Re:Geeks do- everyone else doesn't.
on
The DRM Scorecard
·
· Score: 1
"Each step filters people, and those people pay. Simple as that. "
Actually I don't think it's as simple as that. Just because I can't crack DRM or use someone else's DRM crack does not mean I'm going to pay for it. I think most of the people on P2P sites are people who wouldn't want to (or couldn't) use a DRM crack, but they're not paying for the content. Nope, they went out where there is TONS of already cracked content available for download.
I think the point of this is DRM will always be cracked, so why don't the MAFIAA cartels just adapt a new business model, get rid of DRM, and sell at a more reasonable price and licensing terms? I think most folks would rather be legal, but the scalping of the consumer has turned many of them to stealing content.
He wasn't offensive. He just pointed out your inability to understand that a TIVO remote control is not analogous with an iPhone. You just played the fanboy card when he didn't buy your poor logic.
Does this make you guilty of fanboy ostracizing fanboyism? Shut up with the idiotic fanboy accusations already. It's the refuge of weak minded sheep when they accuse someone of being a fanboy just because they like something that Apple did. In an odd twist of fate you become the fanboy of anti-fanboyism and then the circular logic just gains speed.
I just want to make sure I understand your huge problem. You can afford a BMW and yet you can't afford a dedicated iPod to keep in your BMW's glove box? We should all have such a terrible problem!
I took a quick look at your phone and I'm not sure how that screen is going to blow away the iPhone's? The screen looks MUCH smaller in comparison to the rest of the phone, so for the screen to even be the same size as the iPhone's the Openmoko would have to be a HUGE handset? Maybe this phone will be okay, anything that breaks the carrier's lock down is welcome. I guess we'll have to actually see what they turn out. Right now the iPhone fits 95% of my desire in a mobile, compared to any other phone only fulfilling 10% of my needs. Plus, it has the best interface, hands down. I think Apple did it right for 95% of consumers.
Real expandability? How about a completely software based UI that can be added to whenever new features come out? That seems real.
Real messaging applications? SMS messaging is on the phone. Meebo.com can give you access to IM functionality.
Real improvement? How about a user interface that doesn't suck like EVERY OTHER PHONE. The fact that anyone can pick it up and instantly understand how to use it, that is an improvement. The fact that it has the best web browser on a mobile, that is an improvement. . . .
I think by "real" you mean "real by my narrow definition" because it has all the things you've mentioned. As for the data modem, perhaps you could give the accessory makers even a few days to come out with some attempts to fill that gap. The 1st gen of this phone hasn't even been released yet and you expect every possible need to be addressed already? Sorry, but your expectations are a bit unrealistic. The iPhone has the feature set that most consumers want and that is why it's going to be an iPod style success. Nobody's lining up days in advance to buy a sidekick, are they? Maybe that should tell you something.
Wow, USA Today, the tech oracle of the universe. Never mind that I can Google "flash memory speed versus hard drive" and see tons of articles telling me that flash is faster. Hey, I wonder why they are thinking of using flash memory in laptops. . . . could it be that they want the laptops to run slower?.. . No, turns out they want it to run faster. Tech companies are also working to incorporate flash memory into hard drives, you know why? . . . because it will make them FASTER!
Transfer times via USB to an iPod is not the same thing as access time on the device. Maybe you haven't bought enough iPods to understand that yet. Maybe you should buy some more.
" flash memory. Which is a lot slower than a drive." -Are you daft? Flash memory is faster than a hard drive. You obviously don't know crap.
"So if my 1% coincides pretty nicely with the 1% Apple thinks it has a shot with" -Please try not to be stupid. If the 1% of the target sales audience that Apple has in mind is EXACTLY the same 1% of idiots that you belong to then your point would make sense. But obviously the 1% market share they are trying for will be widely varied, and of that 1% probably less than 1% them cares about an SDK. So, math genius, that is the 1% of the 1%. Show me some people on the street, non-developers/technical people who care about an SDK... . there are NONE. You don't know what you're talking about.
