... it might be the worst device on the market in terms of features and specifications, but why I have an iPad over a Xoom, Galaxy, etc is simple. It's the software. I bought an iPhone when it was first launched and was amazed at how well the experience was. When Apple allowed third-party applications, that just heightened the experience ten-fold. When I heard about the iPad, I knew that was the tablet for me, not because it was by Apple, simply because the apps I bought for my iPhone would work on the iPad and I wouldn't have to purchase them again. This is the same reason I'm not jumping to get an Android phone/tablet. It would mean I would have to re-purchase my applications again and that will cost more money than saving $100 or so on buying the same device from a different manufacturer. If I knew the apps I bought on my iPhone/iPad would carry across onto a Xoom then get out of my way, I'm going shopping!
open source flash, and I don't mean just parts of it but the whole shebang. This would stop Apple from using the excuse that it's too buggy/slow/Adobe and force them to take action on it's implementation on the iPhone/iPad. I don't know the actual feasibility of Adobe doing such a move, especially because it uses a lot of licensed technologies such as MP3, H.264, etc but they could just leave the licensing to be the responsibility of those who are distributing the runtimes and Adobe could still be main distributor of the official runtime.
it's 30% for app purchases. I don't think 40% is too bad of a cut for providing a simple ad service that would be easy to implement. If you don't like it, use someone else, you still have the freedom of choice for your ad agency.
I hate ads like everyone else on the Internet but I can understand that we developers do need to eat and usually to eat you need food, and to have food you need money. That said, Apple are giving developers another avenue for income. I'm sure there are many iPhone apps that would see a greater audience if it were ad-supported instead of being bought or even have two versions of the same app (one with ads and one without). Of course this also leaves the gates open for the system to be abused with ads on purchased ads etc but this is not a new problem. Everyone criticizes Apple on they're closed architecture of the iPhone/iPad (me being one of them) but they are protecting it from being abused, and it has been abused with the flood of cookie-cut applications etc. Don't get me wrong, this isn't Apple's only motivation for locking down the system, I'm just pointing out one of them.
this is the perfect tool for grunts as it will indicate the direction in which they are heading and also visibly tells surrounding people how far away they should be from this person should they throw up.
I know flash for the iphone is an apple decision but I kind of agree with. I always tend to think of flash as a heavy plugin, a couple versions ago it would make my system crawl with all the animation and effects, obviously flash developers didn't factor in that not everyone had a 3ghz computer dedicated for flash. Even youtube occasionally spikes my system now and then when loading videos, imagine the poor lil iphone. I'm a believer that the "web" should be in a "web browser" and not need 3rd plugins at all, but instead bring out features more frequently and target particular versions. ie. HTML6 might have 3d so in order to utilise that feature you must run a HTML6 supported browser, instead of creating a plugin and backporting it to vintage browsers.
this is the beginning of the no-plugins trend and I for one think its about time. Sure some 98% of people have flash installed, silverlight much much less and java (well I tend to steer away from that as much as possible, besides when was the last time anyone ran an applet these days?) but the problem we are seeing is that single vendors take there time to migrate to other platforms, and usually then they lack features and what nots. Look at flash, it isn't even available for the iphone and it's linux support is very limited (alpha still?) not to mention lacking 64bit in windows, fucking windows! If flash was an open platform then more external resources can be used to address these situations but then this is where html5 goes one step further, instead of making it a plugin for everyone to download why not just make it part of the browser and save the hassle.
"This is part of Sony's quiet software revolution" We're getting with the times alright but we wont make it easy for you.
"It's an opportunity to transmit user-generated video anywhere you want to, anytime to anybody, in a protected environment" People like YouTube and Google Video have an awesome idea, the only problem is its not us! We want to milk it for what its worth.
Unlike YouTube, which has drawn criticism that it tolerates user piracy and faces a $1 billion lawsuit from Viacom Inc. alleging copyright violation, Sony said it would closely monitor content on the service. We want to pull a YouTube but we're pretty confident we can get away with all the legal threats and fines.
Such a model would appeal to companies looking to release content and to protect their image Screw user content, we want to be paid to host your shit and there are people willing to pay lots of money for us to shove it in your face.
