The previous poster has been listening to the people yelling in his mind, and to an angry mommy he's determined to humiliate for some reason.
I want you to do a survey of all feminists and tell me exactly what percent are always angry about boys peeking at women? I know a lot of feminists. Very few of them are of that "Take back the night" Catherine MacKinnon Andrea Dworkin variety.
Of course, there's always the caricature. You know, like "Obama is a socialist." A useful lie.
Well, could it have something to do with the appearance of the "Explicit" tag in the App Store?
I'm thinking that the future appearance of the much more useful for porn iPad might have prompted the creation of such a category, through which parents will foolishly believe they are controlling what their children see. But at least, that's something that makes sense.
Apple seems to hate to explain themselves, including explaining rumor A which claims that the sudden disappearance of "Hot 'n' Horny" from the App Store is censorship, and then explaining its reappearance in another part of the store.
Maybe.
Didn't ruin it for me. Or for the great majority of people.
By the way, you seem to think that "38% of jailbroken phones have pirated apps" means "38% of iPhones are jailbroken." Actually, if it's more than 2%, I'd be surprised. Of that 2%, 38% were found to have pirated software. Which means 62% of the hacked phones have no pirated apps on them.
Oh, lots of early PCs were built by guys with neck beards in their garages. The recipe was pretty simple. You could either become a hardware hacker for fun or a small company. There were literally thousands of PC companies, the great majority of them failing in a few years.
Let's see: IBM PC was 1982, and a competitor for the Apple II. In response, Apple brought out the Mac in 1984. Jobs's successors knew there would be a GUI challenger, but they did... nothing. Then, when it was nothing but a money-losing move, they brought out the clones and a thousand different models.
Jobs, meanwhile, made a linux box that worked with Intel.
How vital is a browser on a platform? Very. How sure are you that Firefox will evolve the way you want? Not sure. How sure that Camino, a small software effort, will? Not sure.
Apple had been abandoned by Avid, so they struck back with Final Cut Pro. They had been abandoned by Explorer, so they struck back with Safari. What's knock number one against IE? It renders sites wierdly because of its off-spec engine. Safari has WebKit, an open rendering engine derived from KHTML that is now used on multiple browsers, including, kaff, Google Chrome, and multiple platforms, including Android, no?
And you can run Camino (WebKit) or Firefox (Mozilla) on the Mac, too.
You're not wrong, but you're not right, either. You vote for one approach. I vote for another. There is lots of room in the world for experimentation.
Your mouse button hatred is a complex phenomenon. Apple first went for a consistent design that called for standardized menus to accomplish anything. One button was all you needed for a long time. If you found yourself doing a repetitive motion, you opened the menu and found the Command-key combination. Right-clicks slowly began to intrude from the Windows world, and eventually this was dropped in favor of the Apple mouse designs that are, in fact, two-button or three-button mice. They were demanded by the Windows refugees, because they're used to that, and for no other reason. The newer mice are great, in my experience, except for the tiny nipple roller ball, which get clogged too frequently. I'm now using a Magic mouse, which has a mulitouch-type roller pad, and yes, both left and right click. I really love it. And of course, it's never mentioned by mouse haters that you can use any USB mouse that's on the market, most of which you don't need a special driver for. My Microsoft Mouse works fine, too.
Meanwhile, the right-click-slide-drag world of Windows has one big defect. When you're a bit lost about how to do something, on the Mac you can look through the menus to find out most things. When you're giving your developers free rein to put essential commands on a right click, you make them invisible. I'll cite as an example my long attempt to alphabetize the bookmarks in IE. I searched the menus, nothing. I looked at the menu dialog, and I could find no little button there. Add, subtract bookmarks, clean up the listing, that's it. I actually read somewhere that you right click in the open menu to do that. Weird. How would I have guessed that?
No interface is perfect, but the one-button mouse was a noble effort done for a reason, to keep the interface clear for everyone.
Microsoft's core business is B2B. They provide the OS for a million OEMs. A very small slice of their sales actually has to do directly with consumers. Therefore, much of the costs are swallowed by the hardware manufacturers, who are involved in a dive to the bottom so they can retain margins after paying their Microsoft tax. And business buys computers in job lots, and they're run in networks by IT guys. Nothing wrong with that, but Apple is essentially for the individual.
Frankly, though, the prospect of integrating Outlook fully with the Mac version, being able to import and produce those ghastly.pst balls o' crap, though not very appealing, is good from a business point of view. It doesn't fully integrate with anything before Outlook 2007, I think. At least, I couldn't pick up my Exchange mail from Apple Mail, and I think that was the explanation. So on the Mac, I needed to go to the webbrowser version, which is very limited.
