If the guy who found the phone wasn't willing to call some random phone number in the middle of the night, and instead intended to wait until morning to make that call, well certainly that's not being polite...it's blatent theft.
Well, he *did* call random numbers... just not the obvious ones (how about work# of the guy who just left without the phone?) So let's throw out that argument.
And if he didn't anticipate that the phone would be locked down by morning and thus didn't write down the number on a piece of paper while it was still working in the middle of the night, then that's not a lack of psychic ability...it's blatent theft.
Look, he remembered the guy's name and facebook page, that's why he's in this mess in the first place, right?
You're trying to paint this guy as some polite, moral character. In actuality it's some douche who found a lost phone, accessed his facebook account, attempted to look through all his photos, and then sold it to the highest bidder.
And for the record, I never called it blatent theft, I'm just calling the finder a dickhead. There's no law against being a dickhead.
You're saying exactly what I'm saying. He did the minimal amount in order to appear like he was doing the right thing, but doing the right thing would have meant taking a more obvious route.
A friend request can include an attached message. That would suffice. And we already knew the finder was dialing numbers... just not the most obvious numbers: the owner's home or work phone? Why not try to email "himself". All these things are more obvious than the route the founder took, which tells me he made little effort in the hopes it would not be claimed.
That's not the point. Obviously Apple knew. The point is that now everybody knows. He already had enough problems before Giz tarred-and-feathered the guy.
Yup, and that's why I call bullshit. This guy had the name, home/business phone number, and facebook account. Yet he didn't leave a message on any of those options? Supposing the phone is bricked he *still* has the facebook option.
It seems pretty obvious that he didn't want the phone to be recovered, but made a half-hearted attempt to cover his ass.
Their source found the device and contacted Apple to attempt to return the device but in typical large company fashion, the people at Apple who knew the device was missing never got that message from the people the guy talked to, and Apple basically blew the guy off.
This is what their source claims but personally I find this suspect. What if his "trying" involved calling tech support and saying "hurr hurr I have an 4g iphone"? because that's what it sounds like from the article:
No one took him seriously and all he got for his troubles was a ticket number.
He thought that eventually the ticket would move up high enough and that he would receive a call back, but his phone never rang.
I see, so he randomly dialed some numbers and then dialed tech support. Way to go all out, buddy. How about actually contacting the owner?? After all, he had access to the owner's facebook account as well as his home/work phone number before the 4g was remotely disabled. It seems like an obviously half-hearted attempt because the finder did not want return the phone but wanted to appear like he did.
I don't see the entire point in naming names here, but the dude did lose the phone and it is his fault...
Yes, it is absolutely his fault, and he was probably going to suffer harsh consequences already. However, Gizmodo decided to heap public humiliation on top of this. He was already going to get fired, but now he is a laughingstock who will have a seriously hard time getting another job in the industry because of his newfound name recognition.
This guy was already screwed but Gizmodo decided to utterly destroy his career and reputation -- all for a few more clicks. Total dick move.
The students were, in fact, allowed to leave school grounds. And part of the problem here is that the criteria for them determining whether the laptop was "stolen" seemed really fragile.
I can't find the article now, but one of the IT guys for the district was recorded in a presentation (where he was praising the program) that one of the laptop's owners connected to their neighbor's WiFi, rather than their own network (I'm assuming that students needed to register their router's mac address). Anyway, the software detected this as laptop theft, the school reported it stolen, and the police worked with the local ISP to get the address of the neighbor and searched the neighbors house.
As more details about this story come forward, I am increasingly amazed that this program made it past the idea-stage. You'd think at least *one* person in the chain-of-command would have some common sense.
Not so. Here's section 3.3.1 of the iPhone OS3 license agreement:
3.3.1 — Applications may only use Documented APIs in the manner prescribed by Apple and must not use or call any private APIs.
And here's 3.3.1 for iPhone OS4:
3.3.1 — Applications may only use Documented APIs in the manner prescribed by Apple and must not use or call any private APIs. Applications must be originally written in Objective-C, C, C++, or JavaScript as executed by the iPhone OS WebKit engine, and only code written in C, C++, and Objective-C may compile and directly link against the Documented APIs (e.g., Applications that link to Documented APIs through an intermediary translation or compatibility layer or tool are prohibited).
They explicitly say that -- even if you are using documented api's -- you may not use any language other than c, obj-c, or c++ to do it.
I don't mind Google's targeted ads so I feel no need for a tinfoil hat over this one.
I have a feeling that you'll change your tune once Adwords starts sending you porn ads based on your browsing history. I don't think I should be lumped in with the tinfoil-hat crowed simply because I don't want to share every single keystroke that I type into the address bar.
