It's all because BBM is tightly tied to internal elements of the cell phone network, and introducing WiFi and a completely different network infrastructure requires them to refactor the existing server infrastructure, and architecture, which they can't manage to keep running, the way it is. What do you think really caused those outages? My guess is network backbone software upgrades (called "Routing" in their speak, but which is really the BBM server side code) gone pear-shaped.
W
Whatever... nobody cares why it's hard. They just care that Blackberry is known for email and BBM, and they have a tablet that can't do it yet. There's truth in that - it's undeniable. If it wasn't so important, perhaps they'd have sold a few million. They had trouble shipping into the channel let alone selling to end users. I can't state for certain that it's because of the lack of email and BBM... but that's a pretty good guess for lagging sales, no? Barnes and Noble shipped a tablet with an email client after all!
That Toshiba device just made me vomit in my own mouth.
Its everything wrong with mobile devices.
As much I wanted to dislike the iPad it won me over. Its not perfect (I would like different profiles for my wife and me), but its pretty damned good.
I've also ordered a Kindle Fire because it is a media consumption device. You may not realize it, but Amazon just made itself kind of distribution in the digital world. The bits and pieces didn't seem to fit until now you have unlimited music, video, books and web access inside a tiny package.
I suspect almost everybody (well, except you) gets it and won't be returning it because its not an iPad. They'll probably own both.
I ordered a Fire as well, and think it will complement my iPad quite well, and probably replace my older Kindle, since LCD screens don't seem to bother me when I'm reading, but 10" tablets are a touch too big somtimes late at night when reading.
Specs are irrelevant. I know this is Slashdot, and we love them... but I would trade my iPad 2 for an iPad 1 before any other Android Tablet. Nobody ever complains they are sluggish, and as devices, they serve the role they need to. I dispute those who say they are ONLY for media consumption, but the reality is, they ARE PRIMARILY for media consumption. An iPad is great for apps, games, music, movies, TV shows, book reading, etc.
Amazon is the only one with the ecosystem to attract the type of people who are attracted to the iPad. Amazon can supply not just apps, but TV shows, movies, music, etc. If I bought an ASUS tablet, which app can I use to buy and download last night's episode of XYZ?
I have a Blackberry. I love it (as much as anyone can love a phone) And I'm also somewhat sensitive to choosing the wrong platform, being a former Amiga guy.
For all the talk of RIMs demise, around here (Toronto) in my informal survey of people I see with phones, BlackBerries dominate. I ride the TTC a fair bit, and I have never seen an iPhone on the TTC. Never. I've seen a couple of Android phones, but BlackBerries I see by the dozens. And not just in the hands of government or corporate types - I mean the kids too.
I've tried very hard to avoid self-selection bias so it's not just fanboi recognition - I think it's real data (for as much worth as it is)
DG
With all due respect... it's just hard to imagine you've NEVER SEEN an iPhone on the Toronto subway system, if you're really surveying that much. I could no more believe that, than believe the Blackberry tablet truly has no email client.
I still don't quite understand why there would be hot competition to make a browser. It is not obvious how you monetize a browser besides making a certain search engine default. Maybe that's enough, but Mozilla doesn't own a search engine.
Seems like the grid icons are actually from palm pilots, at least they have lots of prior art. Yeah, it was a stylus, and they went to heat based touch.
True, but the MessagePad showed a grid of icons back in 93. Palm shipped a bit later than that, around 95.
I've been patching my Win 7 box since I got it. Service packs, security patches, hot fixes, etc. If you've never had to reboot after any of those... you aren't patching enough.
Don't get too excited guys... Apple already locked up anything HP produces with a long term contract. They're even going to build the factory for them! On the bright side, if this technology ever gets cheap enough, Apple will switch to it exclusively, meaning flash prices will come down finally for other vendors. Remember, Apple doesn't like flash.
Don't want to dissapoing anyone, but I haven't rebooted Win7 on my Lenovo notebook for about 2 years. When I power it off it hibernates.