"We believe there's a need for a clean and safe place where companies can place their advertisements" Theres a slice of the pie for us but we want to eat the whole damn thing!
ok Google Desktop Search may be good, may be better than Spotlight, etc but Spotlight is "part" of the OS thus is already running even when we don't want it to so now not only do you have Spotlight caching but now Google's app, so your computer is slower. The ability to search your desktop through a webpage is a joke! Why would I when theres a simple icon in the top-right of my screen or pressing Apple+Space to open it up, alot more simplier then through a browser. To search my gmail, why not just intergrate Spotlight search with the gmail notifier for mac, would be easier and simplier. Honestly I think its a waste of Google's resources, I know they mean well but I don't want them to integrate into they're apps, I want them to integrate to the OS! If not then stick to web services Google!
This is gonna put alot of pressure on Google and Jabber. I mean Google just entered the market, with MSN and Yahoo and Possibly AIM, there wont be a need for a new contender. I dont think its bad coz that will bring more ppl close together and save installed 100s of IM apps just to talk to all your friends. I do wonder how they will connect them all and whether you will use screennames or e-mail address or whatever.
Downgrades, exploits, patches etc to allow running homebrew games do mean that the vast majority of people will use it for piracy (no surprise). I can see how sony are against piracy but the people who make these hacks do it in the pure interests of homebrew apps and extending the device (well the majority). Why doesnt sony just release a special SDK for the community where those people can make games and apps for the psp. The sdk could be specially altered one and be for personal use only but that would boost the psp base by 10 fold if not more. I mean if someone made a chat client for the psp to chat to other people who have psps or you could make your own game for a console wouldnt you buy a psp? It would make your psp worth the hefty price tag. I think thats why people who got a ps2 or xbox to install linux wanted to do that. Its the extensibility to the console that it brings. I do hope someone at sony takes this idea literally and into reality. It would benefit all.
Back in the day when I used AOL, I had an unlimited account (or so I thought) where they didnt mind how much I downloaded but after 90 hours a month I would not be able to login until the next month. They didnt tell me that and the fine print I read didnt make mension of that either. "Oh well" I thought, "heck I doubt I will use that much anyways and if I do it would be towards the end of the billing cycle". I couldnt log in, I wondered "hmmm why is that? I dont think I used 90 hours, I better ring them". So I did and they guy said I used 87 hours and I answered "yes so thats not 90 hours so why am I disabled?". He couldnt answer me and told me I would have to put up with it. Well I told him I wanted to cancel my account. "Hold please". About 5 minutes later (quicker then I imagined) a lady asked "what is you reason for cancelling?" and I said "coz your service is shit!". "Oh ok, would you like us to refer you to another AOL partner ISP?" she had the nerve to ask. I just said no and hung up. No more bills. No more headaches. No more AOL.
As an avid WoW player I have been noticing that in a few weeks the 1.7 patch will be released and that version 2 is coming up soon. Marking the 1st year of WoW in a couple months will 2.0 signify that event. And if so/not what sort of changes are we going to see? Hero classes? World change event? New races and classes? Uncap leveling to beyond 60? Would be interesting to see where and what direction the game is going to take.
If Google are heading into the IM direction they need to do it right. Meaning to offer something which is lacking on the competitor front. I know ICQ has/had? this feature of sending messages to ppl even when they are not online. That needs to come back because sometimes an email is too much hassle. Second they need to make an IM client that will run on multiple platforms. ie, on Windows, Mac and above all Linux. MSN is the most popular IM on the net so far but none of them properly support all the OS's. Microsoft have a crappy client on the Mac and nothing on Linux. Google needs to put a universal client on all OS's with the same look 'n feel and the same functionality. Thats the most important thing any IM service should have but dont.
I know Google will do it right because they always do. Gmail is proof of they're success to new areas of service. As for an OS, that would take alot and seeing Google back Linux would be a great benefit for all and would help set Linux into the mainstream. With some of the innovations Linux is going to experience this year, would be a good oppertunity for Google to get they're foot in the door.
There are only two possible exceptions to this which might happen one day in the distant future:
1. Apple licenses OS X and has a couple PC makers build systems from specific components, and adjusts OS X to support those components and only those components (in addition to what is available in Apple-branded Macs, of course).
2. Apple supports a small subset of the available commodity hardware-- like NeXT did when it ran on x86-- so you can build your own Mac OS X-compatible system by choosing parts from their list.
That is the sort of direction I would assume Apple would take. Would still allow them to control the hardware for they're software and still attain some of the experience they deliver.
Were you not around in the mid-to-late 90's when Apple's cloning experiment cost them enough sales to put the company into a death spiral? The only thing that saved them was Jobs returning and doing some fancy footwork to terminate the cloners' licenses so people would have to buy computers from Apple again.
