And you're right, when it comes to apps for doing stuff at work, Android isn't that great right now.
why?
it has a decent email and calendar app, which can be hooked up to your corp w/ activesync (or imap, or whatever). it runs VPN clients. you can use google talk for IM, or download one of many decent IM apps that will work with whatever setup your enterprise is running. it has the best mobile browser bar none (chrome mobile).
and, unlike iOS, your enterprise can actually distribute home grown enterprise apps in the enterprise. iOS forces everything to go through their appstore. good luck getting your enterprise app approved there. what a concept... your company can write apps the hook into the enterprise infrastructure and distribute them to employees.
so what are you lacking? or let me rephrase, as an iOS user, what do you think android lacks for enterprise productivity?
theoretically, but no they can't do that in reality. you are talking about a massive resource and support effort. and of course, that locks all your users into the devices you support, each of which requires significantly more effort to work out the quirks of the particular devices.
users would soon be pissed, because unless you keep growing the team that manages all this, they will be restricted to old devices. oh, and they are also pissed because you are late upgrading them to the latest android version.
folks like to look at cyanogenmod and say "oh, easy!". well, if CM doesn't work or crashes, people say oh well and avoid the crashing behavior or flash something else. if you are an enterprise and a user reports this, you can't say that. you have to support them, at massive cost.
The nuances in that discussion don't matter, the fact is that the market sees IOS as safer than Android. Perception is reality
perception is reality? what is that some kind of truism for morons?
yes, the same market that fills the enterprise with malware ridden virus plugged windows boxes, right? android as an OS is orders of magnitude more secure by design that windows, mac, or linux. yeah that's right i said mac and linux, because there's no sudo / root / admin account on android (yes i know you can go out of your way to root an android device).
We just had a new vendor selection at my employer and IOS was chosen because the comfort level with security and malware on the Android platform is lower
you think that was it? or do you think you had a bunch of apple users that didn't want to change and were looking for reasons to hold on to their iDevices?
it's a near perfect version of World of Warcraft running on iOS and Android. the look, feel, and mechanics are near copies of WoW, but the content is different- the quests, bosses, maps, items, and so on.
if Blizzard can't sue for this, then EA and everyone else doesn't have a prayer in going after copycats.
That's simply not feasible, given that much of the land is used for things like crops, improvements, wilderness, etc.
well, that, and the cost of building, maintaining, and replacing solar panels that cover 450k km^2.
that'd be an engineering project inconceivable in our current society. apple is proposing to build the world's largest solar array, at about 0.4 km^2. and we are bandying about a figure of 450,000 km^2, roughly a million times larger than the largest *proposed* solar array in the world today?
What if during the housing boom, there was a mandate in place that all new homes had to be built with solar panels? Imagine how much power those acres upon acres of vacant homes around Vegas would be producing right now.
the homes would be vacant, or not exist, as it would add $20-$30k to the home prices. the problem is not imagining that solar power could work (like TFA), it's practically implementing it. our govt is broke, and our private energy sector is making $ hand over fist with the status quo.
A few people have brought up the cost of replacing panels. So what? Is that really an argument?
umm, yes. someone has to pay for it. that, compared to the expense people have now of maintaining the black wire that runs into their house.
the best you could hope for is to have a system in place that's as profitable as the existing oil / coal infrastructure. sure, safer and less polluting, but what corporation gives a crap about that?
of course, that's the best you could hope for. the whole thing could go belly up at a total loss (solyndra).
The NREL broke things down into four groups: urban and rural utility-scale photovoltaics (giant solar plants, basically) as well as rooftop solar and concentrated mirror arrays. Between those technologies, which are all already on the market, the NREL reckons there's a proven potential for solar to hit a capacity of 200,000 gigawatts in the United States alone.
oh great. i guess all we need is the bazillion dollars needed to build and maintain these massive solar arrays.
or, you could just try to hang on to reality. CL is obviously OBVIOUSLY not going to run about suing users for posting similar ads on different for sale sites. this is only to give them legal ground against CL scraper sites.
