By the way, that is a nearly impossible distance to maintain, as there is always some sort of school, playground, or daycare within 1,000 yards.
Not in any way defending these assholes, just FYI.
Personally, I can't think of a single good reason why the entire school board hasn't been ARRESTED for this. They are all "co"-conspirators (I hate that term, btw).
One still image of alleged "improper behavior" does not equate to a device recording all the time.
Oh, yes it does, as far as the law is concerned. There is ample statutory and case law on the subject. People have been IMPRISONED (not just sued civilly) for images in a browser's CACHE.
Now go back to preparing your defense brief for these Nazi motherfuckers.
Funny you should mention multitrack...
I was really, really hoping that the "Apple tablet" would be basically a keyboardless laptop with a multitouch interface, so that I could use Main Stage or Abelton Live or some such performance-oriented software to play/record in a live setting.
Using a laptop to play music is cumbersome, but if I had a multitouch "control panel" running multitracked softsynths, that I could plug MIDI controllers into, and even switch to a mixing board with a single tap, that would be SUBLIME!
I couldn't agree more!
In fact, I spent an entire evening about a week ago, fantasizing about iPad applications for multitrack recording, live audio mixing, stage lighting control (already avail. for the iPod Touch/iPhone), and software synths. Even more applications (tablature/musical score display, for example).
However, I think that the iPad is best suited as a control surface, and not actually doing the heavy lifting. That would be done with another machine over Wifi, etc. Apple has WAY optimized the GUI performance on this thing, so control actions would be fluid and responsive.
But, how long do you think it will be before a Logic and Mainstage "remote" is available for the iPad (probably from the mothership herself)? I give it six months, tops!
Now, something like that, with a similar (user-configurable) live interface for Spectrasonics Omnisphere... MMMMmmmmmMMMMMMM!!!!!
I fully believe that Apple will eventually expand the multitouch touchscreen to the laptops, now that they've conquered some of the mechanical problems with doing same; but that day isn't today. So today, we have to still haul around that laptop, but why wait on the control-surface part (which is what you REALLY want, isn't it???). And I submit that the iPad is damn-near perfect for that application right now.
So see? We have more in common than either of us thought! But, if you just wanted to "gin up" something on your own (and have the skillset); it doesn't seem too onerous to pony up the $99 to get a dev. license. That way, you can develop for yourself to your heart's content. No, it isn't a perfect solution; but in the scheme of things, $99 isn't the end of all existence.
Besides, it really looks like this ("banning" thing) is not actually "retaliation against jailbreakers" on Apple's part, but rather a login script just doing it's job of disabling an account after too many failed login attempts. So, you could likely just pay the $99 once (for the dev. tools) (or, ahem, find them somewhere), and then jailbreak your iPad (you know it will happen!), so that you can dev. your own stuff.
BTW, I have been thinking about these applications, and how to do a _USEABLE_ GUI for same, for about 28 years now (no fooling!). If you'd like to chat about it, I'd love to do so, too!
Yeah - did that. As far as I could tell, anyone could develop software for the mac.
Actually, it was originally much harder to become a registered developer. You had to submit a business plan, jump through other hoops, and there was only one (expensive for hobbyists) "level" of developer program.
But, even then (which was back in the mid-80's), IIRC, that was only true if you wanted a "creator code" assigned, and wanted to be on the "developer network" for seeded betas, monthly dev. CDs, tech support, etc. So, Apple had some real costs in supporting those devs. too.
Of course, you could also buy third-party API documentation (the "Inside Macintosh" series, etc.), and purchase the CodeWarrior IDE, so, other than the absence of a "Creator Code" (which simply meant that the Finder would have to use your "Type" code to associate your docs with your app), you were free to develop (and sell) apps for the Mac.
Contrast that with their policy with OS X (for desktop/server apps): FREE dev. suite. Three levels of "registered developer" (including a FREE level). You are totally free (pun intended) to create/sell any app you choose. This has been the case since OS X first appeared in January, 2000.
For the iPhone/iPod Touch/iPad, the situation is a little different: Developer tools are still FREE, but the lowest-level of dev. registration is $99; but the tradeoff is that you have a one-stop-shop where customers KNOW where to find your app, where you are free to distribute your app for any amount of money (including free), and in turn, the customer KNOWS that your app will not try to turn your phone into a botnet zombie (or worse!).