Yeah I was around and yes I know Apple has had bad experiences with releasing they're software to clones etc (and thank god for Jobs' fancy foot work). Back then things were difference, Apple wasnt as widely regarded to the non-computer user as it is now (mainly because of the iPod). Apple just dont have a great OS but a whole set of software that really take advantage of each other, more like a Transformer where the more you get the better they get because they connect together. This can be they're revenue dog as well as the iPod until computer hardware picks up. There is no doubt that hardware will gain again in sales when people start using Apple's software and see that that kind of craftmanship must echo in they're hardware as well.
That's why the iPod is so popular. You plug it in, and iTunes kicks off the sync process. Hardware and software working together as a complete system. No configuration wizard playing 20 Questions with you, or looking for drivers, or even telling you that it's found the drivers and is installing them. Plug it in, it works, you're done.
Yes it is, and its also available for Windows, which just goes to show how eager people are willing to pick up good software and hardware. Apple brought out the Mac Mini to try catch the massing of migrating Windows users to the mac platform from the iPod's success. Some people cant, but want a break from Windows, so why not bring the mac platform to them.
I dont think Apple should release the OS straight away, give it time, let the Intel transition finish and settle. But Apple can do this whenever they feel is necessary. They could release it before Windows Vista really if they want to pick up the market quickly but thats up to Apple to deside.
Apple releasing Mac OS X for the x86 platform would be a good strategy. Take Sun's Solaris 10 as an example. They released it for SPARC as well we x86. The result is they still get customers using their product and seeing how good it is. For the big businesses and the user who depends on stability and reliability, they know that running Solaris on a SPARC will give them better results then on a commodity system. The same will go for Apple.
Imagine, all the iPod lovers out there and all the people sick of Windows. No problem just go to your local retailer and purchase Mac OS X, install, configure (if need be) and your away. Your iPod will work better, you will have better security and just better all round. Everyone knows a computer is as reliable as its affordable and people will know that Mac OS X will run better with better reliability then a cheap Dell etc.
Sure Apple will lose sales of they're hardware at first but it will slowly pick up again and be stronger then ever, this as well as lowing prices and Apple will become a number 1 supplier in computer systems.
Besides I think Apple is the only company currently who has the power to save us from Windows hells. Linux is still not there yet unfortunately.
I rarely use that feature (if you call it that). Sure it can make windows bigger at the click of the button and in some situations it comes in handy. But for example a web browser for instance it should not maximize to my full resolution as most pages dont take advantage of that and it make them look crap.
I get the same thing, trying it in Firefox and then IE but zip zap nothing. Regardless Windows is a crock of shit. Theres been no real UI innovation since 95. Sure theres the quick launch bar and a chunkier start menu but has my ability to manage and organise windows changed? no!
Slashdot Mirror
way to ruin the movie for everyone!!
... it might be the worst device on the market in terms of features and specifications, but why I have an iPad over a Xoom, Galaxy, etc is simple. It's the software. I bought an iPhone when it was first launched and was amazed at how well the experience was. When Apple allowed third-party applications, that just heightened the experience ten-fold. When I heard about the iPad, I knew that was the tablet for me, not because it was by Apple, simply because the apps I bought for my iPhone would work on the iPad and I wouldn't have to purchase them again. This is the same reason I'm not jumping to get an Android phone/tablet. It would mean I would have to re-purchase my applications again and that will cost more money than saving $100 or so on buying the same device from a different manufacturer. If I knew the apps I bought on my iPhone/iPad would carry across onto a Xoom then get out of my way, I'm going shopping!
You can already picture the new marketing campaign "The new Intel is retarded!"
open source flash, and I don't mean just parts of it but the whole shebang. This would stop Apple from using the excuse that it's too buggy/slow/Adobe and force them to take action on it's implementation on the iPhone/iPad. I don't know the actual feasibility of Adobe doing such a move, especially because it uses a lot of licensed technologies such as MP3, H.264, etc but they could just leave the licensing to be the responsibility of those who are distributing the runtimes and Adobe could still be main distributor of the official runtime.
it's 30% for app purchases. I don't think 40% is too bad of a cut for providing a simple ad service that would be easy to implement. If you don't like it, use someone else, you still have the freedom of choice for your ad agency.