And here's the big kicker. So what if Samsung had internal prototypes and designs that look similar to the iPhone before the iPhone launched? Apple got to market first, and used the Design Patent system as it is intended to protect their design from knock-offs and wannabees. Sucks to be Samsung, but thats how this is meant to work.
wrong. that's not how patents work. you aren't awarded a patent for being first to market.
it's not patentable because there's prior art, both conceptual and actual. the conceptual designs date back at least 50 years.
that's the way it should be anyway. the way the system works is that companies like apple throw all sort of ridiculous patens at the patent office, which accepts them because they don't have the resources to do otherwise. now it's a matter for the courts, where decisions are bought and sold by powerful companies.
250GB is a lot, and a normal person won't exhaust that. however, it is a carrot, and this or something like it can be used to stifle netflix at the ISPs' whim.
Sorry, that doesn't make sense to me. Are they saying Amazon, Apple and Google are going to be operating their streaming service at a loss? And since those companies have other revenues, they can afford to go on while Netflix will die? Seriously? Sounds like a really stupid business model to get into.
those companies don't offer an all-you-can-stream buffet like netflix. they offer per-title rentals fees, which is generally much more expensive... so, they are charging more and probably giving the content holders a tastier cut.
amazon has free streaming content for prime members, but that doesn't include a lot of new releases / popular content.
NetFlix has also established a very nice base price-point. If Amazon, Apple, Google or any other competitor want to charge more than $8-10 a month, they'd better provide some added value./quote.
and they were able to survive on that price point because they had no competitors / were essentially a monopoly. that's not the cause any more. as expansion slows and the pie is carved up between them and their competitors, you are going to see their prices rise.
what others have said is correct. they are completely at the mercy of content license holders, and more and more, those license holders are their direct competitors.
netflix was innovative as they figured out how to super-scale the content deliver mechanism, and had the smarts to make their client ubiquitous across almost every platform. however, more and more, such things are well-understood and duplicatable by others.
that, and the fact that the folks that control the pipes into peoples' homes are also competitors (e.g. xfinity streampix). i read recently that xfinity won't count the bits from streaming their service against your data cap.
they have 28M subscribers today, but they don't have a leg to stand on going forward. the opportunity was to bring all of the content license holders in as partners. that boat has sailed. they should have bent over backwards with concessions and profit sharing to make this happen.
does netflix use silverlight on Wii? on android? iOS? i don't know, but it seems unlikely. clearly they have other client technologies they could use on linux.
you have to consider more than just the numbers. netflix is adding crap content daily, but i've stopped looking in their new releases, because there's nothing there i've ever heard of. netflix doesn't get blockbuster movies, ever (anymore). amazon does.
what makes me laugh, is that netflix is full of knock-offs of major movies, like they are trying to fool people into thinking they have something they don't. they don't have "kung fu panda", but they have "chop-kick panda". they don't have "avengers" (the recent movie), but they have "avengers" the crappy cartoon (which, despite being released in 2010, is under "new releases").
"We can all guess about the reasons, but that's the simple reality."
accidentally making the right decision based on incorrect data is a terrible, terrible way to go about life, and an even worse way to run a business.
pirating is easiER on android, but it's still difficult enough that anyone with a rational time / money balance isn't going to bother. trust me, the average android user isn't prowling torrent sites and installing potentially malware infested hacked applications onto their device.
the real reason iOS is more profitable is its audience... affluent geos and upper-class demos. android phones run the gamut in price. so yes, you have a bunch of people in 3rd world countries with android devices pirating, but iphones don't exist there so it's not like you'd be selling your iOS app anyway.
Slashdot Mirror
And you're right, when it comes to apps for doing stuff at work, Android isn't that great right now.
why?
it has a decent email and calendar app, which can be hooked up to your corp w/ activesync (or imap, or whatever). it runs VPN clients. you can use google talk for IM, or download one of many decent IM apps that will work with whatever setup your enterprise is running. it has the best mobile browser bar none (chrome mobile).
and, unlike iOS, your enterprise can actually distribute home grown enterprise apps in the enterprise. iOS forces everything to go through their appstore. good luck getting your enterprise app approved there. what a concept ... your company can write apps the hook into the enterprise infrastructure and distribute them to employees.
so what are you lacking? or let me rephrase, as an iOS user, what do you think android lacks for enterprise productivity?