" Show me anywhere, where any Apple official is making the promises you're making" -Once again displaying your ignorance because Apple NEVER talks about future plans for it's products. Duhh?! When I speculate that an SDK will come it is because Apple can obviously see the benefits from its experience in its computer business, and I'm sure they can see the benefits for the iPhone too. You don't think that everyone in Apple can't figure that out but YOU can, do you? Maybe it's a HUGE product launch that should be focused on first, then worry about an SDK timeline later. Maybe waiting a while for an SDK is a much SMARTER idea because you don't open your device up to every idiot out there who wants to try and make a crappy app, but isn't smart enough to know that the iPhone doesn't have a disk drive, or that flash memory is faster than a disk drive.
Sorry, but your continued idiocy in this is astounding. You don't even know what hardware the iPhone has, nor do you understand the advantages of flash memory over a hard drive, and then you expect anyone to listen to YOU drone on about the huge strategic error of not having an SDK on day one? I don't think I'd even let you mow my lawn, let alone advise me on business strategy or technology.
"There is currently no plan to introduce a SDK for native apps on the iPhone. Nobody has mentioned or even hinted at such." -The first sentence is also pure speculation on your part too. As for the second sentence, I don't think Apple is known for opening it's mouth on it's future product plans. The reason I said I think it will eventually happen, is that it does make sense to have an SDK on the iPhone, obviously Apple knows the benefits from its computer experience. But starting out and launching a revolutionary new product like this, AND having all the little side pieces immediately ready (SDK) is one heck of a lot to deal with. Why not get the phone out there, then work on rolling out an SDK and software vetting/installation process when you have a bit more time and you have ridiculous iPhone revenue coming in? Yes, I was speculating, but I think it's only logical that an SDK comes out at some point. I just don't know if it's necessary to have one out on day one. I think runaway success with the iPhone also gives Apple leverage to get an SDK out there because AT&T HAS to be scared of a VOIP app being installed on an iPhone. I think they're too short sighted to see that VOIP would probably have very little impact on their revenue because most folks would only use it at home anyway.
As for buying one, if I had the money right now I would buy one. That is the only thing holding me back. This is the first well designed phone I've ever seen. All those other smartphones suck in comparison because they are a pain to use. So they haven't lost my sale at all, I just don't have the money to spare right now, but I will soon. As for iPhone being doomed because they lost your sale because of a lack of an SDK. . . . if you can't see how ridiculous that sounds then I'm not sure I can help you. 99+% of the people buying a phone don't give a crap about an iPhone SDK. Soooooo, they might be losing sales of the 1% of snotty SDK whiners, but that hardly "dooms" them.
I'm sure carriers don't want to give Apple a dime. Hey, they're carriers, they're greed MF'ers! But despite that obvious reason I think carriers like Verizon didn't want users to be able to sync their photos/music/contacts/etc. through their computer. They want EVERYTHING sent over the network so they can charge for it. THAT is the reason mobile phones are not progressing, carrier greed.
I'll admit I thought it was a bit arrogant that Apple wants a cut from every iPhone user. I'm a bit torn on this. In a way it reminds me of the RIAA wanting a cut of iPod sales. But, the comparison falls apart after that because the iPhone will drive TONS of customers to AT&T, but RIAA music does not perform a similar function for the iPod.
I think it's more likely that Verizon wouldn't allow the flexibility of the iPhone and the ability to sync to computers directly. They have a history of crippling their phones because of THEIR hubris and greed. I don't doubt Apple asks for things that rock the carriers back on their heels, but then again the carriers don't seem to understand or care about the desires of their own customers. Apple coming in and telling them that this is the feature set and it won't be compromised more likely made many carriers take their ball and go home.
As for the cut Apple is getting from AT&T, it is a new way of doing business, but I think we'll shortly see that Apple was justified in wanting a cut of the business they'll be sending AT&T's way. There is going to be a HUGE adoption of this phone.
As for the network speed, we'll have to wait and see. From what I've heard the 3G networks are not that much better in reality, only in the specs.
Nice point. No, just kidding. You should try following your own advice.
"When you disagree with someone, look for specific points that can attacked." -And where exactly did you do that in YOUR post?
And can you learn not to put bold typeface on irrelevant words in your post? For all your grammatical posturing your post seems to be one of the most unreadable posts I've ever seen. Not to mention off topic.