I hate ads like everyone else on the Internet but I can understand that we developers do need to eat and usually to eat you need food, and to have food you need money. That said, Apple are giving developers another avenue for income. I'm sure there are many iPhone apps that would see a greater audience if it were ad-supported instead of being bought or even have two versions of the same app (one with ads and one without). Of course this also leaves the gates open for the system to be abused with ads on purchased ads etc but this is not a new problem. Everyone criticizes Apple on they're closed architecture of the iPhone/iPad (me being one of them) but they are protecting it from being abused, and it has been abused with the flood of cookie-cut applications etc. Don't get me wrong, this isn't Apple's only motivation for locking down the system, I'm just pointing out one of them.
this is the perfect tool for grunts as it will indicate the direction in which they are heading and also visibly tells surrounding people how far away they should be from this person should they throw up.
I know flash for the iphone is an apple decision but I kind of agree with. I always tend to think of flash as a heavy plugin, a couple versions ago it would make my system crawl with all the animation and effects, obviously flash developers didn't factor in that not everyone had a 3ghz computer dedicated for flash. Even youtube occasionally spikes my system now and then when loading videos, imagine the poor lil iphone. I'm a believer that the "web" should be in a "web browser" and not need 3rd plugins at all, but instead bring out features more frequently and target particular versions. ie. HTML6 might have 3d so in order to utilise that feature you must run a HTML6 supported browser, instead of creating a plugin and backporting it to vintage browsers.
this is the beginning of the no-plugins trend and I for one think its about time. Sure some 98% of people have flash installed, silverlight much much less and java (well I tend to steer away from that as much as possible, besides when was the last time anyone ran an applet these days?) but the problem we are seeing is that single vendors take there time to migrate to other platforms, and usually then they lack features and what nots. Look at flash, it isn't even available for the iphone and it's linux support is very limited (alpha still?) not to mention lacking 64bit in windows, fucking windows! If flash was an open platform then more external resources can be used to address these situations but then this is where html5 goes one step further, instead of making it a plugin for everyone to download why not just make it part of the browser and save the hassle.
that goes well with my MrCoffee and MrRadar
ok Google Desktop Search may be good, may be better than Spotlight, etc but Spotlight is "part" of the OS thus is already running even when we don't want it to so now not only do you have Spotlight caching but now Google's app, so your computer is slower. The ability to search your desktop through a webpage is a joke! Why would I when theres a simple icon in the top-right of my screen or pressing Apple+Space to open it up, alot more simplier then through a browser. To search my gmail, why not just intergrate Spotlight search with the gmail notifier for mac, would be easier and simplier. Honestly I think its a waste of Google's resources, I know they mean well but I don't want them to integrate into they're apps, I want them to integrate to the OS! If not then stick to web services Google!
This is gonna put alot of pressure on Google and Jabber. I mean Google just entered the market, with MSN and Yahoo and Possibly AIM, there wont be a need for a new contender. I dont think its bad coz that will bring more ppl close together and save installed 100s of IM apps just to talk to all your friends. I do wonder how they will connect them all and whether you will use screennames or e-mail address or whatever.
in the end Microsoft will buy out all these companies. Soon we'll have Microsoft Maya and Microsoft Photoshop and Microsoft Linux :-p
Downgrades, exploits, patches etc to allow running homebrew games do mean that the vast majority of people will use it for piracy (no surprise). I can see how sony are against piracy but the people who make these hacks do it in the pure interests of homebrew apps and extending the device (well the majority). Why doesnt sony just release a special SDK for the community where those people can make games and apps for the psp. The sdk could be specially altered one and be for personal use only but that would boost the psp base by 10 fold if not more. I mean if someone made a chat client for the psp to chat to other people who have psps or you could make your own game for a console wouldnt you buy a psp? It would make your psp worth the hefty price tag. I think thats why people who got a ps2 or xbox to install linux wanted to do that. Its the extensibility to the console that it brings. I do hope someone at sony takes this idea literally and into reality. It would benefit all.
Back in the day when I used AOL, I had an unlimited account (or so I thought) where they didnt mind how much I downloaded but after 90 hours a month I would not be able to login until the next month. They didnt tell me that and the fine print I read didnt make mension of that either. "Oh well" I thought, "heck I doubt I will use that much anyways and if I do it would be towards the end of the billing cycle". I couldnt log in, I wondered "hmmm why is that? I dont think I used 90 hours, I better ring them". So I did and they guy said I used 87 hours and I answered "yes so thats not 90 hours so why am I disabled?". He couldnt answer me and told me I would have to put up with it. Well I told him I wanted to cancel my account. "Hold please". About 5 minutes later (quicker then I imagined) a lady asked "what is you reason for cancelling?" and I said "coz your service is shit!". "Oh ok, would you like us to refer you to another AOL partner ISP?" she had the nerve to ask. I just said no and hung up. No more bills. No more headaches. No more AOL.
