FaceTime's protocol, QuickTime's MOV format, the current state of ePub creation in iBooks Author…
Let's see… Ah, ALAC.
"Blank! BLANK! You're not looking at the big picture!"
"Blank! BLANK! You're not looking at the big picture!"
Exactly. The mark of a real troll comes when you can't even try to help their argument out. 
"Blank! BLANK! You're not looking at the big picture!"
"Blank! BLANK! You're not looking at the big picture!"
OH? Apple is a champion of open standards, perhaps the only champion of open standards. Apple didn't corrupt Java to its own benefit. On Macs Java is Java. PDF is built into the system. Try saving as a PDF on Windows. HTML5? Technologies like Bonjour, Webkit and Firewire were released and open-sourced by Apple. Open audio, video and graphical formats were long standard on Macs before anywhere else. You can barely work with PNGs and alpha layers in Windows even now. Fonts, typographic and printing standards... who developed those (basically wrote the book and let Adobe and others run with them)? Music creating tools and standards? Apple wrote the book on that, too. MS and OEMs tout "Multimedia PCs" every chance they get, but my 1984 Mac was a multimedia pc ten years before Windows was a reality. AAC is open, despite the proganda it is Apple-only and proprietary: it is part of the MPEG group of standards.
You can happily open, import, use and export to any number of open standards and file-types from Apple programs. Of course, there are also app file-types that are unique to certain apps, as there are to any software company in the world; if you want certain features then you usually need the authoring software. However, .doc and .xls have been released openly, supposedly.
Mac OS X is posix or unix certified, and of course your Mac can run Windows better than a PC can run Windows. Open networking standards and protocols? Who licenses and implements the proprietary protocol for Exchange Server better than its originating company? Apple. And iOS runs web apps like nobody's business -- probably better than Android.
Of course Apple wants you to use their tools, they believe they are the best and that they can give you the best experience and workflow. But Apple does as much as possible to make sure the THINGS you create with the apps play as well as possible with other things. Apple does more in this regard than just about anyone else you can think of. Output options are what counts.
OH? Apple is a champion of open standards, perhaps the only champion of open standards. Apple didn't corrupt Java to its own benefit. On Macs Java is Java. PDF is built into the system. Try saving as a PDF on Windows. HTML5? Technologies like Bonjour, Webkit and Firewire were released and open-sourced by Apple. Open audio, video and graphical formats were long standard on Macs before anywhere else. You can barely work with PNGs and alpha layers in Windows even now. Fonts, typographic and printing standards... who developed those (basically wrote the book and let Adobe and others run with them)? AAC is open, despite the proganda it is Apple-only and proprietary: it is part of the MPEG group of standards. Networking standards and protocols? Who licenses and implements the proprietary protocol for Exchange Server better than its originating company? Apple.
You can happily open, import, use and export to any number of open standards and file-types from Apple programs. Of course, there are also app file-types that are unique to certain apps, as there are to any software company in the world; if you want certain features then you usually need the authoring software. However, .doc and .xls have been released openly, supposedly.
Of course Apple wants you to use their tools, they believe they are the best and that they can give you the best experience and workflow. But Apple does as much as possible to make sure the THINGS you create with the apps play as well as possible with other things. Apple does more in this regard than just about anyone else you can think of. Output options are what counts.
exactly....the trolls and even the moderator do not seem to get it...
So you didn't read the rest of my posts on this page?
Cute, but delusional.
Possibly. It is jolly hard to decide whether MS is out and out evil, or just incredibly inept. But having foisted idiot upside-down and backwards computers on the world which has fostered a whole infrastructure of support, expense, security nightmares, lost productivity and countless hours of hair pulling, the result is the same as quoted:
exactly....the trolls and even the moderator do not seem to get it...
Tell me about it...
Know something? I have this client and they have PCs in their office. Well, they can't seem to open Office Docs from one PC to the next: different versions of Windows or Office or something, who knows. Anyhow, get this, they actually email me the files, I open them in Pages, export them and email them back so they can use them!
Same happens with Mailchimp. The mailing lists can be exported to Excel file. Their Excel can't open the downloaded file without messing it up completely and shoving all the data into one column! You guessed it, I open it in Numbers, export it as an Excel file and email it to them so they can use it!
