I was also thinking of Chromebooks, but on further reading just now it seems that users can opt to enable a developer mode which disables the need for all code to be digitally signed, so it's not exactly locked down in that sense.
Not arguing against the need, especially for security updates. But yes, I have traditionally stuck with older versions of Windows client and server versions until I actually had a reason to get the new ones though, such as games simply requiring the newer OSes for no reason (or for lame reasons like MS refusing to release new DirectX versions on their older OSes), or mobile support in Exchange Server.
With desktop Linux of course I just upgrade since everything can generally be recompiled to work with whatever you have, and it's all free.
I can certainly appreciate updates just for the sake of having cool or more convenient stuff that you don't technically need, but it usually has to be a "game changing" type of thing, rather than just an incremental improvement for me to go out of my way to get it.
There are obviously trade-offs to be made when deciding between iOS and Android phones. If their idea of how a phone should be suits you, then knock yourself out. If however you want something with a smaller or larger screen, hardware keyboard, better camera, etc, etc, just get the thing that suits you, and be happy:)
I'm saying there was value in one iOS update, to get a feature that should have been there from the first revision of the OS. I hate when apps are released that don't actually require any new OS features, but still have the new OS as an installation requirement. It happens on both desktops and mobile OSes.
I'm also saying that if you're not happy with your phone as it is, why did you buy it? Do you want the upgrade because it's going to be of use for you, or simply as a fashion statement?
Siri is cool, but I doubt you need any iOS5 only features to use it. Apple have used it as a selling point for iOS5, when it could simply be a downloadable app.
Multitasking was only added in iOS 4, but should have been there basically from the start.
The app store was a good idea, but it could just have been a downloadable application (ie by using a browser).. actually maybe iOS 1 couldn't download new programs, it just shows again that it lacked something that should have been there from the start in any decent smartphone OS.
Couldn't see anything else worth mentioning when looking through iOS updates. A lot of iPhone hype tends to be around hardware features than the actual OS. Hardware features that anyone could have had way before the iPhone had them, if they cared to look around.
Mobiles are often locked down, similar to consoles. Both can be cracked. Of course, depending on the competence of the security and the competence of any crackers who want to open up the platform, not all will be.
Amen. Don't buy it if you aren't happy with it the way it is, or it's a flagship model that is basically guaranteed to get the updates you're hoping for. Updates are a bonus, not a guarantee.
In the context, it sounds far more like optimized from a design point of view, ie instead of just slinging stuff out to see if it'll stick, they could focus on the design and create something that they know people will love. Apple really go the whole hog when they add even the most trivial features or concepts to their software, making everyone think that stuff like a lame version of multitasking is manna from heaven even when other platforms already have proper multitasking and so on.
I'm having to learn that kind of lesson myself. I've created a few in house apps here recently that have a lot of functionality, but some of the users just aren't aware that it's there, and when I spoke to one of our Directors recently he isn't even aware I've been making all this stuff that's boosting efficiency in a few different departments. I need to publicise myself better, and probably have more meetings with users to highlight things which seem obvious to experienced users, but a lot of people don't even think about. Even just basic UI things like being able to sort a table by clicking on the headings.
I don't need a commercial to tell me that having a mobile phone/browser/communications device/ebook-reader/media-player/GPS is amazingly useful:p
I've never seen any TV type commercials for the Dell Streak. I either saw it on Dell's website while buying computers for work, saw it through a Slashvertisement-type article, or my friend who's into phones told me about it since he knew it lived up to my requirements. Seeing it promoted by Dell on their own website maybe counts as an ad, though not in the same way as TV ads or online ads (which I block). The rest is more viral marketing than ads though, which like I said I think is the most effective way to market your product.
As for movies, yes I suppose I do find out about a lot of movies when watching the movie commercials! Sometimes things aren't well advertised though, and I still go to see them after checking the cinema listings and relevant reviews. They don't make extra money from me seeing a lot of movies anyway - I'm subscribed to a card where I get unlimited cinema for 15GBP a month, and I rarely buy their food/drinks. Usually I'll smuggle in a drink from elsewhere or just do without.
