How are those opposed to each other? I generally find open software and systems better quality on several counts. Both an open and a closed system can be improved immeasurably, but ultimately, the closed system has limitations. If it didn't, we'd call it an open system.
I don't know if I agree. Both open and closed systems have equal positives and negatives.
The negative of the closed system is obviously the limitation of ideas to improve software. But equally the negative of an open system can be a lack of cohesion and singular vision in the final product.
From what I see the best is a mix of open and closed.
Google is a very creative company but they have never had style. Apple has a much more dynamic and fluid vision for Web 2.0 than Google, which is probably why they are now more valuable than them!
I wonder where you get the fact that Google has never had style? No style due to their first OS? Can you please tell me when Apple had web 2.0 products in place besides webkit and iTunes. Go look at all of Googles products in the more section you will see adSense,Gmail,Google Maps/Streetview, Google Blogger, Google Groups and Google Notebook to name a few. You have no clue what you are talking about so gg friend.
I wonder where you get the fact that Google has never had style? No style due to their first OS? Can you please tell me when Apple had web 2.0 products in place besides webkit and iTunes. Go look at all of Googles products in the more section you will see adSense,Gmail,Google Maps/Streetview, Google Blogger, Google Groups and Google Notebook to name a few. You have no clue what you are talking about so gg friend.
Tyler didn't say they weren't talented, he stated that they have no style. I agree with this statement, though that is what they wish to do. As much as I like the simplistic, utilitarian Google search I would really prefer a little effort with their other web apps.
There are some limitations here as Gmail is designed to be used with older browsers but a simple User Agent check could determine the type of page to be loaded. It really does look like it was designed by—not just built by—coders. The same has gone for cellphones for too long and despite the iPhone's shortcomings it has woken up handset manufacturers to actually design a better UI. But I don't foresee this happening with Android for the reason described above.
All of his posts can be broken down into the following invariable points:
1) If I don't want to run right out and buy a product, then its very existence is a crime against nature.
2) Apple can do no right.
3) Every Apple product is a flop no matter how many units it sells.
Just in the interest of saving time....
You don't know what you're talking about. Hyperbole will get you nowhere.
1.) I ran out and bought an AppleTV and it even though it was a waste and I should have bought a Mac mini, I would never go so far as to call it a "crime against nature". That I reserve for George W. Bush.
I will also be running out to but a new 2G iPod Touch once it's released this September. There are many Apple products that I don't want to run out and they are incredible- Mac Pro, XServe, etc.
2.) Where do you get that from? I've been using Mac for 9 years and currently have numerous Apple products.
3.) Most Apple products are not a "flop". Put down your Koolaid cocktail, Apple has had and still has them.
I didn't call AppleTV a "flop"- Forbes magazine did that. I called it a joke.
(and what Europeans call "monopolistic behaviour")
No. The European government has no problem with iTunes being the dominate software for managing music files. It's nothing but free software to manage your music files on a computer or on an iPod, It's the iTunes Store that the European government has a problem with. The iTunes Store has over 75% of the digital music downloads. Even though the store can only be accessed through the iTunes software, this is not the issue. The issue is that it's files can only be played on an iPod MP3 player. (Though they can be played on any computer with iTunes.) But that's not entirerly true. It does take a little more work, but iTunes Store bought music files (ACC) can be converted to play on other MP3 players. And iTunes can make that conversion for you.
The issue is not that you are forced to use the iTunes software with an iPod. But that you are forced to own an iPod to play the digital music purchased from the iTunes Store. Or that the iTunes Store is the only place you can buy digital music for your iPod. Neither of these issues are true.
It's the iTunes Store that the European government has a problem with.
The issue is not that you are forced to use the iTunes software with an iPod. But that you are forced to own an iPod to play the digital music purchased from the iTunes Store.
Are you sure that is the issue? I understood that the EU had a problem with iTunes variable prices over different EU countries. Is there an EU case pending against Apple for tying Fairplay to iPods?