You called this monopolistic, or anti-competitive! That's legal terminology! You don't get to decide what the law is-- or putting it your way, the government has a cruel monopoly on passing laws by majority vote after elections.
In other words, if you think something isn't nice, that doesn't make it illegal.
I believe they're headed up to around 25% of the smartphone market, depending on the way you count it. Can you say, 25% is not a monopoly on any basis?
Apple provides an SDK and opens the app store to anyone. Some 95% or so are accepted within two weeks. A lot of developers have made serious money. Some have left. That's called a free market.
If they don't want Flash, or they don't want Java, that's up to Apple, wouldn't you say? I don't think they should kick any browser off the farm, unless they, for instance, figure out a way to use Java on the iPhone, which Apple does not support and does not want to be responsible for the security problems and slowdowns for that on a smaller platform where space and time are of the essence.
Excluding.net, or Java, or whatever programming environment, which allows a lot of lazy cross-platform development, is Apple's decision.
If a company is found guilty of monopolistic behavior, the law allows them to be broken up, sold, or disposed of in any way the judge deems correct. In fact, Judge Jackson's suggested restructuring would have resulted in three companies that would have each had a clear mandate. The software division would have concentrated on applications like the Office suite. The OS division would have developed more interoperable systems based on standards, because they wouldn't have been large enough to bully the rest of the world. Still quite large, though. The hardware division might have had a chance against the iPod, because they would have gotten off their asses and had to succeed. The Xbox would have had to survive on its own, and not be able to be sold as a loss leader.
After the company has been found guilty and a remedy -- fine or whatever -- is proposed, the entity is under court scrutiny, like an individual released on probation. For a parolee, talking to the wrong person is enough to put you back in jail, even if it wouldn't be an offense to anyone else.
Ironic, isn't it? Setting IE to be the default browser when they're doing a 'security' update? Probably fixing the umpteenth hole in ActiveX, they also reset the browser to... IE6.
On the main computer platform, all browsers are available and easy as pie to install -- with the exception of Internet Explorer, which Microsoft stopped developing for the Mac years ago.
On the phone, Apple's Webkit runs on the iPhone, Android, and some other platforms. It's open source, after all. There are already other browsers on the iPhone. Check out the app store. What Opera had done was a weird construction based on Java that they didn't submit to the app store, because it demanded Java, which they know damn well the iPhone doesn't support. Gruber has the story here.
On the other hand, this PR genius seems to be starting off on the wrong foot. He's basically blackmailing Jobs to prove he's not a bully. That doesn't seem like a negotiation, but like blackmail. But it certainly helps them on Slashdot/Apple, where any wild surmise about the dictatorial Apple is taken as gospel.
Hulu is in the content business, if the alliance between the various studios lasts much longer. They're not in the Flash business. What they're running is already H.264, only in a Flash container. And since even H.264 is free for free content for at least five years, I'd say they'll switch over with no problems.
Similar players will no doubt evolve, including ones that accept theora or H.264/x.264. And this developer says it will allow for Internet Explorer by falling back to Flash if necessary.
Funny, you're hating on the things that the market has decided it LIKES about the iPod. You use it all day, and then you hook it up to iTunes where it recharges and updates. Don't have to do it manually. That's what people, not computer junkies, LIKE about it. The world doesn't experience it as a "crippled device." Only nerds do.
No, he explained why: it's cheaper than the netbook plus the 5GB network charge.
And maybe they don't need anything but that. And it will network over 3G and WiFi, print to a network, charge a credit card, send e-mail, etc. My bet is, if his salesman are on the road, they'll have enough. And at night, in the motel room, they can play games.
No, they're apps, written in real computer languages. If they need to communicate with the Internet, they can.
I do, however, have the infamous Google Voice on my iPhone -- in HTML5. Works pretty well.
No, it will not be a platform for Final Cut Pro or rendering digital cinema. For that, you need some horsepower, and way more computer than an iPad -- or a scrawny netbook -- anyway.
Slashdot Mirror
The previous poster has been listening to the people yelling in his mind, and to an angry mommy he's determined to humiliate for some reason. I want you to do a survey of all feminists and tell me exactly what percent are always angry about boys peeking at women? I know a lot of feminists. Very few of them are of that "Take back the night" Catherine MacKinnon Andrea Dworkin variety. Of course, there's always the caricature. You know, like "Obama is a socialist." A useful lie.
How old are you? And if you're older than 15, do you have any weapons, and where do you live?
