I am leaving this story in my mental "To be continued" state. UMG is definitely evil. Google is apparently is making deals with them. There is also more to this story than what we initially saw. The question concerning Google is whether they willingly chose to join in on UMGs evil, or if they were faced with choosing the lesser of two evils.
Citation please. I believe you are misunderstanding some numbers that get thrown around that are specifically trimmed to try and make Apple look good. Thinking that people buy Windows machines because they are looking for cheap computers is just silly, and shows a real disconnect from reality.
So, your saying that the fragmentation problem isn't really a problem? Or are you saying that it isn't a problem if it is Apple? Personally, I am getting tired of trying to download apps and being told that they don't work with my phone.
There is nothing BS about it. YOU made presented the premise of the single instance being compared to the cost of a life IF something happened. My point is that your question was loaded and pointless. It is the equivalent of a soda company saying "Tastes Better". You want people answer if a single text message is worth killing someone for. I would say no. You refuse to answer the question of whether one day at school is worth killing someone for. Why? Because, just like a single text message, the answer is an obvious no. That doesn't fit with your rationalization, so you start trying to compare a bus ride to 13 years of school. That is intellectually dishonest.
You also play the intellectually dishonest game of claiming that anyone commits to the full-time job of safety when they are driving. As well as the intellectually dishonest claim that operating a phone while driving is an extremely high risk activity under most circumstances.
I will agree that trying to type while driving is dangerous, but I wouldn't take your dishonest approach in trying to argue it because it is unnecessary. By making a dishonest argument, you show that your issue isn't one of safety, but one see the device as evil.
There are other versions of add on keyboards for the iPhone. That was just the first that popped up on Google. Physical keyboards on any phone are going to bulky compared to non-keyboard models. I got a T-Mobile G2 because I wanted the keyboard. Every time I pick up the Nexus One my son inherited from me, it strikes me how much more bulk there is to the G2. It isn't a big issue, as we are only talking about ounces, and they both can fit in my pocket (At the same time). The screen real-estate issue is one that can't be argued. If that is important to you, a physical keyboard is a must. I don't know if the iPhone keyboard accessories solve the screen real-estate problem, or if the on-screen keyboard pops up no matter what. Either way, I wish that Android makers would take the approach of offering keyboards as accessories to the devices as opposed to building them in.
I suspect that the lock in has a lot to do with poor Mac sales. OSX systems market share is only make a little more than Linux, and that is if you only count Linux on the desktop. Letting people develop for iOS on systems other than OSX would likely cut into the tiny slice of market share that OSX has.
It would be interesting to see what percentage of OSX users were also iOS developers. Does anyone have a link on this?
Or from the other side, why would you want to buy games that can't be patched quickly when you run into a bug? The fact that it takes a week to patch a bug doesn't mean that there are none. It just means that you already have the expectation of waiting a week to get it after the bug has been identified and fixed.
And that is what MacOS users thought in 1992 also. It turned out they were wrong. Maybe things will work out as will with iOS as they did with MacOS, and after a major revamp in 15 years, another 5 years of marketing, a bailout from MS and tie in to a new product, iOS will still be able to maintain single digit market share.
I run into apps that don't work on iPods because they were written for iPhones. I run into apps that won't install on the 3GS because they require a 4. The so called "fragmentation" issue is a bigger long term problem for Apple than it is for Android. Android was built to handle the so called "fragmentation", and handles it far more gracefully than iOS which was not built for it, but with each passing year in digging deeper and deeper into it. Remember the Amiga? WAY ahead of everything else on the market. Yes, even Mac. What happened? Amongst other things, it was too tied to the hardware. It was great when it was new, but as hardware advanced, old software didn't work on new machines, and new software didn't work on old machines. Upgrades became painful. Apple has to be careful not to fall into that trap, and so far it isn't looking like they are preparing for it.
We have also seen what has happened to Apple on the desktop. Sure it is more than Linux, but it is closer to Linux than to Windows which has to deal with levels of hardware "fragmentation" the likes of which, Android will probably never see.
Crowing about how much "people" love a product that gets heavily advertised but only has a 5% market lead over a product that gets no advertising is rediculous. Think about how much effort and money goes into convincing people that OSX is good. Comparing OSX to Linux is like to guys in sitting alone in the basement arguing about who is cooler while everyone else is upstairs at the party.
Once I used Swype, I stopped caring about mobile keyboards. The one-size-take-it-or-leave-it ecosystem of iPhone allows them to do keyboards the way they should be done. As an add on accessory.
By the way, most studies show that hands free cellphone are not significantly less distracting that handheld ones.
There reason for this is that cell phones don't significantly increase the danger of accidents, and the collection methods are horribly and obviously flawed. If they used the same methods of data collection to see if wearing underwear caused accidents, we would need to start taking about banning those as well.
