It's not just the masses. I'm a programmer and I really have no interest at all in spending any time getting my technology to work for me. I want things that just work. Especially when I'm away from my computer.
It's just a good thing the blogosphere didn't exist when (for example) the Model A came out. "What kind of a weenie doesn't want to advance and retard his own timing? FAILZORZ!!!"
It's not just the masses. I'm a programmer and I really have no interest at all in spending any time getting my technology to work for me. I want things that just work. Especially when I'm away from my computer.
There is a group of people who thinks they know a lot about technology are really against Apple for some reason.
Fact is most developers I know really admire Apple and their products. And really not want to wrestle with the phone and computers all day long.
Okay. I'm gonna go ahead and play the "dumb" card here, but will someone more knowledgeable than me about this stuff please explain what it is about Android that makes it "open" and what it is about iOS that makes it "closed"?
When I hear "open", I think "open source" like Linux or meaning, anyone can download the source, tweak it, hack it, modify it, share it, etc. I think of an "open source community" where everyone plays nice together, and nobody owns anything. I think of a kind of software/cyber-utopia, with butterflies and rainbows and unicorns, where everyone is happy and is never sad.
Another way I interpret "open" is, anarchist, libertarian, "freedom". In other words, no rules, no boundaries, no chaperons. Of course, the reality of "freedom" is accepting the restrictions imposed on you. In most modern societies, you're not free to steal, murder, rape, hunt endangered animals, etc. In a truly free society, you could do any of those things (as well as good things, of course) without suffering any legal consequences from the ruling body, because essentially, there wouldn't be a ruling body. What's a ruling body for if there are no rules?
I think this is what the Android is "open" crowd mean when they talk about "openness".
And then there's evil, fascist Apple with their draconian "closed" iOS, and their "rules" and their app "rejections", where developers aren't "free" to do whatever the hell they want in terms of content, UI, functionality, etc. I think this is what Apple critics mean when they say that Apple is "closed", or perhaps, more precisely, "not open".
My suspicion is that Google, and Android advocates are playing fast & loose with the term "open", adapting the definition to suit the particular point their trying to make. Kind of like I think Apple is playing fast & loose with the term "full HD" and including 720p in that. Again, I'm open to being corrected if someone can point out where/how I am wrong--that's one way I get to learn stuff!
"Competitors" of the iPod, iPhone & iPad JUST-DON'T-GET IT!
I know why they're wrong, and I know precisely why the Apple products they're referring to HAVE succeeded and will CONTINUE to succeed. (And what's this about predicting that the iPad will fail? You need to go back to grade school and learn how to tell time. The iPad hassucceeded, the iPad 2 hassucceeded. You can't "put the cart before the horse.")
My best guess is that it's more a product of "wishful thinking," or "whistling past the graveyard." They can't see how much they're embarrassing themselves.
I would love to elaborate on exactly why, but it's highly probable that Apple's direct "competitors" (the many dwarfs to Apple's Snow White) troll these very forums in an attempt to glean any information that will create a competitive advantage. (Lotsa luck. "There are none so blind as those who will not see.")
All I'm willing to do is hint. When even the Apple-devoted sites themselves were frustrated when Apple was mum about highly technical aspects of the iPad 2 at its introduction and would only attempt to shift the focus away from the technicals and onto the product experience, its capabilities and uniqueness, I knew there was a VERY SPECIFIC reason for why ALL Apple representatives were doing this, and was in TOTAL agreement with that approach (which seemed to be a directive given to EVERY Apple spokesperson, not just two-dozen mere coincidences).
I want nothing more than for Apple's "competitors" (put in quotes for a reason) to keep on keeping on! Press on with your current approach and don't change a thing!
(And why is it that only Apple customers seem to get the symbolism of the "Hi. I'm a Mac," "and I'm a PC" commercials? Microsoft responded with TV ads where dozens of people -- including, fortuitously, that charlatan, Deepak Chopra, in my own personal opinion -- all said, "I'm a PC." To be a bit lowbrow and quote Charlie Sheen, "Duh!"; the actors in the Apple ads were lone personifications of a Windows PC and a Mac. I've owned countless Macs for decades, and I'm here to tell you, I AM NOT A MAC! I am a human being. My Mac is separate and distinct from me and not part of me. Further, do ANY companies besides Apple have ANY shred of imagination? It isn't just Microsoft that "photocopies" Apple's products, store designs and advertisements, everyone it seems can't come up with a single other company to copy but Apple. It's now -- including, but not limited to -- Google, Verizon and even IBM! All IBM TV ads now end with the subject saying, "I'm an IBM-er." You'll never convince me that that line would be in IBM TV ads had it not been for Apple's ads.)
