My iPhone is becoming less and less useful to me. That's what my problem is. All the useful stuff will be on Android, not on iPhone. iPhone will be just another Vertu: an expensive phone that looks amazing but has horrible functionalities and people will be buying it not for features but because it's a status symbol.
Oh please. Go troll some other forum with your cackle-footed bozo-Beats dribble-posts.
Please go with him. This post from you was no better and completely non-constructive. We don't need that anywhere on the internet.
I just downloaded it and while it would have been even better if it had supported non-Roman languages, I think this is an incredible app and I don't care who owns it. Seeing as even the in-app purchases are currently free, it's even better.
My only concern about using Google-owned apps is the personal information they collect. And if Google stopped it from working on iOS devices and instead made it part of Android, obviously that would be a bad thing for iOS users.
But you can't blame the developers. Someone (anyone) walks in and offers you a lifetime of riches for your one app, you're going to take the deal.
I may not "like" Google or Microsoft, but if I need/want their apps, then I want/their apps. It's acting like a three-year-old to play the spite game.
You should care who owns them because Google kills off things it buys! Remember Sparrow and number of other iOS/Mac apps that Google bought and killed off.
Oh and I am sure you can show us that you are much smarter than Tim Cook and that you can run Apple or any company even better than how Tim Cook runs Apple.
I know that if I was the CEO of Apple, I wouldn't buy makers of garbage headphones for ghetto/urban kids. And certainly not for $3.2 billion.
Yes, Tim Cook is horrible and he's the next Steve Ballmer… a non-technical executive who messed up once-great company.
My iPhone is becoming less and less useful to me. That's what my problem is. All the useful stuff will be on Android, not on iPhone. iPhone will be just another Vertu: an expensive phone that looks amazing but has horrible functionalities and people will be buying it not for features but because it's a status symbol.
Oh please. Go troll some other forum with your cackle-footed bozo-Beats dribble-posts.
Please go with him. This post from you was no better and completely non-constructive. We don't need that anywhere on the internet.
I know that if I was the CEO of Apple, I wouldn't buy makers of garbage headphones for ghetto/urban kids. And certainly not for $3.2 billion.
Yes, Tim Cook is horrible and he's the next Steve Ballmer… a non-technical executive who messed up once-great company.
I will wait until you eat your word. It shows that the average joe can't run Apple. No vision. And you can't hide that racist tone can you? Ghetto/urban?
This is 1 good app in a sea of great apps in the App store. Apple can't go and buy every single app just as a defensive move so others can't snatch them up. What would Apple do with the app? You know they have no interest in going into the search business? As long as they provide a great app store, more and more transformative apps will appear including Google's apps.
That's a silly non-argument. Does one have to be a CEO to criticize another CEO? What do you do for a living? Are you allowed to comment on someone's performance if you're not in the same profession?
That has nothing to do with smarts, it's just the reality based on facts.
No, but if you had a ounce of humility, knowledge, or perspective- taking into account Cook's impressive accomplishment throughout his career- then you wouldn't go so far as calling him "an idiot", even if you have to disagree with any particular decisions he's made (if he's even made those decisions, since all your hate is focused on a rumored acquisition, and generalizing Cook's entire existence based on this rumor). Most people have a bit more class and insight than calling someone like Tim Cook, who SJ sought fit to appint as Apple's CEO, and who has dramatically increased Apple's success during his tenure, an "idiot".
All American companies are equally vulnerable on this account. Stop being naive !
I didn't claim otherwise. I am well aware of the current sad state of "privacy" policies. I was trying to point out to [@]mstone[/@] that just because it can't be shown that Google hasn't sold your data doesn't mean it hasn't been shared with whatever government wants to see it as long as that government has a legal loophole that permits surveillance. I was responding to him, and he was talking about Google, but I am aware this applies to Facebook, Apple, Microsoft, etc.