(p.s. The url in your sig is unintentionally hilarious. By the time I got to "67. Superior 2D Drawing" I fell out of my chair.)
Dude, if it's in an "Options" dialog we already know that 90% of users will not bother to touch it.
Also, while the first options tab controls *who* you send every single keystroke to, it isn't until you go to the "Under the Hood" tab that you can actually turn the feature off. So don't give me this "but but it isn't an advanced setting" crap just because the tab isn't named "Advanced".
Yes, it *is* a big difference. And I think you fail to appreciate the significance here. Under default settings, Chrome is effectively sending your entire browsing history to Google. I don't like this.
You'd be even more amazed at the sheer number of people who type their URLs in the search box of their Google homepage.
These people aren't the ones using Chrome, are they?
You're comparing apples(no pun intended) and oranges.
If a web app doesn't work in a particular browser, a user can simply fire up another browser. But if a user pays money for app that doesn't work? Well then that user is screwed and you have a serious problem.
I largely agree with your statement, but I would imagine that there is are least *some* developers jumping ship from Wii (or, more likely, DS/DSi) to iPhone/iPod. And they're probably making games for the older consumers that Nintendo has been courting in recent years.
For all the talk of Apple's restrictive policies, Nintendo's stance towards developers is almost draconian by comparison. Development kits for Nintendo hardware run into the thousands of $$$ -- assuming Nintendo even sells you a devkit, which they won't unless you're an established developer or you're being published by someone with a known track record. And unlike Apple which takes 30% off the top, Nintendo's cut is largely determined on a case-by-case basis (EA probably gets a much more lucrative deal than a small publisher.
... multitasking is not required. there is no use case.
I dunno man, sounds like your trying to convince yourself, not us. To say that there aren't *any* use cases is just silly. How about skype calls while using another app? There's a case right there!
Having used an iPhone and and Android phone I can tell you that multitasking is a nice feature to have. And the iPhone notifications are a joke compared to what you get with android (especially for IM and VOIP clients).
The only reason iPhone/iPad doesn't have multitasking is because of battery life issues and RAM limitations. To say "oh you don't need those things" is just being an apologist.
. If the phone meets a video with no H.264 version it just says "cannot display movie at this time" or something like that.
Actually, it seems like the act of requesting the h.264 version for the conversion process. When I receive the "cannot display movie" message, it'll usually play just fine if I request it a second time. Perhaps by second attempt youtube has converted the video.
As more and more games move away from 60fps *snip*
Hmm... I don't accept that premise, either on the PC (where midrange graphics cards can easily pull 60fps with any game on the market now) or on the consoles (where framerates are only going up as PS3 and 360 development matures).
I think that this article (or at least the summary) is a bit of a strawman. Most of the gamers I know recognize that good framerates are important.
I've heard game developers are often approached by folks who say "hey, I've got a great *idea* for a video game, but I don't know how to program. How about I share my ideas with you, you program the video game, and we split the profits 50/50!".
I wonder if it was a similar sitation here. I'm leaning towards believing that Fusion Garage and Chandra Rathakrishnan have the actual ability to design and create the hardware, and Arrington is just a douchebag blogger with an inflated sense of how important his ideas are.
"Okay guys, check out my VISION. How about... a thin and *cheap* tablet pc!" Yeah Michael, thanks.
Possibly, if we're talking about the "gold" XBox Live service, since you can't (to my knowledge) play multiplayer games with the "silver" level service. I assume this is the case, but the article doesn't break it down.
But if we're talking about 600k "silver" users, I can't imagine that these users are all that disappointed seeing as how they aren't losing that much functionality.
he aformentioned Therac incident happened, in part, because such a hardware interlock did not exist.
Ironically, earlier models of the Therac device *did* have hardware interlocks. These earlier models shared the same software defects as the Therac-25, but hardware interlocks prevented the overdose scenario.
I haven't RTFA, and I don't even pretend to assume that I could do things better (or even fully grasp the problem). That said, the struggle for efficiency and programmers' tendency to seek out a software solution to any problem seem to be at odds with the multiple levels of redundancy, checks, and balances that are absolutely required for medical technology.
I would loathe being a software developer in the medical industry. It's a noble thing, but the knowledge that my mistakes could potentially *kill* other people would make me sick.
I think what you're saying people are saying is not what people are actually saying (in other words, you're setting up a straw man argument).
First the press claimed that the UMD format sucks and that the PSP is too bulky to be carried around. At that time they were probably right. Now the same people are claiming that getting rid of the UMD format sucks and that the PSPgo is too small.
Actually, most of the complaints that I see center around the cost. On one hand, this thing clearly costs less to manufacture than a standard PSP (no UMD drive, smaller screen) yet it retails for 50% more. Similarly, the games should cost less due to the decreased manufacturing and distribution costs (not to mention the complete lack of 2nd-hand resell value) but in fact are the exact same price as the UMD equivalent.