What is Apple's market share in the PC market again???
6.1%
They lost the PC war, get over it. I don't want to derail this in to a apple/windows conversation. My point is there business plan looks strikingly familiar to the old PC business plan. I also thing the company that takes the lead in the cell phone OS market will be the next "windows" (business wise that is)
If you want to compare OSX to Windows (all versions) then yes 6.1 % to 90% is not too impressive. And you can say that Apple lost the PC war.
But if you compare the 6.1% Mac hardware to that of Dell, HP, Acer, Sony, Toshiba, Lenovo, IBM and others. Then you can hardly say they lost the PC war. I can name more computer hardware companies, that were around when Apple started selling Macs, that are no longer in business. Than you can name computer hardware companies that still are. Gateway, Compaq, e-Machine, Bell, AT&T, Xerox, Commodore, Amiga, Radio Shack, Micron, Quantex, just to name a few.
The fact that Apple was able to survive the on slaught of Dell speaks volume for their business "model".
The vast majority of the celll phone market will always be the "free" cell phones with no data service. There is very little money to be made OS wise in this market. So having the majority OS in this market doesn't count for squat. They give away apps in this market so that people get their phones. Apple will gladly give all of this market to MS so that Balmer can gloat about how they own the cell phone OS market.
So if Apple "only" gets 6.1% of the whole cell phone market but it's 50% of the included smartphone market, I would hardly call that losing the war. Remember, Apple not only makes money selling the iPhone hardware. They are making money selling software for the iPhone. Just like how Apple makes money from iPods users buying songs from the iTunes Store. Apple can make money from iPhone users when they buy software (and games) from the ITunes AppsStore. And when downloading digital movies (for purchase or rent) takes hold, the iTunes Store may become the biggest online store for all digital media. Not a bad business model if you ask me.
Are you sure that is the issue? I understood that the EU had a problem with iTunes variable prices over different EU countries. Is there an EU case pending against Apple for tying Fairplay to iPods?
Yes. the lockdown of iTune Store to Fairplay to iPod was (I believe) the first case brought against the iTunes Store.
And there's also a case against the iTunes Store selling certain configuration of an album one way in one country but not in another. (e.g. you may be able to buy the individual tracks off a certain album in the UK but not in France or Germany. Where you must buy the whole album.)
The main trouble is that the record industry see Europe made up of a bunch of different countries and treats each differently. Where as the EU see all the countries as one and must be treated the same. Apple must abide by what the record industry want if they are to sell their music in the iTunes Store.
Tyler didn't say they weren't talented, he stated that they have no style. I agree with this statement, though that is what they wish to do. As much as I like the simplistic, utilitarian Google search I would really prefer a little effort with their other web apps.
There are some limitations here as Gmail is designed to be used with older browsers but a simple User Agent check could determine the type of page to be loaded. It really does look like it was designed by—not just built by—coders. The same has gone for cellphones for too long and despite the iPhone's shortcomings it has woken up handset manufacturers to actually design a better UI. But I don't foresee this happening with Android for the reason described above.
Like the HD-based iPod interface, the UI that Google uses can be described as simple and clean, besides if I've more concerned about loading the page quickly, the less background fluff, the better.
Google's UI is also very consistent between serivices as well, settings option links on the upper right, services links on the upper left.
Good for you for renting out the entire iTunes video rental catalogue- you are #1 ATV rental customer! I just hope your family get some exercise in because you have to sit for all those movies each @ 24 hours minimum and watch them all within 30 days.
.
Who said anything about renting from ATV??? Comprehension issues? Read again.
Like the HD-based iPod interface, the UI that Google uses can be described as simple and clean, besides if I've more concerned about loading the page quickly, the less background fluff, the better.
Google's UI is also very consistent between serivices as well, settings option links on the upper right, services links on the upper left.
The iPod OS has been simple and clean and that has been mostly nice and while most of Google's webapps are simple but I wouldn't call them clean. Even that log in page in its simplicity is an unclean mess of advertisement for Gmaill.
