You clearly haven't used a Windows Phone. I use one, and relatively speaking, I think that Android and Apple phones "suck". About half of the people who spend any time with my phone end up switching from Android or Apple to a Windows Phone.
I understand what you're saying. What I'm saying is that after the current fad of people installing as many "apps" as possible on their phones fade, people will eventually want phones that "just work". I may not be a typical user, but I consider a phone less functional if I have to install a bunch of 3rd party apps to get the phone to do what I need it to do. If Microsoft and Blackberry and anybody else can make a good OS that has most of the standard functionality already there, the size of "app stores" will be largely irrelevant to the phones that people choose. Windows Phone 8 has a tremendous amount of stuff already integrated in, thus, a user doesn't need a deep app store to get a very functional phone. I use mine primarily for work, so all I had to install was MS's own free PDF "app". That was it.
What "apps" do you need that you can't get through Windows? I haven't run into anything that I needed that I couldn't get. I grabbed MS's PDF reader, Facebook, Spotify, Netflix, and Twitter. The phone does everything else out of the box (also HTC 8X).
I just got my second Windows Phone today. I really like it. I don't care about all of the "Apps" because it does everything I need right out of the box. I think that a well integrated OS like Windows Phone 8.0 doesn't need to rely on millions of "apps" to be able to sway customers.
At times like these, I'm happy to have a Windows Phone. I don't know if it's because the security is better, or because it's a tighter "walled garden", or it's such a tiny market segment, I don't care. I'm just happy that I don't have to worry about phone viruses.
The whole point to using a phone instead of a computer is because of simplicity. If Android or Android users can't figure out how to keep it *simple* to use a cellphone, users are going to flee to Apple or Microsoft or (Blackberry?).
I use tons of "old" software every day. I use a copy of Paint Shop Pro from the 90's. I use DVD Shrink from about a decade ago. Windows XP still runs my entire business. It doesn't wear out. Congratulations to one more person for realizing that they don't have to have the latest and greatest software to be productive.
So you cannot fathom how the Windows monopoly on 90+% of all PCs sold for the last couple of decades may have provided them a steady revenue source?
So what are you saying? The Microsoft has been resting on its laurels and doing no long term planning, due to its domination of the desktop OS market? If that were the case, how have they maintained said "monopoly" while successfully expanding into other businesses? Their continued growth is due to short term profit taking? I don't think that any rational person could argue that to be true in any way, whatsoever. It sounds to me like you're just regurgitating the classic childish Microsoft hate, while not making any attempt to reconcile what you're saying with reality.
Microsoft is about their bottom line, plain and simple.
That's a bizarre thing to say. They're one of the oldest software companies in history. Companies don't survive (and thrive) as long as they do without some forward thinking. You want to consider doing some reading about this history of the company, especially in relation to other companies that size, and re-consider your admittedly short-sighted response.
So what's left to blow steam?
Doing bad things because that's all there is left.
Kiddo, there are plenty of things one can do to "blow steam". If you want to do "bad" things, there are generally consequences, hence the "bad". I don't really know what point, if any, you're trying to make.
It's disappointing how the Microsoft-pioneered "buy up your competitors before they can afford to buy you" technique has become standard practice for Apple.
Oh, child, read some history. That had been going on for at least 100 years before Microsoft existed.
That DID happen. For a few months, you could search for any song, and Google would display the song with "play" button at the top of the search results that played the entire song. It worked flawlessly.
50 GB? I know this guy's famous, but other than that, is there any other reason I should care? I measure my storage in TB, these days. 50 GB is only about 10 movies (or less).
I'm constantly amazed at the hoops people jump through to help the tech giants control their lives in the name of convenience. This sure as hell doesn't sound convenient to me. Amazon, Google, Apple, Facebook.... It just never really ends.
I'll keep my CD's, thank you. Better sound quality, and I don't have to sell my soul to one of these parasitic companies just to play music. More convenient and infinitely simpler.