As an avid WoW player I have been noticing that in a few weeks the 1.7 patch will be released and that version 2 is coming up soon. Marking the 1st year of WoW in a couple months will 2.0 signify that event. And if so/not what sort of changes are we going to see? Hero classes? World change event? New races and classes? Uncap leveling to beyond 60? Would be interesting to see where and what direction the game is going to take.
If Google are heading into the IM direction they need to do it right. Meaning to offer something which is lacking on the competitor front. I know ICQ has/had? this feature of sending messages to ppl even when they are not online. That needs to come back because sometimes an email is too much hassle. Second they need to make an IM client that will run on multiple platforms. ie, on Windows, Mac and above all Linux. MSN is the most popular IM on the net so far but none of them properly support all the OS's. Microsoft have a crappy client on the Mac and nothing on Linux. Google needs to put a universal client on all OS's with the same look 'n feel and the same functionality. Thats the most important thing any IM service should have but dont.
I know Google will do it right because they always do. Gmail is proof of they're success to new areas of service. As for an OS, that would take alot and seeing Google back Linux would be a great benefit for all and would help set Linux into the mainstream. With some of the innovations Linux is going to experience this year, would be a good oppertunity for Google to get they're foot in the door.
Should make a petition and demand IE7 be compliant. If by the time it is released they haven't changed it then lets burn em at the stake.
Hell lets just do it now!
That is the sort of direction I would assume Apple would take. Would still allow them to control the hardware for they're software and still attain some of the experience they deliver.
Yeah I was around and yes I know Apple has had bad experiences with releasing they're software to clones etc (and thank god for Jobs' fancy foot work). Back then things were difference, Apple wasnt as widely regarded to the non-computer user as it is now (mainly because of the iPod). Apple just dont have a great OS but a whole set of software that really take advantage of each other, more like a Transformer where the more you get the better they get because they connect together. This can be they're revenue dog as well as the iPod until computer hardware picks up. There is no doubt that hardware will gain again in sales when people start using Apple's software and see that that kind of craftmanship must echo in they're hardware as well.
Yes it is, and its also available for Windows, which just goes to show how eager people are willing to pick up good software and hardware. Apple brought out the Mac Mini to try catch the massing of migrating Windows users to the mac platform from the iPod's success. Some people cant, but want a break from Windows, so why not bring the mac platform to them.
I dont think Apple should release the OS straight away, give it time, let the Intel transition finish and settle. But Apple can do this whenever they feel is necessary. They could release it before Windows Vista really if they want to pick up the market quickly but thats up to Apple to deside.
Apple releasing Mac OS X for the x86 platform would be a good strategy. Take Sun's Solaris 10 as an example. They released it for SPARC as well we x86. The result is they still get customers using their product and seeing how good it is. For the big businesses and the user who depends on stability and reliability, they know that running Solaris on a SPARC will give them better results then on a commodity system. The same will go for Apple.
Imagine, all the iPod lovers out there and all the people sick of Windows. No problem just go to your local retailer and purchase Mac OS X, install, configure (if need be) and your away. Your iPod will work better, you will have better security and just better all round. Everyone knows a computer is as reliable as its affordable and people will know that Mac OS X will run better with better reliability then a cheap Dell etc.
Sure Apple will lose sales of they're hardware at first but it will slowly pick up again and be stronger then ever, this as well as lowing prices and Apple will become a number 1 supplier in computer systems.
Besides I think Apple is the only company currently who has the power to save us from Windows hells. Linux is still not there yet unfortunately.
Its not about whether it will run Doom3 or not, its a matter of whether it will run World of Warcraft with all the bells and whistles :-P
pffft maximize!
I rarely use that feature (if you call it that). Sure it can make windows bigger at the click of the button and in some situations it comes in handy. But for example a web browser for instance it should not maximize to my full resolution as most pages dont take advantage of that and it make them look crap.
I get the same thing, trying it in Firefox and then IE but zip zap nothing. Regardless Windows is a crock of shit. Theres been no real UI innovation since 95. Sure theres the quick launch bar and a chunkier start menu but has my ability to manage and organise windows changed? no!
"Its my first day..."