I don't eat popcorn either;) If I'm bored I'll whip out my phone and do some browsing, or simply sit thinking about something else.
It's not that I want them to produce bland commercials. I appreciate fun commercials. Though I often forget what the nice commercials are for, and only remember the things I hated. Doesn't seem like the best marketing.
Saying that every human is unique and special is like saying you're immune to commercials. It's just wishful thinking.
Uhm.. what if every time you see a commercial (which for me is pretty much only whenever I go to the movies) you're just sitting there cynically wondering wtf the marketing droids were smoking? Why the hell would I buy an intel soundcard just because this popular artist plays his song in the commercial? Why would I destroy my health by eating sugary shit just because happy sexy people on a screen are eating it?
I wouldn't say I'm immune to all forms of marketing. Viral marketing probably gets me sometimes. I do tend to be very critical of hype in general though, until I've tried stuff for myself, or read some reviews from people who've actually used the product/played the game/whatever.
Oh yeah, Microsoft having a monopoly on desktop computing and office suites is such an underpowered position to start from..
The real reason they're failing is because IE is still fucking lame. I prefer the IE6 UI over the crap that they have in 7 and up. And no, I don't use IE6.
I used to reorganise FFs toolbar to tidy it up. Chrome actually had things set up exactly the same as my FF custom arrangement by default, only without a search bar or menu to waste space. As soon as it had adblock, I was there.
When MS start showing that they have a clue about UIs (and web standards), I might start caring. Win7's task dock thing is nice enough, and they finally caught up to Unix with users being able to run unprivileged by default and boost to root only when necessary - but all the control panels are a mess. Ribbonised apps are an even bigger mess. I get that MS are trying, but they're kind of like a braindamaged person brute forcing a puzzle, trying all of the different shaped pegs in different orientations, only managing to get one through the hole every now and then by sheer bloody mindedness.
Try reading what he linked to.. they copy everything, not just Google. So yes, they copy, but not in the way that you allege.
They also auto-correct spelling without notifying you that they've done so, so torsorophy is not a smoking gun. Their honeypot experiment was much better proof of copying. It's not a bad idea for improving search relevancy, but pretty creepy at the same time. Next time I see an MS shill complaining about Google's datamining/privacy policies, I'll have to point this one out.
I used a few basics as a teenager, as well as C, C++ & Delphi. Then I tried Perl, which I absolutely love. I've tried a little Ruby, it was okay. Currently learning some lisp, and going to have a look at Python soon. At work I mostly use Perl/HTML/JavaScript/SQL, with a little legacy maintenance of a Delphi app that we've thankfully just sold off the source to someone else, so I can use whatever the hell I want for future desktop-only apps.
If you're going to stick with your "one size fits all" mentality, you should at least use something cross platform. Preferably something like Perl or Python.
What is it you like about VB? Does it even have regular expressions?
I've never made a.NET app, but I was under the impression that it's a VM framework similar to Java's VM, rather than a language. It has been around for a while and works with a few different languages. Any programming language MS creates will probably have a.NET compiler.. if I was going to write a Windows only app then I'd look at. NET in more detail, but who wants to write Windows-only code? I know there's Mono, but who wants to use a framework that's based on an API developed by a company known for embrace/extend/extinguish?
What about prior art? The actual law, not to mention the spirit of the law, suggests that this patent should be invalid.
Personally I don't think that patents should be allowed for simply making a representation of a basic hardware switch in a software UI. In fact I don't think any patents on UI design should be allowed at all. As a programmer, I don't think patents should be allowed on software either, because many of us will recreate each day as a matter of course something that someone else probably will try to patent just because they're an ass that's obsessed with money and doesn't feel bad taking advantage of idiots.
Dear gods. Blackberry is not a great UI for anything. Any time I've come in contact with BBs they have seemed utterly nonsensical. Not intuitive at all. I'm sure once you learn where everything is that you can do the things you want, in the same way that we can adapt to any interface no matter how poor - but the design doesn't jive with anything I've ever used in any other desktop or mobile OS. Even Windows Mobile was better than Blackberry stuff.