I dunno, but it seems like the publishers of those 140,000 (and counting!) apps in the iTunes App Store would tend to make me think that the whole App Store thing IS a viable business model for devs, customers, wireless carriers (who really do have to worry somewhat about an app misbehaving), and Apple.
The marketplace has spoken, and it tends to agree. Wholeheartedly.
The iPhone, iTouch, iPad are only really useful for video games, music/movies, and basic communications and information services, ala maps, sms, etc. ... Anyone interested in developing more serious applications should really look into Maemo/MeeGo or Android.
And what, exactly, do you want to do with an iPhone, iPod Touch, or iPad that you feel is beyond the App Store or built-in offerings? How "serious" of an app were you envisioning? Gene folding? CAD? Video editing (oh, wait, you can sorta do that)? Multitrack audio recording?
From what I can tell, there's an app for just about every frakkin' thing which the hardware is reasonably capable. And then some.
So, what's your point, exactly? Have you even looked at the depth and breadth of applications available in the App Store?
an on screen touchscreen keypad is epic fail- I'd rather type on a 9 button pad than that.
First, I am really getting sick and tired of the overuse of the term "Epic fail." It is not an "Epic fail(ure)"; you just don't happen to enjoy it. Big difference.
Second, I don't think more than one user in 100,000 would "rather type on a 9 button pad" than a qwerty keyboard, even an onscreen one.
Even the seemingly minor Apple requirement that iPad apps adjust their layouts depending on whether the iPad is in landscape or portrait mode is, for my app's purposes, a complete waste of time that reduces the quality of the app for its proper landscape layout.
Is it so hard to create TWO screen layouts? Because that's ALL there are: Portrait and Landscape.
Supporting a laundry list of different screen formats, multi-touch capabilities, etcetera, is of absolute no interest to me.
Sounds like what you really have no interest in is developing an iPad app...
You can only publicly distribute apps through the Apple store. You are free to develop and run as many binaries as you want for your iPhone. Just become a developer, and you can sign your own apps for you. Other licenses allow you to even develop and distribute apps on a company-wide basis (although there are some restrictions that hamper really large corps. from deploying internal apps, I will admit).
Well, here is a list of VNC clients for the iPhone, which will work on the iPad. Several of them will probably be reworked to take advantage of the iPad's larger screen. As for paying for apps, it depends. If everyone who has created a VNC client for the iPhone platform believes they should get paid for their work, then you might have to spend some money. But I'm 85% sure that at least one or two of the apps on that list are free.
Wow, thanks for the list! There were a few on there I had not seen.
Yes, VNSea, Mocha VNC Lite, and I think the RealVNC iPhone client are free. VNSea also is Open Source, and purports to also work (albeit painfully!) on an EDGE network.
Why would Microsoft for example use flash when they could use silverlight?
To keep people from whining (like they do about Apple's iPhone, iPod Touch, and iPad) that it doesn't support Flash, and therefore is unworthy.
Having said that, I agree with you that in MS' case, it could be a Silverlight ploy; but, since they also axed Multitasking in Windows Mobile 7 at the same time (like Apple's iPhone, iPod Touch, and iPad. Hmmm...), methinks its more a problem (like Apple realized) of battery life, heat, and poor performance (this time), rather than them trying to push Silverlight.
Even marketing must sometimes bow to the laws of physics.
What use would HTML5 have if Google insists on streaming crystal-clear high-definition unskippable ads to me in a few seconds, but streams the video to me bit-by-bit to the point where it takes five minutes to watch a one minute HD video.
Boy, I couldn't agree more with that!
I recently switched the "Try HTML5" thing on, and I've got to say, they need to assemble and download those clips a helluva lot faster. They've made the site nearly un-fun.
To the point that I'm about ready to "un-volunteer" to be an HTML5 Guinea Pig...
Apple, Google, and now Microsoft (among others) have announced they won't be supporting Flash.
Think it's not doomed now?
The industry verdict on Flash: You have wasted too many CPU cycles and therefore must DIE!