We can ban and penalize some easy to prove activities like texting and cellphone use. We can attempt to penalize being sleepy, eating, applying makeup, reading a newspaper, smoking, if we are willing to live in a police state.
So, how is banning reading a newspaper and applying makeup a police state, but banning cellphones isn't?
The exact same could be said about a cell phone. The primary purpose of manual transmissions in modern cars are so that the owners can use the car as a giant toy, all the while patting themselves on the back for being a "good" driver.
I ask the same question concerning sending your child to school in a school bus. If that school bus crashes and your child dies, how much was that day of school worth? Would you kill someone, and maybe your own child for a single day in school?
No, there are not 20% driving distracted. There are 100% driving distracted. It's just that with 80%, the are not distracted by things that offend certain people. The statistics on distracted driving are total BS. They are not even good lies. We all know how the statistics on cell phone related accidents are tallied. If you get in an accident, and you were using a cell phone, they mark it as a cell phone related accident. They don't ask you if you are wearing underwear and mark it as an underwear related accident. Why? Because there are groups of people that find cell phones offensive. The work of the devil. (by whatever name they want to call it.)
Sorry to insult your mother, but if it really took her too years to learn how to turn her computer on, she is retarded. My suspicion is that you are just talking smack about your mother in an attempt to make a point.
What is fallacious reasoning is attacking some random distraction that is no worse than dozens of other common distractions, and pretending that it holds some special significance because it is either hip, offends your Neo-Luddite sensibilities, has no utility to you or you are just repeating what people in the other two categories have told you.
Basically, what you and others are saying is "This isn't about safety. This is about cell phones. So stay on topic."
Slashdot Mirror
I am leaving this story in my mental "To be continued" state. UMG is definitely evil. Google is apparently is making deals with them. There is also more to this story than what we initially saw. The question concerning Google is whether they willingly chose to join in on UMGs evil, or if they were faced with choosing the lesser of two evils.
Citation please. I believe you are misunderstanding some numbers that get thrown around that are specifically trimmed to try and make Apple look good. Thinking that people buy Windows machines because they are looking for cheap computers is just silly, and shows a real disconnect from reality.
So, your saying that the fragmentation problem isn't really a problem? Or are you saying that it isn't a problem if it is Apple? Personally, I am getting tired of trying to download apps and being told that they don't work with my phone.
There is nothing BS about it. YOU made presented the premise of the single instance being compared to the cost of a life IF something happened. My point is that your question was loaded and pointless. It is the equivalent of a soda company saying "Tastes Better". You want people answer if a single text message is worth killing someone for. I would say no. You refuse to answer the question of whether one day at school is worth killing someone for. Why? Because, just like a single text message, the answer is an obvious no. That doesn't fit with your rationalization, so you start trying to compare a bus ride to 13 years of school. That is intellectually dishonest.
You also play the intellectually dishonest game of claiming that anyone commits to the full-time job of safety when they are driving. As well as the intellectually dishonest claim that operating a phone while driving is an extremely high risk activity under most circumstances.
I will agree that trying to type while driving is dangerous, but I wouldn't take your dishonest approach in trying to argue it because it is unnecessary. By making a dishonest argument, you show that your issue isn't one of safety, but one see the device as evil.
You do realize that HTC, Motorola and Samsung make the phones that Google releases their initial builds for right?
There are other versions of add on keyboards for the iPhone. That was just the first that popped up on Google. Physical keyboards on any phone are going to bulky compared to non-keyboard models. I got a T-Mobile G2 because I wanted the keyboard. Every time I pick up the Nexus One my son inherited from me, it strikes me how much more bulk there is to the G2. It isn't a big issue, as we are only talking about ounces, and they both can fit in my pocket (At the same time). The screen real-estate issue is one that can't be argued. If that is important to you, a physical keyboard is a must. I don't know if the iPhone keyboard accessories solve the screen real-estate problem, or if the on-screen keyboard pops up no matter what. Either way, I wish that Android makers would take the approach of offering keyboards as accessories to the devices as opposed to building them in.
I suspect that the lock in has a lot to do with poor Mac sales. OSX systems market share is only make a little more than Linux, and that is if you only count Linux on the desktop. Letting people develop for iOS on systems other than OSX would likely cut into the tiny slice of market share that OSX has.
It would be interesting to see what percentage of OSX users were also iOS developers. Does anyone have a link on this?
because it forces developers to produce a more polished product in the first place
No, it really doesn't.
Or from the other side, why would you want to buy games that can't be patched quickly when you run into a bug? The fact that it takes a week to patch a bug doesn't mean that there are none. It just means that you already have the expectation of waiting a week to get it after the bug has been identified and fixed.