"Apple has all but abandoned it's desktops" -Please don't be ridiculous. 9 months! Ooohhhh my gosh, I guess my existing machine doesn't have the power to run Word anymore!! I'm assuming what you really mean is they have abandoned their computer business, not just desktops. Did they not just update the Macbook and Macbook Pro? No, they are not desktop machines, but you're not seriously telling me that Apple has abandoned just desktops, not laptops? Can you get any more dramatic about a 9 month wait to get updates to a product line this is already powerful enough for 99
Funny thing is he seems to be right most of the time when I look back. Maybe we can summarize your comment like this, "om Roughlydrafted, I don't even need to read it. I'm guessing it's probably mostly correct."
You make some good points, and I agree with most, but I think you miss the boat on the VOIP discussion. The place where VOIP would be used most is the scenario you describe . . . . at home. At home I have a b/g/n environment. At home I could use iPhone/VOIP to not have to pay for landline phone service from my local monopoly. Outside of home, almost always I'd be using the wireless plan minutes for voice, but at home I'd use VOIP. If I had this option I could finally drop my landline and still allow my wife the "unlimited" calling she enjoys now.
As I said in another post, the hype over the missing SDK is overblown, but it will eventually happen. Once Apple shows the wireless operators what their business could really be like if they relaxed their control a bit Apple will be able to force them to allow 3rd party apps and the utopian SDK society will arrive (a bit of sarcasm on Monday morning). I believe an SDK is eventually necessary for long term, but starting out most people (99+%) just don't care.
P.S. Nice take on the bar code reader! Can you believe that rube actually posted that as a desired app in the first place? Has he ever heard of girls?
First, the iPhone does not have a "big fast hard drive". I'm trying to figure out how you are a technophile who wants an SDK and yet still don't understand the device you're complaining about?
Second, the iPhone is not "doomed" because 1% of the population (mainly ego driven geeks who've never kissed a girl) can't have an SDK the nanosecond the iPhone is released. I think the SDK thing will resolve itself in time, and I do want an SDK too, but I don't think now is the right time to try and incorporate everything into the phone. Most people do NOT care about this. Most people don't have the first clue what SDK stands for, so why would they care?
I want developers to be able to make apps for the iPhone too, but starting out I think they made the right choice. Get the device out to the consumers who will be waiting in line for this "doomed" device. Did you read that last sentence carefully? People will be WAITING IN LINE. This is an overwhelmingly popular product before it has even been released to the first consumer. How does the pro-SDK crowd reconcile this with their belief that the phone is "doomed" because of no SDK?
Down the road Apple probably will release an SDK, but for right now the infrastructure to support 3rd party apps would get in the way of the release of the device. I want Skype, I want games, I want 3rd party options too, but you folks who are harping on the SDK dogma just don't seem to understand that most people DON'T CARE. They want a phone, an iPod, an internet device, etc. that is mindlessly easy to use and synch. The iPhone is the device. It will get better with time, but it leads the pack already (no one waits in line for a Treo!), and that's without the precious SDK.
Hahahaha! You hit the nail on the head with this post. Who would bitch about image so much except someone who focuses on having the image of being against all people who buy based on image! Me think he doth protest too much.
Then you top off your ruthlessly accurate argument with the Alanis Morisette gambit! Kudos my man! Kudos!
What exactly is the "niche market" that Apple serves? Is it the niche of no viruses? The niche of no spyware? The niche of a stable operating system? What fictional niche were you referring to?
As for the "too cool for you" market segment, you state, "Just about no one else cares at all." Actually, besides ill informed IT writers who just regurgitate drivel, just about no one who uses Macs walks around thinking "I'm too cool using my Mac." They use them because they like them and they work. The cool argument has taken on a life of its own, but I haven't seen one person yet who described their choice of an Apple product as based on how "cool" it made them feel.
And, yes, Apple does sell hardware. It's where they make their money. ALL companies try to sell image as one point of their marketing strategy. Only people with a poor understanding of Mac uers' major reasons for loving their machines would say it was based on image.
I don't think you have an understanding of why Mac users like their Macs. Those same Mac users are walking around proselytizing because they love what they use. Very few products garner this much loyalty and loyalty is not based on "coolness".
Has anyone else noticed that their home page is almost entirely devoted to piracy, stopping piracy, theives, how theives hurt their business, etc? Is it just me or are they almost pathologically obsessed with this issue? It's almost a bunker mentality.
And, just to weigh in on this, I say sue 'em! I have frivolous lawsuits too, but I don't think this qualifies. Despite the fact that they'd get off scott free, this is actually a lawsuit that needs to be filed.