Apple: keep on doing what you're doing, and "competitors," PLEASE! I BEG YOU! Keep on doing what you're doing, too! (Now, please excuse me while I go and short your stock.)
It does say they are going with a multi-OS strategy including Windows 7. Most windows apps are designed for keyboard + mouse.
No, he can't get off the hook that easily. Any top executive in a computer company so clueless he thinks an iPad connects to a mouse should be looking for a new job. It isn't a random technical detail, it is fundamental to why an iPad defines a new category. Just imagine what other inane ideas might lurk in his empty head.
Okay. I'm gonna go ahead and play the "dumb" card here, but will someone more knowledgeable than me about this stuff please explain what it is about Android that makes it "open" and what it is about iOS that makes it "closed"?
When I hear "open", I think "open source" like Linux or meaning, anyone can download the source, tweak it, hack it, modify it, share it, etc. I think of an "open source community" where everyone plays nice together, and nobody owns anything. I think of a kind of software/cyber-utopia, with butterflies and rainbows and unicorns, where everyone is happy and is never sad.
Another way I interpret "open" is, anarchist, libertarian, "freedom". In other words, no rules, no boundaries, no chaperons. Of course, the reality of "freedom" is accepting the restrictions imposed on you. In most modern societies, you're not free to steal, murder, rape, hunt endangered animals, etc. In a truly free society, you could do any of those things (as well as good things, of course) without suffering any legal consequences from the ruling body, because essentially, there wouldn't be a ruling body. What's a ruling body for if there are no rules?
I think this is what the Android is "open" crowd mean when they talk about "openness".
And then there's evil, fascist Apple with their draconian "closed" iOS, and their "rules" and their app "rejections", where developers aren't "free" to do whatever the hell they want in terms of content, UI, functionality, etc. I think this is what Apple critics mean when they say that Apple is "closed", or perhaps, more precisely, "not open".
My suspicion is that Google, and Android advocates are playing fast & loose with the term "open", adapting the definition to suit the particular point their trying to make. Kind of like I think Apple is playing fast & loose with the term "full HD" and including 720p in that. Again, I'm open to being corrected if someone can point out where/how I am wrong--that's one way I get to learn stuff!
Android is open and Apple is closed in simplest terms can be summarized as: anyone can download and compile the source code to Android OS, you cannot do that for any Apple OS.
It quickly becomes more complicated if you examine what has happened in actual shipping products. Motorola and possibly others have locked down what OS can be written to their devices. You could edit and compile an Android OS variant and not be able to install it on the device you have purchased.
Another, probably more important, difference is that only Google engineers have write access to the project. So individuals not employed by Google can watch but not contribute. It is even slightly more insidious with the source code for the newest "pad friendly" OS" being held back for an unspecified period before it becomes publicly available.
In the case of both Apple and Google the API's for third party developers are publicly available, which is in my opinion the most important aspect of being "open".
Android is open and Apple is closed in simplest terms can be summarized as: anyone can download and compile the source code to Android OS, you cannot do that for any Apple OS.
That?s not entirely true. Apple?s Darwin OS is open to all and Android 3.0 is locked down tighter than minister?s daughter.
Dell is a company that's completely lost its way. They once did something reasonably well: produce reasonably priced PCs of reasonable quality and sell them directly to consumers.
Now they are trying to do lots of things and they do none of them well. Are they a hardware company or a computer services company? Their hardware products are pretty awful, cheap and unreliable. Their servers are becoming known for their high failure rate. Their first attempt at a phone/tablet crossover device has been a total disaster.
So why would anyone believe what the leadership at Dell has to say about the future of tablet computing? They haven't made a good call in a decade!
Joined in 2003 and this is your first post? There should be some kind of award for that.
Agreed. Cash would be nice.
No, it's my 9 millionth post. It was one of those "password retrieval" issues that probably reset the counter. I had 2 boot from another drive that didn't have 1Password 3 set up.
