or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by Blastdoor

If Apple had the same attitude as the tv networks, they would have never released the iPhone out of fear that it would cannibalized iPod sales. Heck, nor would they have released the Mac out of fear of cannibalizing the Apple II.
by *June* ? That would be a little late, wouldn't it? Oh well, not that I really care. I'm perfectly happy with my Nehalem Mac Pro that I bought last year, so it's not like I'd be upgrading. But still... seems like a really long time to go without a major revision to the Mac Pro. I definitely like the idea of the 27" Cinema Display, although I hope this one will support DVI in addition to mini display port.
agreed -- I wonder if people will start trying to access the iPad version instead of the main version from their PCs. That would really send a signal about how people feel about Flash...
It's not a bad approach when it's free (like gmail beta). I'm not sure that someone who pays several hundred dollars for a phone would think it's such a great approach, though.
I understand that perspective, but I tend to agree with Apple. If people want to make a web app, they can do whatever they want without any censorship from apple. So if somebody wants to make a HotBoobs webapp (or whatever), they can do that. Apple is just controlling what can be a native app. I suspect that the vast majority of the 150,000 apps could just as easily be web apps.
So I just have to ask -- what "kind of person" do you think I am, oh holy judger of judges? I can't wait to hear this.
I think you vastly underestimate the extent to which Apple's customers want that type of "censorship." Two big apple customers are school districts and parents. Right there you've got a sizable chunk of people who are very much in favor of controlling risque stuff. Add to them all of the prudes, feminists, and religious conservatives, and you're talking about a pretty sizable chunk of people. Also, I seriously doubt that censoring risque material has anything to do with...
You appear to be implicitly equating "slick, polished" with "closed, sanitized". I don't think those are equivalent at all. Outside of the EFF, nobody is saying "oooh, check out the rounded, curvy opensourcedness of my laptop!" Consumers don't care about inputs, they care about outputs. The extent to which a product is "open" or "closed" is just one of many inputs. And when it comes to "slick and polished" I think you're more likely to find closed-source inputs than...
I agree. But I suspect that his real gripe here has nothing to do with "censorship" of controversial or sexual content. This sounds like a cover for an open-source type ideology. He's not concerned about consumer freedom, he's concerned about developer freedom. Those aren't exactly the same things. I think Apple has the right approach, because they are putting consumer experience above ideology (or, perhaps consumer experience is their ideology).
Yeah, I agree that clearly someone has to pay. My point is that corporate IT is willing to pay Microsoft, because Microsoft really does cater to them. I am no fan of MS, but I have to admit that they do pay much more attention to the needs of IT than Apple does. Basically, MS can say to IT -- here's a phone that fits in perfectly with all of your other MS-based infrastructure ("ecosystem", if you will). Maybe that's true, maybe it's not, but just as Apple's brand carries a...
New Posts  All Forums: