The Mac platform prior to the launch of the App Store was a "garbage user experience". But now that the steps toward curation of the platform have begun, Apple fans will get exactly the type of experience they've been celebrating with iOS.
That will never happen with Macs.
Yes, I agree that Apple may begin to make computers that are more similar and restrictive as iOS devices, but that's not a negative for most people... it would enable more people to be less afraid of their computers.
What I disagree with is that this will be only types of computers Apple is going to produce. They will have to keep an open platform for development purposes. You couldn't have 300,000+ apps in the AppStore without a system for developing those apps. And you can't have a true development environment without an open system to develop on.
You cannot compare 1 million Playbooks PRODUCED with 1 million iPads SOLD. Those are unrelated statistics. Just because you can build it doesn't mean you can sell it.
The App Store is necessary for the sake of choice and freedom. I like my freedom!
Many people talk as though curated content has only downsides, no benefits, and that’s dishonest. It has different benefits. And frankly, ones that are useful to a LOT more people a LOT more of the time than the benefits of the wild west approach.
BOTH kinds of platforms should exist:
1. Wild west at-your-own-risk hobbyist platforms where people do crazy cool things that crash and steal your personal details and bury you in a sea of ads and bad interfaces, while being “good enough” to stimulate competition and innovation from everyone. (This would be Android... except Android is more open to the carrier’s whim, not as much to the average user’s needs. Still, Android’s a great start!)
2. Well-managed platforms that work better and offer a higher quality experience, while still allowing 99% of the same crazy cool innovative stuff... and sometimes, the tools to do even more. And which are the R&D departments for the other platforms that copy them! (Don’t like the existence of iOS? If it didn’t exist, neither would Android as we know it, and the other iPhone clones.)
Proponents of the “freedom” and “open” buzzwords seem bent on taking away option #2. But #2 is a flat-out GREAT option that many people (even me) love using.
Please don’t take that option away in the name of “freedom.”
The “danger” of the App Store (and its imitators) would be if that prevented people from a) buying some other platform they prefer or b) making iOS web apps without limits. But a) and b) are not threatened at all. They may turn out to be the less common common choices people make, but that’s because people’s goals aren’t all the same.
More people want manual transmission than want to mod/fix their own engines. It doesn’t mean either option is going away entirely. It means the most-useful option to the most people will be the most used... which seems pretty obvious and good to me
Microsoft, quite in line with their tendency to follow the innovator(s), also hinted at the possibility of a Windows app store similar to Apple's model.
So then what?
As for the Mac experience being whatever it was before the Mac App Store, it was perfectly fine. Not having an app store and having users hunt down what they wanted around the net was just fine, if not inconvenient. With the Mac App Store, Apple is simply extending a wildly successful distribution system to the Mac. Perfectly natural.
Don't like it? Then don't open your walle . . . oh wait, you just did.
The verdict is in. Consumers want more Apple gear and the ecosystem that goes with it. End of story. Time to live with it or get a Dell (only to live with a similar Windows app store in due course!)
It’s been stated as such. The PlayBook looks to be much more appealing in many ways so I expect it to fly past the Tab. It also shows that conumers now want tablets and 7” tablets at that… even if they are pretty shitty.
I also dont get Jimmy Wales point either, at least as far as is quoted in this article.
but, what it might be equivalent to is this:
a private app store is equivalent to a new shopping mall in the suburbs in the early 70's, drawing shoppers away from the city.
shopping malls drew people away from a more spread out, and therefore more equalized economy.
shopping malls centralised people away from a more broad based shopping pattern and concentrated the purchasing power into the hands of the mall tenants.
it is a interesting comparison that could be made with the apple app store. iTunes store accounts for how much of all music purchased in the USA? same could happen to apps as well. fewer traffic to smaller independent software houses.
I don't buy the analogy. Most independent (and for that matter, even the chain) software physical retailers have gone out of business. Even when they were in business, most didn't feature very much Mac software. From a distribution standpoint for physical product, Ingram Micro-D is the largest distributor of software in the U.S. and there really aren't any other major players.