Good riddance. There is absolutely no reason why Flash should be such a resource hog. Adobe has become even fatter and more lazy than even Microsoft, and is about to receive a rude awakening (just like MS has been getting from Apple for the past 10 years or so).
I believe so - and the Mozilla folks are pushing for Ogg/Theora as a standard format.
That's a JOKE, right? Because, outside the walls of/. virtually no one has heard of Ogg anything, and would probably think it was a character from LOTR or something...
.. but when I see someone in a coffee shop hunched over their little netbook I kind of feel bad for them.
I find myself thinking, "Awww.... poor guy. His back, eyes, and fingers must be killing him right now"
It looks really uncomfortable.
From the admittedly limited exposure to the iPad that I've had so far, it seems to be a much more comfortable experience.
Even hardcore mac fanboys think the Ipad is a bit of a joke.
Speak for yourself. I am an embedded developer who, in most cases, (including iPad) also happens to prefer Apple's products.
iPad is far from a joke. It is the VNC device I've been wanting for over 20 years. I could give a shit less about it being an eReader, iPod, or "video consumption" device. For me, it's all about bringing my computer screen to my easy-chair.
And no, balancing a netbook on my lap, crunching my arm around to reach the trackpad, isn't my idea of "comfortable".
there needs to be a "-1 baseless speculation" modifier.
You mean Billy-boy's baseless speculation on the future of Tablet Computing. I say "baseless", because, so far at least, Billy's vision of tablets hasn't worked out so well in the marketplace...
I tend to disagree. I'd say something Microsoft did dream up is actually sexier than the iPad. The obvious problem of course is that it's still just a dream and not an actual product.
Yep, it's certainly easy to dream up something too advanced to actually create, as shown in this Apple video from 1987.
In other words, as asserted earlier, a netbook of the future. Netbooks were conceived and marketed for purposes befitting an overgrown PDA. Not devices to do your programming on, or write your term papers, or edit videos, do your Photoshop work on, etc. But a portable device to carry around and share your photos, movies, music, or check your email, browse the Web, without the bulk/weight penalty of a full-sized laptop. That's why they're called netbooks, not "mini laptops".
Netbooks aren't merely cheaper, smaller, lower-performing laptops, the idea was "why carry all this around when in reality you want a device for only a small subset of the capabilities of a full laptop?" Not "people need smaller laptops with full computing capabilities."
I see the iPad as the best expression of that type of device thus far.
A DRM riddled, unable to multi-task, underpowered tablet with no ability to expand? Lord, I hope not.
DRM? Where, EXACTLY?
Unable to multitask? Um, since the OS is Darwin-based, it most certainly CAN multitask (and does). And it is quite likely that the artificial limitation on third-party app multitasking will disappear very soon, due primarily to the iPad having more breathing-room, battery wise.
Underpowered? For what, exactly? At least one hands-on report called it "Wicked fast." Doesn't sound "underpowered" to me. Also, all the demos I have seen show it to be extremely responsive and "fluid". But if you DO want to see "underpowered", there are a plethora of UNSUCCESSFUL Windows-based "Pen computers" around. Check eBay, I'm SURE you can find a deal...
For example, he complains about weak encryption because it's 'only AES-128 and you can't change that', except that since 10.5 it's been AES-128 or AES-256, even AES-128 is more than secure enough....
Actually, because of the way that AES-256 and AES-192 were implemented, AES-128 is actually MORE secure than AES-256 (or AES-192). IANAC (IANA Cryptologist); but I just finished a project where AES-128 encryption was used, and one of the whitepapers I read said that AES-192 and AES-256 were kind of a kludge, and was actually far more susceptible to a certain class of attacks than AES-128.
Slashdot Mirror
It's 1,000 yards here in Indianapolis!
By the way, that is a nearly impossible distance to maintain, as there is always some sort of school, playground, or daycare within 1,000 yards.
Not in any way defending these assholes, just FYI.
Personally, I can't think of a single good reason why the entire school board hasn't been ARRESTED for this. They are all "co"-conspirators (I hate that term, btw).
One still image of alleged "improper behavior" does not equate to a device recording all the time.
Oh, yes it does, as far as the law is concerned. There is ample statutory and case law on the subject. People have been IMPRISONED (not just sued civilly) for images in a browser's CACHE.
