If I NEVER saw another ad in my entire life, I couldn't be happier.
I'll pay a few bucks to avoid as much of that crap as possible.
Hell, I go out of my way to find logo-free clothing. (Unfortunately cycling gear doesn't qualify.)
Why should I PAY someone to be their walking billboard,? It should be the reverse!
While I agree with you in principle removing even more ads would likely mean an even further increase in products that include both an initial or recurring cost and advertisements, potentially pricing themselves out of the market.
For example, many of us pay for cable or satellite with most channels also including adverts. I think there will always be a market for a hybrid setup. That doesn't ECM scratch the increase in ad placement within content.
Isn't it strange how the tech media covers App Store rejections like it's the end of the world as we know it yet they give a total free pass to Google denying developers the ability to sell apps in so many countries? The double standard extends to Google blocking wifi tethering applications in the market, over clocking tools, etc. If you have to jailbreak your Android device to install those apps it's the exact same situation as jailbreaking an iPhone to get exotic apps. Companies like HTC are starting to make it very difficult to root some Android devices. The current rooting procedure on my HTC Eris is something like a 20+ step process to work around the lock-ins HTC has put in place. Such a gigantic double standard here.
Wasn't Google the first to employ the "remote kill switch" to delete malicious apps, that thing that got everyone up in arms over the iOS App Store?
Hell, I go out of my way to find logo-free clothing. (Unfortunately cycling gear doesn't qualify.)
Why should I PAY someone to be their walking billboard,? It should be the reverse!
You have it backwards there, friend. You use Apple products which display the logo of the company, and thus you pay to be an advertiser for Apple. And when it comes to clothing, why don't you just cut the logos out from the fabric? Or are you just being pretentious and hypocritical when it comes to Apple?
You have it backwards there, friend. You use Apple products which display the logo of the company, and thus you pay to be an advertiser for Apple. And when it comes to clothing, why don't you just cut the logos out from the fabric? Or are you just being pretentious and hypocritical when it comes to Apple?
He's not saying he has a problem buying brand name products that are of a quality he desires (as referenced his his cycling comment), he's saying that he doesn't want to blatantly advertise on top of that. He can put a sticker over his Apple logo but it's still a Mac and that won't change or hide that fact.
Perhaps his example wasn't great, but consider band apparel. I've never understood the desire to pay $30-50 for apparel that literally makes you a walking billboard. It's not like the shirt plays their music. Same goes for many companies that stick a logo on an item that they don't actually make.
You have it backwards there, friend. You use Apple products which display the logo of the company, and thus you pay to be an advertiser for Apple. And when it comes to clothing, why don't you just cut the logos out from the fabric? Or are you just being pretentious and hypocritical when it comes to Apple?
Yeah sure, cut that Nike logo off of your chest on your shirt. Gaping holes are real attractive in clothing. Look at how many of the things Old Navy sells with their name splattered all across it. American Eagle and Abercrombie & Fitch are terrible about this as well. If you buy something like that, you are a walking ad for them. You can cover the Apple logo with a sticker or a case and you can carry the phone in your pocket. People won't see from 30 feet away what store you shop at.
This is poorly worded and may be misleading. Android does not have the "largest share of free applications by far". Free Android apps makes up a greater proportion of total Android apps when compared to other app stores. I have no doubt that the absolute number of free apps for iOS makes Android look puny, even with their greater proportion.
It's not poorly worded and isn't misleading at all, you're just saying that it's incorrect to list percentages. That's ridiculous. It's a fair comparison. If you want to compare pure numbers (i.e. quantities), that's fair too but is a different message.
It's always interesting when you have a figure which represents more than 50% - it says a lot when something is more than 1/2, and is a better figure to quote than quantity which would mean nothing without the percentage.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffharris
If I NEVER saw another ad in my entire life, I couldn't be happier.... Why should I PAY someone to be their walking billboard,? It should be the reverse!
Funny how spin works. Over on engadget they've got an honest article on cross-platform development that paints a different picture...especially of the future.
