It's a legit concern, but it's really a problem of their own making. Microsoft has made it's business out of the idea of splitting the system integrator from the OS developer, and now they're whining that they don't have complete control over the system integration. Well boo hoo. Some of the problem is that OEMs are trying to differentiate themselves with these "craplets" because of the fact that pretty much every other OEM is selling the same exact OS.
Sometimes, OEMs are installing this extra software because Microsoft has done such a crappy job of building in the necessary functionality. They focus on forcing everyone to use the same media player, but then neglect to include DVD playback. They include CD burning, but don't provide the functionality to create/burn ISO images. Therefore, in order to have a functional computer, you suddenly need extra crapware to fill in the gaps, where Microsoft didn't see a market that they could exploit. And of course the programs that fill in the gaps are crappy-- no decent company would invest a lot of money in developing solutions for these little gaps, given that Microsoft might very well decide they want that market, and it'd be trivial for Microsoft to drive them out.
Ultimately, Microsoft created this situation with their own business practices. *Maybe* I'll start feeling sorry for them when people stop believing that Firefox is "broken" because web developers still write crappy IE-only sites. Until then, screw'um.
Even if the candidate doesn't get the job because they weren't qualified, you want them to be excited about the company. It's good PR for *you* and that most certainly is a good reason to treat your candidates respectfully.
Maybe, but offering criticism could just as easily turn into an incident that makes your company look bad. Even if you fully intend to offer kind, thoughtful, constructive criticism, the recipient might not take it well. Then, not only will you be dealing with a PR problem, but possibly a legal problem as well.
I actually saw a speech a year ago by one of the higher-ups at Cingular, where he was saying that the cell phone market needed to become more open, implying that carriers should risk becoming "dumb pipes" in order to give consumers what they really wanted. He said Cingular didn't really want to become a "dumb pipe" for data, but Cingular was going to start taking the strategy of being more open to what consumers actually wanted.
Of course, that could have been a lot of hot air. However, the reason for the iPhone being a "Cingular exclusive" might well be that none of the other carriers were willing to deal with Apple. I suspect that Jobs isn't willing allow carriers much decision-making about the design of the iPhone, and Cingular's *slightly* more open mind-set made them the only game in town.
In any event, I believe Apple will eventually want to see some level of 3rd party development, just as Windows CE and PalmOS would like to see 3rd party development. Smart phones based on those operating systems allow installation of 3rd party software, and Cingular doesn't stop it. Why would they start with the iPhone. Again, this is just my suspicion, but I think Cingular will allow Apple a certain degree of latitude, happy enough with all the people who will switch carriers to use the iPhone (count me as one), and increased percentage of people paying for unlimited data plans (count me as one here, too).
I can't think that bugging money will track a person for very long. Either you only want to track that person for a very short amount of time, or you're really interested in tracking the money itself.
As a point in fact, we don't know that it's not an Intel chip (unless you know something I don't). Jobs highlighted that it ran OSX as part of his speech that it runs "desktop-level applications", not because of eye candy. They made a point of having "widgets" that seem to be pretty much identical to those "widgets" that run on the desktop. Even if it isn't an Intel chip, Xcode already allows you to compile for different archictures (universal binaries), so I'm not sure why it couldn't handle making apps for whatever is on the phone. You just wouldn't want to use universal binaries on the phone for the sake of file-size.
I'm not claiming that it will necessarily make sense to directly port applications from the desktop to the phone. However, I predict there will be a kit within Xcode for making iPhone applications. I think that, in the short term, Apple might treat 3rd party apps as unsupported hacks, while they try to congeal a long-term vision for what the device will become. However, in the long term, I'd bet that it will become a new form-factor for general computing, and it will be about as open as the Macintosh platform.
Yes, you had people eager to buy a product before they knew anything about it other than it was a cell phone made by Apple. But Apple has a knack for this sort of marketing. And when I say "marketing", I don't mean "advertising". I mean everything that goes into marketing, including product creation.