Tell me about it...
Know something? I have this client and they have PCs in their office. Well, they can't seem to open Office Docs from one PC to the next: different versions of Windows or Office or something, who knows. Anyhow, get this, they actually email me the files, I open them in Pages, export them and email them back so they can use them!
Same happens with Mailchimp. The mailing lists can be exported to Excel file. Their Excel can't open the downloaded file without messing it up completely and shoving all the data into one column! You guessed it, I open it in Numbers, export it as an Excel file and email it to them so they can use it!
Sounds more like a PEBKAC issue, just saying...
FaceTime's protocol, QuickTime's MOV format, the current state of ePub creation in iBooks Author…
Let's see… Ah, ALAC.
Apple has moved past QT / .mov. HTML5 video using h.264 codec (both open) is where they have been going for some time. Apple has pushed MP4 files for a long time.
QuickTime was a whole encapsulating and multimedia authoring platform equivalent to REAL, Flash or Windows Media (but far more capable and advanced -- 3D, VR, multi-language tracks, scripting, etc.). Mov files were Apple's equivalent of AVI files.
FaceTime is an example of a protocol supported by Apple hardware and devices so that you get the best quality and features possible between Apple devices. There are countless iOS and Mac apps for chatting and video conferencing. Use one of them or Skype. Apple has long supported AIM protocol. Apple doesn't expect you to stick to their app. But, hey, you want the best quality communication between Apple devices, use the system Apple developed.
Same for iBooks. Uh hum, export as an ePub, PDF, HTML, whatever. But, again, you want all the features, stick to the authoring and decoding apps.
In the news lately: MS will no longer license MPEG2 decoding for each copy of Windows.
FireWire isn't proprietary. Mini DisplayPort isn't proprietary.
You've actually hit on something with the 30-pin Dock Connector, but you can't say it hasn't worked well. I shouldn't think the accessory market would have anywhere near the scope it does today had Apple chosen mini or Micro USB.
And they'll have a field day when the port changes. We're talking revenue city for them.
FireWire isn't proprietary. Mini DisplayPort isn't proprietary.
You've actually hit on something with the 30-pin Dock Connector, but you can't say it hasn't worked well. I shouldn't think the accessory market would have anywhere near the scope it does today had Apple chosen mini or Micro USB.
And they'll have a field day when the port changes. We're talking revenue city for them.
Why do Apple license Mini displayport then? https://developer.apple.com/softwarelicensing/agreements/pdf/MiniDisplayPortEval.pdf
https://developer.apple.com/hardwaredrivers/firewire/FireWire_RefPlat_Eval_Lic.pdf
Ok maybe not pushing but I was actually thinking of hardware when I wrote that i.e. mini displayport, firewire and iPhone connector.
Mini DisplayPort is a part of the DisplayPort 2.1 spec. Originally developed by Apple, licensed for free, adopted by VESA. Firewire, aka IEEE 1394, is every bit as much as a standard as USB, licensed under a patent pool by MPEG LA. Initially developed mainly by Apple, with further contributions from other vendors. You shouldn't confuse "open" with "ubiquitous" or "proprietary" with "small market share." Just because these technologies are largely associated with Apple doesn't mean they aren't available for other vendors to use.
The dock connector per se is proprietary, since Apple needed a future proofed multipin connector for their long range iPod plans. However, it plays nice with USB, VGA, audio, etc. and the spec is readily licensable (as the abundance of dock compatible accessories attests).
EDIT: Eh, Tallest Skil beat me to it.
Mac OS X is posix or unix certified, and of course your Mac can run Windows better than a PC can run Windows. Open networking standards and protocols? Who licenses and implements the proprietary protocol for Exchange Server better than its originating company? Apple. And iOS runs web apps like nobody's business -- probably better than Android.
Most of the time, a consortium of companies works on a common standard. Their ideas are then combined during negotiations, in which every company tries to put as much of their IP into the standard as possible. The reasons are multiple -- control, royalties, prestige -- however the result isn't necessarily the best possible standard. There's much politics and haggling involved, and companies are sometimes in the position to strong-arm their partners into accepting inferior and even useless solutions. That's the ugly reality, although few of the participants will admit it openly.