Like the HD-based iPod interface, the UI that Google uses can be described as simple and clean, besides if I've more concerned about loading the page quickly, the less background fluff, the better.
?
A few sentences of text is far more conducive to quick loading than big graphics. That gMail login has 32k of images, Apple's is 192k.
I don't know if I agree. Both open and closed systems have equal positives and negatives.
The negative of the closed system is obviously the limitation of ideas to improve software. But equally the negative of an open system can be a lack of cohesion and singular vision in the final product.
That's not an inherent problem. You can develop any open system the same as you develop a closed system. The difference is you don't lock it down.
You don't know what you're talking about. Hyperbole will get you nowhere.
1.) I ran out and bought an AppleTV and it even though it was a waste and I should have bought a Mac mini, I would never go so far as to call it a "crime against nature". That I reserve for George W. Bush.
I will also be running out to but a new 2G iPod Touch once it's released this September. There are many Apple products that I don't want to run out and they are incredible- Mac Pro, XServe, etc.
2.) Where do you get that from? I've been using Mac for 9 years and currently have numerous Apple products.
3.) Most Apple products are not a "flop". Put down your Koolaid cocktail, Apple has had and still has them.
I didn't call AppleTV a "flop"- Forbes magazine did that. I called it a joke.
Well, since there's no way anyone could read any of your previous posts to verify what I said, I guess you showed me!
Too bad they can't access your dozens of repetitious, insane rants against the MacBook Air, your theory that since it's smaller, it should be cheaper, and your hysterical attempts to paint it as a "flop" when it was their fastest-selling laptop.
But anybody who feels that way about Dubya can't be all bad; just don't embarrass yourself by quoting Forbes magazine on a tech forum. They're about as knowledgeable as Consumer Reports.
It looks like the EU some what resolve the complaints last year. Which is why it hasn't been in the news lately. But the complaints were made back in 2004. It may not have been a "case" in the legal sense. But the EU did listen to the consumer groups and made a ruling in Apple favor in 2007 by not persuing this issue any further.
Given that Android is only in its first iteration, I'm not too concerned with limited functionality or other such growing pains... give it some time, kids.
same thing could be said about the iphone. it's only the second try, it's still a kid in the game.
but what I love is that one of the biggest complaints about the iphone is that you have to use ATT. so I would think that anyone that wanted to really create competition would go open market on carriers. and yet, this Google phone is T-Mobile only. and the Instinct is Sprint only. i believe there is one also that is Verizon only.
but they don't get yelled out. just Apple for picking one carrier and forcing that one on everyone.
What is Apple's market share in the PC market again???
6.1%
but is that number rising or falling.
and you are assuming that Apple wants the whole market. maybe they don't. maybe they are happy with 6.1% of the market because that small percentage is willing to go Apple to a huge degree. they aren't just buying computers they are buying an Airport station to take the house wireless, or a time capsule to do wireless and backups. they are buying an Apple TV for the family room and all 4 kids have an ipod and mom and dad both have the iphone. they update to the latest OS, they use ilife, they got iwork cause it integrates with the other Apple programs and Office doesn't. etc.
One computer can bring with it hundreds of dollars in other Apple stuff. you don't see that happening in the PC world. You can't always even get a printer the same brand as your computer cause few computer companies make them.
Comments
It would help if you could take the trouble to write in a manner that makes it comprehensible for the reader.
All of his posts can be broken down into the following invariable points:
1) If I don't want to run right out and buy a product, then its very existence is a crime against nature.
2) Apple can do no right.
3) Every Apple product is a flop no matter how many units it sells.
Just in the interest of saving time....
How are those opposed to each other? I generally find open software and systems better quality on several counts. Both an open and a closed system can be improved immeasurably, but ultimately, the closed system has limitations. If it didn't, we'd call it an open system.
I don't know if I agree. Both open and closed systems have equal positives and negatives.