Well, could it have something to do with the appearance of the "Explicit" tag in the App Store? I'm thinking that the future appearance of the much more useful for porn iPad might have prompted the creation of such a category, through which parents will foolishly believe they are controlling what their children see. But at least, that's something that makes sense. Apple seems to hate to explain themselves, including explaining rumor A which claims that the sudden disappearance of "Hot 'n' Horny" from the App Store is censorship, and then explaining its reappearance in another part of the store. Maybe.
Unbelievable. You go to /. and they're still fighting over the Betamax/VHS wars.
Oh, yeah, somebody posted it to attract the "Apple is a funny cult" posts. Compare them to Jim Jones and Kool-Aid. Interesting that it didn't. There's a very good reason that no-one would do this in one of those wildly popular Microsoft stores. http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/09/11/18/microsoft_retail_store_gets_odd_viral_marketing_buzz.html
Didn't ruin it for me. Or for the great majority of people.
By the way, you seem to think that "38% of jailbroken phones have pirated apps" means "38% of iPhones are jailbroken." Actually, if it's more than 2%, I'd be surprised. Of that 2%, 38% were found to have pirated software. Which means 62% of the hacked phones have no pirated apps on them.
Oh, lots of early PCs were built by guys with neck beards in their garages. The recipe was pretty simple. You could either become a hardware hacker for fun or a small company. There were literally thousands of PC companies, the great majority of them failing in a few years.
Let's see: IBM PC was 1982, and a competitor for the Apple II. In response, Apple brought out the Mac in 1984. Jobs's successors knew there would be a GUI challenger, but they did... nothing. Then, when it was nothing but a money-losing move, they brought out the clones and a thousand different models.
Jobs, meanwhile, made a linux box that worked with Intel.
How vital is a browser on a platform? Very. How sure are you that Firefox will evolve the way you want? Not sure. How sure that Camino, a small software effort, will? Not sure.
Apple had been abandoned by Avid, so they struck back with Final Cut Pro. They had been abandoned by Explorer, so they struck back with Safari. What's knock number one against IE? It renders sites wierdly because of its off-spec engine. Safari has WebKit, an open rendering engine derived from KHTML that is now used on multiple browsers, including, kaff, Google Chrome, and multiple platforms, including Android, no?
And you can run Camino (WebKit) or Firefox (Mozilla) on the Mac, too.
You're not wrong, but you're not right, either. You vote for one approach. I vote for another. There is lots of room in the world for experimentation.
Your mouse button hatred is a complex phenomenon. Apple first went for a consistent design that called for standardized menus to accomplish anything. One button was all you needed for a long time. If you found yourself doing a repetitive motion, you opened the menu and found the Command-key combination. Right-clicks slowly began to intrude from the Windows world, and eventually this was dropped in favor of the Apple mouse designs that are, in fact, two-button or three-button mice. They were demanded by the Windows refugees, because they're used to that, and for no other reason. The newer mice are great, in my experience, except for the tiny nipple roller ball, which get clogged too frequently. I'm now using a Magic mouse, which has a mulitouch-type roller pad, and yes, both left and right click. I really love it. And of course, it's never mentioned by mouse haters that you can use any USB mouse that's on the market, most of which you don't need a special driver for. My Microsoft Mouse works fine, too.
Meanwhile, the right-click-slide-drag world of Windows has one big defect. When you're a bit lost about how to do something, on the Mac you can look through the menus to find out most things. When you're giving your developers free rein to put essential commands on a right click, you make them invisible. I'll cite as an example my long attempt to alphabetize the bookmarks in IE. I searched the menus, nothing. I looked at the menu dialog, and I could find no little button there. Add, subtract bookmarks, clean up the listing, that's it. I actually read somewhere that you right click in the open menu to do that. Weird. How would I have guessed that?
No interface is perfect, but the one-button mouse was a noble effort done for a reason, to keep the interface clear for everyone.
Microsoft's core business is B2B. They provide the OS for a million OEMs. A very small slice of their sales actually has to do directly with consumers. Therefore, much of the costs are swallowed by the hardware manufacturers, who are involved in a dive to the bottom so they can retain margins after paying their Microsoft tax. And business buys computers in job lots, and they're run in networks by IT guys. Nothing wrong with that, but Apple is essentially for the individual.
The difference is in support costs, and of course, we can fire the IT department.
It makes Microsoft more money??
Frankly, though, the prospect of integrating Outlook fully with the Mac version, being able to import and produce those ghastly .pst balls o' crap, though not very appealing, is good from a business point of view. It doesn't fully integrate with anything before Outlook 2007, I think. At least, I couldn't pick up my Exchange mail from Apple Mail, and I think that was the explanation. So on the Mac, I needed to go to the webbrowser version, which is very limited.
