Bullshit. That's the low level API. Since 10.4 or so, Apple released CoreVideo, which provided video playback, and used hardware acceleration if available. Adobe just didn't want to use the high level API.
You're still just as locked into Microsoft as you were into Adobe when you used Flash. Nothing changed, except the name of the vendor you write the check out to.
Eh, if I'm trying to show the other person something somewhat important, I'm probably just going to want all the video quality/bandwidth showing them that. They probably know what my ugly face looks like already.
Buying anything labeled "Made in Sweden" would most likely be much more expensive than "Made in China."
But the quality is usually much higher. Moreso than the price difference. I know I'd much rather have a Swiss made mechanical watch than a Chinese one.
If a major news source, like the NY Times (you know, a place where they actually care about journalistic integrity), the reporter who found it would have had to turn it in to Legal, who then would have turned it back over to Apple.
They admitted no crime and the pictures don't prove a crime.
Bullshit. They said from day one they bought it from someone who "found" it at a bar, and those pictures definitely show them taking apart an iPhone 4. Their whole coverage of the thing was some damning evidence to be sure, and you'd have to be either an idiot or someone who really hates Apple or really loves Gizmodo to think otherwise.
You're an idiot. Gizmodo paid for a stolen phone. Not just that, but a prototype phone full of trade secrets. They dismantled the phone, breaking it in the process. They then attempted to extort Apple before giving the phone back. These are all facts of public record, even fully admitted to by Gizmodo on their website.
They had the Facebook page and contact info of the guy who actually lost it. A reasonable effort would have been contacting him and trying to return it. Calling AppleCare is not a reasonable effort.
I don't see why we shouldn't be able to use unsupported APIs, but when the program breaks, we can't blame Apple.
Because when Joe User updates their phone, and then their favorite fart app won't work (or more likely, some app they've come to depend on), then they're going to blame Apple, not the developer, even though it is entirely the developer's fault. Not allowing private APIs avoids this problem altogether.
Tiny margins? They make 70%, and don't have to worry about hosting or credit card processing fees. Those are better terms than most of the other mobile app stores. Definitely much better than what you'd get from the carriers themselves.
That's not the point and you know it. The point is that there is a significant number of phones out there that do not have access to these new features, and in all likelyhood never will. Over half the phones out there are on 1.5 or 1.6.
The point is that the iPhone doesn't have this problem, or at least in any way close to Android, because the vast majority of the handsets are running the latest OS. You really only have to target the latest version. With Android, you can't do that. You either use the really old version, you implement separate code paths for the different versions and handsets, or you tell people using the older stuff (which is still being sold as new) to fuck off.
Are we talking Windows desktop apps, or Windows Phone apps? Because Microsoft has said there will be no native development on Windows Phone 7, only.NET stuff.
There are still 1.5 and 1.6 devices being sold. The Hero, the Droid Eris, and the G1 are still being sold, and with the exception of the Hero, have no plans of being updated.
Yet, you're having to ignore large portions of that install base if you're going with newer features of the OS. You have to decide if that new feature that may be required for your app is worth alienating a significant part of the Android install base. At least with Apple, if they add a feature to the OS, you can reliably begin using it when its released, and be assured that most of your install base can use it.
You're an idiot. Just about any phone worth a damn in the US is carrier locked. Original Palm Pre? Carrier locked to Sprint. HTC HD2? Carrier locked to T-Mobile. Droid? Carrier locked to Verizon. The fact of the matter is that you can't successfully sell a phone in the US without having it be carrier locked to one of the 4 major carriers. They just won't take it. It doesn't help that they all use different frequencies, and that the only one that's compatible with Europe is AT&T.
Well, he probably needs money "now", so not being able to sell currently is a deterrent. He'd probably also have to invest significant resources (time, mostly) into learning the Android system, and possibly into learning Java.
While that's true, as a developer, I'm going to want to have my app on the official marketplace, the one that every phone has. While I'd probably be willing to list it on the others (after perusing their dev agreements and such, obviously), the main one is going to be where the money is.
Slashdot Mirror
Bullshit. That's the low level API. Since 10.4 or so, Apple released CoreVideo, which provided video playback, and used hardware acceleration if available. Adobe just didn't want to use the high level API.
You're still just as locked into Microsoft as you were into Adobe when you used Flash. Nothing changed, except the name of the vendor you write the check out to.
