will android become riddled with virus's similar to desktops? I really don't know, but their approach is much more dangerous than apples. i won't be accessing my bank account on one of those "open" machine, i'll tell you that.
If the virus problem on android rises to the current level of the virus problem on Windows, well, then, I guess it really will never be much of a problem.
"Riddled with viruses"? WTF are you talking about?
And finally, I assume that you don't access you bank account on your Mac, eh? How is your Mac different from what you call "one of those 'open' machine[s]".
My favorite line was "Google's efforts to match Apple's iTunes features integrated into its iPhone OS may stomp out the emerging third party solutions to the feature gap on Android,"
So it's horrible when Apple vets applications for quality, but it's OK for Google to restrict applications simply because they compete? ROTFLMAO.
They do no such thing. Nor does the quoted line say anything about them doing that.
That sounds like a very good idea. I see no reason why Apple shouldn't have an Android-friendly avenue into the iTunes store. And no reason not to offer a version of iTunes player for Android too.
Apple has all that stuff for Windows computers, so why not Android?
Right. Google has apps for the App Store, Apple should start offering apps (perhaps with certain limitations) on other devices as further incentive to future Apple purchases. Worked with iTunes on Windows... more devices sold.
Once again, it's clear that you don't know what you're talking about.
First, there's a RUMOR that Apple is being looked into by DOJ. No formal investigation has been launched. Even if it does get launched (due to whining from competitors), no charges have been filed.
There is absolutely nothing illegal about dominating music sold online. Nothing. Nor has anyone pointed out a single thing Apple has done that is illegal - by even the broadest interpretation of the law. Apple is allowed to sell what they want in their store.
Your inability to present a logical argument is really demonstrated by your childish rant at the end.
I never said anything was illegal. All I'm saying is whenever a company dominates it will no doubt come under scrutiny for anti-trust violations, but that doesn't mean that's the case. I'm far from childish, I just don't consider these things that serious.
But that openess would have to be both ways. Meaning letting whatever music services android users use be available to iPhone users. If they just made an iTunes android app then they'd be just trying to hoard additional customers increasing their market share and that my friend is an anti-trust violation.
If you have no idea of what you are talking about, it is better to remain silent.
Increasing your market share by competing with others is not an antitrust violation.
If you don't like Apple's policies, there are a wide range of other stores out there where you can buy music. That ensures that competition exists - regardless of whether people are choosing to use those stores or not.
But the current allegation is that Apple is using its market power to prevent other vendors from getting good deals from the labels. They are trying to use their power to stifle the competing stores, interfering/preventing their competitors from getting deals sufficient to constitute competition with iTunes, so it is alleged.
Do you want the security of that walled garden for your Mac too? Would you prefer that no Mac software could be installed unless you you bought it straight from Apple?
You really are a master of the diversionary red herring.
But why is that a Red Herring? If a walled garden is superior, why does the Mac have an inferior system?
Well, for one reason because what may be optimal or ideal on one type of platform isn't necessarily optimal or ideal on another type of platform, and, as such, it has no bearing on the issue under discussion. And also, because we know you are just throwing it out there to attempt to get in a dig at Apple.
But the current allegation is that Apple is using its market power to prevent other vendors from getting good deals from the labels. They are trying to use their power to stifle the competing stores, interfering/preventing their competitors from getting deals sufficient to constitute competition with iTunes, so it is alleged.
And there is, of course, no evidence of that.
In fact, even the Amazon complaint simply said that Apple refused to highlight record labels which gave Amazon a head start.
How is that using Apple's 'market power' to stifle competition? Your argument is equivalent to saying Apple should be forced to subsidize the competition.
The analogy isn't the same. GM is not a retail store as the iTunes store is. But feel free to cite a specific part of the law that forces Apple to carry songs and software that they don't want to carry.
If you don't like Apple's policies, there are a wide range of other stores out there where you can buy music. That ensures that competition exists - regardless of whether people are choosing to use those stores or not.
Ok, shift from music to apps (which is what I was referring to) and the analogy makes sense.