Apple is just doing such a good job right now at making products that fall in line with what people are looking for. It is inspiring fierce brand loyalty and buzz. Sony is not doing a great at making products that satisfy what people want, and so people aren't clamoring for a chance to see every new Sony product.
Right. For *years*, it's been public knowledge (from multiple semi-reliable sources) that Apple was eyeballing the cell phone market, and then for the past few years that they were working on a phone. It wasn't certain whether the phone would make it to market, let alone when, but we knew they were working on something. For the past few months, there have been frequent reliable and undisputed rumors that it was coming out soon, and in the last couple months, everyone got pretty sure it would be announced in January.
It wasn't secret to anyone who was paying attention. The mainstream media just wasn't paying attention.
Do you really know how big it is? It's not that big. From the data people have been posting, it seems that the iPhone is smaller than a Motorola Q, and just a little bigger than a SLVR. For something with the iPhone's capabilities, I'd say that it's satisfactorily small.
Can users install their own software? Rumor is that you cannot - you have to buy it from Apple or Cingular.
There hasn't been any real information on this, but I've heard people complaining that it will be sold "as is", and that you won't be able to get new software on it at all. While nothing has really been said about it, it seems ridiculous to me. Jobs made a big deal of the idea that it's running OSX with support for Cocoa and Core Animation and such. He made a point of saying that the screen would allow people to think of new, clever interfaces and be able to add things that are unforeseen at the time the device is sold. These statements don't make a lot of sense unless they intend to encourage third-party development.
My guess is that the version of Xcode distributed with Leopard will have support for making iPhone applications and widgets. I suppose it's possible that Apple and Cingular would try to control installation, but it doesn't seem realistic. First, it would discourage 3rd party development. Second, these things tend to get hacked, and Apple knows it. The only reason to do it would be if Cingular insisted, but Cingular might just be happy to be gaining so many data-plan subscribers.
Yeah, really. Whenever people have talked about having computers to run you a bath or turn off the porch light, I always think, "Really, is that anywhere near worth it?"
Think of the R&D costs, the cost in materials, the price of installation, and then maintenance. You *know* these things are going to break. They'll malfunction sometimes. The light will turn itself on at inopportune moments, and refuse to turn on when you really need it. And for all that, what have you gained? You've saved yourself the fraction of a second of flipping a light switch? You've saved yourself the thoughtfulness of paying attention to when you want to turn the lights out?
And why should we save ourselves from that level of thoughtfulness? Let's suppose you could completely save yourself from worrying that the porch light might be on. You could just empty that from your head. Do we really want to be raising people to be so empty-headed? Do we want to turn ourselves into a species that can't figure out to turn the porch light off if computers aren't doing it for us?
The whole thing just makes no sense. I think it fits into that whole category of technology, that "science fiction from the '40s" stuff, that seems cool but makes very little sense when you really consider it.
Re:Interoperability and market dominance
on
The Home Server Cometh
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
And I think that's why I don't want to head down the Microsoft path, even if they do make a good product (like the 360): Microsoft seems intent in pushing their whole portolio as a single unit. The XBox and Windows Mobile are means to lock you into using Windows on the desktop as much as they're products themselves.
I want to be able to buy different components from different vendors. I don't want to have to buy a new computer just because I want to buy a new set-top box that only works with Windows. Give me the ability to stream between devices using open formats and open protocols, so that I can buy an Xbox 360, a Mac laptop, and a Linux file server, and a Palm smartphone (or any other combo I want). THEN I'll think about investing in some of these pieces of equipment.
Of course, in reality, I say screw the Palm smartphone. I was sick and tired of those things already, and since Apple entered the market, they have a lot of catching up to do.
Personally, I would really like to have *both* cell phone and VOIP functionality. There are plenty of times when I can get a cell phone signal when WiFi is no where to be found. There are also plenty of places where I have WiFi access but the cell phone coverage sucks. Ideally, I think, we'd all have one phone number that could find us on whatever network we had available. The problem is that cell phone carriers don't want to be dumb data pipes where you can choose to use VOIP.