Exactly! How many people reduce their decision to price on everything else they buy? Are they buying the cheapest car? The cheapest house? The cheapest TV? The cheapest beer? No. So why does this argument always surface when buying computers? The argument that Windows is good enough makes no sense either. By that reasoning they should be buying everything else as cheap as they can as long as it's "good enough", but we all know they aren't.
This price of the computer argument doesn't hold water on the surface of it, and it definitely falls apart once you consider TCO.
I think the other side of the coin that no one is mentioning is that using Plays for Sure hardly meant that it would, indeed, PLAY FOR SURE. I've heard so many horror stories about how different devices would not work with different stores and they all used Plays for Sure.
The tightly controlled Apple solution works, and works well, and that is why they are leading the market too. Plays for Sure never seemed to work well and people get frustrated when it doesn't just work.
Nor can you.
Plays for Sure has low market share and has been cracked several times. In fact, I'd be willing to wager it's been cracked at a rate far above its market share percentage in comparison to Fairplay.
Macs have a low market share compared to Windows machines. Windows machines have over 114,000+ viruses in the wild. Macs have ZERO.
Actually this sort of makes the point of many Mac fans that security through obscurity is an overly simplistic and untrue argument. Market share does make some difference, but it is far from the only reason. When Mac fans bitch about this argument it's because "expert" columnists spew the obscurity FUD to explain away Windows poor security.
So, this actually seems to support the Mac fans arguments to some degree. Funny how that worked out, isn't it?
The moment I saw this I knew someone would make this point, and rightly so. Yet, I would say that this is not an apples (pardon the pun) to oranges comparison. Yes, market share does make some difference, but it does not explain everything.
Let's take this separately. Fairplay has 80+% market share, and let's assume Plays for Sure has the rest. BOTH Fairplay and Plays for Sure DRM have been cracked. Fairplay has the vast majority of the market so yes, I would expect that the bulk of the attention would be on them when cracking DRM. Yet, Plays for Sure has had their DRM cracked and, although I don't have numbers to back me up on this, I would expect the percentage of cracks for Plays for Sure is far higher than their market share.
Windows has something like 90+% of the OS market. Apple has 6+% based on some report I saw within the last week. Windows has 114,000+ viruses in the wild. Apple has zero. . ..ZERO!
I think the point of most MODERATE Mac fans arguing this issue is that the blanket assumption of security through obscurity does not hold water and that most columnists that spread this argument are making an overly simplistic and ignorant statement. Market share does have something to do with it, but if that was the sole determining factor then shouldn't the Mac at least have roughly 6% of the viruses instead of ZERO? The simple fact they can't seem to wrap their mind around is that the Mac does have better security. I'm not saying it's perfect, or impenetrable, just far better than Windows.
Slashdot Mirror
"Each step filters people, and those people pay. Simple as that. "
Actually I don't think it's as simple as that. Just because I can't crack DRM or use someone else's DRM crack does not mean I'm going to pay for it. I think most of the people on P2P sites are people who wouldn't want to (or couldn't) use a DRM crack, but they're not paying for the content. Nope, they went out where there is TONS of already cracked content available for download.
I think the point of this is DRM will always be cracked, so why don't the MAFIAA cartels just adapt a new business model, get rid of DRM, and sell at a more reasonable price and licensing terms? I think most folks would rather be legal, but the scalping of the consumer has turned many of them to stealing content.
He wasn't offensive. He just pointed out your inability to understand that a TIVO remote control is not analogous with an iPhone. You just played the fanboy card when he didn't buy your poor logic.
I read your posts just fine. You played the "fanboy" card as soon as someone disagreed with you. Case closed.
Does this make you guilty of fanboy ostracizing fanboyism? Shut up with the idiotic fanboy accusations already. It's the refuge of weak minded sheep when they accuse someone of being a fanboy just because they like something that Apple did. In an odd twist of fate you become the fanboy of anti-fanboyism and then the circular logic just gains speed.
I just want to make sure I understand your huge problem. You can afford a BMW and yet you can't afford a dedicated iPod to keep in your BMW's glove box? We should all have such a terrible problem!
I took a quick look at your phone and I'm not sure how that screen is going to blow away the iPhone's? The screen looks MUCH smaller in comparison to the rest of the phone, so for the screen to even be the same size as the iPhone's the Openmoko would have to be a HUGE handset? Maybe this phone will be okay, anything that breaks the carrier's lock down is welcome. I guess we'll have to actually see what they turn out. Right now the iPhone fits 95% of my desire in a mobile, compared to any other phone only fulfilling 10% of my needs. Plus, it has the best interface, hands down. I think Apple did it right for 95% of consumers.