Now go back to preparing your defense brief for these Nazi motherfuckers.
Funny you should mention multitrack... I was really, really hoping that the "Apple tablet" would be basically a keyboardless laptop with a multitouch interface, so that I could use Main Stage or Abelton Live or some such performance-oriented software to play/record in a live setting. Using a laptop to play music is cumbersome, but if I had a multitouch "control panel" running multitracked softsynths, that I could plug MIDI controllers into, and even switch to a mixing board with a single tap, that would be SUBLIME!
I couldn't agree more!
In fact, I spent an entire evening about a week ago, fantasizing about iPad applications for multitrack recording, live audio mixing, stage lighting control (already avail. for the iPod Touch/iPhone), and software synths. Even more applications (tablature/musical score display, for example).
However, I think that the iPad is best suited as a control surface, and not actually doing the heavy lifting. That would be done with another machine over Wifi, etc. Apple has WAY optimized the GUI performance on this thing, so control actions would be fluid and responsive.
But, how long do you think it will be before a Logic and Mainstage "remote" is available for the iPad (probably from the mothership herself)? I give it six months, tops!
Now, something like that, with a similar (user-configurable) live interface for Spectrasonics Omnisphere... MMMMmmmmmMMMMMMM!!!!!
I fully believe that Apple will eventually expand the multitouch touchscreen to the laptops, now that they've conquered some of the mechanical problems with doing same; but that day isn't today. So today, we have to still haul around that laptop, but why wait on the control-surface part (which is what you REALLY want, isn't it???). And I submit that the iPad is damn-near perfect for that application right now.
So see? We have more in common than either of us thought! But, if you just wanted to "gin up" something on your own (and have the skillset); it doesn't seem too onerous to pony up the $99 to get a dev. license. That way, you can develop for yourself to your heart's content. No, it isn't a perfect solution; but in the scheme of things, $99 isn't the end of all existence.
Besides, it really looks like this ("banning" thing) is not actually "retaliation against jailbreakers" on Apple's part, but rather a login script just doing it's job of disabling an account after too many failed login attempts. So, you could likely just pay the $99 once (for the dev. tools) (or, ahem, find them somewhere), and then jailbreak your iPad (you know it will happen!), so that you can dev. your own stuff.
BTW, I have been thinking about these applications, and how to do a _USEABLE_ GUI for same, for about 28 years now (no fooling!). If you'd like to chat about it, I'd love to do so, too!
Yeah - did that. As far as I could tell, anyone could develop software for the mac.
Actually, it was originally much harder to become a registered developer. You had to submit a business plan, jump through other hoops, and there was only one (expensive for hobbyists) "level" of developer program.
But, even then (which was back in the mid-80's), IIRC, that was only true if you wanted a "creator code" assigned, and wanted to be on the "developer network" for seeded betas, monthly dev. CDs, tech support, etc. So, Apple had some real costs in supporting those devs. too.
Of course, you could also buy third-party API documentation (the "Inside Macintosh" series, etc.), and purchase the CodeWarrior IDE, so, other than the absence of a "Creator Code" (which simply meant that the Finder would have to use your "Type" code to associate your docs with your app), you were free to develop (and sell) apps for the Mac. Contrast that with their policy with OS X (for desktop/server apps): FREE dev. suite. Three levels of "registered developer" (including a FREE level). You are totally free (pun intended) to create/sell any app you choose. This has been the case since OS X first appeared in January, 2000.
For the iPhone/iPod Touch/iPad, the situation is a little different: Developer tools are still FREE, but the lowest-level of dev. registration is $99; but the tradeoff is that you have a one-stop-shop where customers KNOW where to find your app, where you are free to distribute your app for any amount of money (including free), and in turn, the customer KNOWS that your app will not try to turn your phone into a botnet zombie (or worse!).
I dunno, but it seems like the publishers of those 140,000 (and counting!) apps in the iTunes App Store would tend to make me think that the whole App Store thing IS a viable business model for devs, customers, wireless carriers (who really do have to worry somewhat about an app misbehaving), and Apple.
The marketplace has spoken, and it tends to agree. Wholeheartedly.