I wasn't claiming that what Apple did was especially innovative, but the fact that they bothered to do it at all is what forced everyone else to improve, and I see that as a big bonus. Before that, I could generally do what I wanted with my phone, and I had good hardware capabilities and could download apps like putty, etc - but it was kind of cumbersome compared to what we have now.
I always preferred physical keyboards to styluses and touchscreens. I tried a Dell Streak one day though and decided it was worth losing the keyboard for - the touchscreen keyboard isn't that bad when you have a large enough screen for it.
Yep I am aware of it - but my sister actually tried to be clever and try that with my tablet, and she couldn't figure it out. I know that's not a guarantee that nobody will figure it out, especially given a lot of time, but it's definitely better than just slide to unlock. It's enough to stop you getting fraped if you leave the room for a few minutes. If someone has actually stolen your tablet, all they need to do is wipe it to factory default to have use of it anyway.
Why would I consider that? What's wrong with copying such a basic and easily implemented UI feature? Here in the EU I'm not sure that software UI patents are even valid.
Well, MichaelKristopeitBro said things like "Blame it on the patent system, but not on apple for playing by the rules of the system" and "Apple is not gaming the system", so he does seem to be absolving them in his own head. As long as he's getting cool stuff, he doesn't care what they do.
The point is to limit what people with no morals can do, yes. It doesn't mean that everything they do within the rules is still respectable. People should be allowed to complain if they think that someone is not acting within the spirit of the law, or even if they're well within the law, but still damaging society. Patent and Copyright laws were put in place to encourage innovation, but companies such as Apple like to patent things and not even license them out to anyone that they see as a competitor. Both MS and Apple seem to revel in "destroying" their competitors, rather than competing with them.
Slashdot Mirror
As the above poster said, the first XBox is one.
I was also thinking of Chromebooks, but on further reading just now it seems that users can opt to enable a developer mode which disables the need for all code to be digitally signed, so it's not exactly locked down in that sense.
Not arguing against the need, especially for security updates. But yes, I have traditionally stuck with older versions of Windows client and server versions until I actually had a reason to get the new ones though, such as games simply requiring the newer OSes for no reason (or for lame reasons like MS refusing to release new DirectX versions on their older OSes), or mobile support in Exchange Server.
With desktop Linux of course I just upgrade since everything can generally be recompiled to work with whatever you have, and it's all free.
I can certainly appreciate updates just for the sake of having cool or more convenient stuff that you don't technically need, but it usually has to be a "game changing" type of thing, rather than just an incremental improvement for me to go out of my way to get it.
There are obviously trade-offs to be made when deciding between iOS and Android phones. If their idea of how a phone should be suits you, then knock yourself out. If however you want something with a smaller or larger screen, hardware keyboard, better camera, etc, etc, just get the thing that suits you, and be happy :)
I'm saying there was value in one iOS update, to get a feature that should have been there from the first revision of the OS. I hate when apps are released that don't actually require any new OS features, but still have the new OS as an installation requirement. It happens on both desktops and mobile OSes.
I'm also saying that if you're not happy with your phone as it is, why did you buy it? Do you want the upgrade because it's going to be of use for you, or simply as a fashion statement?
Such as?
Siri is cool, but I doubt you need any iOS5 only features to use it. Apple have used it as a selling point for iOS5, when it could simply be a downloadable app.
Multitasking was only added in iOS 4, but should have been there basically from the start.
The app store was a good idea, but it could just have been a downloadable application (ie by using a browser).. actually maybe iOS 1 couldn't download new programs, it just shows again that it lacked something that should have been there from the start in any decent smartphone OS.
Couldn't see anything else worth mentioning when looking through iOS updates. A lot of iPhone hype tends to be around hardware features than the actual OS. Hardware features that anyone could have had way before the iPhone had them, if they cared to look around.
Yeah, I did consider that angle too, but I'd already clicked submit. The fact is, you can still install them. And that some x86 PCs are locked down..
Ahem.
Mobiles are often locked down, similar to consoles. Both can be cracked. Of course, depending on the competence of the security and the competence of any crackers who want to open up the platform, not all will be.