In the online world, you can buy product from online sites from the manufacturers themselves, from sites like MacMall and from the big ecommerce vendors like Amazon, et al. So Apple becomes one more place where software publishers can elect to distribute their software or not. The presence of Apple's store might take a little business away from the other major outlets, but that's what competition is about. I don't see Apple in the role of Wal-Mart and other sellers as the poor business owner on Main Street.
So I don't see the Apple store as dangerous at all (except perhaps to other major online stores). If however, Apple said that in order to distribute in the App store, it needed to be exclusive, then I would have a big problem. Or if Apple decided that all Mac apps had to be sold through the store. Either of those two things would be "dangerous". But I can't see Apple being dumb enough to even attempt to go there.
I think the App store is going to benefit small developers and publishers the most. These are the businesses who can't get their products sold via other distribution channels. I really don't need the App store to buy an Adobe or Microsoft product.
Another poster stated that they thought Apple shouldn't limit anything and any app should be able to be sold in the app store. I think just the opposite: I think that both in the App store and in the iPad/iPhone store, there is far too much garbage. Good retailers (think of a good classic bookstore) don't carry everything. They pick and choose and curate the best products for their customers. People will bitch and moan and claim discrimination, etc., but that's what I think Apple should be doing. Having 100,000 apps in the store does me no good if I can't easily find the best app for my given purpose. If I'm looking for a non-linear video editor, I don't want to see every video editor from companies I've never heard of (unless there's a review from someone I trust), I want to see the five best video editors. And I don't want to see the equivalent of 50 different iFart applications.
And by the way, for all the people who complain that Apple's 30% cut is too much, when you sell to a major physical retail distributor, you sell for 48% to 60% off of list.
It’s been stated as such. The PlayBook looks to be much more appealing in many ways so I expect it to fly past the Tab. It also shows that conumers now want tablets and 7” tablets at that… even if they are pretty shitty. ...
Seven-inch tablet owners will end up with buyers remorse and iPad envy. Let's review the applications suited to 7 and 10 inch tablets
* UI Interaction
- 7" either elements, like buttons, are so small they are difficult to manipulate, or they take up a large percentage of screen space in service of usability.
- 10" adequate room for properly sized UI elements that leave plenty of room for content and are easily manipulated.
* eReading
- 7" excellent, especially when holding the tablet in one hand, unsupported, for hours on end.
- 10" excellent, except perhaps when holding the tablet in one hand, unsupported, for hours on end.
* Web browsing
- 7" really not much better than a smartphone, text too small to read without a lot of zooming, and the necessary panning as a result of zooming.
- 10" works great
* Document editing
- 7" cramped, barely enough room for (tiny) keyboard and viewing content. Spreadsheets even worse.
- 10" room for full size keyboard and still room to view document. Spreadsheets not as good as large desktop monitor, but useable.
* Media viewing
7" slightly better than a smartphone
10" close to as good as a laptop.
* Portability
7" doesn't fit comfortably into normal pockets, so some sort of bag required to carry
10" doesn't fit comfortably into normal pockets, so some sort of bag required to carry
* Gaming
7" slightly better than a smartphone, but not much. a little more screen real estate, but loses the ability for users to comfortably interact with in the manner of a smartphone.
10" large enough to allow for a unique gaming experience.
The list of comparisons could go on and on, and the 7" tablet is always on the short end of the stick. It's a bastard child of a smartphone that gains few if any of the advantages of the 10" form factor. These tiny "tablets" will be nice for some as eReaders, but a Kindle would be cheaper, and just as useful.
Well I'm pretty sure it's illegal what Apple practices, but because the governments are so damn corporate-friendly they led this slide.
When you buy Apple's product then it's your product, you give money in exchange for an iPhone, that makes it your device which you can do whatever you want with it. Having it locked from Apple so you can't install 3rd party programs from 3rd party venues is illegal because Apple is restricting you from using your device however you want.