Hey, I don't want to alarm you or anything... but your system might be vulnerable to a things... I try to reboot mine regularly after patching security holes.
Each processor contains ALU and FPU units, 32K of SRAM cache and each processor node incorporates a router. Nodes communicate with each other via mesh networking. The implementation is capable of scaling up to a 64x64 array (4,096 processors). Adapteva claims that Epiphany is capable of delivering unprecedented performance per watt, with a 16-core array offering up to 19Gflops at 270mW on a 28nm process."
You anti-Apple morons just don't get it. It's not about the specs, it's about the design!
Firstly, what happens if the page you try and visit doesn't exist? Maybe you get a 404 page showing you some other sites you might like to visit instead (ie - 404 page loaded with amazon paying adverts)
But more dangerously, what happens if the Amazon have some reason to block the site you are visiting. Do amazon let you visit the page?
If only you could turn the feature off completely and render all content locally. Oh yeah, you can!
Yeah, Sony tried this before with their own touchscreen e-ink book. I have the last non-touch screen one and never upgraded because of the slight extra reflectivity the touch screen gave. So I'm curious if the amazon version will avoid said problem. What really got me semi-interested was the $79 basic no thrills version. The prices for the e-ink screens must be going down to get an e-ink device for so cheap.
Even Sony doesn't use that kind of screen anymore. Nook Touch, newer Sony models and the new Amazon touch have an IR sensor ring around the frame of the device. There is no touch panel mounted on top of the eInk screen, and therefore, no extra glare.
So you think someone is going to capture a large market share and force them to lower their margins, or even make them unprofitable. Ok, I disagree. See: Microsoft Windows versus OS X for an example of why I think that.
Apple has the highest market cap of any company right now. In order for them to be worth that, they can't just make more profit than each of their competitors. They have to make substantially more.
What's next, you're going to explain to me that Apple is poised to lose it's lead in tablets? If they do, which perhaps they will, I think you'll find they still have a healthy market for them, huge sales, and amazing gross margins. Even if Ice Cream Sandwich, or whatever cute name the next big Android OS opens up things to Android selling more tablets overall.
The trouble is that maybe Samsung doesn't really like being in the mobile space. Given Microsoft/Nokia and Google/Motorola, they might just see the writing on the wall. Mobile devices are a small fraction of Samsung's business, but a very, very large fraction of Apple's. If Samsung decides they're better off exiting the business and then demanding a sizable chunk of Apple's profits, they end up in the position of a patent troll with a number of very fundamental mobile device patents and Apple would have no obvious counter if Samsung does not fear an injunction.
Samsung seems very interested in mobile. Apple's also a HUGE customer. Samsung stopped reporting mobile/tablet sales individually, but I don't think anybody seriously expects their end game to be walking away from selling 20+ million handsets a quarter, despite margins on other products dragging down their profitability last quarter, just so they can hurt Apple, who represents a tenth of their sales anyway. That makes no more sense then those who think Intel's end game is to destroy the MacBook Air with their new ultra notebook initiative. It's to increase sales of their low power chips, presumably to gain a foothold with Microsoft and Windows 8 and stem the tide of ARM taking over a large segment of this sector. The more Intel based systems Apple sells... guess what, Intel doesn't suffer from that.
I completely agree that Apple would sooner accept a reduction in volume than a reduction in margin, but that doesn't take anything away from the need to make the trade off. Apple was on a growth vector before Android, now they have a consistent market share with little to no growth.
There's just no truth that Android has slowed Apple's sales. Apple hasn't quickly become a 25% player in desktop OS either, but sales are SURGING, even though Windows 7 proved to be the release everyone wished Vista had been. Last quarter was the best ever for iPhone sales even though iPhone 5 is perceived as delayed from it's usual lifecycle. It's hard to believe, but Apple consistently just doesn't care about marketshare. They care about profits. So their margins remain high and their sales continue to increase 140% at a time year over year in this sector. Ask HP how they feel about that? Being #1 isn't necessarily the way to profitability. Would you rather run Apple's notebook division or HPs? Yet HP is the number one seller, and Dell fast on their heels. Apple is a distant third hardware wise, and their OS is absurdly lagging Windows in marketshare.