Then you see things like the Nexus 7, where the profit is all in the advertising spyware, not the hardware.
the profit is in the ecosystem ... google play apps, movies, books, and music. this is model coined by amazon with the fire, don't be surprised.
theoretically, but no they can't do that in reality. you are talking about a massive resource and support effort. and of course, that locks all your users into the devices you support, each of which requires significantly more effort to work out the quirks of the particular devices.
users would soon be pissed, because unless you keep growing the team that manages all this, they will be restricted to old devices. oh, and they are also pissed because you are late upgrading them to the latest android version.
folks like to look at cyanogenmod and say "oh, easy!". well, if CM doesn't work or crashes, people say oh well and avoid the crashing behavior or flash something else. if you are an enterprise and a user reports this, you can't say that. you have to support them, at massive cost.
The nuances in that discussion don't matter, the fact is that the market sees IOS as safer than Android. Perception is reality
perception is reality? what is that some kind of truism for morons?
yes, the same market that fills the enterprise with malware ridden virus plugged windows boxes, right? android as an OS is orders of magnitude more secure by design that windows, mac, or linux. yeah that's right i said mac and linux, because there's no sudo / root / admin account on android (yes i know you can go out of your way to root an android device).
We just had a new vendor selection at my employer and IOS was chosen because the comfort level with security and malware on the Android platform is lower
you think that was it? or do you think you had a bunch of apple users that didn't want to change and were looking for reasons to hold on to their iDevices?
take a look at this game, Order and Chaos,
http://itunes.apple.com/us/app/order-chaos-online/id414664715?mt=8
it's a near perfect version of World of Warcraft running on iOS and Android. the look, feel, and mechanics are near copies of WoW, but the content is different- the quests, bosses, maps, items, and so on.
if Blizzard can't sue for this, then EA and everyone else doesn't have a prayer in going after copycats.
BTW, OaC is quite a good game.
That's simply not feasible, given that much of the land is used for things like crops, improvements, wilderness, etc.
well, that, and the cost of building, maintaining, and replacing solar panels that cover 450k km^2.
that'd be an engineering project inconceivable in our current society. apple is proposing to build the world's largest solar array, at about 0.4 km^2. and we are bandying about a figure of 450,000 km^2, roughly a million times larger than the largest *proposed* solar array in the world today?
What if during the housing boom, there was a mandate in place that all new homes had to be built with solar panels? Imagine how much power those acres upon acres of vacant homes around Vegas would be producing right now.
the homes would be vacant, or not exist, as it would add $20-$30k to the home prices. the problem is not imagining that solar power could work (like TFA), it's practically implementing it. our govt is broke, and our private energy sector is making $ hand over fist with the status quo.
A few people have brought up the cost of replacing panels. So what? Is that really an argument?
umm, yes. someone has to pay for it. that, compared to the expense people have now of maintaining the black wire that runs into their house.
right, because if it couldn't work with a $500,000,000 grant, it will obviously work the next time without any grant, right? oh wait.
and what law is that forces a companies to expend massive capital and incur incredible risk to expand into new markets?
the best you could hope for is to have a system in place that's as profitable as the existing oil / coal infrastructure. sure, safer and less polluting, but what corporation gives a crap about that?
of course, that's the best you could hope for. the whole thing could go belly up at a total loss (solyndra).
good luck.
The NREL broke things down into four groups: urban and rural utility-scale photovoltaics (giant solar plants, basically) as well as rooftop solar and concentrated mirror arrays. Between those technologies, which are all already on the market, the NREL reckons there's a proven potential for solar to hit a capacity of 200,000 gigawatts in the United States alone.
oh great. i guess all we need is the bazillion dollars needed to build and maintain these massive solar arrays.
duh.
or, you could just try to hang on to reality. CL is obviously OBVIOUSLY not going to run about suing users for posting similar ads on different for sale sites. this is only to give them legal ground against CL scraper sites.