That's like buying a PC from HP and you would only be able to install programs from an HP virtual store. Apple goes even further, it won't allow a program unless it's been approved by them.. hellooo? Doesn't anyone see how illegal this is???
The fact that they demand a premium price for the device isn't enough, they need to get a share of the revenues from applications which are programmed by third parties which Apple had no investment whatsoever. They are making money off of enslaved developers and the only ones profiting off of apps is mostly Apple. That's 21st century slavery!
If this doesn't smell like an international class-action lawsuit then i don't know what is.
You do know that you have to sign a license agreement that restricts what you can do with Windows, right? Also, when you buy an X-box, you can't use just any game. You can use games developed only for the X-box platform. Also, you can't just use any hard drive for the X-box. There's a particular kind of hard drive that you have to use.
Hypocrisy and double-standards make me very angry. What I'm finding here is that everybody cries foul when Apple engages in a perfectly legitimate behavior and if any other company were to engage in that same behavior, people just look the other way.
I don't see how anything that Apple is doing is illegal. It's called business. Businesses are supposed to make money. Apple is not forcing you to use their product. Vote with your wallets and don't buy an Apple product. Just as you have the right to spend your money however you want, Apple has the right to do what it wants with products that it spent hard cash on developing.
Is Steve Jobs spooning you right now? Here is an idea, Freedom of Choice! Allow third party OTA installations without asking for Papa's permission, warn the user of the danger but let the user choose! Its a mobile computing platform just like a Apple Macintosh not a toaster.
It always amazes me how paranoid, unhappy frustrated people think we are drinking apple kool-aid or "are being spoon fed by jobs" because we dont mind or agree with the business model or conditions tied to using the product we chose or prefer.
Quote:
Originally Posted by agolongo
So I dont buy it? I'll go to google where I have more installation freedom but they will mine all my personal data to exploit me in the future. Maybe I'll check out WP7, ohh wait they are doing both.
exactly
Quote:
Originally Posted by agolongo
God your the customer, pretend for once like your in the drivers seat, looking after your own self interest and demanding progress instead of running PR for Apple.
I'm not only in the driver's seat, I even have the freedom to get out of the car and walk
Quote:
Originally Posted by agolongo
Its up to us to mold the construct of how the corporation behaves in our society, its the dog and has its purpose but we are supposed to be the handler!
MORE POWER TO THE PEOPLE!!!
I dont buy something when I dont like the conditions, dont complain about the company exploiting me
I change the tv channel when I dont like the show, dont complain about content.
I change the radio channel on talk shows when people like you call up to cry about how exploited they are by the evil corporations
Maybe I should bitch that I can't play PS3 games on my 360? Or I can't play PC games on my PS3? Or put diseal fuel in my unleaded gas car? I mean really? where does all this crap come from? Maybe I should bitch I can't run android specific apps on my iOS? I mean really, this utter nonsense.
You do know that you have to sign a license agreement that restricts what you can do with Windows, right? Also, when you buy an X-box, you can't use just any game. You can use games developed only for the X-box platform. Also, you can't just use any hard drive for the X-box. There's a particular kind of hard drive that you have to use.
Hypocrisy and double-standards make me very angry. What I'm finding here is that everybody cries foul when Apple engages in a perfectly legitimate behavior and if any other company were to engage in that same behavior, people just look the other way.
I don't see how anything that Apple is doing is illegal. It's called business. Businesses are supposed to make money. Apple is not forcing you to use their product. Vote with your wallets and don't buy an Apple product. Just as you have the right to spend your money however you want, Apple has the right to do what it wants with products that it spent hard cash on developing.
I honestly believe that jealousy has so much to do with the reason people like to pick on Apple.
And apparently the co-founder of wikipedia (the philosopher not the one selling porn via their website, that's Jimbo Wales) agrees on the sad state of affairs at wikipedia:
His staements sound conradictory. What he is saying about Wikipedia's downfall is what he really wants with the iOS app store but he doesnt realize it. The iOS app store in its enclosed structure insures that apps are of decent quality and work and don't mislead people and don't rip people off. They he describes wikipedia today is that akin to androids market.