Look, you are right that Android will probably have the highest footprint in smartphones over the next several years. Apple doesn't care about that number, WebOS is as dead as they come, Blackberry is stagnated and Windows Phone hasn't taken off the way MS had hoped. It's just that most people realize it's not important to Apple's bottom line, customer base, or shareholders.
And you don't see why being forced into a quick settlement would be a serious problem for Apple?
Besides the obvious one (Apple already pays Lodsys royalties), there's some history of Apple paying one time fees to settle disputes. Also, considering the number of injunctions Apple has won against Samsung, chances are, if both parties had to sit down and negotiate, and both parties really like being in the mobile phone space, I think Apple has a fairly strong negotiating platform.
iPhone is only $199 on contract, or do you think that a Chinese manufacturer is about to equal the iPhone build quality, and incorporate the long battery life, multi-core CPU, high DPI display, best of breed touch screen and stick 16gb to 32gb of memory in there for about $100 unsubsidized?
Who cares? If they're 80% as good for 20% of the price, the competition will by its nature cause Apple to have to reduce their margins to maintain their volume, or vice versa.
There's really not a lot of history of Apple cutting their margins to maintain their volume in the face of an onslaught of slightly inferior but cheaper products. iPhone is on the market a LONG time now. So is Android. I really don't see an onslaught of cheap Android phones keeping Tim Cook up at night. There will be $99 Android phones unsubsidized and free Android phones subsidized. Heck, there already are. At the end of the day, even with a slightly longer than usual time between iPhone 4 and iPhone 5 compared to past releases, they seem to sell okay. I'd cite a source, but come on, we all know they sell them just shy of as fast as they can make them. And they make a lot.
For example, say Samsung wins their case against Apple and gets an injunction in all the major markets against the iPhone.
I suspect that's quite unlikely... but if so, you'd probably see a large payout by Apple (which with $70+ billion in cash is likely possible). Apple might fight a judgement via appeal, but an actual injunction against iPhone would be settled, and quickly.
Or suppose a Chinese manufacturer takes an Android license and gets into the mobile device market, and then drives the retail price for iPhone-comparable devices down to $100. Apple could lose half their revenues practically overnight.
Seems highly unlikely. iPhone is only $199 on contract, or do you think that a Chinese manufacturer is about to equal the iPhone build quality, and incorporate the long battery life, multi-core CPU, high DPI display, best of breed touch screen and stick 16gb to 32gb of memory in there for about $100 unsubsidized? And even if they did, the iPhone would continue to sell great. Android handsets run with similar specs and similar prices now. Android has taken over the #1 spot in the Smartphone segment at the expense of non-Smartphone sales. iPhone sales haven't slowed at all, even as the lifecycle of the iPhone 4 was stretched beyond that of the previous annual releases.
The amount of mobile browsing is over 7% of all browsing - that's just not insignificant. Of that, all iOS devices, and MANY Android devices do not run Flash. People just increasingly don't care about it.
We've been talking about HTML5 video for years and it has gone nowhere, except for a few special cases from Google (which have required you to install Chrome to view them, by the way). Even Google doesn't use HTML5 video on YouTube, and their old experimental test player is broken as hell and lacking a lot of things that the Flash player has.
My iPad gets video via Mobile Safari all the time. Are you sure that's not HTML 5 video? There's quite a number of iPads, iPhones and iPod Touches out there seeing video. Even people hesitant to just embrace HTML 5 video because of DRM needs/desires seem to be acknowledging Flash isn't a necessity, look at the various apps like the Android and iOS Netflix app.
Also, my latest notebook (MacBook Air) didn't ship with Flash. I have a copy of Chrome with Flash installed "just in case", but Safari seems to play tons of videos just fine, even though I've not installed the full Flash install yet... even YouTube seems to work just fine.
Unless you meant by nowhere "not 100% of the market".