The negative of the closed system is obviously the limitation of ideas to improve software. But equally the negative of an open system can be a lack of cohesion and singular vision in the final product.
From what I see the best is a mix of open and closed.
Google is a very creative company but they have never had style. Apple has a much more dynamic and fluid vision for Web 2.0 than Google, which is probably why they are now more valuable than them!
I wonder where you get the fact that Google has never had style? No style due to their first OS? Can you please tell me when Apple had web 2.0 products in place besides webkit and iTunes. Go look at all of Googles products in the more section you will see adSense,Gmail,Google Maps/Streetview, Google Blogger, Google Groups and Google Notebook to name a few. You have no clue what you are talking about so gg friend.
I wonder where you get the fact that Google has never had style? No style due to their first OS? Can you please tell me when Apple had web 2.0 products in place besides webkit and iTunes. Go look at all of Googles products in the more section you will see adSense,Gmail,Google Maps/Streetview, Google Blogger, Google Groups and Google Notebook to name a few. You have no clue what you are talking about so gg friend.
Tyler didn't say they weren't talented, he stated that they have no style. I agree with this statement, though that is what they wish to do. As much as I like the simplistic, utilitarian Google search I would really prefer a little effort with their other web apps.
There are some limitations here as Gmail is designed to be used with older browsers but a simple User Agent check could determine the type of page to be loaded. It really does look like it was designed by—not just built by—coders. The same has gone for cellphones for too long and despite the iPhone's shortcomings it has woken up handset manufacturers to actually design a better UI. But I don't foresee this happening with Android for the reason described above.
All of his posts can be broken down into the following invariable points:
1) If I don't want to run right out and buy a product, then its very existence is a crime against nature.
2) Apple can do no right.
3) Every Apple product is a flop no matter how many units it sells.
Just in the interest of saving time....
You don't know what you're talking about. Hyperbole will get you nowhere.
1.) I ran out and bought an AppleTV and it even though it was a waste and I should have bought a Mac mini, I would never go so far as to call it a "crime against nature". That I reserve for George W. Bush.
I will also be running out to but a new 2G iPod Touch once it's released this September. There are many Apple products that I don't want to run out and they are incredible- Mac Pro, XServe, etc.
2.) Where do you get that from? I've been using Mac for 9 years and currently have numerous Apple products.
3.) Most Apple products are not a "flop". Put down your Koolaid cocktail, Apple has had and still has them.
I didn't call AppleTV a "flop"- Forbes magazine did that. I called it a joke.
It would help if you could take the trouble to write in a manner that makes it comprehensible for the reader.
Has anybody else noticed that there is a core of 2-3 Koolaid board members on here that will defend each til the depths of their glasses?
Anantsundaram must be their chairman.
(and what Europeans call "monopolistic behaviour")
No. The European government has no problem with iTunes being the dominate software for managing music files. It's nothing but free software to manage your music files on a computer or on an iPod, It's the iTunes Store that the European government has a problem with. The iTunes Store has over 75% of the digital music downloads. Even though the store can only be accessed through the iTunes software, this is not the issue. The issue is that it's files can only be played on an iPod MP3 player. (Though they can be played on any computer with iTunes.) But that's not entirerly true. It does take a little more work, but iTunes Store bought music files (ACC) can be converted to play on other MP3 players. And iTunes can make that conversion for you.
The issue is not that you are forced to use the iTunes software with an iPod. But that you are forced to own an iPod to play the digital music purchased from the iTunes Store. Or that the iTunes Store is the only place you can buy digital music for your iPod. Neither of these issues are true.
It's the iTunes Store that the European government has a problem with.
The issue is not that you are forced to use the iTunes software with an iPod. But that you are forced to own an iPod to play the digital music purchased from the iTunes Store.
Are you sure that is the issue? I understood that the EU had a problem with iTunes variable prices over different EU countries. Is there an EU case pending against Apple for tying Fairplay to iPods?
What is Apple's market share in the PC market again???