Amen. Don't buy it if you aren't happy with it the way it is, or it's a flagship model that is basically guaranteed to get the updates you're hoping for. Updates are a bonus, not a guarantee.
In the context, it sounds far more like optimized from a design point of view, ie instead of just slinging stuff out to see if it'll stick, they could focus on the design and create something that they know people will love. Apple really go the whole hog when they add even the most trivial features or concepts to their software, making everyone think that stuff like a lame version of multitasking is manna from heaven even when other platforms already have proper multitasking and so on.
I'm having to learn that kind of lesson myself. I've created a few in house apps here recently that have a lot of functionality, but some of the users just aren't aware that it's there, and when I spoke to one of our Directors recently he isn't even aware I've been making all this stuff that's boosting efficiency in a few different departments. I need to publicise myself better, and probably have more meetings with users to highlight things which seem obvious to experienced users, but a lot of people don't even think about. Even just basic UI things like being able to sort a table by clicking on the headings.
My bad. Mea culpa.
Redundant much? You said the same thing twice! That's more than once!
You might want to finish any exposed points with a layer of duct tape just to be on the safe side.
Don't thank me. I don't watch TV either. Like I said I only see these commercials at the movies.
What's the point in TV when you can rent/buy/stream without all the ads? Unless you're addicted to crappy reality TV and worshipping celebrities.
I don't need a commercial to tell me that having a mobile phone/browser/communications device/ebook-reader/media-player/GPS is amazingly useful :p
I've never seen any TV type commercials for the Dell Streak. I either saw it on Dell's website while buying computers for work, saw it through a Slashvertisement-type article, or my friend who's into phones told me about it since he knew it lived up to my requirements. Seeing it promoted by Dell on their own website maybe counts as an ad, though not in the same way as TV ads or online ads (which I block). The rest is more viral marketing than ads though, which like I said I think is the most effective way to market your product.
As for movies, yes I suppose I do find out about a lot of movies when watching the movie commercials! Sometimes things aren't well advertised though, and I still go to see them after checking the cinema listings and relevant reviews. They don't make extra money from me seeing a lot of movies anyway - I'm subscribed to a card where I get unlimited cinema for 15GBP a month, and I rarely buy their food/drinks. Usually I'll smuggle in a drink from elsewhere or just do without.
I don't eat popcorn either ;) If I'm bored I'll whip out my phone and do some browsing, or simply sit thinking about something else.
It's not that I want them to produce bland commercials. I appreciate fun commercials. Though I often forget what the nice commercials are for, and only remember the things I hated. Doesn't seem like the best marketing.
Saying that every human is unique and special is like saying you're immune to commercials. It's just wishful thinking.
Uhm.. what if every time you see a commercial (which for me is pretty much only whenever I go to the movies) you're just sitting there cynically wondering wtf the marketing droids were smoking? Why the hell would I buy an intel soundcard just because this popular artist plays his song in the commercial? Why would I destroy my health by eating sugary shit just because happy sexy people on a screen are eating it?
I wouldn't say I'm immune to all forms of marketing. Viral marketing probably gets me sometimes. I do tend to be very critical of hype in general though, until I've tried stuff for myself, or read some reviews from people who've actually used the product/played the game/whatever.
A force to be reckoned with, indeed.
Oh yeah, Microsoft having a monopoly on desktop computing and office suites is such an underpowered position to start from..
The real reason they're failing is because IE is still fucking lame. I prefer the IE6 UI over the crap that they have in 7 and up. And no, I don't use IE6.
I used to reorganise FFs toolbar to tidy it up. Chrome actually had things set up exactly the same as my FF custom arrangement by default, only without a search bar or menu to waste space. As soon as it had adblock, I was there.
When MS start showing that they have a clue about UIs (and web standards), I might start caring. Win7's task dock thing is nice enough, and they finally caught up to Unix with users being able to run unprivileged by default and boost to root only when necessary - but all the control panels are a mess. Ribbonised apps are an even bigger mess. I get that MS are trying, but they're kind of like a braindamaged person brute forcing a puzzle, trying all of the different shaped pegs in different orientations, only managing to get one through the hole every now and then by sheer bloody mindedness.