The iPhone, iTouch, iPad are only really useful for video games, music/movies, and basic communications and information services, ala maps, sms, etc.
...
Anyone interested in developing more serious applications should really look into Maemo/MeeGo or Android.
And what, exactly, do you want to do with an iPhone, iPod Touch, or iPad that you feel is beyond the App Store or built-in offerings? How "serious" of an app were you envisioning? Gene folding? CAD? Video editing (oh, wait, you can sorta do that)? Multitrack audio recording?
From what I can tell, there's an app for just about every frakkin' thing which the hardware is reasonably capable. And then some.
So, what's your point, exactly? Have you even looked at the depth and breadth of applications available in the App Store?
I thought not.
an on screen touchscreen keypad is epic fail- I'd rather type on a 9 button pad than that.
First, I am really getting sick and tired of the overuse of the term "Epic fail." It is not an "Epic fail(ure)"; you just don't happen to enjoy it. Big difference.
Second, I don't think more than one user in 100,000 would "rather type on a 9 button pad" than a qwerty keyboard, even an onscreen one.
And allow an iPod to sync with other media players, like Media Center...
You mean like THIS?
Even the seemingly minor Apple requirement that iPad apps adjust their layouts depending on whether the iPad is in landscape or portrait mode is, for my app's purposes, a complete waste of time that reduces the quality of the app for its proper landscape layout.
Is it so hard to create TWO screen layouts? Because that's ALL there are: Portrait and Landscape.
Supporting a laundry list of different screen formats, multi-touch capabilities, etcetera, is of absolute no interest to me.
Sounds like what you really have no interest in is developing an iPad app...
DRM? Where, EXACTLY?
It will only run binaries that Apple approves.
No. That's not correct.
You can only publicly distribute apps through the Apple store. You are free to develop and run as many binaries as you want for your iPhone. Just become a developer, and you can sign your own apps for you. Other licenses allow you to even develop and distribute apps on a company-wide basis (although there are some restrictions that hamper really large corps. from deploying internal apps, I will admit).
Well, here is a list of VNC clients for the iPhone, which will work on the iPad. Several of them will probably be reworked to take advantage of the iPad's larger screen. As for paying for apps, it depends. If everyone who has created a VNC client for the iPhone platform believes they should get paid for their work, then you might have to spend some money. But I'm 85% sure that at least one or two of the apps on that list are free.
Wow, thanks for the list! There were a few on there I had not seen.
Yes, VNSea, Mocha VNC Lite, and I think the RealVNC iPhone client are free. VNSea also is Open Source, and purports to also work (albeit painfully!) on an EDGE network.
Why would Microsoft for example use flash when they could use silverlight?
To keep people from whining (like they do about Apple's iPhone, iPod Touch, and iPad) that it doesn't support Flash, and therefore is unworthy.
Having said that, I agree with you that in MS' case, it could be a Silverlight ploy; but, since they also axed Multitasking in Windows Mobile 7 at the same time (like Apple's iPhone, iPod Touch, and iPad. Hmmm...), methinks its more a problem (like Apple realized) of battery life, heat, and poor performance (this time), rather than them trying to push Silverlight.
Even marketing must sometimes bow to the laws of physics.
What use would HTML5 have if Google insists on streaming crystal-clear high-definition unskippable ads to me in a few seconds, but streams the video to me bit-by-bit to the point where it takes five minutes to watch a one minute HD video.
Boy, I couldn't agree more with that!
I recently switched the "Try HTML5" thing on, and I've got to say, they need to assemble and download those clips a helluva lot faster. They've made the site nearly un-fun.
To the point that I'm about ready to "un-volunteer" to be an HTML5 Guinea Pig...
Apple, Google, and now Microsoft (among others) have announced they won't be supporting Flash.
Think it's not doomed now?
The industry verdict on Flash: You have wasted too many CPU cycles and therefore must DIE!
Good riddance. There is absolutely no reason why Flash should be such a resource hog. Adobe has become even fatter and more lazy than even Microsoft, and is about to receive a rude awakening (just like MS has been getting from Apple for the past 10 years or so).
I believe so - and the Mozilla folks are pushing for Ogg/Theora as a standard format.