I have several customers who have purchased iPad and the lack of flash support is a big turn off to all of them. I have one person specifically who has decided to sell their iPad and wait until they 'mature' into a device that will actually run the websites he's interested in. The iPad is doing alright for a fad device, but when you hobble something then expect users to be somewhat put off by it. Just image how much better they would continue to do if they had just added flash support.
It's good you dropped in the anecdote. Before I read about your one person, I was beginning to think the vast majority of people couldn't care less and tens of millions of these suckers were going to be sold every year.
The connector doesn't 'HAVE' to support video out. A second connector could have been added for that. The USB connector could be one of the tiny standard connectors.
It couldn't have been "one of the tiny standard connectors", since this was a few years before Micro USB. So you mean, it could have been Mini USB, which was around at the time. But that somebody modded you up for suggesting TWO connectors... wow... I mean... wow!
Out of curiosity, given the size of the iPod, which two connectors would have worked? I guess it'd have to be something common for video out, since you hate proprietary connectors. The 3rd gen iPod was.62" thick and just over 4" wide. We can rule out component video (too many plugs, you wanted two). Micro HDMI didn't exist yet. HDMI was unknown to most consumers. RCA wasn't going to provide much quality. I spent about 45 seconds Googling the size of an S-Video connection before getting bored, but my guess is, it wouldn't fit in.62". Coax?
The problem is that it self record itself as the default player everytime it udpates or start or whatever, and that's the worst player ever built in windows. Anyway.
Funny, mine reminds me that it's not the default player for certain media types, and offers me a chance to stop being reminded.
iTunes comes with QuickTime... mostly because it requires QuickTime. PS: iTunes also comes with Bonjour for Windows... mostly because it uses Bonjour.
I think I heard that same argument before, only it was about Windows and Internet Explorer. I'm not sure how it could be anything but abusive to make me install Quicktime if I want to do a backup of an iPhone.
First came iTunes for music. Then iTunes for video. Then the iTunes store for music, which used DRM at the time which required QuickTime. Then came video, which did (and still does) require QuickTime and DRM. Somewhere way after that QuickTime requirement was established, they released a phone. Which requires iTunes to backup and activate. But soon won't require iTunes to activate or backup. But in the mean time, iTunes has a strong, strong need for QuickTime. Even if that one little module you seem most interested in (iPhone backup) doesn't. Unless you jailbroke your phone, in which case, Apple doesn't really care about supporting you, the assumption is that iPhone users use iTunes, and by way of the videos it supports, QuickTime. It's just kind of a given.
COULD they release a separate, standalone app just to backup your phone for you? I suppose they could, but really... they aren't going to. PS: Windows still comes with IE, just like Mac comes with Safari. Windows still comes with their media player. Mac still comes with theirs. I'm not normally the guy to suggest this, but in this case, you should run Android and get a Linux box perhaps.
PS: iTunes secretly has a copy of Webkit in there, so you can browse the HTML based store. Is that also abusive, making you install Webkit just so you can browse a music store?
You might chose to download it without quicktime (both of them, when I last did), but then the updater would keep popping up with optional downloads of quicktime whenever a new patch for either of the previously installer was available..
Perhaps... who knows. To be honest, I've never met anyone who uses Safari for Windows AND refuses to use QuickTime. But... what's wrong with an optional download? This isn't some third party, privacy busting toolbar. It's QuickTime, which to Apple, is a core component of their software.
I`d side with you about apple not being a reputable company, as they also keep bundling Quicktime with other downloads (Safari ? iTunes ?). Anyway..
The default link for Safari for Windows does not include QuickTime, although you can optionally click a button and choose to receive it. iTunes comes with QuickTime... mostly because it requires QuickTime. PS: iTunes also comes with Bonjour for Windows... mostly because it uses Bonjour.
On the Mac, of course, QuickTime, iTunes and Safari are already pre-installed.