Real expandability? How about a completely software based UI that can be added to whenever new features come out? That seems real.
Real messaging applications? SMS messaging is on the phone. Meebo.com can give you access to IM functionality.
Real improvement? How about a user interface that doesn't suck like EVERY OTHER PHONE. The fact that anyone can pick it up and instantly understand how to use it, that is an improvement. The fact that it has the best web browser on a mobile, that is an improvement. . . .
I think by "real" you mean "real by my narrow definition" because it has all the things you've mentioned. As for the data modem, perhaps you could give the accessory makers even a few days to come out with some attempts to fill that gap. The 1st gen of this phone hasn't even been released yet and you expect every possible need to be addressed already? Sorry, but your expectations are a bit unrealistic. The iPhone has the feature set that most consumers want and that is why it's going to be an iPod style success. Nobody's lining up days in advance to buy a sidekick, are they? Maybe that should tell you something.
Wow, USA Today, the tech oracle of the universe. Never mind that I can Google "flash memory speed versus hard drive" and see tons of articles telling me that flash is faster. Hey, I wonder why they are thinking of using flash memory in laptops. . . . could it be that they want the laptops to run slower? .. . No, turns out they want it to run faster. Tech companies are also working to incorporate flash memory into hard drives, you know why? . . . because it will make them FASTER!
Transfer times via USB to an iPod is not the same thing as access time on the device. Maybe you haven't bought enough iPods to understand that yet. Maybe you should buy some more.
" flash memory. Which is a lot slower than a drive."
.. . there are NONE. You don't know what you're talking about.
-Are you daft? Flash memory is faster than a hard drive. You obviously don't know crap.
"So if my 1% coincides pretty nicely with the 1% Apple thinks it has a shot with"
-Please try not to be stupid. If the 1% of the target sales audience that Apple has in mind is EXACTLY the same 1% of idiots that you belong to then your point would make sense. But obviously the 1% market share they are trying for will be widely varied, and of that 1% probably less than 1% them cares about an SDK. So, math genius, that is the 1% of the 1%. Show me some people on the street, non-developers/technical people who care about an SDK.
" Show me anywhere, where any Apple official is making the promises you're making"
-Once again displaying your ignorance because Apple NEVER talks about future plans for it's products. Duhh?! When I speculate that an SDK will come it is because Apple can obviously see the benefits from its experience in its computer business, and I'm sure they can see the benefits for the iPhone too. You don't think that everyone in Apple can't figure that out but YOU can, do you? Maybe it's a HUGE product launch that should be focused on first, then worry about an SDK timeline later. Maybe waiting a while for an SDK is a much SMARTER idea because you don't open your device up to every idiot out there who wants to try and make a crappy app, but isn't smart enough to know that the iPhone doesn't have a disk drive, or that flash memory is faster than a disk drive.
Sorry, but your continued idiocy in this is astounding. You don't even know what hardware the iPhone has, nor do you understand the advantages of flash memory over a hard drive, and then you expect anyone to listen to YOU drone on about the huge strategic error of not having an SDK on day one? I don't think I'd even let you mow my lawn, let alone advise me on business strategy or technology.
"There is currently no plan to introduce a SDK for native apps on the iPhone. Nobody has mentioned or even hinted at such."
-The first sentence is also pure speculation on your part too. As for the second sentence, I don't think Apple is known for opening it's mouth on it's future product plans. The reason I said I think it will eventually happen, is that it does make sense to have an SDK on the iPhone, obviously Apple knows the benefits from its computer experience. But starting out and launching a revolutionary new product like this, AND having all the little side pieces immediately ready (SDK) is one heck of a lot to deal with. Why not get the phone out there, then work on rolling out an SDK and software vetting/installation process when you have a bit more time and you have ridiculous iPhone revenue coming in? Yes, I was speculating, but I think it's only logical that an SDK comes out at some point. I just don't know if it's necessary to have one out on day one. I think runaway success with the iPhone also gives Apple leverage to get an SDK out there because AT&T HAS to be scared of a VOIP app being installed on an iPhone. I think they're too short sighted to see that VOIP would probably have very little impact on their revenue because most folks would only use it at home anyway.
