You might want to clarify that you mean Windows OS PC desktop or he’ll likely come back saying that XBox is built off of Windows which won’t make any sense in the context of his argument but it require a couple pages of schooling from various posters and him changing his stance several times before he finally wets himself and moves onto to another thread to troll.
While the article didn't mention teckstud, I feel obligated to chime in on the main discussion in this thread.
I feel his posts balance out people like Quadra 610. Mixed in amongst intelligent posts, they make these threads no less enjoyable in my opinion. A bunch of one-sided, ass kissing Apple fans can be found elsewhere, and it's a complete bore to read. If you'd like you can just go over to macrumors and find out for----oh wait.
I stumbled on your post about their entire user base sucking something similar to a hairy coin purse, and your waving the bird as you walked away from their forum. The polar opposites here are few and far between; by my count I have about four people I'd choose to ignore entirely if it weren't for their sometimes humorous banter. Sometimes is, in their respective cases, better than never.
AT&T upgraded their crap network this past August in NewYork, New Jersey and Long Island. Where've you been? I'm sorry-don't answer that- it may be too painful.
Which is months AFTER you bought your iPhone. Where are all these friends that ALL have iPhones and NEVER can make a call?
Quote:
Originally Posted by teckstud
YES, YOU HAVE- FOR YEARS!
I?ve never defended AT&T?s cons, but have defended AT&T for their pros while you blindly bashing their entire network while saying that Apple should come to Verizon and will come to Verizon shortly because ?it?s the bestest network? EVER!? Each mobile network in the US has their problems but your ability to have an objective balanced view of a company instead of an all love or all hate relationship?like you have with baseball teams?isn?t something you?re capable of.
Quote:
And FYI- the new Apple Tv GUI is so nice now that my movies, my music, my photos are all at the top of the list- unlike what you said in that I would never get (and which I championed from day one I may add) that as it wasn't the priority of the AppleTV's objective.
Funny, isn't it, how everything I ask for comes to fruition in spite of your nonsensical dismissals.
I asked for these feature when they changed in v2.0. You agreed with me but you took it to a whole ?notha level by constantly complaining about it. For some reason you think whining on AI is a productive use of your time. Me and others expressed our dislike with the change in productive ways. Many of us also have been using Boxee for some time to add functionality to the device that Apple didn?t include. I?d ask if you understand the difference but we?ve been down that road more than a few times.
What else have you asked for? Oh yeah, WAH WAH the camera needs to be better. WAH WAH they need to add a video camera. Amazing that technology evolves forward. You?re crying that the Touch didn?t get a camera; we?d all like you to STFU about it; and next year you?ll claim that you were the one who got the camera in next year?s Touch. So odd that you can?t how you affect nothing with a multi-billion dollar company by your internet forum tantrums.
Quote:
Originally Posted by teckstud
WHat makes you so wrong is you think the Droid app wouldn't be offered for free? Apple therefor wouldn't be selling it.
Your logic fails.
It goes through Apple?s App Store so they are selling it, this is regardless of the price. You could argue that Apple?s closed store policy is a problem but that would require actually thinking about the issue instead of just nonsensically complaining about it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by teckstud
Oh so now you've changed your answer whereas before I was purely wrong as were all American journalists. I'm so glad you've changed your mind. There may still be hope for you yet to obtain common sense.
By the way where's your sidekick been - the mouse?
Anonymous made an astute observation for which you claimed was undeniably wrong. You were the only one not to understand the definition of a decade. My very first post on the subject to anonymouse clearly stated, ?I count 2010 as the start of a new decade.? in regard to the context of the article, but you would have had to actually read a thread and grasp where you are clearly wrong in your limited comprehension.
Everytime a Windows user needs to update Apple's iTunes program for upteenth time they get an default Safari download (basically an advertisement) that they have to disengage- OK? Let's see the reaction from the fanbots if Microsoft rejects that mumbo-combo.
How exactly would MS reject it? MS is not distributing it or promoting it.
Maybe Apple should sue MS for not selling iPhone apps in the Zune store?
How do you figure? Apple is under no obligation to provide marketing for a competing product on their own products. The app store is Apple's and they are free to do with it as they wish.
Well, the problem is that once Apple started filtering out competition it became hard to justify what's ok and what's not ok. I mean is it ok to allow a movie countdown app that keeps you hyped til the movie release? And then the movie is released only on Blu-Ray. Is this then an app designed to get people to use a competing format over Apple's iTunes store?
Should the iPhone app "Windows Vista: The Missing Manual" be rejected because it informs people about a competing OS?
Should "Forum Nokia Podcasts" be shut out of iTunes distribution because it informs the users about what's going on in Nokia development?
