innovative than any 2-D side-scroller.
I remember this because when "Oddworld: Abe's Oddyssey" came out, some gaming magazines gave it a bad review just because it was a 2-D side-scroller and not another eye-popping 3-D game, as the rest of the industry was expected to release. And those who gave it a good review went out of their way to convince people that "even though" it was a 2-D side-scroller, it was still very innovative and a lot of fun to play.
That Oddworld game blew my mind and it was indeed better and more innovative than most of the 3-D crap of the era.
-dZ.
I think he meant classic-style Mario games: side-scrolling 2-D like the old Super Mario Bros. NES game.
Super Mario Sunshine, and Super Mario Galaxy are fantastic games in their own right, but they are 3-D "adventure" games, in the style of Ratchet and Clank, Spyro, etc.
-dZ.
At any time, whoever is lagging behind, can hit the "A" button which encloses them in a bubble. When bubbled, they can safely gravitate towards the other player when he reaches a safe spot.
That's how my wife and I play it, and it is loads of fun!
-dZ.
I thought that whoever came up with the tag "diamondsinuranus" was rather clever too.
-dZ.
No, the Mac OS X based on NeXTStep's technology, which is in itself based on the CMU Mach micro-kernel with a sprinkle of Berkley UNIX (BSD). It does contain parts of FreeBSD and NetBSD in its userland sub-systems, but to say that it is based on it is an exaggeration.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mac_OS_X#History
But more to the point, the genius of Mac OS X is not in its discreet parts, but in the final product, which admittedly is a combination of various technologies, some of them FOSS. The high quality of these combinations, and the attention to detail in the interaction of each part and the user experience is what the article alludes to when it says that FOSS has failed to produce something of comparable quality.
-dZ.
But my Dolce and Gabbana "Punk" t-shirt has a skull on it!
-dZ.
Mod parent up:
+1 Abso-fucking-lutely right on the money.
-dZ.
It is when you learn English by trolling the Intarwebs.
-dZ.