Except Adobe is solely in control of that "standard". Face it, Flash is about as "open" as Microsoft's Office XML format.
Eh, if I'm trying to show the other person something somewhat important, I'm probably just going to want all the video quality/bandwidth showing them that. They probably know what my ugly face looks like already.
They've had video calling, but nobody used it.
Buying anything labeled "Made in Sweden" would most likely be much more expensive than "Made in China."
But the quality is usually much higher. Moreso than the price difference. I know I'd much rather have a Swiss made mechanical watch than a Chinese one.
Could Sherline (and other US manufacturers) scale up production to meet demand if we no longer imported the Chinese shit? And at what cost?
If a major news source, like the NY Times (you know, a place where they actually care about journalistic integrity), the reporter who found it would have had to turn it in to Legal, who then would have turned it back over to Apple.
They admitted no crime and the pictures don't prove a crime.
Bullshit. They said from day one they bought it from someone who "found" it at a bar, and those pictures definitely show them taking apart an iPhone 4. Their whole coverage of the thing was some damning evidence to be sure, and you'd have to be either an idiot or someone who really hates Apple or really loves Gizmodo to think otherwise.
Video calls are only on WiFi for now.
And used by who?
Kinda. This has a much better screen, and a camera that's as good or better.
You're an idiot. Gizmodo paid for a stolen phone. Not just that, but a prototype phone full of trade secrets. They dismantled the phone, breaking it in the process. They then attempted to extort Apple before giving the phone back. These are all facts of public record, even fully admitted to by Gizmodo on their website.
They had the Facebook page and contact info of the guy who actually lost it. A reasonable effort would have been contacting him and trying to return it. Calling AppleCare is not a reasonable effort.
It's called innocent until proven guilty.
That's kinda hard to claim when you actually admit to doing it, and have pictures of you doing it all over your website.
I don't see why we shouldn't be able to use unsupported APIs, but when the program breaks, we can't blame Apple.
Because when Joe User updates their phone, and then their favorite fart app won't work (or more likely, some app they've come to depend on), then they're going to blame Apple, not the developer, even though it is entirely the developer's fault. Not allowing private APIs avoids this problem altogether.
If you don't want to see it, then go into your preferences and uncheck Apple. Poof. You won't see any more Apple stories.
Tiny margins? They make 70%, and don't have to worry about hosting or credit card processing fees. Those are better terms than most of the other mobile app stores. Definitely much better than what you'd get from the carriers themselves.
That's not the point and you know it. The point is that there is a significant number of phones out there that do not have access to these new features, and in all likelyhood never will. Over half the phones out there are on 1.5 or 1.6.
The point is that the iPhone doesn't have this problem, or at least in any way close to Android, because the vast majority of the handsets are running the latest OS. You really only have to target the latest version. With Android, you can't do that. You either use the really old version, you implement separate code paths for the different versions and handsets, or you tell people using the older stuff (which is still being sold as new) to fuck off.
Are we talking Windows desktop apps, or Windows Phone apps? Because Microsoft has said there will be no native development on Windows Phone 7, only .NET stuff.
There are still 1.5 and 1.6 devices being sold. The Hero, the Droid Eris, and the G1 are still being sold, and with the exception of the Hero, have no plans of being updated.
Yet, you're having to ignore large portions of that install base if you're going with newer features of the OS. You have to decide if that new feature that may be required for your app is worth alienating a significant part of the Android install base. At least with Apple, if they add a feature to the OS, you can reliably begin using it when its released, and be assured that most of your install base can use it.
You're an idiot. Just about any phone worth a damn in the US is carrier locked. Original Palm Pre? Carrier locked to Sprint. HTC HD2? Carrier locked to T-Mobile. Droid? Carrier locked to Verizon. The fact of the matter is that you can't successfully sell a phone in the US without having it be carrier locked to one of the 4 major carriers. They just won't take it. It doesn't help that they all use different frequencies, and that the only one that's compatible with Europe is AT&T.
Well, he probably needs money "now", so not being able to sell currently is a deterrent. He'd probably also have to invest significant resources (time, mostly) into learning the Android system, and possibly into learning Java.
While that's true, as a developer, I'm going to want to have my app on the official marketplace, the one that every phone has. While I'd probably be willing to list it on the others (after perusing their dev agreements and such, obviously), the main one is going to be where the money is.