Should a Microsoft Office app be rejected because Apple is developing its own iWork suite?
Should a browser be rejected because Apple is already providing a browser?
It doesn't smell good, filtering out competition...
Since the iPhone is a REAL computing platform, and not just a toy, I think Apple should be thinking about opening up, like it is on any computing platform. I mean, how bad could this iDroid be for Apple? The people who'd buy it are most likely either techies that know everything about Droid already, or those who don't really like their iPhone and consider a new phone. Nothing wrong with either. It wasn't a "Let's All Hate The iPhone" app or a virus or anything.
... sooner or later Apple will probably get sued over anticompetitive behaviour... if it isn't already...
...This is kind of like telling BMW that they have to allow Mercedes advertisements to be plastered on the window....
Once you bought your BMW though, it is up to you to have an "I love Mercedes" sticker on the window. That's the difference. You can just do that. With iPhone you can't, since it's a locked system. (Well, a Droid sticker is possible, hehe... but not a Droid app)
It's not blocking advertising; Droid ads can still pop up on websites or on TVU or whatever. If Apple asked MS to ship Windows with a bunch of "I'm a Mac, and I'm a PC" ads on the desktop, they would (quite fairly) tell them to go shove it.
Not quite the same example. If Apple released the "I'm a Mac, and I'm a PC" add application for Windows and the next release of Service Pack XXX would modify Windows in the way it won't run this application (substitute this hypothetical application by iTunes or Safari to get the real example) in the next version of Windows, I am pretty sure that Apple and others would complain.
If Apple opens iPhone to other application source than AppStore, no one would make a story out of it.
How exactly would MS reject it? MS is not distributing it or promoting it.
Maybe Apple should sue MS for not selling iPhone apps in the Zune store?
What if the next version of Windows is altered that iTunes or Safari won't run on it ? It's theirs OS after all, isn't it ? They can do whatever they want with it, can't they ? Including refusing to run any application named "iTunes" or "Safari". This is pretty absurd, but only to show how absurd the closed market for iPhone is as well.
What would happen is that Apple would sell a whole lot more Macs.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brainless
What if the next version of Windows is altered that iTunes or Safari won't run on it ? It's theirs OS after all, isn't it ? They can do whatever they want with it, can't they ? Including refusing to run any application named "iTunes" or "Safari". This is pretty absurd, but only to show how absurd the closed market for iPhone is as well.
I'm amazed that people here are actually surprised that Apple rejected this 'iDroid' application, or that they would reject advertisements for competing products. Or that they would be under any sort of obligation, moral or otherwise, and for any reason at all, to do so.
Agreed. The point is that no one needs to actually give a damn about it. And in the real world, outside the Mac fansite bubble, no one does. The interesting thing about our little corner of the internet (MR included and whatever other Apple site) is that we actually create problems where there aren't any.
there is a huge difference between an app or software that actually has some sort of function (productive or not) than one that is just simply an advertisement. Now if Motorola actually had the app. offer something (however stupid or pointless they want) you would have a point, otherwise this was just a scam to get some publicity.
No app rejection to date, that is, NO APP REJECTION TO DATE, has had any kind of significant effect on Apple. Not even Google Voice.
Rejecting a Droid marketing app is at most, something rather amusing, and at worst, something everyone outside these fansites will barely notice. LOL, assuming anyone really cares about the Droid.
With 250,000 sales on a single carrier in a single country in about a week (and counting) and accounts for 25% of all Android net traffic use worldwide, I'd say plenty of people care about the Droid.
Please take the Apple blinders off. The Droid is the phone that finally put Android on the map as a significant competitor.
But back on topic. I find Apple's rejection amusing and not surprising. But like others have said, discussing it is just free press for Droid...
What would happen is that Apple would sell a whole lot more Macs.
Would you say so ? I don't know. Bet most people who wants a Mac and can afford it pretty much owes one. There are reasons for the majority that they stick to Windows and I would say availability of either iTunes or Safari is not really that big deal for them. However, nonexistence of iTunes for Windows might be quite a problem for further adoption of iPhone.
But definitely it is not to benefit of the end user...if any application is excluded, it just limits your choices. iPhone needs to be open. Joe Hewitt is right.
Would you say so ? I don't know. Bet most people who wants a Mac and can afford it pretty much owes one.
Did this just happen, because each quarter since the Intel transition Apple has been reporting that about 50% of all Mac sales are to switchers. Doesn?t sound like they?ve hit a wall to me. Some proof or even a well thought out hypothesis would be nice.
Quote:
There are reasons for the majority that they stick to Windows and I would say availability of either iTunes or Safari is not really that big deal for them.