Funny how spin works. Over on engadget they've got an honest article on cross-platform development that paints a different picture...especially of the future.
Honest, of course, meaning something you agree with.
You have it backwards there, friend. You use Apple products which display the logo of the company, and thus you pay to be an advertiser for Apple. And when it comes to clothing, why don't you just cut the logos out from the fabric? Or are you just being pretentious and hypocritical when it comes to Apple?
Displaying logos is pretentious. "See what I can buy, everyone!"
If someone else doesn't care or finds some benefit in advertising for their brands of choice, no problem here, I simply choose not to. Ego and/or pretension have nothing to do with it, I simply dislike advertising.
Unfortunately, with many products (outdoor and cycling gear especially), there's little choice. If possible, I remove or obscure logos. An Xacto knife and a Sharpie can perform miracles!
Isn't it more reasonable to find items that are logo-free than to buy clothing and cut away the offending parts. Doing what you suggest qualifies as just plain stupid.
Life works out much better in the end when you actually strive to interpret real information, rather than being a tool of either the media or the interpretation of the universe that suits you best. In any case, I can tell you don't actually own an iPhone 4.
I'm not owning an iPone 4 either. I have 3GS. I'd rather have a real fix on the 4 before buying it iso of a non existant fix
FYI apple went to Verizon first to carry the iphone and the laugh in Jobs face say that the iphone would not be successful. Apple then went to att and didnt even show they a prototype and teh accept apple offer
so how could you say it apple fault stupid troll read your facts first b4 u utter shit
The original post said it was a mistake on Apple's part to lock into AT&T "for so long" and I agree. I'm sure Verizon was kicking themselves after the first month, saying "that could have been us!"
Apple and Verizon could have kissed and made up after the second or third year, but now going on four years is bad for consumers who don't have coverage with ATT.
Verizon has their own copycat iPhone and doesn't have to play with Apple now. I don't know what goes on behind closed doors at the Apple campus, but this sure sounds like a personal issue between Verizon and Steve Jobs.
And please don't use four letter words, it's not nice.
It's not poorly worded and isn't misleading at all, you're just saying that it's incorrect to list percentages. That's ridiculous. It's a fair comparison. If you want to compare pure numbers (i.e. quantities), that's fair too but is a different message.
It's always interesting when you have a figure which represents more than 50% - it says a lot when something is more than 1/2, and is a better figure to quote than quantity which would mean nothing without the percentage.
+1
So by this wonderful logic, if android only had 10 apps, all free, and the headline said 'android market has all free apps'. That would fine? The relative size would not matter?
Honest, of course, meaning something you agree with.
No. Honest as in balanced with criticism and well reasoned analysis of the prospects of all parties involved.
The title of this article barely has anything to even do with its substance. Android is struggling to mimic iOS pay-to-own marketplace? How so? You can buy an app just as easily on an Android device as on iTunes. The author takes statistics about how there are more free aps on Android and then makes a rather reaching conclusion about how that means Android is struggling to mimic the pay-to-own marketplace.
No look at how the differences play into the issue. For example, you don't need to use the Android marketplace to download an Android app. A developer can offer an app for sale right off his website. You don't think that would impact the stats?
Their junk is made in the same Chinese sweat shops as the Dell junk, HP junk, etc. with the same parts that they all use. If Apple would let you open their units without voiding their warranty, you would find the same HD, memory chips and such. The reason they are not cheap is because you will pay more.
You can't be serious. I have heard that in China there is tiered quality system for every product. You get what you pay for, or it should be the other way, you pay for what you get.
Apple product is definitely better than Dell's or HP's - I have owned both.
Where are the assumptions? These are facts. Just check the press releases. And shouldn't this top notch, state of the art company correct there errors right away? I don't think the dust will settle before they got a right. Which should be straight away for a device costing over 700 USD.
*Sigh* I don't know why I'm even bothering to reply. With your July registration and 2 posts it is more likely than not that you have just passed through to spray some negative graffiti on the AI walls before passing into forum oblivion.