1Password is priceless, but has one side-effect (for me): it makes my slack off on remembering my passwords.
Dell may last another few years, but that's because many of the buyers of their products are forced to think short-term for budgetary reasons. Flawed logic tells the average consumer that it's better to shell out $900 every 2 to 3 years for a Dell than to bite the bullet every five years and drop $1800 on a Mac, which is how long MacBooks tend to last. Parenthetically, my G4 finally died a few months shy of its 5th anniversary; during those five years, i think it was turned off for perhaps one month and I beat the living hell out of it; the aluminium was bent from the multiple times it had fallen, it had a pixel problem 3 years into the purchase and I'd lost of couple of keys along the way. I suspect that had I had a Dell, I'd have ended up replacing it annually, so the real cost for the "cheaper" Dell would have been $4500. And that's not to mention the down time that one has to deal with every time you have to reboot Windows.
Dell is dead; they're already losing market share and have one-tenth the market cap of Apple
But HP? You have to wonder about the ethics of a company that sells products designed to fail after you've bought more than 6 ink cartridges. I agree with the other posters who complained about the crap quality of their printers. I so wish that Apple would get back into the printer business, to reduce the waste and the number of lousy HP printers that end up in landfills. If Apple can (and did) design 3 blockbusters in 10 years, then they can design a quality printer made from recyclable material, using re-fillable cartridges.
Sorry to hear about your G4, make she rest in peace.
My G$ is about 10 years old, only had two problems with it, the monitor went (it was a non-Mac one by the way) and one self-inflicted. Pretty good run.
It runs Tiger, and although a little slow does get the job done, although Safari is VERY BAD on it.
Comments
It's not just the masses. I'm a programmer and I really have no interest at all in spending any time getting my technology to work for me. I want things that just work. Especially when I'm away from my computer.
It's just a good thing the blogosphere didn't exist when (for example) the Model A came out. "What kind of a weenie doesn't want to advance and retard his own timing? FAILZORZ!!!"
It's not just the masses. I'm a programmer and I really have no interest at all in spending any time getting my technology to work for me. I want things that just work. Especially when I'm away from my computer.
There is a group of people who thinks they know a lot about technology are really against Apple for some reason.
Fact is most developers I know really admire Apple and their products. And really not want to wrestle with the phone and computers all day long.
There is a group of people who thinks they know a lot about technology are really against Apple for some reason.
Fact is most developers I know really admire Apple and their products. And really not want to wrestle with the phone and computers all day long.
I think there are a group of people who DO know a lot about technology, but see Apple as just dumbed down shit for idiots. (Not my words)
Maybe they just feel left out. Maybe if Apple made what these geeks are looking for, the lambasting would cease.
When I hear "open", I think "open source" like Linux or meaning, anyone can download the source, tweak it, hack it, modify it, share it, etc. I think of an "open source community" where everyone plays nice together, and nobody owns anything. I think of a kind of software/cyber-utopia, with butterflies and rainbows and unicorns, where everyone is happy and is never sad.
Another way I interpret "open" is, anarchist, libertarian, "freedom". In other words, no rules, no boundaries, no chaperons. Of course, the reality of "freedom" is accepting the restrictions imposed on you. In most modern societies, you're not free to steal, murder, rape, hunt endangered animals, etc. In a truly free society, you could do any of those things (as well as good things, of course) without suffering any legal consequences from the ruling body, because essentially, there wouldn't be a ruling body. What's a ruling body for if there are no rules?
I think this is what the Android is "open" crowd mean when they talk about "openness".
And then there's evil, fascist Apple with their draconian "closed" iOS, and their "rules" and their app "rejections", where developers aren't "free" to do whatever the hell they want in terms of content, UI, functionality, etc. I think this is what Apple critics mean when they say that Apple is "closed", or perhaps, more precisely, "not open".
My suspicion is that Google, and Android advocates are playing fast & loose with the term "open", adapting the definition to suit the particular point their trying to make. Kind of like I think Apple is playing fast & loose with the term "full HD" and including 720p in that. Again, I'm open to being corrected if someone can point out where/how I am wrong--that's one way I get to learn stuff!
Look who is giving Apple advice on how sell computers and make profit. They are so worried about Apple doomed future
Who is living in an island again?