And here's the big kicker. So what if Samsung had internal prototypes and designs that look similar to the iPhone before the iPhone launched? Apple got to market first, and used the Design Patent system as it is intended to protect their design from knock-offs and wannabees. Sucks to be Samsung, but thats how this is meant to work.
wrong. that's not how patents work. you aren't awarded a patent for being first to market.
it's not patentable because there's prior art, both conceptual and actual. the conceptual designs date back at least 50 years.
that's the way it should be anyway. the way the system works is that companies like apple throw all sort of ridiculous patens at the patent office, which accepts them because they don't have the resources to do otherwise. now it's a matter for the courts, where decisions are bought and sold by powerful companies.
4. What is a surprise is that Sony didn't patent their design so they could be suing Apple right now for lifting it.
no, what's a surprise is that apple received a patent their design.
That's the beautiful thing about capitalism and the free market.
The peasantry is in control rather than a few Robber Barons.
you are more confused than you can ever imagine.
250GB is a lot, and a normal person won't exhaust that. however, it is a carrot, and this or something like it can be used to stifle netflix at the ISPs' whim.
Sorry, that doesn't make sense to me. Are they saying Amazon, Apple and Google are going to be operating their streaming service at a loss? And since those companies have other revenues, they can afford to go on while Netflix will die? Seriously? Sounds like a really stupid business model to get into.
those companies don't offer an all-you-can-stream buffet like netflix. they offer per-title rentals fees, which is generally much more expensive ... so, they are charging more and probably giving the content holders a tastier cut.
amazon has free streaming content for prime members, but that doesn't include a lot of new releases / popular content.
it has already begun.
xfinity has a cap of 250GB, however, content streamed from their streampix service doesn't count against the cap.
Clearly I'm missing something.
you are missing that netflix doesn't have the new season of BB. when will they have it? will they ever have it? who knows.
NetFlix has also established a very nice base price-point. If Amazon, Apple, Google or any other competitor want to charge more than $8-10 a month, they'd better provide some added value. /quote.
and they were able to survive on that price point because they had no competitors / were essentially a monopoly. that's not the cause any more. as expansion slows and the pie is carved up between them and their competitors, you are going to see their prices rise.
what others have said is correct. they are completely at the mercy of content license holders, and more and more, those license holders are their direct competitors.
netflix was innovative as they figured out how to super-scale the content deliver mechanism, and had the smarts to make their client ubiquitous across almost every platform. however, more and more, such things are well-understood and duplicatable by others.
that, and the fact that the folks that control the pipes into peoples' homes are also competitors (e.g. xfinity streampix). i read recently that xfinity won't count the bits from streaming their service against your data cap.
they have 28M subscribers today, but they don't have a leg to stand on going forward. the opportunity was to bring all of the content license holders in as partners. that boat has sailed. they should have bent over backwards with concessions and profit sharing to make this happen.
does netflix use silverlight on Wii? on android? iOS? i don't know, but it seems unlikely. clearly they have other client technologies they could use on linux.
Because Amazon has far less selection?
you have to consider more than just the numbers. netflix is adding crap content daily, but i've stopped looking in their new releases, because there's nothing there i've ever heard of. netflix doesn't get blockbuster movies, ever (anymore). amazon does.
what makes me laugh, is that netflix is full of knock-offs of major movies, like they are trying to fool people into thinking they have something they don't. they don't have "kung fu panda", but they have "chop-kick panda". they don't have "avengers" (the recent movie), but they have "avengers" the crappy cartoon (which, despite being released in 2010, is under "new releases").
"We can all guess about the reasons, but that's the simple reality."
accidentally making the right decision based on incorrect data is a terrible, terrible way to go about life, and an even worse way to run a business.
pirating is easiER on android, but it's still difficult enough that anyone with a rational time / money balance isn't going to bother. trust me, the average android user isn't prowling torrent sites and installing potentially malware infested hacked applications onto their device.
the real reason iOS is more profitable is its audience ... affluent geos and upper-class demos. android phones run the gamut in price. so yes, you have a bunch of people in 3rd world countries with android devices pirating, but iphones don't exist there so it's not like you'd be selling your iOS app anyway.