Slashdot Mirror
It's all because BBM is tightly tied to internal elements of the cell phone network, and introducing WiFi and a completely different network infrastructure requires them to refactor the existing server infrastructure, and architecture, which they can't manage to keep running, the way it is. What do you think really caused those outages? My guess is network backbone software upgrades (called "Routing" in their speak, but which is really the BBM server side code) gone pear-shaped.
W
Whatever... nobody cares why it's hard. They just care that Blackberry is known for email and BBM, and they have a tablet that can't do it yet. There's truth in that - it's undeniable. If it wasn't so important, perhaps they'd have sold a few million. They had trouble shipping into the channel let alone selling to end users. I can't state for certain that it's because of the lack of email and BBM... but that's a pretty good guess for lagging sales, no? Barnes and Noble shipped a tablet with an email client after all!
That Toshiba device just made me vomit in my own mouth.
Its everything wrong with mobile devices.
As much I wanted to dislike the iPad it won me over. Its not perfect (I would like different profiles for my wife and me), but its pretty damned good.
I've also ordered a Kindle Fire because it is a media consumption device. You may not realize it, but Amazon just made itself kind of distribution in the digital world. The bits and pieces didn't seem to fit until now you have unlimited music, video, books and web access inside a tiny package.
I suspect almost everybody (well, except you) gets it and won't be returning it because its not an iPad. They'll probably own both.
I ordered a Fire as well, and think it will complement my iPad quite well, and probably replace my older Kindle, since LCD screens don't seem to bother me when I'm reading, but 10" tablets are a touch too big somtimes late at night when reading.
Specs are irrelevant. I know this is Slashdot, and we love them... but I would trade my iPad 2 for an iPad 1 before any other Android Tablet. Nobody ever complains they are sluggish, and as devices, they serve the role they need to. I dispute those who say they are ONLY for media consumption, but the reality is, they ARE PRIMARILY for media consumption. An iPad is great for apps, games, music, movies, TV shows, book reading, etc.
Amazon is the only one with the ecosystem to attract the type of people who are attracted to the iPad. Amazon can supply not just apps, but TV shows, movies, music, etc. If I bought an ASUS tablet, which app can I use to buy and download last night's episode of XYZ?
I have a Blackberry. I love it (as much as anyone can love a phone) And I'm also somewhat sensitive to choosing the wrong platform, being a former Amiga guy.
For all the talk of RIMs demise, around here (Toronto) in my informal survey of people I see with phones, BlackBerries dominate. I ride the TTC a fair bit, and I have never seen an iPhone on the TTC. Never. I've seen a couple of Android phones, but BlackBerries I see by the dozens. And not just in the hands of government or corporate types - I mean the kids too.
I've tried very hard to avoid self-selection bias so it's not just fanboi recognition - I think it's real data (for as much worth as it is)
DG
With all due respect... it's just hard to imagine you've NEVER SEEN an iPhone on the Toronto subway system, if you're really surveying that much. I could no more believe that, than believe the Blackberry tablet truly has no email client.
I still don't quite understand why there would be hot competition to make a browser. It is not obvious how you monetize a browser besides making a certain search engine default. Maybe that's enough, but Mozilla doesn't own a search engine.
Can't find a more current link right now, but they don't need a search engine.
Seems like the grid icons are actually from palm pilots, at least they have lots of prior art. Yeah, it was a stylus, and they went to heat based touch.
True, but the MessagePad showed a grid of icons back in 93. Palm shipped a bit later than that, around 95.
I've been patching my Win 7 box since I got it. Service packs, security patches, hot fixes, etc. If you've never had to reboot after any of those... you aren't patching enough.
Or joking... your choice!
Don't get too excited guys... Apple already locked up anything HP produces with a long term contract. They're even going to build the factory for them! On the bright side, if this technology ever gets cheap enough, Apple will switch to it exclusively, meaning flash prices will come down finally for other vendors. Remember, Apple doesn't like flash.
Don't want to dissapoing anyone, but I haven't rebooted Win7 on my Lenovo notebook for about 2 years. When I power it off it hibernates.