But I'm a masochist, so let's just take one of these assertions as an example:
"Releasing a fix which isnt a fix at all... just reports the bars differently. You will still lose calls."
On the face of it it might appear to be a fact since Apple is the source. But ask yourself, "Has it actually been released and tested by the public on any iPhone?" No. Apple gave a preliminary statement about their intention to provide a fix. It did not give a definitive engineering breakdown of all aspects of the update, or what other elements it will include before it is finished and released. So you cannot state as fact that it won't fix the problem.
Anyway, the dismissive tone of your remarks have all the characteristics of a typical Apple hater, so what's the point of going on. You are only interested in launching spitballs.
No. Honest as in balanced with criticism and well reasoned analysis of the prospects of all parties involved.
The title of this article barely has anything to even do with its substance. Android is struggling to mimic iOS pay-to-own marketplace? How so? You can buy an app just as easily on an Android device as on iTunes. The author takes statistics about how there are more free aps on Android and then makes a rather reaching conclusion about how that means Android is struggling to mimic the pay-to-own marketplace.
No look at how the differences play into the issue. For example, you don't need to use the Android marketplace to download an Android app. A developer can offer an app for sale right off his website. You don't think that would impact the stats?
If a significant number of apps being distributed and sold are from websites rather than the Market, then it would. Is that the case?
That would be interesting if developers decided to sell products from their own websites rather than use the Android Market, which is immediately accessible on every Android phone and must be much more convenient for everybody. It would really show the lack of confidence developers have in the actual Market, which I doubt would be what Google wants for it.
Comments
If I NEVER saw another ad in my entire life, I couldn't be happier.
I'll pay a few bucks to avoid as much of that crap as possible.
Hell, I go out of my way to find logo-free clothing. (Unfortunately cycling gear doesn't qualify.)
Why should I PAY someone to be their walking billboard,? It should be the reverse!
While I agree with you in principle removing even more ads would likely mean an even further increase in products that include both an initial or recurring cost and advertisements, potentially pricing themselves out of the market.
For example, many of us pay for cable or satellite with most channels also including adverts. I think there will always be a market for a hybrid setup. That doesn't ECM scratch the increase in ad placement within content.
PS: Have you seen this?
Isn't it strange how the tech media covers App Store rejections like it's the end of the world as we know it yet they give a total free pass to Google denying developers the ability to sell apps in so many countries? The double standard extends to Google blocking wifi tethering applications in the market, over clocking tools, etc. If you have to jailbreak your Android device to install those apps it's the exact same situation as jailbreaking an iPhone to get exotic apps. Companies like HTC are starting to make it very difficult to root some Android devices. The current rooting procedure on my HTC Eris is something like a 20+ step process to work around the lock-ins HTC has put in place. Such a gigantic double standard here.
Wasn't Google the first to employ the "remote kill switch" to delete malicious apps, that thing that got everyone up in arms over the iOS App Store?
Hell, I go out of my way to find logo-free clothing. (Unfortunately cycling gear doesn't qualify.)
Why should I PAY someone to be their walking billboard,? It should be the reverse!
You have it backwards there, friend. You use Apple products which display the logo of the company, and thus you pay to be an advertiser for Apple. And when it comes to clothing, why don't you just cut the logos out from the fabric? Or are you just being pretentious and hypocritical when it comes to Apple?
You have it backwards there, friend. You use Apple products which display the logo of the company, and thus you pay to be an advertiser for Apple. And when it comes to clothing, why don't you just cut the logos out from the fabric? Or are you just being pretentious and hypocritical when it comes to Apple?
He's not saying he has a problem buying brand name products that are of a quality he desires (as referenced his his cycling comment), he's saying that he doesn't want to blatantly advertise on top of that. He can put a sticker over his Apple logo but it's still a Mac and that won't change or hide that fact.
Perhaps his example wasn't great, but consider band apparel. I've never understood the desire to pay $30-50 for apparel that literally makes you a walking billboard. It's not like the shirt plays their music. Same goes for many companies that stick a logo on an item that they don't actually make.