6.1%
They lost the PC war, get over it. I don't want to derail this in to a apple/windows conversation. My point is there business plan looks strikingly familiar to the old PC business plan. I also thing the company that takes the lead in the cell phone OS market will be the next "windows" (business wise that is)
If you want to compare OSX to Windows (all versions) then yes 6.1 % to 90% is not too impressive. And you can say that Apple lost the PC war.
But if you compare the 6.1% Mac hardware to that of Dell, HP, Acer, Sony, Toshiba, Lenovo, IBM and others. Then you can hardly say they lost the PC war. I can name more computer hardware companies, that were around when Apple started selling Macs, that are no longer in business. Than you can name computer hardware companies that still are. Gateway, Compaq, e-Machine, Bell, AT&T, Xerox, Commodore, Amiga, Radio Shack, Micron, Quantex, just to name a few.
The fact that Apple was able to survive the on slaught of Dell speaks volume for their business "model".
The vast majority of the celll phone market will always be the "free" cell phones with no data service. There is very little money to be made OS wise in this market. So having the majority OS in this market doesn't count for squat. They give away apps in this market so that people get their phones. Apple will gladly give all of this market to MS so that Balmer can gloat about how they own the cell phone OS market.
So if Apple "only" gets 6.1% of the whole cell phone market but it's 50% of the included smartphone market, I would hardly call that losing the war. Remember, Apple not only makes money selling the iPhone hardware. They are making money selling software for the iPhone. Just like how Apple makes money from iPods users buying songs from the iTunes Store. Apple can make money from iPhone users when they buy software (and games) from the ITunes AppsStore. And when downloading digital movies (for purchase or rent) takes hold, the iTunes Store may become the biggest online store for all digital media. Not a bad business model if you ask me.
Are you sure that is the issue? I understood that the EU had a problem with iTunes variable prices over different EU countries. Is there an EU case pending against Apple for tying Fairplay to iPods?
Yes. the lockdown of iTune Store to Fairplay to iPod was (I believe) the first case brought against the iTunes Store.
And there's also a case against the iTunes Store selling certain configuration of an album one way in one country but not in another. (e.g. you may be able to buy the individual tracks off a certain album in the UK but not in France or Germany. Where you must buy the whole album.)
The main trouble is that the record industry see Europe made up of a bunch of different countries and treats each differently. Where as the EU see all the countries as one and must be treated the same. Apple must abide by what the record industry want if they are to sell their music in the iTunes Store.
Tyler didn't say they weren't talented, he stated that they have no style. I agree with this statement, though that is what they wish to do. As much as I like the simplistic, utilitarian Google search I would really prefer a little effort with their other web apps.
There are some limitations here as Gmail is designed to be used with older browsers but a simple User Agent check could determine the type of page to be loaded. It really does look like it was designed by—not just built by—coders. The same has gone for cellphones for too long and despite the iPhone's shortcomings it has woken up handset manufacturers to actually design a better UI. But I don't foresee this happening with Android for the reason described above.
Like the HD-based iPod interface, the UI that Google uses can be described as simple and clean, besides if I've more concerned about loading the page quickly, the less background fluff, the better.
Google's UI is also very consistent between serivices as well, settings option links on the upper right, services links on the upper left.
Good for you for renting out the entire iTunes video rental catalogue- you are #1 ATV rental customer! I just hope your family get some exercise in because you have to sit for all those movies each @ 24 hours minimum and watch them all within 30 days.
.
Who said anything about renting from ATV??? Comprehension issues? Read again.
Like the HD-based iPod interface, the UI that Google uses can be described as simple and clean, besides if I've more concerned about loading the page quickly, the less background fluff, the better.
Google's UI is also very consistent between serivices as well, settings option links on the upper right, services links on the upper left.
The iPod OS has been simple and clean and that has been mostly nice and while most of Google's webapps are simple but I wouldn't call them clean. Even that log in page in its simplicity is an unclean mess of advertisement for Gmaill.