"The government is right about everything"?
You called this monopolistic, or anti-competitive! That's legal terminology! You don't get to decide what the law is-- or putting it your way, the government has a cruel monopoly on passing laws by majority vote after elections.
In other words, if you think something isn't nice, that doesn't make it illegal.
I believe they're headed up to around 25% of the smartphone market, depending on the way you count it. Can you say, 25% is not a monopoly on any basis?
Apple provides an SDK and opens the app store to anyone. Some 95% or so are accepted within two weeks. A lot of developers have made serious money. Some have left. That's called a free market.
If they don't want Flash, or they don't want Java, that's up to Apple, wouldn't you say? I don't think they should kick any browser off the farm, unless they, for instance, figure out a way to use Java on the iPhone, which Apple does not support and does not want to be responsible for the security problems and slowdowns for that on a smaller platform where space and time are of the essence.
Excluding .net, or Java, or whatever programming environment, which allows a lot of lazy cross-platform development, is Apple's decision.
Yes, it's important that we prejudge the event so that if Apple decides to reject Opera on any basis, we can hang them!
If a company is found guilty of monopolistic behavior, the law allows them to be broken up, sold, or disposed of in any way the judge deems correct. In fact, Judge Jackson's suggested restructuring would have resulted in three companies that would have each had a clear mandate. The software division would have concentrated on applications like the Office suite. The OS division would have developed more interoperable systems based on standards, because they wouldn't have been large enough to bully the rest of the world. Still quite large, though. The hardware division might have had a chance against the iPod, because they would have gotten off their asses and had to succeed. The Xbox would have had to survive on its own, and not be able to be sold as a loss leader.
After the company has been found guilty and a remedy -- fine or whatever -- is proposed, the entity is under court scrutiny, like an individual released on probation. For a parolee, talking to the wrong person is enough to put you back in jail, even if it wouldn't be an offense to anyone else.
Ironic, isn't it? Setting IE to be the default browser when they're doing a 'security' update? Probably fixing the umpteenth hole in ActiveX, they also reset the browser to... IE6.
On the main computer platform, all browsers are available and easy as pie to install -- with the exception of Internet Explorer, which Microsoft stopped developing for the Mac years ago.
On the phone, Apple's Webkit runs on the iPhone, Android, and some other platforms. It's open source, after all. There are already other browsers on the iPhone. Check out the app store. What Opera had done was a weird construction based on Java that they didn't submit to the app store, because it demanded Java, which they know damn well the iPhone doesn't support. Gruber has the story here.
http://daringfireball.net/2008/11/opera_app_store
On the other hand, this PR genius seems to be starting off on the wrong foot. He's basically blackmailing Jobs to prove he's not a bully. That doesn't seem like a negotiation, but like blackmail. But it certainly helps them on Slashdot/Apple, where any wild surmise about the dictatorial Apple is taken as gospel.
Hulu is in the content business, if the alliance between the various studios lasts much longer. They're not in the Flash business. What they're running is already H.264, only in a Flash container. And since even H.264 is free for free content for at least five years, I'd say they'll switch over with no problems.
http://jilion.com/sublime/video
Try to right-click on that. And sorry to say, you can grab the movies from Hulu if you're clever. Flash just hides itself in spaghetti code.
It's not alone in that mission. Google is also pushing HTML5, which will run better than any Flash player devised.
http://jilion.com/sublime/video
Similar players will no doubt evolve, including ones that accept theora or H.264/x.264. And this developer says it will allow for Internet Explorer by falling back to Flash if necessary.
Funny, you're hating on the things that the market has decided it LIKES about the iPod. You use it all day, and then you hook it up to iTunes where it recharges and updates. Don't have to do it manually. That's what people, not computer junkies, LIKE about it. The world doesn't experience it as a "crippled device." Only nerds do.
No, he explained why: it's cheaper than the netbook plus the 5GB network charge.
And maybe they don't need anything but that. And it will network over 3G and WiFi, print to a network, charge a credit card, send e-mail, etc. My bet is, if his salesman are on the road, they'll have enough. And at night, in the motel room, they can play games.
The Nomad was great, but it just wasn't a mass-market item. Quod erat demonstrandum.
Apple got a lot of grief when they had much less market share. Now they're getting grief because they sell a lot of mass-market stuff.
No, they're apps, written in real computer languages. If they need to communicate with the Internet, they can.
I do, however, have the infamous Google Voice on my iPhone -- in HTML5. Works pretty well.
No, it will not be a platform for Final Cut Pro or rendering digital cinema. For that, you need some horsepower, and way more computer than an iPad -- or a scrawny netbook -- anyway.