For what it's worth, most people actually like the PSP Go hardware, and even like the concept. It's the execution that is sorely lacking.
I have the original PSP-1000 but that didn't stop me getting a PSPgo. I can play those UMD games on the old system if I want but since it's so big I rarely carry it around.
Wow, you are Sony's dream demographic -- people who like getting punched in the face and will repeatedly line up for more. Please think about what you are saying: the Go is *so* convenient that you don't mind the inconvenience of having to bring your old PSP when you want to actually play games.
I suppose you could *rebuy* the games that you already own , but then you run the risk putting the pieces together and realizing what an incredibly stupid decision you've made.
Slashdot Mirror
Well, he *did* call random numbers... just not the obvious ones (how about work# of the guy who just left without the phone?) So let's throw out that argument.
Look, he remembered the guy's name and facebook page, that's why he's in this mess in the first place, right?
You're trying to paint this guy as some polite, moral character. In actuality it's some douche who found a lost phone, accessed his facebook account, attempted to look through all his photos, and then sold it to the highest bidder.
And for the record, I never called it blatent theft, I'm just calling the finder a dickhead. There's no law against being a dickhead.
You're saying exactly what I'm saying. He did the minimal amount in order to appear like he was doing the right thing, but doing the right thing would have meant taking a more obvious route.
A friend request can include an attached message. That would suffice. And we already knew the finder was dialing numbers... just not the most obvious numbers: the owner's home or work phone? Why not try to email "himself". All these things are more obvious than the route the founder took, which tells me he made little effort in the hopes it would not be claimed.
That's not the point. Obviously Apple knew. The point is that now everybody knows. He already had enough problems before Giz tarred-and-feathered the guy.
Yup, and that's why I call bullshit. This guy had the name, home/business phone number, and facebook account. Yet he didn't leave a message on any of those options? Supposing the phone is bricked he *still* has the facebook option.
It seems pretty obvious that he didn't want the phone to be recovered, but made a half-hearted attempt to cover his ass.
This is what their source claims but personally I find this suspect. What if his "trying" involved calling tech support and saying "hurr hurr I have an 4g iphone"? because that's what it sounds like from the article:
I see, so he randomly dialed some numbers and then dialed tech support. Way to go all out, buddy. How about actually contacting the owner ?? After all, he had access to the owner's facebook account as well as his home/work phone number before the 4g was remotely disabled. It seems like an obviously half-hearted attempt because the finder did not want return the phone but wanted to appear like he did.
Yes, it is absolutely his fault, and he was probably going to suffer harsh consequences already. However, Gizmodo decided to heap public humiliation on top of this. He was already going to get fired, but now he is a laughingstock who will have a seriously hard time getting another job in the industry because of his newfound name recognition.
This guy was already screwed but Gizmodo decided to utterly destroy his career and reputation -- all for a few more clicks. Total dick move.
The students were, in fact, allowed to leave school grounds. And part of the problem here is that the criteria for them determining whether the laptop was "stolen" seemed really fragile.
I can't find the article now, but one of the IT guys for the district was recorded in a presentation (where he was praising the program) that one of the laptop's owners connected to their neighbor's WiFi, rather than their own network (I'm assuming that students needed to register their router's mac address). Anyway, the software detected this as laptop theft, the school reported it stolen, and the police worked with the local ISP to get the address of the neighbor and searched the neighbors house .
As more details about this story come forward, I am increasingly amazed that this program made it past the idea-stage. You'd think at least *one* person in the chain-of-command would have some common sense.
Not so. Here's section 3.3.1 of the iPhone OS3 license agreement:
And here's 3.3.1 for iPhone OS4:
They explicitly say that -- even if you are using documented api's -- you may not use any language other than c, obj-c, or c++ to do it.
I have a feeling that you'll change your tune once Adwords starts sending you porn ads based on your browsing history. I don't think I should be lumped in with the tinfoil-hat crowed simply because I don't want to share every single keystroke that I type into the address bar.
(p.s. The url in your sig is unintentionally hilarious. By the time I got to "67. Superior 2D Drawing" I fell out of my chair.)
Dude, if it's in an "Options" dialog we already know that 90% of users will not bother to touch it.
Also, while the first options tab controls *who* you send every single keystroke to, it isn't until you go to the "Under the Hood" tab that you can actually turn the feature off. So don't give me this "but but it isn't an advanced setting" crap just because the tab isn't named "Advanced".
Yes, it *is* a big difference. And I think you fail to appreciate the significance here. Under default settings, Chrome is effectively sending your entire browsing history to Google. I don't like this.