Cingular was probably the only carrier willing to allow this phone, and Cingular offers an unlimited data plan for smart phones for an additional $20 a month. Not a terrible price. Dropping the phone functionality probably wouldn't save much in terms of price, since the actual cell-phone components are pretty cheap these days. Plus, if they're saying it's $500 with a two year contract, it probably means it would cost $700-$800 without a contract.
So in the end, dropping the cell phone components might save you, say, $15. But it means you might pay a couple hundred extra to get it. No, it really isn't the cell-phone components that are making this expensive. It has a very advanced touch screen and display, motion sensors, WiFi and Bluetooth, 4-8GB of flash, a 2MP camera, audio processors, and enough processing power to run all these components on a build of OSX. All of that squeezed into something slightly bigger than a Motorola SLVR. This thing is going to be expensive even if you dropped the cell-phone functionality.
Regarding 2, I'd have to see the touch-screen keyboard in action. If you watch their demos, the fact that it's a multi-touch screen means you can still press multiple keys on the virtual keyboard at the same time, so it's really just an issue of having no tactile feedback. It might not be so bad.
Regarding 3, I would think OSX. First, it shouldn't be too hard to strip Darwin itself down to optimize it for this device. So then it's just an issue of deciding which pieces of the Aqua interface should be brought over. I would very much doubt that it's a full 4GB install of the desktop version of OSX, but they're saying it runs OSX, which I think implies that they're running a different version that's been optimized for this device.
As far as what chipset is powering it, I've been wondering that myself. There was a lot of talk when Apple started using Intel chips, that part of the reason might be that Intel was promising better chips for next generation iPods. Who knows? We'll probably need to wait until someone dissects the iPhone to find out..
Well, they didn't claim that it was a full install of the desktop version of OSX. It could very well use the same kernel and many of the same components, be the same operating system, but just be stripped down for this particular device. I really hope so. I'm hoping that it will be possible to get access to things like a bash prompt and ssh. Hopefully, Apple will provide good development kits so that, even if they don't include some of that functionality out of the box, someone else can.
Yes, but FYI there's been a long-standing legal dispute between the two companies, which is part of the reason Apple was officially "Apple Computer" in the first place. The name change being made during a presentation which included Beatles music seems to be an indication that the matter is finally settled.
You're talking about the name "iPhone", but I guess they also got the name "Apple" from the Beatles' record label (after a couple decades of legal wrangling). It was announced that Apple was going to use the name "Apple" instead of "Apple Computers".
The only thing which will lead to a decrease in price is an increase in supply (competitors realize there is a market) or a decrease in demand.
Yes, but in this case, "increased supply" is not dependent on some natural limit like it is in many markets. Whether the "supply" of bandwidth increases is completely dependent on whether the carriers invest money in increasing it by improving their networks. They will only put the money into increasing bandwidth to the extent they feel that they'll get a return on their investment, and therefore the "increase" in "supply" will materialize when there is sufficient demand to justify the huge investment of overhauling the networks.
It simply wouldn't be profitable for the networks to pour money into creating extremely robust wireless networks before they're sure that investment will, over some time period, become profitable. This means that you either need a small number of people to pay a lot, or a lot of people to pay a little. Right now, the demand isn't as widespread as Slashdot would have you believe. Even among the many people who would like to get e-mail on their phones, a relatively small percentage are actually willing to put up with the crappy quality of current smart-phones.
Maybe they'd charge less if they can afford to do so, and they find people aren't be willing to pay the high prices. That's usually when prices drop.
Seriously, though, to some degree bandwidth is expensive right now because there are so few people who are willing to pay for it. Cingular has to shell out tons of money for infrastructure on their network when only a relatively small fraction of their customers would buy a data plan even if it were an extra $10 a month. However, if you suddenly flood the market with a highly desirable internet-enabled smart phone, and data services become more popular, the price of maintaining the network per-customer might actually go down as bandwidth usage goes up.
Well, I'm sorry about that (not sure why it's doing that). To find them, try going to http://linux.dell.com./ Look along the side for links to "n Series" laptops and desktops.
You actually can configure a desktop or notebook without Windows directly from their web site. The selection is more limited, and it's harder to find, but Dell will sell you a system with FreeDOS instead of Windows.