There are some significant missing features in both DoubleTwist's existing and Google's planned apps, and no combination of apps for Android provide the seamless, consistent and refined experience of Apple's combination of iTunes on the desktop and its iPod, iTunes, and App Store iPhone OS apps for its mobile devices.
I don't find the iTunes experience particularly refined: there is no WiFi syncing, iTunes haphazardly breaks up albums, songs get duplicated, songs disappear, and to top it all off, Apple requires me to make my own backups instead of being able to re-download. Mixing TV, movies, and music also doesn't work so well. iTunes is already obsolete; if Apple doesn't quickly move to streaming and hosted music libraries, they are dead because nobody really wants to manage gigabytes of MP3s on their desktop.
With all the Apple bashing at Google it seems that they are trying to replicate some of that walled garden approach that apple has to their platform.
Oh, please, don't try to obfuscate the issues. The only "walled garden" about the Apple platform is Apple's app store reviews. They are ineffective as a security measure, they are simply designed to keep competitors off Apple's platform. Google has no interest in doing this, and they don't even need to do security reviews because of Android's sandboxing features.
Quote:
Google shipped out Nexus One ... Now Google is hiring a UI expert to synchronize the UI ... With Spotify Google is building... Google is moving more and more to controlled app eco-system
I don't see anything "controlled" about that.
Quote:
Google is moving more and more to controlled app eco-system, forcing its hardware suppliers to adhere to strict rules,
Google from the start has simply specified minimum requirements that devices need to conform to if they want to access their app store. Those are quite loose, when devices like the X10 Mini and the Droid X can both conform.
Quote:
This is somthing microsoft tried to do:
I think you're really grasping at straws here. Android is, at the same time, secure, open, easy to use, popular, and supports a wide range of hardware from many manufacturers. Apple hasn't managed to come close with iPhone. Apple did mange to grab early market share by dropping some of those requirements and shpping a bit earlier than Android. If Android had been out at the same time as iPhone, iPhone wouldn't have stood a chance. Just look at what happened to the MacBook Air vs the netbooks.
Comments
didn't they just kick a bunch of Tetris clone out of the Android store?
Copyright issues.
will android become riddled with virus's similar to desktops? I really don't know, but their approach is much more dangerous than apples. i won't be accessing my bank account on one of those "open" machine, i'll tell you that.
If the virus problem on android rises to the current level of the virus problem on Windows, well, then, I guess it really will never be much of a problem.
"Riddled with viruses"? WTF are you talking about?
And finally, I assume that you don't access you bank account on your Mac, eh? How is your Mac different from what you call "one of those 'open' machine[s]".
My favorite line was "Google's efforts to match Apple's iTunes features integrated into its iPhone OS may stomp out the emerging third party solutions to the feature gap on Android,"
So it's horrible when Apple vets applications for quality, but it's OK for Google to restrict applications simply because they compete? ROTFLMAO.
They do no such thing. Nor does the quoted line say anything about them doing that.
That sounds like a very good idea. I see no reason why Apple shouldn't have an Android-friendly avenue into the iTunes store. And no reason not to offer a version of iTunes player for Android too.
Apple has all that stuff for Windows computers, so why not Android?
Right. Google has apps for the App Store, Apple should start offering apps (perhaps with certain limitations) on other devices as further incentive to future Apple purchases. Worked with iTunes on Windows... more devices sold.
Once again, it's clear that you don't know what you're talking about.
First, there's a RUMOR that Apple is being looked into by DOJ. No formal investigation has been launched. Even if it does get launched (due to whining from competitors), no charges have been filed.
There is absolutely nothing illegal about dominating music sold online. Nothing. Nor has anyone pointed out a single thing Apple has done that is illegal - by even the broadest interpretation of the law. Apple is allowed to sell what they want in their store.
Your inability to present a logical argument is really demonstrated by your childish rant at the end.
I never said anything was illegal. All I'm saying is whenever a company dominates it will no doubt come under scrutiny for anti-trust violations, but that doesn't mean that's the case. I'm far from childish, I just don't consider these things that serious.
But that openess would have to be both ways. Meaning letting whatever music services android users use be available to iPhone users. If they just made an iTunes android app then they'd be just trying to hoard additional customers increasing their market share and that my friend is an anti-trust violation.