And quite frankly I don't want a copycat iPhone.
You have it backwards there, friend. You use Apple products which display the logo of the company, and thus you pay to be an advertiser for Apple. And when it comes to clothing, why don't you just cut the logos out from the fabric? Or are you just being pretentious and hypocritical when it comes to Apple?
Yeah sure, cut that Nike logo off of your chest on your shirt. Gaping holes are real attractive in clothing. Look at how many of the things Old Navy sells with their name splattered all across it. American Eagle and Abercrombie & Fitch are terrible about this as well. If you buy something like that, you are a walking ad for them. You can cover the Apple logo with a sticker or a case and you can carry the phone in your pocket. People won't see from 30 feet away what store you shop at.
This is poorly worded and may be misleading. Android does not have the "largest share of free applications by far". Free Android apps makes up a greater proportion of total Android apps when compared to other app stores. I have no doubt that the absolute number of free apps for iOS makes Android look puny, even with their greater proportion.
It's not poorly worded and isn't misleading at all, you're just saying that it's incorrect to list percentages. That's ridiculous. It's a fair comparison. If you want to compare pure numbers (i.e. quantities), that's fair too but is a different message.
It's always interesting when you have a figure which represents more than 50% - it says a lot when something is more than 1/2, and is a better figure to quote than quantity which would mean nothing without the percentage.
If I NEVER saw another ad in my entire life, I couldn't be happier.... Why should I PAY someone to be their walking billboard,? It should be the reverse!
+1
Company logos.
The shirts were free because they are company shirts with logos.
I am only too happy to wear the shirts.
Did I mention that I got the shirts for free?
I love free shirts.
On another topic.
I always prefer paying for an app and having zero adverts, then getting it for free.
Seriously. If you can afford an iPhone (or an Android phone), you can afford to pay 99 cents and up for apps.
Funny how spin works. Over on engadget they've got an honest article on cross-platform development that paints a different picture...especially of the future.
Honest, of course, meaning something you agree with.
You have it backwards there, friend. You use Apple products which display the logo of the company, and thus you pay to be an advertiser for Apple. And when it comes to clothing, why don't you just cut the logos out from the fabric? Or are you just being pretentious and hypocritical when it comes to Apple?
Displaying logos is pretentious. "See what I can buy, everyone!"
If someone else doesn't care or finds some benefit in advertising for their brands of choice, no problem here, I simply choose not to. Ego and/or pretension have nothing to do with it, I simply dislike advertising.
Unfortunately, with many products (outdoor and cycling gear especially), there's little choice. If possible, I remove or obscure logos. An Xacto knife and a Sharpie can perform miracles!
Isn't it more reasonable to find items that are logo-free than to buy clothing and cut away the offending parts. Doing what you suggest qualifies as just plain stupid.
Life works out much better in the end when you actually strive to interpret real information, rather than being a tool of either the media or the interpretation of the universe that suits you best. In any case, I can tell you don't actually own an iPhone 4.
I'm not owning an iPone 4 either. I have 3GS. I'd rather have a real fix on the 4 before buying it iso of a non existant fix
I have a large collection of golf shirts with logos on them.
Company logos.
The shirts were free because they are company shirts with logos.
I am only too happy to wear the shirts.
Did I mention that I got the shirts for free?
I love free shirts.
On another topic.
I always prefer paying for an app and having zero adverts, then getting it for free.
Seriously. If you can afford an iPhone (or an Android phone), you can afford to pay 99 cents and up for apps.
Yeah, I have a few, too. Even some old Apple and Mac-related t-shirts.
FYI apple went to Verizon first to carry the iphone and the laugh in Jobs face say that the iphone would not be successful. Apple then went to att and didnt even show they a prototype and teh accept apple offer
so how could you say it apple fault stupid troll read your facts first b4 u utter shit
The original post said it was a mistake on Apple's part to lock into AT&T "for so long" and I agree. I'm sure Verizon was kicking themselves after the first month, saying "that could have been us!"