Hey, I don't want to alarm you or anything... but your system might be vulnerable to a things... I try to reboot mine regularly after patching security holes.
Each processor contains ALU and FPU units, 32K of SRAM cache and each processor node incorporates a router. Nodes communicate with each other via mesh networking. The implementation is capable of scaling up to a 64x64 array (4,096 processors). Adapteva claims that Epiphany is capable of delivering unprecedented performance per watt, with a 16-core array offering up to 19Gflops at 270mW on a 28nm process."
You anti-Apple morons just don't get it. It's not about the specs, it's about the design!
Firstly, what happens if the page you try and visit doesn't exist? Maybe you get a 404 page showing you some other sites you might like to visit instead (ie - 404 page loaded with amazon paying adverts)
But more dangerously, what happens if the Amazon have some reason to block the site you are visiting. Do amazon let you visit the page?
If only you could turn the feature off completely and render all content locally. Oh yeah, you can!
Yeah, Sony tried this before with their own touchscreen e-ink book. I have the last non-touch screen one and never upgraded because of the slight extra reflectivity the touch screen gave. So I'm curious if the amazon version will avoid said problem. What really got me semi-interested was the $79 basic no thrills version. The prices for the e-ink screens must be going down to get an e-ink device for so cheap.
Even Sony doesn't use that kind of screen anymore. Nook Touch, newer Sony models and the new Amazon touch have an IR sensor ring around the frame of the device. There is no touch panel mounted on top of the eInk screen, and therefore, no extra glare.
Apple has the highest market cap of any company right now. In order for them to be worth that, they can't just make more profit than each of their competitors. They have to make substantially more.
Umm... don't they? 7% of sales but 35% of profits in desktop OS. Also see 2/3rds of phone profits in 2Q 2011 for another example.
What's next, you're going to explain to me that Apple is poised to lose it's lead in tablets? If they do, which perhaps they will, I think you'll find they still have a healthy market for them, huge sales, and amazing gross margins. Even if Ice Cream Sandwich, or whatever cute name the next big Android OS opens up things to Android selling more tablets overall.
The trouble is that maybe Samsung doesn't really like being in the mobile space. Given Microsoft/Nokia and Google/Motorola, they might just see the writing on the wall. Mobile devices are a small fraction of Samsung's business, but a very, very large fraction of Apple's. If Samsung decides they're better off exiting the business and then demanding a sizable chunk of Apple's profits, they end up in the position of a patent troll with a number of very fundamental mobile device patents and Apple would have no obvious counter if Samsung does not fear an injunction.
Samsung seems very interested in mobile. Apple's also a HUGE customer. Samsung stopped reporting mobile/tablet sales individually, but I don't think anybody seriously expects their end game to be walking away from selling 20+ million handsets a quarter, despite margins on other products dragging down their profitability last quarter, just so they can hurt Apple, who represents a tenth of their sales anyway. That makes no more sense then those who think Intel's end game is to destroy the MacBook Air with their new ultra notebook initiative. It's to increase sales of their low power chips, presumably to gain a foothold with Microsoft and Windows 8 and stem the tide of ARM taking over a large segment of this sector. The more Intel based systems Apple sells... guess what, Intel doesn't suffer from that.
I completely agree that Apple would sooner accept a reduction in volume than a reduction in margin, but that doesn't take anything away from the need to make the trade off. Apple was on a growth vector before Android, now they have a consistent market share with little to no growth.
There's just no truth that Android has slowed Apple's sales. Apple hasn't quickly become a 25% player in desktop OS either, but sales are SURGING, even though Windows 7 proved to be the release everyone wished Vista had been. Last quarter was the best ever for iPhone sales even though iPhone 5 is perceived as delayed from it's usual lifecycle. It's hard to believe, but Apple consistently just doesn't care about marketshare. They care about profits. So their margins remain high and their sales continue to increase 140% at a time year over year in this sector. Ask HP how they feel about that? Being #1 isn't necessarily the way to profitability. Would you rather run Apple's notebook division or HPs? Yet HP is the number one seller, and Dell fast on their heels. Apple is a distant third hardware wise, and their OS is absurdly lagging Windows in marketshare.