If you have no idea of what you are talking about, it is better to remain silent.
Increasing your market share by competing with others is not an antitrust violation.
If you don't like Apple's policies, there are a wide range of other stores out there where you can buy music. That ensures that competition exists - regardless of whether people are choosing to use those stores or not.
But the current allegation is that Apple is using its market power to prevent other vendors from getting good deals from the labels. They are trying to use their power to stifle the competing stores, interfering/preventing their competitors from getting deals sufficient to constitute competition with iTunes, so it is alleged.
Do you want the security of that walled garden for your Mac too? Would you prefer that no Mac software could be installed unless you you bought it straight from Apple?
You really are a master of the diversionary red herring.
You really are a master of the diversionary red herring.
Thanks.
But why is that a Red Herring? If a walled garden is superior, why does the Mac have an inferior system?
Thanks.
But why is that a Red Herring? If a walled garden is superior, why does the Mac have an inferior system?
Well, for one reason because what may be optimal or ideal on one type of platform isn't necessarily optimal or ideal on another type of platform, and, as such, it has no bearing on the issue under discussion. And also, because we know you are just throwing it out there to attempt to get in a dig at Apple.
But the current allegation is that Apple is using its market power to prevent other vendors from getting good deals from the labels. They are trying to use their power to stifle the competing stores, interfering/preventing their competitors from getting deals sufficient to constitute competition with iTunes, so it is alleged.
And there is, of course, no evidence of that.
In fact, even the Amazon complaint simply said that Apple refused to highlight record labels which gave Amazon a head start.
How is that using Apple's 'market power' to stifle competition? Your argument is equivalent to saying Apple should be forced to subsidize the competition.
The analogy isn't the same. GM is not a retail store as the iTunes store is. But feel free to cite a specific part of the law that forces Apple to carry songs and software that they don't want to carry.
If you don't like Apple's policies, there are a wide range of other stores out there where you can buy music. That ensures that competition exists - regardless of whether people are choosing to use those stores or not.
Ok, shift from music to apps (which is what I was referring to) and the analogy makes sense.
There are some significant missing features in both DoubleTwist's existing and Google's planned apps, and no combination of apps for Android provide the seamless, consistent and refined experience of Apple's combination of iTunes on the desktop and its iPod, iTunes, and App Store iPhone OS apps for its mobile devices.
I don't find the iTunes experience particularly refined: there is no WiFi syncing, iTunes haphazardly breaks up albums, songs get duplicated, songs disappear, and to top it all off, Apple requires me to make my own backups instead of being able to re-download. Mixing TV, movies, and music also doesn't work so well. iTunes is already obsolete; if Apple doesn't quickly move to streaming and hosted music libraries, they are dead because nobody really wants to manage gigabytes of MP3s on their desktop.
With all the Apple bashing at Google it seems that they are trying to replicate some of that walled garden approach that apple has to their platform.
Oh, please, don't try to obfuscate the issues. The only "walled garden" about the Apple platform is Apple's app store reviews. They are ineffective as a security measure, they are simply designed to keep competitors off Apple's platform. Google has no interest in doing this, and they don't even need to do security reviews because of Android's sandboxing features.
Google shipped out Nexus One ... Now Google is hiring a UI expert to synchronize the UI ... With Spotify Google is building... Google is moving more and more to controlled app eco-system
I don't see anything "controlled" about that.
Google is moving more and more to controlled app eco-system, forcing its hardware suppliers to adhere to strict rules,
Google from the start has simply specified minimum requirements that devices need to conform to if they want to access their app store. Those are quite loose, when devices like the X10 Mini and the Droid X can both conform.
This is somthing microsoft tried to do:
I think you're really grasping at straws here. Android is, at the same time, secure, open, easy to use, popular, and supports a wide range of hardware from many manufacturers. Apple hasn't managed to come close with iPhone. Apple did mange to grab early market share by dropping some of those requirements and shpping a bit earlier than Android. If Android had been out at the same time as iPhone, iPhone wouldn't have stood a chance. Just look at what happened to the MacBook Air vs the netbooks.