Apple and Verizon could have kissed and made up after the second or third year, but now going on four years is bad for consumers who don't have coverage with ATT.
Verizon has their own copycat iPhone and doesn't have to play with Apple now. I don't know what goes on behind closed doors at the Apple campus, but this sure sounds like a personal issue between Verizon and Steve Jobs.
And please don't use four letter words, it's not nice.
It's not poorly worded and isn't misleading at all, you're just saying that it's incorrect to list percentages. That's ridiculous. It's a fair comparison. If you want to compare pure numbers (i.e. quantities), that's fair too but is a different message.
It's always interesting when you have a figure which represents more than 50% - it says a lot when something is more than 1/2, and is a better figure to quote than quantity which would mean nothing without the percentage.
+1
So by this wonderful logic, if android only had 10 apps, all free, and the headline said 'android market has all free apps'. That would fine? The relative size would not matter?
Honest, of course, meaning something you agree with.
No. Honest as in balanced with criticism and well reasoned analysis of the prospects of all parties involved.
The title of this article barely has anything to even do with its substance. Android is struggling to mimic iOS pay-to-own marketplace? How so? You can buy an app just as easily on an Android device as on iTunes. The author takes statistics about how there are more free aps on Android and then makes a rather reaching conclusion about how that means Android is struggling to mimic the pay-to-own marketplace.
No look at how the differences play into the issue. For example, you don't need to use the Android marketplace to download an Android app. A developer can offer an app for sale right off his website. You don't think that would impact the stats?
Their junk is made in the same Chinese sweat shops as the Dell junk, HP junk, etc. with the same parts that they all use. If Apple would let you open their units without voiding their warranty, you would find the same HD, memory chips and such. The reason they are not cheap is because you will pay more.
You can't be serious. I have heard that in China there is tiered quality system for every product. You get what you pay for, or it should be the other way, you pay for what you get.
Apple product is definitely better than Dell's or HP's - I have owned both.
Where are the assumptions? These are facts. Just check the press releases. And shouldn't this top notch, state of the art company correct there errors right away? I don't think the dust will settle before they got a right. Which should be straight away for a device costing over 700 USD.
*Sigh* I don't know why I'm even bothering to reply. With your July registration and 2 posts it is more likely than not that you have just passed through to spray some negative graffiti on the AI walls before passing into forum oblivion.
But I'm a masochist, so let's just take one of these assertions as an example:
"Releasing a fix which isnt a fix at all... just reports the bars differently. You will still lose calls."
On the face of it it might appear to be a fact since Apple is the source. But ask yourself, "Has it actually been released and tested by the public on any iPhone?" No. Apple gave a preliminary statement about their intention to provide a fix. It did not give a definitive engineering breakdown of all aspects of the update, or what other elements it will include before it is finished and released. So you cannot state as fact that it won't fix the problem.
Anyway, the dismissive tone of your remarks have all the characteristics of a typical Apple hater, so what's the point of going on. You are only interested in launching spitballs.
No. Honest as in balanced with criticism and well reasoned analysis of the prospects of all parties involved.
The title of this article barely has anything to even do with its substance. Android is struggling to mimic iOS pay-to-own marketplace? How so? You can buy an app just as easily on an Android device as on iTunes. The author takes statistics about how there are more free aps on Android and then makes a rather reaching conclusion about how that means Android is struggling to mimic the pay-to-own marketplace.
No look at how the differences play into the issue. For example, you don't need to use the Android marketplace to download an Android app. A developer can offer an app for sale right off his website. You don't think that would impact the stats?
If a significant number of apps being distributed and sold are from websites rather than the Market, then it would. Is that the case?
That would be interesting if developers decided to sell products from their own websites rather than use the Android Market, which is immediately accessible on every Android phone and must be much more convenient for everybody. It would really show the lack of confidence developers have in the actual Market, which I doubt would be what Google wants for it.