Rather lame all around to be using IE6 today, esp. given that the very folks who made it are investing in sites like this to try to tell people to stop using it:
Legacy applications are all over the place in enterprise computing. In relative terms, these IE6 apps are fairly young compared to a lot of apps and systems in use. They'd much rather spend their resources on immediate concerns than updating things to the most current technology. Until the equivalent of a "year 2000" crisis comes along, they aren't going to update these apps.
But a chart that shows that every iPhone is on the latest version of iOS doesn?t tell the whole story. It doesn?t show that the original iPhone didn't get updated to iOS 5. It's been "fragmented" out. And it doesn't show that an iPhone 3G doesn?t run iOS 5 anywhere near as well as an iPhone 4 or iPhone 4S. And it doesn?t show that the iPhone 4 is lacking a major feature found on the iPhone 4S, the one that?s currently featured in commercials -- Siri. If that?s not ?fragmentation,? we don?t know what is.
Now, I do like Apple's implementation of unix... called Mac OS X. The UI is intuitive and works well. However, of all the Macs I have ever owned and use (again, going all the way back to the Mac Classic running System 6). I do not prefer Apple products for the very reason that I am not a closed modeled type of person.
So... You're saying that you prefer to use a system you don't like because of politics?
Quote:
Originally Posted by ElitistNot
In regards to the iPhone Vs Android... the iPhone will always receive timely updates providing Apple is always profitable ... simply because they control the entire product production and distribution and support systems.
...
Android is the complete opposite approach to this and is a very open business model. Open business model do have phenomenal success but come with the disadvantages of less than satisfactory support quite often. ... So, yes, obviously Android is going to suffer from serious lack of updates. That is abundantly clear in the Android world.
While you make some good points, you conclusion, that it is inevitable that Apple will provide good support and Android will provide poor support, purely because of the "openness" of the business model is pure religion.
There are plenty of examples of commercial platforms with lousy support and sporadic updates, and there are plenty of examples of open source platforms with good support and frequent updates.
Apple's good support and Android's lack of support is a result of their respective business models, but the "openness" of their source code is only a small piece of the equation.
The fact that Apple makes all iOS hardware devices and doesn't allow carriers to customize the software is what makes it possible for them to push out updates in a way that allows all customers to get them.
The fact that Google only makes the software, and relies on others to make the hardware, and allows both manufacturers and carriers to customize the software, and distributes updates in a way that requires carriers to push them out to customers creates an environment that almost certainly guarantees long delays for update delivery.
Either could happen with closed source or open source. Other phones (Blackberry, Symbian, etc.) rarely, if ever, get their system software updated. And Google could have selected a licensing and distribution model allowing them (or at least the handset manufacturers) to push out updates without requiring carrier involvement.
Choose what you want. Nobody is telling you you're wrong. But don't go preaching religious arguments that closed-source products always suck or that open-source products are always good.
Actually, using iOS, it isn't TOO closed. I mean, it is quite restrictive, but I like the management part of it. Android, while it's an OS....it's kind of multiple OSes (though I LOVE the intgegration of gmail, gcalendar, gvoice, etc.). Even Android is limited in many respects (carrier) so it's not totally open. Google is closer to windows desktops in this regard.
Actually. it just shows that that poster can't read a chart. The chart shows three years after release, not till current date. The chart shows that support has ended for the iPhone and iPhone 3. You just have to read it to see that.
Secondly, Siri is a feature like the 8 megapixel camera. You don't need it for the phone to work or to run certain apps. It something that at this time is being used to separate the iPhone4S from the iPhone 4 and 3S. Using this flimsy argument is a pointless as saying that the physical differences in droids is a major disadvantage, it causes problems with fragmentation, but is inevitable with no control over the who and how when the phones are made.
Droid has some strong points, don't get angry because people point out it's weaknesses. Also this is called Apple Insider, Not exactly neutral ground.
To the person who claims betrayal about the Power PC to Intel model switch. They changed chipsets entirely, they may well have not been able to create an OS that ran as fluently on both chipsets. Should people buying the newer system have to compromise because of someone else's 5 year old system?
