They did put it out on Android. Meaning that people still have access to their game. Hell, on their site they have a link to Google Play AND a link directly to the APK.
If Android is no longer FLOSS, it has no advantage over iOS
That statement is idiotic, if only for the implication that the only reason people were using Android is because it was FLOSS, and not because it was better at some things than iOS. Which means that people would be willing to use an admittedly worse system just because it's "open".
Wait, how is Amazon's device a "walled garden"? You can still sideload apps onto it. Sure, there's an approval process to get into their store, but so what? Should the owner of a store not be able to decide what they sell in their store?
And you please continue to bring down the level of discussion even further by being a pedantic asshole who is clearly more interested in word usage than on a discussion of morality.
At the same time, the fallacy of your argument is the fact that while there is not a 1:1 correlation between piracy and lost sales, for the amount of pirates of a work, P, there exists a non-zero subset of P that would have paid for it if it wasn't easily pirated.
And quite frankly, your argument is stupid anyways. It doesn't matter if they had no intention of paying for it. They are still enjoying the fruits of someone else's labor for free. How many of you are willing to work for free?
Slashdot is (or once was) an intellectual site, people with intelligence can see just how wrong the system is because, unlike the sheep, we can see just how wrong copyright is.
So your solution to the "wrong" system is to simply take the fruits of someone else's labor without compensating them? Are you willing to work for free?
Slashdot Mirror
Maybe, but totally protected under the 1st amendment.
The 1st Amendment says that you can say it. It doesn't say you have to have a platform to do so on.
Besides, they've also put the game out on Android. So it's still available.
Yeah! You COULD sell a bajillion copies! If they don't hamstring you and waste all your time and money.
95% of apps are approved with little or no incident, and in a timely manner. This idea that they're going to hamstring you is quite outdated.
They did put it out on Android. Meaning that people still have access to their game. Hell, on their site they have a link to Google Play AND a link directly to the APK.
Nobody said you were entitled to things being easy.
Because that's what they agreed to when they started developing the game, and that's what iOS users agreed to when they bought their device.
This group could have easily made their game for Android, not had to deal with any of this bullshit, and reached a larger audience.
And as it turns out, they have. Their message has still gotten out, and people still have the ability to experience it.
Really? What's wrong with you bunch?
Treating employees like people hurts the "job creators"
Most of the anti-vaxxers will trust a thoroughly debunked, redacted, and even admittedly made up report over what the government says.
That would be for things using .NET. Legacy native code, written in C/C++, would have to be recompiled.
But why would Amazon care to do that?
It didn't become closed source either.
If Android is no longer FLOSS, it has no advantage over iOS
That statement is idiotic, if only for the implication that the only reason people were using Android is because it was FLOSS, and not because it was better at some things than iOS. Which means that people would be willing to use an admittedly worse system just because it's "open".
No, because CM doesn't create their own SDK.
Ebayed netbooks. 11" Ultrabooks.
Catering to your specific hardware desires is not their concern.
Actually some people do care.
A few people care. Most do not.
Because we are smarter
Really? Your ability to care about something that most people don't makes you smarter?
Wait, how is Amazon's device a "walled garden"? You can still sideload apps onto it. Sure, there's an approval process to get into their store, but so what? Should the owner of a store not be able to decide what they sell in their store?
This allows them to interfere with the free market for their own benefit.
No, it doesn't. The "free market" does not depend on people copying the works of others.
As an Android App Developer, how exactly does this change affect me? How does it make me unable to make the applications I was making before?
So basically, you feel entitled to take the work of others for free. Tell me, are you willing to work for free?
Nobody implied that at all. You're just grasping at straws.
The fact of the matter is, All of your justifications basically came down to the idea that Two Wrongs Make a Right. And they don't.
So fucking what?
And you please continue to bring down the level of discussion even further by being a pedantic asshole who is clearly more interested in word usage than on a discussion of morality.
Since Apple makes so much money from their app store
[Citation Needed]
Just about every one of their earnings reports puts their revenues from the iTunes Store at about equal with the costs of running it.
How in the hell does someone seeking compensation for their time and effort deprive you of any rights whatsoever?
At the same time, the fallacy of your argument is the fact that while there is not a 1:1 correlation between piracy and lost sales, for the amount of pirates of a work, P, there exists a non-zero subset of P that would have paid for it if it wasn't easily pirated.
And quite frankly, your argument is stupid anyways. It doesn't matter if they had no intention of paying for it. They are still enjoying the fruits of someone else's labor for free. How many of you are willing to work for free?
Slashdot is (or once was) an intellectual site, people with intelligence can see just how wrong the system is because, unlike the sheep, we can see just how wrong copyright is.
So your solution to the "wrong" system is to simply take the fruits of someone else's labor without compensating them? Are you willing to work for free?