Of course not because iTunes and Safari is also on Mac OS X. There are certainly reasons why MS? Windows monopoly is not in jeopardy but it has nothing to do with your hatred for Apple and everything to do with MS? choice to only sell the OS which it licenses to other vendors. Mac OS X can never be that big. Even if they took with HP?s spot as #1 they?d still only have ¼ the OS marketshare of Windows. I really don?t understand how their different business models are so often compared as if they are somehow fighting for the same thing.
Quote:
However, nonexistence of iTunes for Windows might be quite a problem for further adoption of iPhone.
How exactly would this happen?
Quote:
But definitely it is not to benefit of the end user...if any application is excluded, it just limits your choices. iPhone needs to be open. Joe Hewitt is right.
So an app that grabs your contacts, sends it back to a server and uses it for SPAM benefits a user. An app that loads a runtime and waits for specific sites to be accessed so it can grab personal information like CC numbers and tax IDs benefit the user. An app that runs in the background without the user?s knowledge running down the battery in hours is a great choice for the average user. Maybe you want to revise your statement about ?any? excluded app limits a user?s choice.
PS: You may also want to limit your comments as to how company be should run to the ones that aren?t the most profitable handset markets in the world, the ones that don?t have the device by which all other devices are measured, and the ones that don?t have App Stores and SDKs that are excessively popular. Maybe your insights into how Palm can fix the Pre, WebOS, their SDk and their App Store. Or what Nokia needs to do to rebuild their empire. Or how Android as a platform is not going to be a mobile OS that is pushed out of the higher-end phones, but instead an also-ran OS regulated to the majority of units sold but at lowest-end of the device HW.
But Apple will be hosting the app, and paying the bandwidth cost, you blinkered fool!
I'm a fool? You don't even understand that in order to sell something there needs to be someone who's buying (paying) for something. How exactly are you paying for free apps? Is Apple paying the free app developers? Who's the foo?
After reading this entire thread, did it ever cross anyone's mind what would happen if apple accepted the app?
Fire and brimstone coming down from the skies! Rivers and seas boiling! Forty years of darkness! Earthquakes, volcanoes? The dead rising from the grave! Human sacrifice, dogs and cats living together... mass hysteria!
Comments
You might want to clarify that you mean Windows OS PC desktop or he’ll likely come back saying that XBox is built off of Windows which won’t make any sense in the context of his argument but it require a couple pages of schooling from various posters and him changing his stance several times before he finally wets himself and moves onto to another thread to troll.
While the article didn't mention teckstud, I feel obligated to chime in on the main discussion in this thread.
I feel his posts balance out people like Quadra 610. Mixed in amongst intelligent posts, they make these threads no less enjoyable in my opinion. A bunch of one-sided, ass kissing Apple fans can be found elsewhere, and it's a complete bore to read. If you'd like you can just go over to macrumors and find out for----oh wait.
I stumbled on your post about their entire user base sucking something similar to a hairy coin purse, and your waving the bird as you walked away from their forum. The polar opposites here are few and far between; by my count I have about four people I'd choose to ignore entirely if it weren't for their sometimes humorous banter. Sometimes is, in their respective cases, better than never.
AT&T upgraded their crap network this past August in NewYork, New Jersey and Long Island. Where've you been? I'm sorry-don't answer that- it may be too painful.
Which is months AFTER you bought your iPhone. Where are all these friends that ALL have iPhones and NEVER can make a call?
YES, YOU HAVE- FOR YEARS!
I?ve never defended AT&T?s cons, but have defended AT&T for their pros while you blindly bashing their entire network while saying that Apple should come to Verizon and will come to Verizon shortly because ?it?s the bestest network? EVER!? Each mobile network in the US has their problems but your ability to have an objective balanced view of a company instead of an all love or all hate relationship?like you have with baseball teams?isn?t something you?re capable of.
And FYI- the new Apple Tv GUI is so nice now that my movies, my music, my photos are all at the top of the list- unlike what you said in that I would never get (and which I championed from day one I may add) that as it wasn't the priority of the AppleTV's objective.
Funny, isn't it, how everything I ask for comes to fruition in spite of your nonsensical dismissals.
I asked for these feature when they changed in v2.0. You agreed with me but you took it to a whole ?notha level by constantly complaining about it. For some reason you think whining on AI is a productive use of your time. Me and others expressed our dislike with the change in productive ways. Many of us also have been using Boxee for some time to add functionality to the device that Apple didn?t include. I?d ask if you understand the difference but we?ve been down that road more than a few times.