The originals were all done in the pulp-action adventure style...[snip]...On the other hand, twenty-some odd years later... hey, an Indiana Jones that took place in the sixties might have real potential.
Aw, crap. pulp-action from the sixties? It suddenly occurred to me that this new Indiana Jones might look a lot like Austin Powers.
Slashdot Mirror
Sometimes, OEMs are installing this extra software because Microsoft has done such a crappy job of building in the necessary functionality. They focus on forcing everyone to use the same media player, but then neglect to include DVD playback. They include CD burning, but don't provide the functionality to create/burn ISO images. Therefore, in order to have a functional computer, you suddenly need extra crapware to fill in the gaps, where Microsoft didn't see a market that they could exploit. And of course the programs that fill in the gaps are crappy-- no decent company would invest a lot of money in developing solutions for these little gaps, given that Microsoft might very well decide they want that market, and it'd be trivial for Microsoft to drive them out.
Ultimately, Microsoft created this situation with their own business practices. *Maybe* I'll start feeling sorry for them when people stop believing that Firefox is "broken" because web developers still write crappy IE-only sites. Until then, screw'um.
Even if the candidate doesn't get the job because they weren't qualified, you want them to be excited about the company. It's good PR for *you* and that most certainly is a good reason to treat your candidates respectfully.
Maybe, but offering criticism could just as easily turn into an incident that makes your company look bad. Even if you fully intend to offer kind, thoughtful, constructive criticism, the recipient might not take it well. Then, not only will you be dealing with a PR problem, but possibly a legal problem as well.
I actually saw a speech a year ago by one of the higher-ups at Cingular, where he was saying that the cell phone market needed to become more open, implying that carriers should risk becoming "dumb pipes" in order to give consumers what they really wanted. He said Cingular didn't really want to become a "dumb pipe" for data, but Cingular was going to start taking the strategy of being more open to what consumers actually wanted.
Of course, that could have been a lot of hot air. However, the reason for the iPhone being a "Cingular exclusive" might well be that none of the other carriers were willing to deal with Apple. I suspect that Jobs isn't willing allow carriers much decision-making about the design of the iPhone, and Cingular's *slightly* more open mind-set made them the only game in town.
In any event, I believe Apple will eventually want to see some level of 3rd party development, just as Windows CE and PalmOS would like to see 3rd party development. Smart phones based on those operating systems allow installation of 3rd party software, and Cingular doesn't stop it. Why would they start with the iPhone. Again, this is just my suspicion, but I think Cingular will allow Apple a certain degree of latitude, happy enough with all the people who will switch carriers to use the iPhone (count me as one), and increased percentage of people paying for unlimited data plans (count me as one here, too).
I can't think that bugging money will track a person for very long. Either you only want to track that person for a very short amount of time, or you're really interested in tracking the money itself.
As a point in fact, we don't know that it's not an Intel chip (unless you know something I don't). Jobs highlighted that it ran OSX as part of his speech that it runs "desktop-level applications", not because of eye candy. They made a point of having "widgets" that seem to be pretty much identical to those "widgets" that run on the desktop. Even if it isn't an Intel chip, Xcode already allows you to compile for different archictures (universal binaries), so I'm not sure why it couldn't handle making apps for whatever is on the phone. You just wouldn't want to use universal binaries on the phone for the sake of file-size.
I'm not claiming that it will necessarily make sense to directly port applications from the desktop to the phone. However, I predict there will be a kit within Xcode for making iPhone applications. I think that, in the short term, Apple might treat 3rd party apps as unsupported hacks, while they try to congeal a long-term vision for what the device will become. However, in the long term, I'd bet that it will become a new form-factor for general computing, and it will be about as open as the Macintosh platform.
I also think we should have a new mod category "-1, Must be new here"
Yes, you had people eager to buy a product before they knew anything about it other than it was a cell phone made by Apple. But Apple has a knack for this sort of marketing. And when I say "marketing", I don't mean "advertising". I mean everything that goes into marketing, including product creation.