Look, you are right that Android will probably have the highest footprint in smartphones over the next several years. Apple doesn't care about that number, WebOS is as dead as they come, Blackberry is stagnated and Windows Phone hasn't taken off the way MS had hoped. It's just that most people realize it's not important to Apple's bottom line, customer base, or shareholders.
And you don't see why being forced into a quick settlement would be a serious problem for Apple?
Besides the obvious one (Apple already pays Lodsys royalties), there's some history of Apple paying one time fees to settle disputes. Also, considering the number of injunctions Apple has won against Samsung, chances are, if both parties had to sit down and negotiate, and both parties really like being in the mobile phone space, I think Apple has a fairly strong negotiating platform.
iPhone is only $199 on contract, or do you think that a Chinese manufacturer is about to equal the iPhone build quality, and incorporate the long battery life, multi-core CPU, high DPI display, best of breed touch screen and stick 16gb to 32gb of memory in there for about $100 unsubsidized?
Who cares? If they're 80% as good for 20% of the price, the competition will by its nature cause Apple to have to reduce their margins to maintain their volume, or vice versa.
There's really not a lot of history of Apple cutting their margins to maintain their volume in the face of an onslaught of slightly inferior but cheaper products. iPhone is on the market a LONG time now. So is Android. I really don't see an onslaught of cheap Android phones keeping Tim Cook up at night. There will be $99 Android phones unsubsidized and free Android phones subsidized. Heck, there already are. At the end of the day, even with a slightly longer than usual time between iPhone 4 and iPhone 5 compared to past releases, they seem to sell okay. I'd cite a source, but come on, we all know they sell them just shy of as fast as they can make them. And they make a lot.
For example, say Samsung wins their case against Apple and gets an injunction in all the major markets against the iPhone.
I suspect that's quite unlikely... but if so, you'd probably see a large payout by Apple (which with $70+ billion in cash is likely possible). Apple might fight a judgement via appeal, but an actual injunction against iPhone would be settled, and quickly.
Or suppose a Chinese manufacturer takes an Android license and gets into the mobile device market, and then drives the retail price for iPhone-comparable devices down to $100. Apple could lose half their revenues practically overnight.
Seems highly unlikely. iPhone is only $199 on contract, or do you think that a Chinese manufacturer is about to equal the iPhone build quality, and incorporate the long battery life, multi-core CPU, high DPI display, best of breed touch screen and stick 16gb to 32gb of memory in there for about $100 unsubsidized? And even if they did, the iPhone would continue to sell great. Android handsets run with similar specs and similar prices now. Android has taken over the #1 spot in the Smartphone segment at the expense of non-Smartphone sales. iPhone sales haven't slowed at all, even as the lifecycle of the iPhone 4 was stretched beyond that of the previous annual releases.
The photos were suggested to be uploaded by default to directory what was unvisible and non-accessible for anyone else.
I'd rather they were invisible and inaccessible by default.
The amount of mobile browsing is over 7% of all browsing - that's just not insignificant. Of that, all iOS devices, and MANY Android devices do not run Flash. People just increasingly don't care about it.
We've been talking about HTML5 video for years and it has gone nowhere, except for a few special cases from Google (which have required you to install Chrome to view them, by the way). Even Google doesn't use HTML5 video on YouTube, and their old experimental test player is broken as hell and lacking a lot of things that the Flash player has.
My iPad gets video via Mobile Safari all the time. Are you sure that's not HTML 5 video? There's quite a number of iPads, iPhones and iPod Touches out there seeing video. Even people hesitant to just embrace HTML 5 video because of DRM needs/desires seem to be acknowledging Flash isn't a necessity, look at the various apps like the Android and iOS Netflix app.
Also, my latest notebook (MacBook Air) didn't ship with Flash. I have a copy of Chrome with Flash installed "just in case", but Safari seems to play tons of videos just fine, even though I've not installed the full Flash install yet... even YouTube seems to work just fine.
