I agree, I take issue with the obviousness of this. Since every existing open platform is worse and has a smaller selection of useful application, I fail to see how changing the existing system would "obviously" make it better.
What specific function do you want to perform on your iPhone that had its app pulled from the iPhone never to return. Google voice about the only mildly useful thing I am aware of being rejected..It had a lot of issues and should have been rejected, google was probablly aiming for a rejection anyway. (note: I will be totally shocked by anything but crickets).
Your comparison is to a midrange desktop computer? Really, a device that weighs 15lbs + at a minimum and requires a continuous source of power?
Than you go on to compare it to a laptop computer (a little better, now you are only 6x the weight and twice the thickness at a minimum). I think 99% of the reasonable in the world would take issue with your "just as portable as the ipad" claim.
I own a Macbook pro 15" which is about as portable as a full featured laptop gets. Even if you went with a macbook air, neither is anywhere near as portable, let alone "just as portable." All netbooks are thicker and I am fairly certain most if not all of them are heavier.
I believe it is safe to say , you just don't get it....
I think you will find quite a few developers with iPad apps shipping at the exact time that Apple ships some. Real developers, with real applications that actually do things people want to do.
You know what is hard...Making a usable touchscreen interface people like to use.
The first (and in many ways still the only) in the phone market was Apple. (scoff all you want , anyone who believes there was usable touchscreen phone before the iphone is delusional).
to date there has not been a successful device in the tablet form factor because no one has had a usable touch screen interface. I have had the opportunity to try 10-15 models of tablets over the past 5 years (most for more than a week or two) and I can say without any hesitation that every single one of them was worthless.
You mean a web site with a developer to lazy to replace an outdated and buggy system that is no longer necessary for anything and removing it will make their site better for all their users no matter what platform they are using. Only flash developers and adobe love flash, which are you?
You do realize that the iPhone OS is the third (maybe second?) most popular operating system for developers creating actual applications that people want to pay money for and use...These people you are speaking of would be much happier with an iPad than a Linux based tablet.
No offense to your company, but than they suck. There is a lot wrong with using Citrix (IMHO), but usability in a properly configured installation is not one of them.
What Linux games are you paying for? And of course, if you are playing games on Linux, you are definately one of the people that would have a superior gaming experience with OnLive.
I am sure Mark Cuban is all torn up about the 6 Billion dollars (well I think after he sold it all of he actually walked away with about $4B) Yahoo paid for broadcast.com. Since Yahoo merged it into all their other media services it is difficult to call it a "failure". It is difficult to call it much of anything at all. It was clearly not worth $6B or $4B (Cuban has alluded to his own disbelief several times in interviews). In another 24 months Google would have likely paid even more after streaming media over the Internet really took hold.
Slashdot Mirror
I agree, I take issue with the obviousness of this. Since every existing open platform is worse and has a smaller selection of useful application, I fail to see how changing the existing system would "obviously" make it better.
What specific function do you want to perform on your iPhone that had its app pulled from the iPhone never to return. Google voice about the only mildly useful thing I am aware of being rejected..It had a lot of issues and should have been rejected, google was probablly aiming for a rejection anyway. (note: I will be totally shocked by anything but crickets).
Your comparison is to a midrange desktop computer? Really, a device that weighs 15lbs + at a minimum and requires a continuous source of power?
Than you go on to compare it to a laptop computer (a little better, now you are only 6x the weight and twice the thickness at a minimum). I think 99% of the reasonable in the world would take issue with your "just as portable as the ipad" claim.
I own a Macbook pro 15" which is about as portable as a full featured laptop gets. Even if you went with a macbook air, neither is anywhere near as portable, let alone "just as portable." All netbooks are thicker and I am fairly certain most if not all of them are heavier.
I believe it is safe to say , you just don't get it....
You deserve a funny :)
I think you will find quite a few developers with iPad apps shipping at the exact time that Apple ships some. Real developers, with real applications that actually do things people want to do.
You know what is hard...Making a usable touchscreen interface people like to use.
The first (and in many ways still the only) in the phone market was Apple. (scoff all you want , anyone who believes there was usable touchscreen phone before the iphone is delusional).
to date there has not been a successful device in the tablet form factor because no one has had a usable touch screen interface. I have had the opportunity to try 10-15 models of tablets over the past 5 years (most for more than a week or two) and I can say without any hesitation that every single one of them was worthless.
There have been refrigerators with web browsers built in for at least 5 or 10 years now.
You do realize when most users think of flash, their first thought is..."don't let the door hit you in the ass"
You mean a web site with a developer to lazy to replace an outdated and buggy system that is no longer necessary for anything and removing it will make their site better for all their users no matter what platform they are using. Only flash developers and adobe love flash, which are you?
You can write your own iPhone or iPad apps without permission as well. Can even distribute them to your 100 closest friends.
You do realize that the iPhone OS is the third (maybe second?) most popular operating system for developers creating actual applications that people want to pay money for and use...These people you are speaking of would be much happier with an iPad than a Linux based tablet.
Or just use the little dock connector with a usb port and SD card slot. learn before posting, it will make you look smarter.
And it will outsell every tablet pc ever produced by the end of the year.. People must really like oddballs.
While it is obvious you are dealing with many significant personal issues, there are better reasons to dislike Creatia.
http://www.creatia.org/page.asp?page=1
I am amazed you have not yet been modded funny. This is the funniest post of the year. GJ.
Of course all of the things you just described work the same way on an iphone. All of the apps you mentioned already multitask.
While I think that is true of every other smart phone on the Market, based on mobile browser statistics, the iPhone is the exception.
No offense to your company, but than they suck. There is a lot wrong with using Citrix (IMHO), but usability in a properly configured installation is not one of them.
Wow you are super smart. Just kidding, I am not your mother.
What Linux games are you paying for? And of course, if you are playing games on Linux, you are definately one of the people that would have a superior gaming experience with OnLive.
Everything new sucks. Everything anyone expects to be paid for sucks.
Welcome /.
Thin clients are gaining popularity in many corporate IT environments, not losing it. Your confused and/or misinformed.
What does everyone keeping saying that (You even said twice after admitting you were incorrect).
Steam is just another vehicle for traditional game sales.
I am sure Mark Cuban is all torn up about the 6 Billion dollars (well I think after he sold it all of he actually walked away with about $4B) Yahoo paid for broadcast.com. Since Yahoo merged it into all their other media services it is difficult to call it a "failure". It is difficult to call it much of anything at all. It was clearly not worth $6B or $4B (Cuban has alluded to his own disbelief several times in interviews). In another 24 months Google would have likely paid even more after streaming media over the Internet really took hold.
But do you know it will run midrange better than OnLive?