Maybe it was a child under five with a PhD who contributed the fact "that frank discussion of necrophilia in their hit "Wake Up, Little Susie," led them to receive the nickname "fraternal godfathers of heavy metal.""
There's nothing I like better than a frank discussion of necrophilia, so I appreciate the fact that Wikipedia called this to my attention in their article on the Everly Brothers.
I am a 50's gen person and I remember and enjoy the song "Wake Up, Little Susie".
I don't remember frank discussions of anything sexual by anyone in that era -- not to mention necrophilia.
Those were the days when a man and a woman couldn't kiss on TV.
So I checked your assertion about wiki -- you are correct.
Here are the lyrics -- that's a pretty esoteric discussion of necrophilia, IMO:
Quote:
Wake up little Suzie, wake up
Wake up little Suzie, wake up
We've both been sound asleep
Wake up little Suzie and weep
The movie's over, it's four o'clock
And we're in trouble deep
Wake up little Suzie, wake up little Suzie
Well, what are we gonna tell your mama
What are we gonna tell your pa
What are we gonna tell our friends when they say ooh-la-la
Wake up little Suzie, wake up little Suzie
Well, I told your mama that you'd be in by ten
Well, Suzie baby, looks like we goofed again
Wake up little Suzie, wake up little Suzie
We gotta go home
Wake up little Suzie, wake up!
Wake up little Suzie, wake up!
The movie wasn't so hot
It didn't have much of a plot
We fell asleep, our goose is cooked
Our reputation is shot
Wake up little Suzie, wake up little Suzie
Well, what are we gonna tell your mama
What are we gonna tell your pa
What are we gonna tell our friends when they say ooh-la-la
Wake up little Suzie, wake up little Suzie
Wake up little Suzie
BTW, it is about a couple who fell asleep in a drive-in movie (not too many of those, anymore).
BlackBerry doesn't have as many cult members, thus won't sell as many tablets.
What on Earth are you talking about? BlackBerry was the *original* smartphone and has, or had, a huge cult following. The name CrackBerry came about for a reason!
If that's changed recently, that can only be blamed on RIM's neglect. (Their mobile browser has historically been abysmal, just as one example.)
The reality is that you can only ride your coattails so long before you go the way of Palm, etc. And I think that's where they are headed if they don't figure out a way to kickstart their platform, and soon.
Well I'm pretty sure it's illegal what Apple practices, but because the governments are so damn corporate-friendly they led this slide.
When you buy Apple's product then it's your product, you give money in exchange for an iPhone, that makes it your device which you can do whatever you want with it. Having it locked from Apple so you can't install 3rd party programs from 3rd party venues is illegal because Apple is restricting you from using your device however you want.
That's like buying a PC from HP and you would only be able to install programs from an HP virtual store. Apple goes even further, it won't allow a program unless it's been approved by them.. hellooo? Doesn't anyone see how illegal this is???
The fact that they demand a premium price for the device isn't enough, they need to get a share of the revenues from applications which are programmed by third parties which Apple had no investment whatsoever. They are making money off of enslaved developers and the only ones profiting off of apps is mostly Apple. That's 21st century slavery!
If this doesn't smell like an international class-action lawsuit then i don't know what is.
Wiki has moderators that monitor the content that is posted onto Wikipedia. This is exactly the same thing that Apple does with the Apps. Both of them are moderating and filtering what the consumers see. Based on what Wikipedia does, not what he says, Wikipedia believes that the internet needs moderation from people who want to post inaccurate information and/or spam. I find what he says to be incredibly hypocritical based on the policies enforced at Wikipedia.
Excellent point! Best post on this thread subtopic!
No, he's brilliant. In the way that making any kind of statement that criticizes Apple will gain him HUGE press coverage and generate a significant spike in traffic to Wikipedia, where maybe a few will make contributions.
Whether he actually believes it or not is irrelevant, he's making the statement for traffic.