At least with Facebook you can restrict viewing the info to friends or friends of friends.
Do you really think that by clicking on various buttons in Facebook, that you're actually restricting access to your information? Are you joking, perhaps?
I don't think that even Ray Bradbury could have imagined that people would have entirely given up their books, and put control of all formerly printed media in the hands of a few giant corporations, due to "clutter".
I bet you and I both could steal credit cards too if we wanted to, it doesn't take much skill to be criminal jackasses.
There's nothing criminal about bullshitting on Kickstarter, last I checked. Taking money from gullible people is only taking advantage of a broken system, not breaking the law.
That's a rotten incentive. Identities can be faked easily. And of course, some people (myself included), couldn't give a flying shit about their "reputation".
Kickstarter is set up in a way that there's no incentive, at all, for anybody to do anything once they get the money. There's really not. Many times, I've considered creating a project that is an Open Source, Apple product related, DIY bullshit thing and just taking the money. Heck, I still might.
Kickstarter I believe, was either created by very naive, or very smart people who take advantage of the very naive people, or very stupid people.
I dealt with this, myself. I worked as a hired gun for a very large TV marketing company in the US that decided they didn't want to pay me for my work as a developer. I regular ol' lawyer got me paid in a matter of hours (minus his cut, of course) by contacting their legal department. They were clearly wrong, and didn't want to spend more than a few minutes' of their legal time looking into it, so I was paid the same day my attorney first contacted them. It was for an amount in the low 5-figures.
Of course, I didn't want to have to pay an attorney every time I wanted to get paid for a job, so I quit working with those kinds of companies.
Slashdot Mirror
You clearly haven't used a Windows Phone. I use one, and relatively speaking, I think that Android and Apple phones "suck". About half of the people who spend any time with my phone end up switching from Android or Apple to a Windows Phone.
I understand what you're saying. What I'm saying is that after the current fad of people installing as many "apps" as possible on their phones fade, people will eventually want phones that "just work". I may not be a typical user, but I consider a phone less functional if I have to install a bunch of 3rd party apps to get the phone to do what I need it to do. If Microsoft and Blackberry and anybody else can make a good OS that has most of the standard functionality already there, the size of "app stores" will be largely irrelevant to the phones that people choose. Windows Phone 8 has a tremendous amount of stuff already integrated in, thus, a user doesn't need a deep app store to get a very functional phone. I use mine primarily for work, so all I had to install was MS's own free PDF "app". That was it.
What "apps" do you need that you can't get through Windows? I haven't run into anything that I needed that I couldn't get. I grabbed MS's PDF reader, Facebook, Spotify, Netflix, and Twitter. The phone does everything else out of the box (also HTC 8X).
I just got my second Windows Phone today. I really like it. I don't care about all of the "Apps" because it does everything I need right out of the box. I think that a well integrated OS like Windows Phone 8.0 doesn't need to rely on millions of "apps" to be able to sway customers.
At times like these, I'm happy to have a Windows Phone. I don't know if it's because the security is better, or because it's a tighter "walled garden", or it's such a tiny market segment, I don't care. I'm just happy that I don't have to worry about phone viruses.
The whole point to using a phone instead of a computer is because of simplicity. If Android or Android users can't figure out how to keep it *simple* to use a cellphone, users are going to flee to Apple or Microsoft or (Blackberry?).
By your stellar logic, you must be an apologist for the US Judicial system. How's that Patriot Act working for you? How about the DMCA?
I use tons of "old" software every day. I use a copy of Paint Shop Pro from the 90's. I use DVD Shrink from about a decade ago. Windows XP still runs my entire business. It doesn't wear out. Congratulations to one more person for realizing that they don't have to have the latest and greatest software to be productive.
So you cannot fathom how the Windows monopoly on 90+% of all PCs sold for the last couple of decades may have provided them a steady revenue source?