Like the HD-based iPod interface, the UI that Google uses can be described as simple and clean, besides if I've more concerned about loading the page quickly, the less background fluff, the better.
?
A few sentences of text is far more conducive to quick loading than big graphics. That gMail login has 32k of images, Apple's is 192k.
I don't know if I agree. Both open and closed systems have equal positives and negatives.
The negative of the closed system is obviously the limitation of ideas to improve software. But equally the negative of an open system can be a lack of cohesion and singular vision in the final product.
That's not an inherent problem. You can develop any open system the same as you develop a closed system. The difference is you don't lock it down.
You don't know what you're talking about. Hyperbole will get you nowhere.
1.) I ran out and bought an AppleTV and it even though it was a waste and I should have bought a Mac mini, I would never go so far as to call it a "crime against nature". That I reserve for George W. Bush.
I will also be running out to but a new 2G iPod Touch once it's released this September. There are many Apple products that I don't want to run out and they are incredible- Mac Pro, XServe, etc.
2.) Where do you get that from? I've been using Mac for 9 years and currently have numerous Apple products.
3.) Most Apple products are not a "flop". Put down your Koolaid cocktail, Apple has had and still has them.
I didn't call AppleTV a "flop"- Forbes magazine did that. I called it a joke.
Well, since there's no way anyone could read any of your previous posts to verify what I said, I guess you showed me!
Too bad they can't access your dozens of repetitious, insane rants against the MacBook Air, your theory that since it's smaller, it should be cheaper, and your hysterical attempts to paint it as a "flop" when it was their fastest-selling laptop.
But anybody who feels that way about Dubya can't be all bad; just don't embarrass yourself by quoting Forbes magazine on a tech forum. They're about as knowledgeable as Consumer Reports.
Yes. the lockdown of iTune Store to Fairplay to iPod was (I believe) the first case brought against the iTunes Store.
Sorry David, but I cant find any reference to this. Got a link?
A few consumer organizations have made some huffy noises but that's about it.
Sorry David, but I cant find any reference to this. Got a link?
A few consumer organizations have made some huffy noises but that's about it.
http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post...es-tie-in.html
http://www.engadget.com/2007/01/24/f...drm-pressures/
http://digital-lifestyles.info/2007/...-apple-itunes/
It looks like the EU some what resolve the complaints last year. Which is why it hasn't been in the news lately. But the complaints were made back in 2004. It may not have been a "case" in the legal sense. But the EU did listen to the consumer groups and made a ruling in Apple favor in 2007 by not persuing this issue any further.
http://www.macworld.co.uk/ipod-itune...pe=allchandate
http://www.macworld.co.uk/news/index.cfm?newsid=17616
Given that Android is only in its first iteration, I'm not too concerned with limited functionality or other such growing pains... give it some time, kids.
same thing could be said about the iphone. it's only the second try, it's still a kid in the game.
but what I love is that one of the biggest complaints about the iphone is that you have to use ATT. so I would think that anyone that wanted to really create competition would go open market on carriers. and yet, this Google phone is T-Mobile only. and the Instinct is Sprint only. i believe there is one also that is Verizon only.
but they don't get yelled out. just Apple for picking one carrier and forcing that one on everyone.
What is Apple's market share in the PC market again???
6.1%
but is that number rising or falling.
and you are assuming that Apple wants the whole market. maybe they don't. maybe they are happy with 6.1% of the market because that small percentage is willing to go Apple to a huge degree. they aren't just buying computers they are buying an Airport station to take the house wireless, or a time capsule to do wireless and backups. they are buying an Apple TV for the family room and all 4 kids have an ipod and mom and dad both have the iphone. they update to the latest OS, they use ilife, they got iwork cause it integrates with the other Apple programs and Office doesn't. etc.
One computer can bring with it hundreds of dollars in other Apple stuff. you don't see that happening in the PC world. You can't always even get a printer the same brand as your computer cause few computer companies make them.