Comments
The Mac platform prior to the launch of the App Store was a "garbage user experience". But now that the steps toward curation of the platform have begun, Apple fans will get exactly the type of experience they've been celebrating with iOS.
That will never happen with Macs.
Yes, I agree that Apple may begin to make computers that are more similar and restrictive as iOS devices, but that's not a negative for most people... it would enable more people to be less afraid of their computers.
What I disagree with is that this will be only types of computers Apple is going to produce. They will have to keep an open platform for development purposes. You couldn't have 300,000+ apps in the AppStore without a system for developing those apps. And you can't have a true development environment without an open system to develop on.
Many people talk as though curated content has only downsides, no benefits, and that’s dishonest. It has different benefits. And frankly, ones that are useful to a LOT more people a LOT more of the time than the benefits of the wild west approach.
BOTH kinds of platforms should exist:
1. Wild west at-your-own-risk hobbyist platforms where people do crazy cool things that crash and steal your personal details and bury you in a sea of ads and bad interfaces, while being “good enough” to stimulate competition and innovation from everyone. (This would be Android... except Android is more open to the carrier’s whim, not as much to the average user’s needs. Still, Android’s a great start!)
2. Well-managed platforms that work better and offer a higher quality experience, while still allowing 99% of the same crazy cool innovative stuff... and sometimes, the tools to do even more. And which are the R&D departments for the other platforms that copy them! (Don’t like the existence of iOS? If it didn’t exist, neither would Android as we know it, and the other iPhone clones.)
Proponents of the “freedom” and “open” buzzwords seem bent on taking away option #2. But #2 is a flat-out GREAT option that many people (even me) love using.
Please don’t take that option away in the name of “freedom.”
The “danger” of the App Store (and its imitators) would be if that prevented people from a) buying some other platform they prefer or b) making iOS web apps without limits. But a) and b) are not threatened at all. They may turn out to be the less common common choices people make, but that’s because people’s goals aren’t all the same.
More people want manual transmission than want to mod/fix their own engines. It doesn’t mean either option is going away entirely. It means the most-useful option to the most people will be the most used... which seems pretty obvious and good to me
We have nowhere to go. Its not just Apple.
Four years ago, before the iPhone.... did you have more choices or less?
So then what?
As for the Mac experience being whatever it was before the Mac App Store, it was perfectly fine. Not having an app store and having users hunt down what they wanted around the net was just fine, if not inconvenient. With the Mac App Store, Apple is simply extending a wildly successful distribution system to the Mac. Perfectly natural.
Don't like it? Then don't open your walle . . . oh wait, you just did.
The verdict is in. Consumers want more Apple gear and the ecosystem that goes with it. End of story. Time to live with it or get a Dell (only to live with a similar Windows app store in due course!)
Cheers.
It’s been stated as such. The PlayBook looks to be much more appealing in many ways so I expect it to fly past the Tab. It also shows that conumers now want tablets and 7” tablets at that… even if they are pretty shitty.PS: I have a feeling many of these Tab owners have buyer’s remorse, much like netbook owners.
Of course I've seen the same reports.
I don't know what they mean, that's all. Indeed, I don't buy it (no pun intented) - I find it odd that there's no mention of it on Samsung's website.
I also dont get Jimmy Wales point either, at least as far as is quoted in this article.
but, what it might be equivalent to is this:
a private app store is equivalent to a new shopping mall in the suburbs in the early 70's, drawing shoppers away from the city.
shopping malls drew people away from a more spread out, and therefore more equalized economy.
shopping malls centralised people away from a more broad based shopping pattern and concentrated the purchasing power into the hands of the mall tenants.
it is a interesting comparison that could be made with the apple app store. iTunes store accounts for how much of all music purchased in the USA? same could happen to apps as well. fewer traffic to smaller independent software houses.
I don't buy the analogy. Most independent (and for that matter, even the chain) software physical retailers have gone out of business. Even when they were in business, most didn't feature very much Mac software. From a distribution standpoint for physical product, Ingram Micro-D is the largest distributor of software in the U.S. and there really aren't any other major players.