These people aren't the ones using Chrome, are they?
Well, pretty much killed linux on the PS2 as well, so anyone who is surprised by this move doesn't know them very well.
You're comparing apples(no pun intended) and oranges.
If a web app doesn't work in a particular browser, a user can simply fire up another browser. But if a user pays money for app that doesn't work? Well then that user is screwed and you have a serious problem.
Offtopic but funny. For fun, go to a Ryan Adams concert and request "Summer of '69". Watch Ryan Adams flip out. Good times.
That's just the thing though, according to the lawsuit, the school district did not indicate that it would be monitoring students via the webcam.
I largely agree with your statement, but I would imagine that there is are least *some* developers jumping ship from Wii (or, more likely, DS/DSi) to iPhone/iPod. And they're probably making games for the older consumers that Nintendo has been courting in recent years.
For all the talk of Apple's restrictive policies, Nintendo's stance towards developers is almost draconian by comparison. Development kits for Nintendo hardware run into the thousands of $$$ -- assuming Nintendo even sells you a devkit, which they won't unless you're an established developer or you're being published by someone with a known track record. And unlike Apple which takes 30% off the top, Nintendo's cut is largely determined on a case-by-case basis (EA probably gets a much more lucrative deal than a small publisher.
First thing that came to mind:
I dunno man, sounds like your trying to convince yourself, not us. To say that there aren't *any* use cases is just silly. How about skype calls while using another app? There's a case right there!
Having used an iPhone and and Android phone I can tell you that multitasking is a nice feature to have. And the iPhone notifications are a joke compared to what you get with android (especially for IM and VOIP clients).
The only reason iPhone/iPad doesn't have multitasking is because of battery life issues and RAM limitations. To say "oh you don't need those things" is just being an apologist.
Actually, it seems like the act of requesting the h.264 version for the conversion process. When I receive the "cannot display movie" message, it'll usually play just fine if I request it a second time. Perhaps by second attempt youtube has converted the video.
Hmm... I don't accept that premise, either on the PC (where midrange graphics cards can easily pull 60fps with any game on the market now) or on the consoles (where framerates are only going up as PS3 and 360 development matures).
I think that this article (or at least the summary) is a bit of a strawman. Most of the gamers I know recognize that good framerates are important.
C'mon guys. Tux is a penguin. Him and Santa are quite literally polar opposites!
I've heard game developers are often approached by folks who say "hey, I've got a great *idea* for a video game, but I don't know how to program. How about I share my ideas with you, you program the video game, and we split the profits 50/50!".
I wonder if it was a similar sitation here. I'm leaning towards believing that Fusion Garage and Chandra Rathakrishnan have the actual ability to design and create the hardware, and Arrington is just a douchebag blogger with an inflated sense of how important his ideas are.
"Okay guys, check out my VISION. How about... a thin and *cheap* tablet pc!" Yeah Michael, thanks.
Possibly, if we're talking about the "gold" XBox Live service, since you can't (to my knowledge) play multiplayer games with the "silver" level service. I assume this is the case, but the article doesn't break it down.
But if we're talking about 600k "silver" users, I can't imagine that these users are all that disappointed seeing as how they aren't losing that much functionality.
Ironically, earlier models of the Therac device *did* have hardware interlocks. These earlier models shared the same software defects as the Therac-25, but hardware interlocks prevented the overdose scenario.
I haven't RTFA, and I don't even pretend to assume that I could do things better (or even fully grasp the problem). That said, the struggle for efficiency and programmers' tendency to seek out a software solution to any problem seem to be at odds with the multiple levels of redundancy, checks, and balances that are absolutely required for medical technology.
I would loathe being a software developer in the medical industry. It's a noble thing, but the knowledge that my mistakes could potentially *kill* other people would make me sick.
I think what you're saying people are saying is not what people are actually saying (in other words, you're setting up a straw man argument).
Actually, most of the complaints that I see center around the cost. On one hand, this thing clearly costs less to manufacture than a standard PSP (no UMD drive, smaller screen) yet it retails for 50% more. Similarly, the games should cost less due to the decreased manufacturing and distribution costs (not to mention the complete lack of 2nd-hand resell value) but in fact are the exact same price as the UMD equivalent.
For what it's worth, most people actually like the PSP Go hardware, and even like the concept. It's the execution that is sorely lacking.
Wow, you are Sony's dream demographic -- people who like getting punched in the face and will repeatedly line up for more. Please think about what you are saying: the Go is *so* convenient that you don't mind the inconvenience of having to bring your old PSP when you want to actually play games.
I suppose you could *rebuy* the games that you already own , but then you run the risk putting the pieces together and realizing what an incredibly stupid decision you've made.