Your Mac still runs I am sure. It's not like Tim Cook comes to your house kicks you in the shin and then takes your computer. You just don't get all of the updates. I am sure that the apps you run still have updates that you can have. When the switch happened people complained that apps that they had not updated in almost a decade were being left out when there were comparable or even better apps in it's place, and there had been for years. Nothing last forever.
That's basically 5 years. Most people upgrade their hardware every 3-5 years. For the few who don't, it's a waste of engineering resources to support an old CPU architecture.
I was talking home before. Maybe some people buy a new computer for their kids as well as themselves every 3 years, but they must be earning more money than I do.
But as for work...
Graphics arts businesses and media production upgrade every 3 years. Our little office certainly does.
But the larger company doesn't completely replace its hardware every 3 years, and it would be crazy to expect it to do so.
If Apple is serious about making inroads in the enterprise beyond the media departments, that attitude has to change.
I still haven't heard anybody offer an explanation as to what earth-shaking differences required Apple to drop PPC support between 10.5 and 10.6.
Its not open sourced look at honeycomb its closed source.Also not updating phones os is probably why IT departments shun Android
Google released both the Honeycomb and Ice Cream Sandwich source code today, with a note that developers should concentrate on ICS with the Honeycomb code being less "complete".
I suppose if Amazon wanted to claim Honeycomb for their tablet line that Google wouldn't complain.
Now if only a manufacturer started permanent production of Nexus-like, plain Android phones, and guaranteed quick updates directly from the manufacturer for X years.
They could put out a high-end phone right in the middle of two Nexus launches (thus beating the Nexus of the time handily in hardware) and also offer a nice and capable midrange phone appealing to folks who just want something that works.
I think the only reason this isn't happening is the operators' chokehold on the worldwide market. In my region of the world we tend to buy the phone separately, phones like that would be a good fit here.
Comments
Rather lame all around to be using IE6 today, esp. given that the very folks who made it are investing in sites like this to try to tell people to stop using it:
http://www.ie6countdown.com/
Legacy applications are all over the place in enterprise computing. In relative terms, these IE6 apps are fairly young compared to a lot of apps and systems in use. They'd much rather spend their resources on immediate concerns than updating things to the most current technology. Until the equivalent of a "year 2000" crisis comes along, they aren't going to update these apps.
But a chart that shows that every iPhone is on the latest version of iOS doesn?t tell the whole story. It doesn?t show that the original iPhone didn't get updated to iOS 5. It's been "fragmented" out. And it doesn't show that an iPhone 3G doesn?t run iOS 5 anywhere near as well as an iPhone 4 or iPhone 4S. And it doesn?t show that the iPhone 4 is lacking a major feature found on the iPhone 4S, the one that?s currently featured in commercials -- Siri. If that?s not ?fragmentation,? we don?t know what is.
Someting intelligent:
It's not fragmentation because devs don't have to develop multiple versions of apps. Unless its utilizing features only found on iOS 5, it'll run
It's not fragmentation because devs don't have to develop multiple versions of apps. Unless its utilizing features only found on iOS 5, it'll run
That depends though. What IS fragmentation?
Fragmentation is whatever happens on Android. Anything that happens in any Apple OS is never fragmentation.
So...then.....Angry birds is fragmentation on 'droid, but not on iPod touch?!
Now, I do like Apple's implementation of unix... called Mac OS X. The UI is intuitive and works well. However, of all the Macs I have ever owned and use (again, going all the way back to the Mac Classic running System 6). I do not prefer Apple products for the very reason that I am not a closed modeled type of person.
So... You're saying that you prefer to use a system you don't like because of politics?
In regards to the iPhone Vs Android... the iPhone will always receive timely updates providing Apple is always profitable ... simply because they control the entire product production and distribution and support systems.
...
Android is the complete opposite approach to this and is a very open business model. Open business model do have phenomenal success but come with the disadvantages of less than satisfactory support quite often. ... So, yes, obviously Android is going to suffer from serious lack of updates. That is abundantly clear in the Android world.
While you make some good points, you conclusion, that it is inevitable that Apple will provide good support and Android will provide poor support, purely because of the "openness" of the business model is pure religion.