I actually agree with this guy.... I live on an island, Australia... And the iPad is great
Basically, Andy Lark is a Fucktard. Even my dog knows you don't need a mouse for an iPad.
I know why they're wrong, and I know precisely why the Apple products they're referring to HAVE succeeded and will CONTINUE to succeed. (And what's this about predicting that the iPad will fail? You need to go back to grade school and learn how to tell time. The iPad has succeeded, the iPad 2 has succeeded. You can't "put the cart before the horse.")
My best guess is that it's more a product of "wishful thinking," or "whistling past the graveyard." They can't see how much they're embarrassing themselves.
I would love to elaborate on exactly why, but it's highly probable that Apple's direct "competitors" (the many dwarfs to Apple's Snow White) troll these very forums in an attempt to glean any information that will create a competitive advantage. (Lotsa luck. "There are none so blind as those who will not see.")
All I'm willing to do is hint. When even the Apple-devoted sites themselves were frustrated when Apple was mum about highly technical aspects of the iPad 2 at its introduction and would only attempt to shift the focus away from the technicals and onto the product experience, its capabilities and uniqueness, I knew there was a VERY SPECIFIC reason for why ALL Apple representatives were doing this, and was in TOTAL agreement with that approach (which seemed to be a directive given to EVERY Apple spokesperson, not just two-dozen mere coincidences).
I want nothing more than for Apple's "competitors" (put in quotes for a reason) to keep on keeping on! Press on with your current approach and don't change a thing!
(And why is it that only Apple customers seem to get the symbolism of the "Hi. I'm a Mac," "and I'm a PC" commercials? Microsoft responded with TV ads where dozens of people -- including, fortuitously, that charlatan, Deepak Chopra, in my own personal opinion -- all said, "I'm a PC." To be a bit lowbrow and quote Charlie Sheen, "Duh!"; the actors in the Apple ads were lone personifications of a Windows PC and a Mac. I've owned countless Macs for decades, and I'm here to tell you, I AM NOT A MAC! I am a human being. My Mac is separate and distinct from me and not part of me. Further, do ANY companies besides Apple have ANY shred of imagination? It isn't just Microsoft that "photocopies" Apple's products, store designs and advertisements, everyone it seems can't come up with a single other company to copy but Apple. It's now -- including, but not limited to -- Google, Verizon and even IBM! All IBM TV ads now end with the subject saying, "I'm an IBM-er." You'll never convince me that that line would be in IBM TV ads had it not been for Apple's ads.)
Apple: keep on doing what you're doing, and "competitors," PLEASE! I BEG YOU! Keep on doing what you're doing, too! (Now, please excuse me while I go and short your stock.)
"Competitors" of the iPod, iPhone & iPad JUST-DON'T-GET IT!
Joined in 2003 and this is your first post? There should be some kind of award for that.
Those dudes lashed out at a lot of things, and not smartly so, IMO. But did they "lash out at Apple's successes"? Only in Desperate Digler's mind.
Of course they did. If Apple weren't so successful, they wouldn't ever even mention them.
It does say they are going with a multi-OS strategy including Windows 7. Most windows apps are designed for keyboard + mouse.
No, he can't get off the hook that easily. Any top executive in a computer company so clueless he thinks an iPad connects to a mouse should be looking for a new job. It isn't a random technical detail, it is fundamental to why an iPad defines a new category. Just imagine what other inane ideas might lurk in his empty head.
Okay. I'm gonna go ahead and play the "dumb" card here, but will someone more knowledgeable than me about this stuff please explain what it is about Android that makes it "open" and what it is about iOS that makes it "closed"?
When I hear "open", I think "open source" like Linux or meaning, anyone can download the source, tweak it, hack it, modify it, share it, etc. I think of an "open source community" where everyone plays nice together, and nobody owns anything. I think of a kind of software/cyber-utopia, with butterflies and rainbows and unicorns, where everyone is happy and is never sad.
Another way I interpret "open" is, anarchist, libertarian, "freedom". In other words, no rules, no boundaries, no chaperons. Of course, the reality of "freedom" is accepting the restrictions imposed on you. In most modern societies, you're not free to steal, murder, rape, hunt endangered animals, etc. In a truly free society, you could do any of those things (as well as good things, of course) without suffering any legal consequences from the ruling body, because essentially, there wouldn't be a ruling body. What's a ruling body for if there are no rules?