What else have you asked for? Oh yeah, WAH WAH the camera needs to be better. WAH WAH they need to add a video camera. Amazing that technology evolves forward. You?re crying that the Touch didn?t get a camera; we?d all like you to STFU about it; and next year you?ll claim that you were the one who got the camera in next year?s Touch. So odd that you can?t how you affect nothing with a multi-billion dollar company by your internet forum tantrums.
WHat makes you so wrong is you think the Droid app wouldn't be offered for free? Apple therefor wouldn't be selling it.
Your logic fails.
It goes through Apple?s App Store so they are selling it, this is regardless of the price. You could argue that Apple?s closed store policy is a problem but that would require actually thinking about the issue instead of just nonsensically complaining about it.
Oh so now you've changed your answer whereas before I was purely wrong as were all American journalists. I'm so glad you've changed your mind. There may still be hope for you yet to obtain common sense.
By the way where's your sidekick been - the mouse?
Anonymous made an astute observation for which you claimed was undeniably wrong. You were the only one not to understand the definition of a decade. My very first post on the subject to anonymouse clearly stated, ?I count 2010 as the start of a new decade.? in regard to the context of the article, but you would have had to actually read a thread and grasp where you are clearly wrong in your limited comprehension.
Everytime a Windows user needs to update Apple's iTunes program for upteenth time they get an default Safari download (basically an advertisement) that they have to disengage- OK? Let's see the reaction from the fanbots if Microsoft rejects that mumbo-combo.
How exactly would MS reject it? MS is not distributing it or promoting it.
Maybe Apple should sue MS for not selling iPhone apps in the Zune store?
Yes I do - what is your point?
My point is it doesn't do it, so there.
Right- we need a new improved longer fart app.
Essential I would say.
How do you figure? Apple is under no obligation to provide marketing for a competing product on their own products. The app store is Apple's and they are free to do with it as they wish.
Well, the problem is that once Apple started filtering out competition it became hard to justify what's ok and what's not ok. I mean is it ok to allow a movie countdown app that keeps you hyped til the movie release? And then the movie is released only on Blu-Ray. Is this then an app designed to get people to use a competing format over Apple's iTunes store?
Should the iPhone app "Windows Vista: The Missing Manual" be rejected because it informs people about a competing OS?
Should "Forum Nokia Podcasts" be shut out of iTunes distribution because it informs the users about what's going on in Nokia development?
Should a Microsoft Office app be rejected because Apple is developing its own iWork suite?
Should a browser be rejected because Apple is already providing a browser?
It doesn't smell good, filtering out competition...
Since the iPhone is a REAL computing platform, and not just a toy, I think Apple should be thinking about opening up, like it is on any computing platform. I mean, how bad could this iDroid be for Apple? The people who'd buy it are most likely either techies that know everything about Droid already, or those who don't really like their iPhone and consider a new phone. Nothing wrong with either. It wasn't a "Let's All Hate The iPhone" app or a virus or anything.
... sooner or later Apple will probably get sued over anticompetitive behaviour... if it isn't already...
...This is kind of like telling BMW that they have to allow Mercedes advertisements to be plastered on the window....
Once you bought your BMW though, it is up to you to have an "I love Mercedes" sticker on the window. That's the difference. You can just do that. With iPhone you can't, since it's a locked system. (Well, a Droid sticker is possible, hehe... but not a Droid app)
WHat makes you so wrong is you think the Droid app wouldn't be offered for free? Apple therefor wouldn't be selling it.
Your logic fails.
But Apple will be hosting the app, and paying the bandwidth cost, you blinkered fool!
It's not blocking advertising; Droid ads can still pop up on websites or on TVU or whatever. If Apple asked MS to ship Windows with a bunch of "I'm a Mac, and I'm a PC" ads on the desktop, they would (quite fairly) tell them to go shove it.
Not quite the same example. If Apple released the "I'm a Mac, and I'm a PC" add application for Windows and the next release of Service Pack XXX would modify Windows in the way it won't run this application (substitute this hypothetical application by iTunes or Safari to get the real example) in the next version of Windows, I am pretty sure that Apple and others would complain.
If Apple opens iPhone to other application source than AppStore, no one would make a story out of it.
How exactly would MS reject it? MS is not distributing it or promoting it.
Maybe Apple should sue MS for not selling iPhone apps in the Zune store?
What if the next version of Windows is altered that iTunes or Safari won't run on it ? It's theirs OS after all, isn't it ? They can do whatever they want with it, can't they ? Including refusing to run any application named "iTunes" or "Safari". This is pretty absurd, but only to show how absurd the closed market for iPhone is as well.