In the online world, you can buy product from online sites from the manufacturers themselves, from sites like MacMall and from the big ecommerce vendors like Amazon, et al. So Apple becomes one more place where software publishers can elect to distribute their software or not. The presence of Apple's store might take a little business away from the other major outlets, but that's what competition is about. I don't see Apple in the role of Wal-Mart and other sellers as the poor business owner on Main Street.
So I don't see the Apple store as dangerous at all (except perhaps to other major online stores). If however, Apple said that in order to distribute in the App store, it needed to be exclusive, then I would have a big problem. Or if Apple decided that all Mac apps had to be sold through the store. Either of those two things would be "dangerous". But I can't see Apple being dumb enough to even attempt to go there.
I think the App store is going to benefit small developers and publishers the most. These are the businesses who can't get their products sold via other distribution channels. I really don't need the App store to buy an Adobe or Microsoft product.
Another poster stated that they thought Apple shouldn't limit anything and any app should be able to be sold in the app store. I think just the opposite: I think that both in the App store and in the iPad/iPhone store, there is far too much garbage. Good retailers (think of a good classic bookstore) don't carry everything. They pick and choose and curate the best products for their customers. People will bitch and moan and claim discrimination, etc., but that's what I think Apple should be doing. Having 100,000 apps in the store does me no good if I can't easily find the best app for my given purpose. If I'm looking for a non-linear video editor, I don't want to see every video editor from companies I've never heard of (unless there's a review from someone I trust), I want to see the five best video editors. And I don't want to see the equivalent of 50 different iFart applications.
And by the way, for all the people who complain that Apple's 30% cut is too much, when you sell to a major physical retail distributor, you sell for 48% to 60% off of list.
It’s been stated as such. The PlayBook looks to be much more appealing in many ways so I expect it to fly past the Tab. It also shows that conumers now want tablets and 7” tablets at that… even if they are pretty shitty. ...
Seven-inch tablet owners will end up with buyers remorse and iPad envy. Let's review the applications suited to 7 and 10 inch tablets
* UI Interaction
- 7" either elements, like buttons, are so small they are difficult to manipulate, or they take up a large percentage of screen space in service of usability.
- 10" adequate room for properly sized UI elements that leave plenty of room for content and are easily manipulated.
* eReading
- 7" excellent, especially when holding the tablet in one hand, unsupported, for hours on end.
- 10" excellent, except perhaps when holding the tablet in one hand, unsupported, for hours on end.
* Web browsing
- 7" really not much better than a smartphone, text too small to read without a lot of zooming, and the necessary panning as a result of zooming.
- 10" works great
* Document editing
- 7" cramped, barely enough room for (tiny) keyboard and viewing content. Spreadsheets even worse.
- 10" room for full size keyboard and still room to view document. Spreadsheets not as good as large desktop monitor, but useable.
* Media viewing
7" slightly better than a smartphone
10" close to as good as a laptop.
* Portability
7" doesn't fit comfortably into normal pockets, so some sort of bag required to carry
10" doesn't fit comfortably into normal pockets, so some sort of bag required to carry
* Gaming
7" slightly better than a smartphone, but not much. a little more screen real estate, but loses the ability for users to comfortably interact with in the manner of a smartphone.
10" large enough to allow for a unique gaming experience.
The list of comparisons could go on and on, and the 7" tablet is always on the short end of the stick. It's a bastard child of a smartphone that gains few if any of the advantages of the 10" form factor. These tiny "tablets" will be nice for some as eReaders, but a Kindle would be cheaper, and just as useful.
Well I'm pretty sure it's illegal what Apple practices, but because the governments are so damn corporate-friendly they led this slide.
When you buy Apple's product then it's your product, you give money in exchange for an iPhone, that makes it your device which you can do whatever you want with it. Having it locked from Apple so you can't install 3rd party programs from 3rd party venues is illegal because Apple is restricting you from using your device however you want.