There are plenty of examples of commercial platforms with lousy support and sporadic updates, and there are plenty of examples of open source platforms with good support and frequent updates.
Apple's good support and Android's lack of support is a result of their respective business models, but the "openness" of their source code is only a small piece of the equation.
The fact that Apple makes all iOS hardware devices and doesn't allow carriers to customize the software is what makes it possible for them to push out updates in a way that allows all customers to get them.
The fact that Google only makes the software, and relies on others to make the hardware, and allows both manufacturers and carriers to customize the software, and distributes updates in a way that requires carriers to push them out to customers creates an environment that almost certainly guarantees long delays for update delivery.
Either could happen with closed source or open source. Other phones (Blackberry, Symbian, etc.) rarely, if ever, get their system software updated. And Google could have selected a licensing and distribution model allowing them (or at least the handset manufacturers) to push out updates without requiring carrier involvement.
Choose what you want. Nobody is telling you you're wrong. But don't go preaching religious arguments that closed-source products always suck or that open-source products are always good.
Someting intelligent:
Actually. it just shows that that poster can't read a chart. The chart shows three years after release, not till current date. The chart shows that support has ended for the iPhone and iPhone 3. You just have to read it to see that.
Secondly, Siri is a feature like the 8 megapixel camera. You don't need it for the phone to work or to run certain apps. It something that at this time is being used to separate the iPhone4S from the iPhone 4 and 3S. Using this flimsy argument is a pointless as saying that the physical differences in droids is a major disadvantage, it causes problems with fragmentation, but is inevitable with no control over the who and how when the phones are made.
Droid has some strong points, don't get angry because people point out it's weaknesses. Also this is called Apple Insider, Not exactly neutral ground.
To the person who claims betrayal about the Power PC to Intel model switch. They changed chipsets entirely, they may well have not been able to create an OS that ran as fluently on both chipsets. Should people buying the newer system have to compromise because of someone else's 5 year old system?
Your Mac still runs I am sure. It's not like Tim Cook comes to your house kicks you in the shin and then takes your computer. You just don't get all of the updates. I am sure that the apps you run still have updates that you can have. When the switch happened people complained that apps that they had not updated in almost a decade were being left out when there were comparable or even better apps in it's place, and there had been for years. Nothing last forever.
Some times you have to move forward.
That's basically 5 years. Most people upgrade their hardware every 3-5 years. For the few who don't, it's a waste of engineering resources to support an old CPU architecture.
I was talking home before. Maybe some people buy a new computer for their kids as well as themselves every 3 years, but they must be earning more money than I do.
But as for work...
Graphics arts businesses and media production upgrade every 3 years. Our little office certainly does.
But the larger company doesn't completely replace its hardware every 3 years, and it would be crazy to expect it to do so.
If Apple is serious about making inroads in the enterprise beyond the media departments, that attitude has to change.
I still haven't heard anybody offer an explanation as to what earth-shaking differences required Apple to drop PPC support between 10.5 and 10.6.
If Apple is serious about making inroads in the enterprise beyond the media departments, that attitude has to change.
MS really doesn't want to continue to support XP. Because the XP user base is still so large MS has to support it.
Apple does not have to support a 10 year old OS.
I still haven't heard anybody offer an explanation as to what earth-shaking differences required Apple to drop PPC support between 10.5 and 10.6.
If you understand the difference between PPC and Intel Core processors. Then you would understand the earth shaking differences.
Its not open sourced look at honeycomb its closed source.Also not updating phones os is probably why IT departments shun Android
Google released both the Honeycomb and Ice Cream Sandwich source code today, with a note that developers should concentrate on ICS with the Honeycomb code being less "complete".
I suppose if Amazon wanted to claim Honeycomb for their tablet line that Google wouldn't complain.
They could put out a high-end phone right in the middle of two Nexus launches (thus beating the Nexus of the time handily in hardware) and also offer a nice and capable midrange phone appealing to folks who just want something that works.
I think the only reason this isn't happening is the operators' chokehold on the worldwide market. In my region of the world we tend to buy the phone separately, phones like that would be a good fit here.