So what are you saying? The Microsoft has been resting on its laurels and doing no long term planning, due to its domination of the desktop OS market? If that were the case, how have they maintained said "monopoly" while successfully expanding into other businesses? Their continued growth is due to short term profit taking? I don't think that any rational person could argue that to be true in any way, whatsoever. It sounds to me like you're just regurgitating the classic childish Microsoft hate, while not making any attempt to reconcile what you're saying with reality.
Or a strangehold monopoly on an entire market. That helps too.
I'm sure that'd help if it were true, sure. I don't think what you're saying applies in this particular situation, though.
Microsoft is about their bottom line, plain and simple.
That's a bizarre thing to say. They're one of the oldest software companies in history. Companies don't survive (and thrive) as long as they do without some forward thinking. You want to consider doing some reading about this history of the company, especially in relation to other companies that size, and re-consider your admittedly short-sighted response.
So what's left to blow steam? Doing bad things because that's all there is left.
Kiddo, there are plenty of things one can do to "blow steam". If you want to do "bad" things, there are generally consequences, hence the "bad". I don't really know what point, if any, you're trying to make.
It's disappointing how the Microsoft-pioneered "buy up your competitors before they can afford to buy you" technique has become standard practice for Apple.
Oh, child, read some history. That had been going on for at least 100 years before Microsoft existed.
That DID happen. For a few months, you could search for any song, and Google would display the song with "play" button at the top of the search results that played the entire song. It worked flawlessly.
50 GB? I know this guy's famous, but other than that, is there any other reason I should care? I measure my storage in TB, these days. 50 GB is only about 10 movies (or less).
I'm constantly amazed at the hoops people jump through to help the tech giants control their lives in the name of convenience. This sure as hell doesn't sound convenient to me. Amazon, Google, Apple, Facebook.... It just never really ends.
I'll keep my CD's, thank you. Better sound quality, and I don't have to sell my soul to one of these parasitic companies just to play music. More convenient and infinitely simpler.
At least with Facebook you can restrict viewing the info to friends or friends of friends.
Do you really think that by clicking on various buttons in Facebook, that you're actually restricting access to your information? Are you joking, perhaps?
I don't think that even Ray Bradbury could have imagined that people would have entirely given up their books, and put control of all formerly printed media in the hands of a few giant corporations, due to "clutter".
No way. I'm an an unlimited everything plan (Sprint). I couldn't care less which I use. Lots of people have unlimited everything plans.
The catch is data mining, of course. They'll be mined the same way Google mines email.
Sounds like a job for handy, dandy DVD Shrink!
That makes no sense.
Speak for yourself. My business runs on Microsoft stuff. I couldn't give two shits about Facebook, Google, or Amazon.
I bet you and I both could steal credit cards too if we wanted to, it doesn't take much skill to be criminal jackasses.
There's nothing criminal about bullshitting on Kickstarter, last I checked. Taking money from gullible people is only taking advantage of a broken system, not breaking the law.
That's a rotten incentive. Identities can be faked easily. And of course, some people (myself included), couldn't give a flying shit about their "reputation".
Kickstarter is set up in a way that there's no incentive, at all, for anybody to do anything once they get the money. There's really not. Many times, I've considered creating a project that is an Open Source, Apple product related, DIY bullshit thing and just taking the money. Heck, I still might.
Kickstarter I believe, was either created by very naive, or very smart people who take advantage of the very naive people, or very stupid people.
I dealt with this, myself. I worked as a hired gun for a very large TV marketing company in the US that decided they didn't want to pay me for my work as a developer. I regular ol' lawyer got me paid in a matter of hours (minus his cut, of course) by contacting their legal department. They were clearly wrong, and didn't want to spend more than a few minutes' of their legal time looking into it, so I was paid the same day my attorney first contacted them. It was for an amount in the low 5-figures.
Of course, I didn't want to have to pay an attorney every time I wanted to get paid for a job, so I quit working with those kinds of companies.