What if the next version of Windows is altered that iTunes or Safari won't run on it ? It's theirs OS after all, isn't it ? They can do whatever they want with it, can't they ? Including refusing to run any application named "iTunes" or "Safari". This is pretty absurd, but only to show how absurd the closed market for iPhone is as well.
I'm amazed that people here are actually surprised that Apple rejected this 'iDroid' application, or that they would reject advertisements for competing products. Or that they would be under any sort of obligation, moral or otherwise, and for any reason at all, to do so.
Agreed. The point is that no one needs to actually give a damn about it. And in the real world, outside the Mac fansite bubble, no one does. The interesting thing about our little corner of the internet (MR included and whatever other Apple site) is that we actually create problems where there aren't any.
No app rejection to date, that is, NO APP REJECTION TO DATE, has had any kind of significant effect on Apple. Not even Google Voice.
Rejecting a Droid marketing app is at most, something rather amusing, and at worst, something everyone outside these fansites will barely notice. LOL, assuming anyone really cares about the Droid.
With 250,000 sales on a single carrier in a single country in about a week (and counting) and accounts for 25% of all Android net traffic use worldwide, I'd say plenty of people care about the Droid.
Please take the Apple blinders off. The Droid is the phone that finally put Android on the map as a significant competitor.
But back on topic. I find Apple's rejection amusing and not surprising. But like others have said, discussing it is just free press for Droid...
What would happen is that Apple would sell a whole lot more Macs.
Would you say so ? I don't know. Bet most people who wants a Mac and can afford it pretty much owes one. There are reasons for the majority that they stick to Windows and I would say availability of either iTunes or Safari is not really that big deal for them. However, nonexistence of iTunes for Windows might be quite a problem for further adoption of iPhone.
But definitely it is not to benefit of the end user...if any application is excluded, it just limits your choices. iPhone needs to be open. Joe Hewitt is right.
Would you say so ? I don't know. Bet most people who wants a Mac and can afford it pretty much owes one.
Did this just happen, because each quarter since the Intel transition Apple has been reporting that about 50% of all Mac sales are to switchers. Doesn?t sound like they?ve hit a wall to me. Some proof or even a well thought out hypothesis would be nice.
There are reasons for the majority that they stick to Windows and I would say availability of either iTunes or Safari is not really that big deal for them.
Of course not because iTunes and Safari is also on Mac OS X. There are certainly reasons why MS? Windows monopoly is not in jeopardy but it has nothing to do with your hatred for Apple and everything to do with MS? choice to only sell the OS which it licenses to other vendors. Mac OS X can never be that big. Even if they took with HP?s spot as #1 they?d still only have ¼ the OS marketshare of Windows. I really don?t understand how their different business models are so often compared as if they are somehow fighting for the same thing.
However, nonexistence of iTunes for Windows might be quite a problem for further adoption of iPhone.
How exactly would this happen?
But definitely it is not to benefit of the end user...if any application is excluded, it just limits your choices. iPhone needs to be open. Joe Hewitt is right.
So an app that grabs your contacts, sends it back to a server and uses it for SPAM benefits a user. An app that loads a runtime and waits for specific sites to be accessed so it can grab personal information like CC numbers and tax IDs benefit the user. An app that runs in the background without the user?s knowledge running down the battery in hours is a great choice for the average user. Maybe you want to revise your statement about ?any? excluded app limits a user?s choice.
PS: You may also want to limit your comments as to how company be should run to the ones that aren?t the most profitable handset markets in the world, the ones that don?t have the device by which all other devices are measured, and the ones that don?t have App Stores and SDKs that are excessively popular. Maybe your insights into how Palm can fix the Pre, WebOS, their SDk and their App Store. Or what Nokia needs to do to rebuild their empire. Or how Android as a platform is not going to be a mobile OS that is pushed out of the higher-end phones, but instead an also-ran OS regulated to the majority of units sold but at lowest-end of the device HW.
But Apple will be hosting the app, and paying the bandwidth cost, you blinkered fool!
I'm a fool? You don't even understand that in order to sell something there needs to be someone who's buying (paying) for something. How exactly are you paying for free apps? Is Apple paying the free app developers? Who's the foo?
Is Apple paying the free app developers? Who's the foo?
Effectively yes, by hosting and providing the data. They would be commercially complicit is advertising a competing product.
The mind really boggles has to how this could have even become a debatable topic.
After reading this entire thread, did it ever cross anyone's mind what would happen if apple accepted the app?
Fire and brimstone coming down from the skies! Rivers and seas boiling! Forty years of darkness! Earthquakes, volcanoes? The dead rising from the grave! Human sacrifice, dogs and cats living together... mass hysteria!