Unless you meant by nowhere "not 100% of the market".
I have several customers who have purchased iPad and the lack of flash support is a big turn off to all of them. I have one person specifically who has decided to sell their iPad and wait until they 'mature' into a device that will actually run the websites he's interested in. The iPad is doing alright for a fad device, but when you hobble something then expect users to be somewhat put off by it. Just image how much better they would continue to do if they had just added flash support.
It's good you dropped in the anecdote. Before I read about your one person, I was beginning to think the vast majority of people couldn't care less and tens of millions of these suckers were going to be sold every year.
The connector doesn't 'HAVE' to support video out. A second connector could have been added for that. The USB connector could be one of the tiny standard connectors.
It couldn't have been "one of the tiny standard connectors", since this was a few years before Micro USB. So you mean, it could have been Mini USB, which was around at the time. But that somebody modded you up for suggesting TWO connectors... wow... I mean... wow!
.62" thick and just over 4" wide. We can rule out component video (too many plugs, you wanted two). Micro HDMI didn't exist yet. HDMI was unknown to most consumers. RCA wasn't going to provide much quality. I spent about 45 seconds Googling the size of an S-Video connection before getting bored, but my guess is, it wouldn't fit in .62". Coax?
Out of curiosity, given the size of the iPod, which two connectors would have worked? I guess it'd have to be something common for video out, since you hate proprietary connectors. The 3rd gen iPod was
I mean, what connector(s) SHOULD they have used?
The problem is that it self record itself as the default player everytime it udpates or start or whatever, and that's the worst player ever built in windows. Anyway.
Funny, mine reminds me that it's not the default player for certain media types, and offers me a chance to stop being reminded.
iTunes comes with QuickTime... mostly because it requires QuickTime. PS: iTunes also comes with Bonjour for Windows... mostly because it uses Bonjour.
I think I heard that same argument before, only it was about Windows and Internet Explorer. I'm not sure how it could be anything but abusive to make me install Quicktime if I want to do a backup of an iPhone.
First came iTunes for music. Then iTunes for video. Then the iTunes store for music, which used DRM at the time which required QuickTime. Then came video, which did (and still does) require QuickTime and DRM. Somewhere way after that QuickTime requirement was established, they released a phone. Which requires iTunes to backup and activate. But soon won't require iTunes to activate or backup. But in the mean time, iTunes has a strong, strong need for QuickTime. Even if that one little module you seem most interested in (iPhone backup) doesn't. Unless you jailbroke your phone, in which case, Apple doesn't really care about supporting you, the assumption is that iPhone users use iTunes, and by way of the videos it supports, QuickTime. It's just kind of a given.
COULD they release a separate, standalone app just to backup your phone for you? I suppose they could, but really... they aren't going to. PS: Windows still comes with IE, just like Mac comes with Safari. Windows still comes with their media player. Mac still comes with theirs. I'm not normally the guy to suggest this, but in this case, you should run Android and get a Linux box perhaps.
PS: iTunes secretly has a copy of Webkit in there, so you can browse the HTML based store. Is that also abusive, making you install Webkit just so you can browse a music store?
You might chose to download it without quicktime (both of them, when I last did), but then the updater would keep popping up with optional downloads of quicktime whenever a new patch for either of the previously installer was available..
Perhaps... who knows. To be honest, I've never met anyone who uses Safari for Windows AND refuses to use QuickTime. But... what's wrong with an optional download? This isn't some third party, privacy busting toolbar. It's QuickTime, which to Apple, is a core component of their software.
I`d side with you about apple not being a reputable company, as they also keep bundling Quicktime with other downloads (Safari ? iTunes ?). Anyway..
The default link for Safari for Windows does not include QuickTime, although you can optionally click a button and choose to receive it. iTunes comes with QuickTime... mostly because it requires QuickTime. PS: iTunes also comes with Bonjour for Windows... mostly because it uses Bonjour.
On the Mac, of course, QuickTime, iTunes and Safari are already pre-installed.