And that is what MacOS users thought in 1992 also. It turned out they were wrong. Maybe things will work out as will with iOS as they did with MacOS, and after a major revamp in 15 years, another 5 years of marketing, a bailout from MS and tie in to a new product, iOS will still be able to maintain single digit market share.
I run into apps that don't work on iPods because they were written for iPhones. I run into apps that won't install on the 3GS because they require a 4. The so called "fragmentation" issue is a bigger long term problem for Apple than it is for Android. Android was built to handle the so called "fragmentation", and handles it far more gracefully than iOS which was not built for it, but with each passing year in digging deeper and deeper into it. Remember the Amiga? WAY ahead of everything else on the market. Yes, even Mac. What happened? Amongst other things, it was too tied to the hardware. It was great when it was new, but as hardware advanced, old software didn't work on new machines, and new software didn't work on old machines. Upgrades became painful. Apple has to be careful not to fall into that trap, and so far it isn't looking like they are preparing for it.
We have also seen what has happened to Apple on the desktop. Sure it is more than Linux, but it is closer to Linux than to Windows which has to deal with levels of hardware "fragmentation" the likes of which, Android will probably never see.
There seems to be this myth that Macs are popular. Sure, they are popular enough that we all know someone that has one, but really they are just a blip on the radar. MacInsider is reporting that they are only 6.03% of the desktop market. http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/11/09/03/mac_os_x_install_base_grows_to_over_6_worldwide_13_in_the_us.html
Crowing about how much "people" love a product that gets heavily advertised but only has a 5% market lead over a product that gets no advertising is rediculous. Think about how much effort and money goes into convincing people that OSX is good. Comparing OSX to Linux is like to guys in sitting alone in the basement arguing about who is cooler while everyone else is upstairs at the party.
Why do I keep running into Apps that say they don't work on my model of iOS devices then?
IBM seems to think otherwise: http://www.edbrill.com/ebrill/edbrill.nsf/dx/ibms-2011-tech-trends-report
I think we can all agree that IBM is catering to the corporate sector.
Behind who?
Exactly, complaining about a lack of native SDK on Android makes about as much sense as complaining that there was no SDK at all for iOS.
They have keyboards for iPhones.
http://www.google.com/products/catalog?q=keyboards+for+iphone&oe=utf-8&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a&um=1&ie=UTF-8&tbm=shop&cid=8862461336801209181&sa=X&ei=VpHqTv6oJOGUiQLG0bDyBQ&ved=0CLoBEPICMAQ
Once I used Swype, I stopped caring about mobile keyboards. The one-size-take-it-or-leave-it ecosystem of iPhone allows them to do keyboards the way they should be done. As an add on accessory.
IBM seems to think that Android is going to have plenty of developer also.
http://www.edbrill.com/ebrill/edbrill.nsf/dx/ibms-2011-tech-trends-report
By the way, most studies show that hands free cellphone are not significantly less distracting that handheld ones.
There reason for this is that cell phones don't significantly increase the danger of accidents, and the collection methods are horribly and obviously flawed. If they used the same methods of data collection to see if wearing underwear caused accidents, we would need to start taking about banning those as well.
We can ban and penalize some easy to prove activities like texting and cellphone use. We can attempt to penalize being sleepy, eating, applying makeup, reading a newspaper, smoking, if we are willing to live in a police state.
So, how is banning reading a newspaper and applying makeup a police state, but banning cellphones isn't?
The exact same could be said about a cell phone. The primary purpose of manual transmissions in modern cars are so that the owners can use the car as a giant toy, all the while patting themselves on the back for being a "good" driver.
I ask the same question concerning sending your child to school in a school bus. If that school bus crashes and your child dies, how much was that day of school worth? Would you kill someone, and maybe your own child for a single day in school?
No, there are not 20% driving distracted. There are 100% driving distracted. It's just that with 80%, the are not distracted by things that offend certain people. The statistics on distracted driving are total BS. They are not even good lies. We all know how the statistics on cell phone related accidents are tallied. If you get in an accident, and you were using a cell phone, they mark it as a cell phone related accident. They don't ask you if you are wearing underwear and mark it as an underwear related accident. Why? Because there are groups of people that find cell phones offensive. The work of the devil. (by whatever name they want to call it.)
Sorry to insult your mother, but if it really took her too years to learn how to turn her computer on, she is retarded. My suspicion is that you are just talking smack about your mother in an attempt to make a point.
What is fallacious reasoning is attacking some random distraction that is no worse than dozens of other common distractions, and pretending that it holds some special significance because it is either hip, offends your Neo-Luddite sensibilities, has no utility to you or you are just repeating what people in the other two categories have told you.
Basically, what you and others are saying is "This isn't about safety. This is about cell phones. So stay on topic."
Those are much better links. So, yes. That is stupid of Amazon. Dumb enough that it was hard to believe they would make that kind of blunder.