That's like buying a PC from HP and you would only be able to install programs from an HP virtual store. Apple goes even further, it won't allow a program unless it's been approved by them.. hellooo? Doesn't anyone see how illegal this is???
The fact that they demand a premium price for the device isn't enough, they need to get a share of the revenues from applications which are programmed by third parties which Apple had no investment whatsoever. They are making money off of enslaved developers and the only ones profiting off of apps is mostly Apple. That's 21st century slavery!
If this doesn't smell like an international class-action lawsuit then i don't know what is.
You do know that you have to sign a license agreement that restricts what you can do with Windows, right? Also, when you buy an X-box, you can't use just any game. You can use games developed only for the X-box platform. Also, you can't just use any hard drive for the X-box. There's a particular kind of hard drive that you have to use.
Hypocrisy and double-standards make me very angry. What I'm finding here is that everybody cries foul when Apple engages in a perfectly legitimate behavior and if any other company were to engage in that same behavior, people just look the other way.
I don't see how anything that Apple is doing is illegal. It's called business. Businesses are supposed to make money. Apple is not forcing you to use their product. Vote with your wallets and don't buy an Apple product. Just as you have the right to spend your money however you want, Apple has the right to do what it wants with products that it spent hard cash on developing.
Is Steve Jobs spooning you right now? Here is an idea, Freedom of Choice! Allow third party OTA installations without asking for Papa's permission, warn the user of the danger but let the user choose! Its a mobile computing platform just like a Apple Macintosh not a toaster.
It always amazes me how paranoid, unhappy frustrated people think we are drinking apple kool-aid or "are being spoon fed by jobs" because we dont mind or agree with the business model or conditions tied to using the product we chose or prefer.
So I dont buy it? I'll go to google where I have more installation freedom but they will mine all my personal data to exploit me in the future. Maybe I'll check out WP7, ohh wait they are doing both.
exactly
God your the customer, pretend for once like your in the drivers seat, looking after your own self interest and demanding progress instead of running PR for Apple.
I'm not only in the driver's seat, I even have the freedom to get out of the car and walk
Its up to us to mold the construct of how the corporation behaves in our society, its the dog and has its purpose but we are supposed to be the handler!
MORE POWER TO THE PEOPLE!!!
I dont buy something when I dont like the conditions, dont complain about the company exploiting me
I change the tv channel when I dont like the show, dont complain about content.
I change the radio channel on talk shows when people like you call up to cry about how exploited they are by the evil corporations
You do know that you have to sign a license agreement that restricts what you can do with Windows, right? Also, when you buy an X-box, you can't use just any game. You can use games developed only for the X-box platform. Also, you can't just use any hard drive for the X-box. There's a particular kind of hard drive that you have to use.
Hypocrisy and double-standards make me very angry. What I'm finding here is that everybody cries foul when Apple engages in a perfectly legitimate behavior and if any other company were to engage in that same behavior, people just look the other way.
I don't see how anything that Apple is doing is illegal. It's called business. Businesses are supposed to make money. Apple is not forcing you to use their product. Vote with your wallets and don't buy an Apple product. Just as you have the right to spend your money however you want, Apple has the right to do what it wants with products that it spent hard cash on developing.
I honestly believe that jealousy has so much to do with the reason people like to pick on Apple.
And apparently the co-founder of wikipedia (the philosopher not the one selling porn via their website, that's Jimbo Wales) agrees on the sad state of affairs at wikipedia:
His staements sound conradictory. What he is saying about Wikipedia's downfall is what he really wants with the iOS app store but he doesnt realize it. The iOS app store in its enclosed structure insures that apps are of decent quality and work and don't mislead people and don't rip people off. They he describes wikipedia today is that akin to androids market.
When Apple goofs up, I'll stop buying their products. You know like I did with PCs, years ago.
Maybe it was a child under five with a PhD who contributed the fact "that frank discussion of necrophilia in their hit "Wake Up, Little Susie," led them to receive the nickname "fraternal godfathers of heavy metal.""