I think this is what the Android is "open" crowd mean when they talk about "openness".
And then there's evil, fascist Apple with their draconian "closed" iOS, and their "rules" and their app "rejections", where developers aren't "free" to do whatever the hell they want in terms of content, UI, functionality, etc. I think this is what Apple critics mean when they say that Apple is "closed", or perhaps, more precisely, "not open".
My suspicion is that Google, and Android advocates are playing fast & loose with the term "open", adapting the definition to suit the particular point their trying to make. Kind of like I think Apple is playing fast & loose with the term "full HD" and including 720p in that. Again, I'm open to being corrected if someone can point out where/how I am wrong--that's one way I get to learn stuff!
Android is open and Apple is closed in simplest terms can be summarized as: anyone can download and compile the source code to Android OS, you cannot do that for any Apple OS.
It quickly becomes more complicated if you examine what has happened in actual shipping products. Motorola and possibly others have locked down what OS can be written to their devices. You could edit and compile an Android OS variant and not be able to install it on the device you have purchased.
Another, probably more important, difference is that only Google engineers have write access to the project. So individuals not employed by Google can watch but not contribute. It is even slightly more insidious with the source code for the newest "pad friendly" OS" being held back for an unspecified period before it becomes publicly available.
In the case of both Apple and Google the API's for third party developers are publicly available, which is in my opinion the most important aspect of being "open".
Android is open and Apple is closed in simplest terms can be summarized as: anyone can download and compile the source code to Android OS, you cannot do that for any Apple OS.
That?s not entirely true. Apple?s Darwin OS is open to all and Android 3.0 is locked down tighter than minister?s daughter.
Joined in 2003 and this is your first post? There should be some kind of award for that.
Did you not notice his name?
Those dudes lashed out at a lot of things, and not smartly so, IMO. But did they "lash out at Apple's successes"? Only in Desperate Digler's mind.
We didn't ask for YO.
Now they are trying to do lots of things and they do none of them well. Are they a hardware company or a computer services company? Their hardware products are pretty awful, cheap and unreliable. Their servers are becoming known for their high failure rate. Their first attempt at a phone/tablet crossover device has been a total disaster.
So why would anyone believe what the leadership at Dell has to say about the future of tablet computing? They haven't made a good call in a decade!
Joined in 2003 and this is your first post? There should be some kind of award for that.
Agreed. Cash would be nice.
No, it's my 9 millionth post. It was one of those "password retrieval" issues that probably reset the counter. I had 2 boot from another drive that didn't have 1Password 3 set up.
1Password is priceless, but has one side-effect (for me): it makes my slack off on remembering my passwords.
Dell may last another few years, but that's because many of the buyers of their products are forced to think short-term for budgetary reasons. Flawed logic tells the average consumer that it's better to shell out $900 every 2 to 3 years for a Dell than to bite the bullet every five years and drop $1800 on a Mac, which is how long MacBooks tend to last. Parenthetically, my G4 finally died a few months shy of its 5th anniversary; during those five years, i think it was turned off for perhaps one month and I beat the living hell out of it; the aluminium was bent from the multiple times it had fallen, it had a pixel problem 3 years into the purchase and I'd lost of couple of keys along the way. I suspect that had I had a Dell, I'd have ended up replacing it annually, so the real cost for the "cheaper" Dell would have been $4500. And that's not to mention the down time that one has to deal with every time you have to reboot Windows.
Dell is dead; they're already losing market share and have one-tenth the market cap of Apple
But HP? You have to wonder about the ethics of a company that sells products designed to fail after you've bought more than 6 ink cartridges. I agree with the other posters who complained about the crap quality of their printers. I so wish that Apple would get back into the printer business, to reduce the waste and the number of lousy HP printers that end up in landfills. If Apple can (and did) design 3 blockbusters in 10 years, then they can design a quality printer made from recyclable material, using re-fillable cartridges.
Sorry to hear about your G4, make she rest in peace.
My G$ is about 10 years old, only had two problems with it, the monitor went (it was a non-Mac one by the way) and one self-inflicted. Pretty good run.
It runs Tiger, and although a little slow does get the job done, although Safari is VERY BAD on it.