As for buying one, if I had the money right now I would buy one. That is the only thing holding me back. This is the first well designed phone I've ever seen. All those other smartphones suck in comparison because they are a pain to use. So they haven't lost my sale at all, I just don't have the money to spare right now, but I will soon. As for iPhone being doomed because they lost your sale because of a lack of an SDK. . . . if you can't see how ridiculous that sounds then I'm not sure I can help you. 99+% of the people buying a phone don't give a crap about an iPhone SDK. Soooooo, they might be losing sales of the 1% of snotty SDK whiners, but that hardly "dooms" them.
I'm sure carriers don't want to give Apple a dime. Hey, they're carriers, they're greed MF'ers! But despite that obvious reason I think carriers like Verizon didn't want users to be able to sync their photos/music/contacts/etc. through their computer. They want EVERYTHING sent over the network so they can charge for it. THAT is the reason mobile phones are not progressing, carrier greed.
I'll admit I thought it was a bit arrogant that Apple wants a cut from every iPhone user. I'm a bit torn on this. In a way it reminds me of the RIAA wanting a cut of iPod sales. But, the comparison falls apart after that because the iPhone will drive TONS of customers to AT&T, but RIAA music does not perform a similar function for the iPod.
I think it's more likely that Verizon wouldn't allow the flexibility of the iPhone and the ability to sync to computers directly. They have a history of crippling their phones because of THEIR hubris and greed. I don't doubt Apple asks for things that rock the carriers back on their heels, but then again the carriers don't seem to understand or care about the desires of their own customers. Apple coming in and telling them that this is the feature set and it won't be compromised more likely made many carriers take their ball and go home.
As for the cut Apple is getting from AT&T, it is a new way of doing business, but I think we'll shortly see that Apple was justified in wanting a cut of the business they'll be sending AT&T's way. There is going to be a HUGE adoption of this phone.
As for the network speed, we'll have to wait and see. From what I've heard the 3G networks are not that much better in reality, only in the specs.
Nice point. No, just kidding. You should try following your own advice.
"When you disagree with someone, look for specific points that can attacked."
-And where exactly did you do that in YOUR post?
And can you learn not to put bold typeface on irrelevant words in your post? For all your grammatical posturing your post seems to be one of the most unreadable posts I've ever seen. Not to mention off topic.
"Apple has all but abandoned it's desktops"
-Please don't be ridiculous. 9 months! Ooohhhh my gosh, I guess my existing machine doesn't have the power to run Word anymore!! I'm assuming what you really mean is they have abandoned their computer business, not just desktops. Did they not just update the Macbook and Macbook Pro? No, they are not desktop machines, but you're not seriously telling me that Apple has abandoned just desktops, not laptops? Can you get any more dramatic about a 9 month wait to get updates to a product line this is already powerful enough for 99
Funny thing is he seems to be right most of the time when I look back. Maybe we can summarize your comment like this, "om Roughlydrafted, I don't even need to read it. I'm guessing it's probably mostly correct."
You make some good points, and I agree with most, but I think you miss the boat on the VOIP discussion. The place where VOIP would be used most is the scenario you describe . . . . at home. At home I have a b/g/n environment. At home I could use iPhone/VOIP to not have to pay for landline phone service from my local monopoly. Outside of home, almost always I'd be using the wireless plan minutes for voice, but at home I'd use VOIP. If I had this option I could finally drop my landline and still allow my wife the "unlimited" calling she enjoys now.
As I said in another post, the hype over the missing SDK is overblown, but it will eventually happen. Once Apple shows the wireless operators what their business could really be like if they relaxed their control a bit Apple will be able to force them to allow 3rd party apps and the utopian SDK society will arrive (a bit of sarcasm on Monday morning). I believe an SDK is eventually necessary for long term, but starting out most people (99+%) just don't care.
P.S. Nice take on the bar code reader! Can you believe that rube actually posted that as a desired app in the first place? Has he ever heard of girls?
First, the iPhone does not have a "big fast hard drive". I'm trying to figure out how you are a technophile who wants an SDK and yet still don't understand the device you're complaining about?