There's nothing I like better than a frank discussion of necrophilia, so I appreciate the fact that Wikipedia called this to my attention in their article on the Everly Brothers.
I am a 50's gen person and I remember and enjoy the song "Wake Up, Little Susie".
I don't remember frank discussions of anything sexual by anyone in that era -- not to mention necrophilia.
Those were the days when a man and a woman couldn't kiss on TV.
So I checked your assertion about wiki -- you are correct.
Here are the lyrics -- that's a pretty esoteric discussion of necrophilia, IMO:
Wake up little Suzie, wake up
Wake up little Suzie, wake up
We've both been sound asleep
Wake up little Suzie and weep
The movie's over, it's four o'clock
And we're in trouble deep
Wake up little Suzie, wake up little Suzie
Well, what are we gonna tell your mama
What are we gonna tell your pa
What are we gonna tell our friends when they say ooh-la-la
Wake up little Suzie, wake up little Suzie
Well, I told your mama that you'd be in by ten
Well, Suzie baby, looks like we goofed again
Wake up little Suzie, wake up little Suzie
We gotta go home
Wake up little Suzie, wake up!
Wake up little Suzie, wake up!
The movie wasn't so hot
It didn't have much of a plot
We fell asleep, our goose is cooked
Our reputation is shot
Wake up little Suzie, wake up little Suzie
Well, what are we gonna tell your mama
What are we gonna tell your pa
What are we gonna tell our friends when they say ooh-la-la
Wake up little Suzie, wake up little Suzie
Wake up little Suzie
BTW, it is about a couple who fell asleep in a drive-in movie (not too many of those, anymore).
...Here are the lyrics -- that's a pretty esoteric cussion of necrophilia, IMO:
[...]
BTW, it is about a couple who fell asleep in a drive-in movie (not too many of those, anymore).
Well, yes, but it's about necrophilia if you play it backwards.
BlackBerry doesn't have as many cult members, thus won't sell as many tablets.
What on Earth are you talking about? BlackBerry was the *original* smartphone and has, or had, a huge cult following. The name CrackBerry came about for a reason!
If that's changed recently, that can only be blamed on RIM's neglect. (Their mobile browser has historically been abysmal, just as one example.)
The reality is that you can only ride your coattails so long before you go the way of Palm, etc. And I think that's where they are headed if they don't figure out a way to kickstart their platform, and soon.
Well I'm pretty sure it's illegal what Apple practices, but because the governments are so damn corporate-friendly they led this slide.
When you buy Apple's product then it's your product, you give money in exchange for an iPhone, that makes it your device which you can do whatever you want with it. Having it locked from Apple so you can't install 3rd party programs from 3rd party venues is illegal because Apple is restricting you from using your device however you want.
That's like buying a PC from HP and you would only be able to install programs from an HP virtual store. Apple goes even further, it won't allow a program unless it's been approved by them.. hellooo? Doesn't anyone see how illegal this is???
The fact that they demand a premium price for the device isn't enough, they need to get a share of the revenues from applications which are programmed by third parties which Apple had no investment whatsoever. They are making money off of enslaved developers and the only ones profiting off of apps is mostly Apple. That's 21st century slavery!
If this doesn't smell like an international class-action lawsuit then i don't know what is.
You are right... you don't know!
How many businesses have you owned or run?
Wiki has moderators that monitor the content that is posted onto Wikipedia. This is exactly the same thing that Apple does with the Apps. Both of them are moderating and filtering what the consumers see. Based on what Wikipedia does, not what he says, Wikipedia believes that the internet needs moderation from people who want to post inaccurate information and/or spam. I find what he says to be incredibly hypocritical based on the policies enforced at Wikipedia.
Excellent point! Best post on this thread subtopic!
Is this guy high?
No, he's brilliant. In the way that making any kind of statement that criticizes Apple will gain him HUGE press coverage and generate a significant spike in traffic to Wikipedia, where maybe a few will make contributions.
Whether he actually believes it or not is irrelevant, he's making the statement for traffic.