That's a JOKE, right? Because, outside the walls of /. virtually no one has heard of Ogg anything, and would probably think it was a character from LOTR or something...
A quick Google search turns up this. DRM here,
The linked-to article is nothing BUT baseless speculation. How can ANYONE know that there is DRM on the bookstore?
Oh, and even if there is, you can be SURE that Apple will never REMOVE (and secretly, too!) books from your iPad, UNLIKE SOME 'bookstores'.
So, is that the BEST you can do to PROVE there is DRM on iPad?
.. but when I see someone in a coffee shop hunched over their little netbook I kind of feel bad for them. I find myself thinking, "Awww.... poor guy. His back, eyes, and fingers must be killing him right now" It looks really uncomfortable. From the admittedly limited exposure to the iPad that I've had so far, it seems to be a much more comfortable experience.
EXACTLY!
I will wait until a PC vendor starts making a similar device for half the price running windows and all the software I like to use.
Well, they've had about a DECADE to do so (and failed MISERABLY); so I wonder just exactly WHEN you'll feel you can stop waiting.
Even hardcore mac fanboys think the Ipad is a bit of a joke.
Speak for yourself. I am an embedded developer who, in most cases, (including iPad) also happens to prefer Apple's products.
iPad is far from a joke. It is the VNC device I've been wanting for over 20 years. I could give a shit less about it being an eReader, iPod, or "video consumption" device. For me, it's all about bringing my computer screen to my easy-chair.
And no, balancing a netbook on my lap, crunching my arm around to reach the trackpad, isn't my idea of "comfortable".
there needs to be a "-1 baseless speculation" modifier.
You mean Billy-boy's baseless speculation on the future of Tablet Computing. I say "baseless", because, so far at least, Billy's vision of tablets hasn't worked out so well in the marketplace...
Please don't call it a 'Computer'.
Fine, because Apple makes a big point of distinguishing the iPad from a computer.
I tend to disagree. I'd say something Microsoft did dream up is actually sexier than the iPad. The obvious problem of course is that it's still just a dream and not an actual product.
Yep, it's certainly easy to dream up something too advanced to actually create, as shown in this Apple video from 1987.
Of course the keyboard will always be necessary
"Always" is a long, long time.
It's just an overgrown PDA.
In other words, as asserted earlier, a netbook of the future. Netbooks were conceived and marketed for purposes befitting an overgrown PDA. Not devices to do your programming on, or write your term papers, or edit videos, do your Photoshop work on, etc. But a portable device to carry around and share your photos, movies, music, or check your email, browse the Web, without the bulk/weight penalty of a full-sized laptop. That's why they're called netbooks, not "mini laptops". Netbooks aren't merely cheaper, smaller, lower-performing laptops, the idea was "why carry all this around when in reality you want a device for only a small subset of the capabilities of a full laptop?" Not "people need smaller laptops with full computing capabilities." I see the iPad as the best expression of that type of device thus far.
FINALLY! Someone who GETS IT!!!!
A DRM riddled, unable to multi-task, underpowered tablet with no ability to expand? Lord, I hope not.
DRM? Where, EXACTLY?
Unable to multitask? Um, since the OS is Darwin-based, it most certainly CAN multitask (and does). And it is quite likely that the artificial limitation on third-party app multitasking will disappear very soon, due primarily to the iPad having more breathing-room, battery wise.
Underpowered? For what, exactly? At least one hands-on report called it "Wicked fast." Doesn't sound "underpowered" to me. Also, all the demos I have seen show it to be extremely responsive and "fluid". But if you DO want to see "underpowered", there are a plethora of UNSUCCESSFUL Windows-based "Pen computers" around. Check eBay, I'm SURE you can find a deal...
For example, he complains about weak encryption because it's 'only AES-128 and you can't change that', except that since 10.5 it's been AES-128 or AES-256, even AES-128 is more than secure enough....
Actually, because of the way that AES-256 and AES-192 were implemented, AES-128 is actually MORE secure than AES-256 (or AES-192). IANAC (IANA Cryptologist); but I just finished a project where AES-128 encryption was used, and one of the whitepapers I read said that AES-192 and AES-256 were kind of a kludge, and was actually far more susceptible to a certain class of attacks than AES-128.