Try reading what he linked to.. they copy everything, not just Google. So yes, they copy, but not in the way that you allege.
They also auto-correct spelling without notifying you that they've done so, so torsorophy is not a smoking gun. Their honeypot experiment was much better proof of copying. It's not a bad idea for improving search relevancy, but pretty creepy at the same time. Next time I see an MS shill complaining about Google's datamining/privacy policies, I'll have to point this one out.
I used a few basics as a teenager, as well as C, C++ & Delphi. Then I tried Perl, which I absolutely love. I've tried a little Ruby, it was okay. Currently learning some lisp, and going to have a look at Python soon. At work I mostly use Perl/HTML/JavaScript/SQL, with a little legacy maintenance of a Delphi app that we've thankfully just sold off the source to someone else, so I can use whatever the hell I want for future desktop-only apps.
If you're going to stick with your "one size fits all" mentality, you should at least use something cross platform. Preferably something like Perl or Python.
What is it you like about VB? Does it even have regular expressions?
I've never made a .NET app, but I was under the impression that it's a VM framework similar to Java's VM, rather than a language. It has been around for a while and works with a few different languages. Any programming language MS creates will probably have a .NET compiler.. if I was going to write a Windows only app then I'd look at. NET in more detail, but who wants to write Windows-only code? I know there's Mono, but who wants to use a framework that's based on an API developed by a company known for embrace/extend/extinguish?
What about prior art? The actual law, not to mention the spirit of the law, suggests that this patent should be invalid.
Personally I don't think that patents should be allowed for simply making a representation of a basic hardware switch in a software UI. In fact I don't think any patents on UI design should be allowed at all. As a programmer, I don't think patents should be allowed on software either, because many of us will recreate each day as a matter of course something that someone else probably will try to patent just because they're an ass that's obsessed with money and doesn't feel bad taking advantage of idiots.
Blackberry is also a great UI for a phone.
Dear gods. Blackberry is not a great UI for anything. Any time I've come in contact with BBs they have seemed utterly nonsensical. Not intuitive at all. I'm sure once you learn where everything is that you can do the things you want, in the same way that we can adapt to any interface no matter how poor - but the design doesn't jive with anything I've ever used in any other desktop or mobile OS. Even Windows Mobile was better than Blackberry stuff.
I wasn't claiming that what Apple did was especially innovative, but the fact that they bothered to do it at all is what forced everyone else to improve, and I see that as a big bonus. Before that, I could generally do what I wanted with my phone, and I had good hardware capabilities and could download apps like putty, etc - but it was kind of cumbersome compared to what we have now.
I always preferred physical keyboards to styluses and touchscreens. I tried a Dell Streak one day though and decided it was worth losing the keyboard for - the touchscreen keyboard isn't that bad when you have a large enough screen for it.
Yep I am aware of it - but my sister actually tried to be clever and try that with my tablet, and she couldn't figure it out. I know that's not a guarantee that nobody will figure it out, especially given a lot of time, but it's definitely better than just slide to unlock. It's enough to stop you getting fraped if you leave the room for a few minutes. If someone has actually stolen your tablet, all they need to do is wipe it to factory default to have use of it anyway.
Why would I consider that? What's wrong with copying such a basic and easily implemented UI feature? Here in the EU I'm not sure that software UI patents are even valid.
Well, MichaelKristopeitBro said things like "Blame it on the patent system, but not on apple for playing by the rules of the system" and "Apple is not gaming the system", so he does seem to be absolving them in his own head. As long as he's getting cool stuff, he doesn't care what they do.
The point is to limit what people with no morals can do, yes. It doesn't mean that everything they do within the rules is still respectable. People should be allowed to complain if they think that someone is not acting within the spirit of the law, or even if they're well within the law, but still damaging society. Patent and Copyright laws were put in place to encourage innovation, but companies such as Apple like to patent things and not even license them out to anyone that they see as a competitor. Both MS and Apple seem to revel in "destroying" their competitors, rather than competing with them.