In contrast, the situation that you describe, where one company single-handedly develops a standard, is more ideal and likely to produce compromise-free solutions. However, adoption of those solutions will be met with resistance from other companies in the same industry, for the reasons I pointed out before: control, royalties, and prestige.
I find it admirable when companies such as Apple develop and actually openly publish specifications. Industry-wide adoption is also desirable but, for the reasons outlined above, difficult to achieve.
The interface isn't a problem as far as I'm concerned. The blocks appear to be labeled well enough and easily recognizable; it's just a matter of the user deciding what goes where, and getting used to the positioning. I'm sure you did the same thing with your phone; I know I did with mine.
Nope, the problem is people are going to buy the cheaper tablet, and then wonder why they can't install Steam on it. DOA unfortunately. Not that I wouldn't mind seeing an option other than Premium iOS and malware-ridden Android.
Nope, the problem is people are going to buy the cheaper tablet, and then wonder why they can't install Steam on it. DOA unfortunately. Not that I wouldn't mind seeing an option other than Premium iOS and malware-ridden Android.
How is iOS "premium"? (sounds like you were trying to frame "Premium iOS" as a negative because you contrast it with "the cheaper tablet" and make it parallel to "malware-ridden Android" for which you would like to see alternatives).
You can get an iPad for 499, and now 399. It's solid aluminium and glass. No-one can match it for materials or quality (I drop mine on a regular basis and it has dented corners, but it's still in perfect working order). The battery lasts all day and it has downloaded my mail via WIFI before I get out of the car at McDonalds, while Windows or Android customers struggle for 25 minutes to connect and then come over and ask me if in fact the WIFI is working. It does what it is designed to do... without a dongle, I might add.
Secondly, Google has conditioned us that software itself is worthless, as they try to commoditize everything and redistribute everthing for free. MS, as a software company, has tried to do the opposite and get you to pay 300 bucks for a boxed set of Windows or Office. Apple, on the other hand, has actually added some real value to their products through superior, integrated software. Apple tries to give the best experience possible and tries to extend the life of your Apple product by letting you immediately download updates for about three years before you have to upgrade it. That is worth something. (Of course, Apple products are usable far longer than three years; I love my 2nd gen iPod touch and still use a dual G4 PowerMac running Leopard that is at least ten years old.)
You might be thinking that because Apple gets some good margins on its products, that that automatically makes it a "premium" product? Apple can't help it if others must have fire sales or make a loss in order to shift any of their junk. Others simply can not make a competing product at any where near the same price point.
We could have a whole discussion on margin. Apple makes good margins (and it makes far less margin on the iPad than the iPhone), because of its product strategy and development process. Apple makes one tablet. It puts X amount of fixed cost into development/design/tooling/etc. It aims to make back that fixed cost by selling Y number of iPads at Z margin over the following year before the next model. Except, what do you know, the iPad is so popular that they practically sell that Y number of iPads in two months! So, the more they sell, the more Z goes up. If they keep selling a model the next year as the new low end, why, the margin on those models goes up even more (because all the fixed costs for it have been more than covered). The more you sell, the less each unit costs to produce. This is pretty obvious to people that have had to get something printed like a brochure or T-shirt: you order more, your unit cost goes down. Simple as that. And Apple is selling as many iPads as it can make.
By contrast, other makers are developing all sorts of tablets because they have no idea what works, they need to throw something at the wall to see what sticks; they need to tweak and change the color or button arrangement every three months, and they sell maybe 200,000 before they discontinue and move on to the next idea. See how that works? They can't make any margin that way. So, if all you have to go on to call iOS "premium" is that Apple actually makes some money on it because they do a good job, then I urge you to reconsider your classification of iOS.
To the person that didn't know what RT meant.
There will be two types of tablets.
One that uses intel chips, and will use Windows 8. Those tablets will supposedly be able to run current windows software.
RT tablets will use the ARM chips. They will not be able to run current windows software. Only updated windows 8/metro software.
Confused?
I can't remember what RT really stands for though.
Ah yes....Microsoft marketing! ;)
Here is a blast from the past...a spoof video showing what Microsoft would likely do if they were designing the marketing/packaging for the iPod:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EUXnJraKM3k
Will there be similar considerations for their new tablet? ;)