Apple is just doing such a good job right now at making products that fall in line with what people are looking for. It is inspiring fierce brand loyalty and buzz. Sony is not doing a great at making products that satisfy what people want, and so people aren't clamoring for a chance to see every new Sony product.
Right. For *years*, it's been public knowledge (from multiple semi-reliable sources) that Apple was eyeballing the cell phone market, and then for the past few years that they were working on a phone. It wasn't certain whether the phone would make it to market, let alone when, but we knew they were working on something. For the past few months, there have been frequent reliable and undisputed rumors that it was coming out soon, and in the last couple months, everyone got pretty sure it would be announced in January.
It wasn't secret to anyone who was paying attention. The mainstream media just wasn't paying attention.
Do you really know how big it is? It's not that big. From the data people have been posting, it seems that the iPhone is smaller than a Motorola Q, and just a little bigger than a SLVR. For something with the iPhone's capabilities, I'd say that it's satisfactorily small.
Can users install their own software? Rumor is that you cannot - you have to buy it from Apple or Cingular.
There hasn't been any real information on this, but I've heard people complaining that it will be sold "as is", and that you won't be able to get new software on it at all. While nothing has really been said about it, it seems ridiculous to me. Jobs made a big deal of the idea that it's running OSX with support for Cocoa and Core Animation and such. He made a point of saying that the screen would allow people to think of new, clever interfaces and be able to add things that are unforeseen at the time the device is sold. These statements don't make a lot of sense unless they intend to encourage third-party development.
My guess is that the version of Xcode distributed with Leopard will have support for making iPhone applications and widgets. I suppose it's possible that Apple and Cingular would try to control installation, but it doesn't seem realistic. First, it would discourage 3rd party development. Second, these things tend to get hacked, and Apple knows it. The only reason to do it would be if Cingular insisted, but Cingular might just be happy to be gaining so many data-plan subscribers.
Yeah, really. Whenever people have talked about having computers to run you a bath or turn off the porch light, I always think, "Really, is that anywhere near worth it?"
Think of the R&D costs, the cost in materials, the price of installation, and then maintenance. You *know* these things are going to break. They'll malfunction sometimes. The light will turn itself on at inopportune moments, and refuse to turn on when you really need it. And for all that, what have you gained? You've saved yourself the fraction of a second of flipping a light switch? You've saved yourself the thoughtfulness of paying attention to when you want to turn the lights out?
And why should we save ourselves from that level of thoughtfulness? Let's suppose you could completely save yourself from worrying that the porch light might be on. You could just empty that from your head. Do we really want to be raising people to be so empty-headed? Do we want to turn ourselves into a species that can't figure out to turn the porch light off if computers aren't doing it for us?
The whole thing just makes no sense. I think it fits into that whole category of technology, that "science fiction from the '40s" stuff, that seems cool but makes very little sense when you really consider it.
I want to be able to buy different components from different vendors. I don't want to have to buy a new computer just because I want to buy a new set-top box that only works with Windows. Give me the ability to stream between devices using open formats and open protocols, so that I can buy an Xbox 360, a Mac laptop, and a Linux file server, and a Palm smartphone (or any other combo I want). THEN I'll think about investing in some of these pieces of equipment.
Of course, in reality, I say screw the Palm smartphone. I was sick and tired of those things already, and since Apple entered the market, they have a lot of catching up to do.
Personally, I would really like to have *both* cell phone and VOIP functionality. There are plenty of times when I can get a cell phone signal when WiFi is no where to be found. There are also plenty of places where I have WiFi access but the cell phone coverage sucks. Ideally, I think, we'd all have one phone number that could find us on whatever network we had available. The problem is that cell phone carriers don't want to be dumb data pipes where you can choose to use VOIP.
Cingular was probably the only carrier willing to allow this phone, and Cingular offers an unlimited data plan for smart phones for an additional $20 a month. Not a terrible price. Dropping the phone functionality probably wouldn't save much in terms of price, since the actual cell-phone components are pretty cheap these days. Plus, if they're saying it's $500 with a two year contract, it probably means it would cost $700-$800 without a contract.