Second, the iPhone is not "doomed" because 1% of the population (mainly ego driven geeks who've never kissed a girl) can't have an SDK the nanosecond the iPhone is released. I think the SDK thing will resolve itself in time, and I do want an SDK too, but I don't think now is the right time to try and incorporate everything into the phone. Most people do NOT care about this. Most people don't have the first clue what SDK stands for, so why would they care?
I want developers to be able to make apps for the iPhone too, but starting out I think they made the right choice. Get the device out to the consumers who will be waiting in line for this "doomed" device. Did you read that last sentence carefully? People will be WAITING IN LINE. This is an overwhelmingly popular product before it has even been released to the first consumer. How does the pro-SDK crowd reconcile this with their belief that the phone is "doomed" because of no SDK?
Down the road Apple probably will release an SDK, but for right now the infrastructure to support 3rd party apps would get in the way of the release of the device. I want Skype, I want games, I want 3rd party options too, but you folks who are harping on the SDK dogma just don't seem to understand that most people DON'T CARE. They want a phone, an iPod, an internet device, etc. that is mindlessly easy to use and synch. The iPhone is the device. It will get better with time, but it leads the pack already (no one waits in line for a Treo!), and that's without the precious SDK.
Hahahaha! You hit the nail on the head with this post. Who would bitch about image so much except someone who focuses on having the image of being against all people who buy based on image! Me think he doth protest too much. Then you top off your ruthlessly accurate argument with the Alanis Morisette gambit! Kudos my man! Kudos!
As for the "too cool for you" market segment, you state, "Just about no one else cares at all." Actually, besides ill informed IT writers who just regurgitate drivel, just about no one who uses Macs walks around thinking "I'm too cool using my Mac." They use them because they like them and they work. The cool argument has taken on a life of its own, but I haven't seen one person yet who described their choice of an Apple product as based on how "cool" it made them feel.
And, yes, Apple does sell hardware. It's where they make their money. ALL companies try to sell image as one point of their marketing strategy. Only people with a poor understanding of Mac uers' major reasons for loving their machines would say it was based on image.
I don't think you have an understanding of why Mac users like their Macs. Those same Mac users are walking around proselytizing because they love what they use. Very few products garner this much loyalty and loyalty is not based on "coolness".
Sorry, I guesss you've got this one . . . .
And, just to weigh in on this, I say sue 'em! I have frivolous lawsuits too, but I don't think this qualifies. Despite the fact that they'd get off scott free, this is actually a lawsuit that needs to be filed.
This price of the computer argument doesn't hold water on the surface of it, and it definitely falls apart once you consider TCO.
The tightly controlled Apple solution works, and works well, and that is why they are leading the market too. Plays for Sure never seemed to work well and people get frustrated when it doesn't just work.
Macs have a low market share compared to Windows machines. Windows machines have over 114,000+ viruses in the wild. Macs have ZERO.
Actually this sort of makes the point of many Mac fans that security through obscurity is an overly simplistic and untrue argument. Market share does make some difference, but it is far from the only reason. When Mac fans bitch about this argument it's because "expert" columnists spew the obscurity FUD to explain away Windows poor security.
So, this actually seems to support the Mac fans arguments to some degree. Funny how that worked out, isn't it?
The moment I saw this I knew someone would make this point, and rightly so. Yet, I would say that this is not an apples (pardon the pun) to oranges comparison. Yes, market share does make some difference, but it does not explain everything. Let's take this separately. Fairplay has 80+% market share, and let's assume Plays for Sure has the rest. BOTH Fairplay and Plays for Sure DRM have been cracked. Fairplay has the vast majority of the market so yes, I would expect that the bulk of the attention would be on them when cracking DRM. Yet, Plays for Sure has had their DRM cracked and, although I don't have numbers to back me up on this, I would expect the percentage of cracks for Plays for Sure is far higher than their market share. Windows has something like 90+% of the OS market. Apple has 6+% based on some report I saw within the last week. Windows has 114,000+ viruses in the wild. Apple has zero. . . .ZERO!
I think the point of most MODERATE Mac fans arguing this issue is that the blanket assumption of security through obscurity does not hold water and that most columnists that spread this argument are making an overly simplistic and ignorant statement. Market share does have something to do with it, but if that was the sole determining factor then shouldn't the Mac at least have roughly 6% of the viruses instead of ZERO? The simple fact they can't seem to wrap their mind around is that the Mac does have better security. I'm not saying it's perfect, or impenetrable, just far better than Windows.