So in the end, dropping the cell phone components might save you, say, $15. But it means you might pay a couple hundred extra to get it. No, it really isn't the cell-phone components that are making this expensive. It has a very advanced touch screen and display, motion sensors, WiFi and Bluetooth, 4-8GB of flash, a 2MP camera, audio processors, and enough processing power to run all these components on a build of OSX. All of that squeezed into something slightly bigger than a Motorola SLVR. This thing is going to be expensive even if you dropped the cell-phone functionality.
Regarding 2, I'd have to see the touch-screen keyboard in action. If you watch their demos, the fact that it's a multi-touch screen means you can still press multiple keys on the virtual keyboard at the same time, so it's really just an issue of having no tactile feedback. It might not be so bad.
Regarding 3, I would think OSX. First, it shouldn't be too hard to strip Darwin itself down to optimize it for this device. So then it's just an issue of deciding which pieces of the Aqua interface should be brought over. I would very much doubt that it's a full 4GB install of the desktop version of OSX, but they're saying it runs OSX, which I think implies that they're running a different version that's been optimized for this device.
As far as what chipset is powering it, I've been wondering that myself. There was a lot of talk when Apple started using Intel chips, that part of the reason might be that Intel was promising better chips for next generation iPods. Who knows? We'll probably need to wait until someone dissects the iPhone to find out..
Well, they didn't claim that it was a full install of the desktop version of OSX. It could very well use the same kernel and many of the same components, be the same operating system, but just be stripped down for this particular device. I really hope so. I'm hoping that it will be possible to get access to things like a bash prompt and ssh. Hopefully, Apple will provide good development kits so that, even if they don't include some of that functionality out of the box, someone else can.
Yes, but FYI there's been a long-standing legal dispute between the two companies, which is part of the reason Apple was officially "Apple Computer" in the first place. The name change being made during a presentation which included Beatles music seems to be an indication that the matter is finally settled.
You're talking about the name "iPhone", but I guess they also got the name "Apple" from the Beatles' record label (after a couple decades of legal wrangling). It was announced that Apple was going to use the name "Apple" instead of "Apple Computers".
Yes, but in this case, "increased supply" is not dependent on some natural limit like it is in many markets. Whether the "supply" of bandwidth increases is completely dependent on whether the carriers invest money in increasing it by improving their networks. They will only put the money into increasing bandwidth to the extent they feel that they'll get a return on their investment, and therefore the "increase" in "supply" will materialize when there is sufficient demand to justify the huge investment of overhauling the networks.
It simply wouldn't be profitable for the networks to pour money into creating extremely robust wireless networks before they're sure that investment will, over some time period, become profitable. This means that you either need a small number of people to pay a lot, or a lot of people to pay a little. Right now, the demand isn't as widespread as Slashdot would have you believe. Even among the many people who would like to get e-mail on their phones, a relatively small percentage are actually willing to put up with the crappy quality of current smart-phones.
Maybe they'd charge less if they can afford to do so, and they find people aren't be willing to pay the high prices. That's usually when prices drop.
Seriously, though, to some degree bandwidth is expensive right now because there are so few people who are willing to pay for it. Cingular has to shell out tons of money for infrastructure on their network when only a relatively small fraction of their customers would buy a data plan even if it were an extra $10 a month. However, if you suddenly flood the market with a highly desirable internet-enabled smart phone, and data services become more popular, the price of maintaining the network per-customer might actually go down as bandwidth usage goes up.
No, those prices are *with* a 2 year contract. It was stated in the announcement.
I have no access to fix anything with Dell (no connection to them, other than being a fairly satisfied customer). I'm connecting from the internet.
Well, I'm sorry about that (not sure why it's doing that). To find them, try going to http://linux.dell.com./ Look along the side for links to "n Series" laptops and desktops.
You actually can configure a desktop or notebook without Windows directly from their web site. The selection is more limited, and it's harder to find, but Dell will sell you a system with FreeDOS instead of Windows.
Aw, crap. pulp-action from the sixties? It suddenly occurred to me that this new Indiana Jones might look a lot like Austin Powers.