I am aware of that already. But thanks for the requisite "but but but Apple does it too!" post. I expected nothing less from you
Anyone else interested in the online privacy topic should watch this documentary (it's on Netflix): http://tacma.net
For what it's worth: Now that this app is free it also is deemed a "demo" app when you go to download the language packs... yeah, a "free" demo app now. It's effectively had its balls cut off. A better solution from a different developer must be in the wings... Google just bought another dead end product.
What would be better? If Apple bought Google or if Google bought Apple?
Obviously Apple buying Google would be better. They could shut the company down and give the money to the shareholders.
Or together, they could create the singularity. This will consist of a self-driving android wearing Google Glasses that watches films, listens to music, creates music, worships God, watches tv, reads your favourite websites, does your errands, argues, has sex, looks after your family and pets, carries out charitable works and goes on holiday for you so you don't have to.
Your reminders are permanently empty and you have no more need to do anything, say anything, to think or to feel.
Obviously Apple buying Google would be better. They could shut the company down and give the money to the shareholders.
I wouldn't necessarily call that a good outcome. It's also a waste of money, and it's once again unlikely that the DOJ would approve of such an acquisition. The same would be true for Google buying Apple.
Obviously Apple buying Google would be better. They could shut the company down and give the money to the shareholders.
I wouldn't necessarily call that a good outcome. It's also a waste of money, and it's once again unlikely that the DOJ would approve of such an acquisition. The same would be true for Google buying Apple.
Not for a minute do I think Apple should buy Google; I was simply answering the other poster's question. Apple and Googles’ cultures don’t mix; Apple has one of excellence and Google one of shoddiness and theft.
What would be better? If Apple bought Google or if Google bought Apple?
The best choice is for them to remain independent entities that cooperate. Google's strengths are not Apple's and vice versa. It was great when they worked together: they pretty much wiped out Microsoft. But, to paraphrase Steve Jobs: "we didn't enter the search business."
The best choice is for them to remain independent entities that cooperate. Google's strengths are not Apple's and vice versa. It was great when they worked together: they pretty much wiped out Microsoft. But, to paraphrase Steve Jobs: "we didn't enter the search business."
You could also paraphrase Mr Jobs and say "but we did enter the ad business". That does make tight cooperation a bit more problematic. It's hard to say how much importance Apple is putting on ad revenue as a future driver.
Comments
So what?
How is that a problem for you?
My iPhone is becoming less and less useful to me. That's what my problem is. All the useful stuff will be on Android, not on iPhone. iPhone will be just another Vertu: an expensive phone that looks amazing but has horrible functionalities and people will be buying it not for features but because it's a status symbol.
Oh please. Go troll some other forum with your cackle-footed bozo-Beats dribble-posts.
Please go with him. This post from you was no better and completely non-constructive. We don't need that anywhere on the internet.
What an immense butthurt!
Care to name these lies? It's easy just to throw around silly accusations.
You should care who owns them because Google kills off things it buys! Remember Sparrow and number of other iOS/Mac apps that Google bought and killed off.
I know that if I was the CEO of Apple, I wouldn't buy makers of garbage headphones for ghetto/urban kids. And certainly not for $3.2 billion.
Yes, Tim Cook is horrible and he's the next Steve Ballmer… a non-technical executive who messed up once-great company.
So what?
How is that a problem for you?
My iPhone is becoming less and less useful to me. That's what my problem is. All the useful stuff will be on Android, not on iPhone. iPhone will be just another Vertu: an expensive phone that looks amazing but has horrible functionalities and people will be buying it not for features but because it's a status symbol.
Oh please. Go troll some other forum with your cackle-footed bozo-Beats dribble-posts.
Please go with him. This post from you was no better and completely non-constructive. We don't need that anywhere on the internet.
Go boil a goat, clod-hopper.
Did this utility suddenly stop working?
He hates anything associated with Google. That said it seems like a really neat app.
I know that if I was the CEO of Apple, I wouldn't buy makers of garbage headphones for ghetto/urban kids. And certainly not for $3.2 billion.
Yes, Tim Cook is horrible and he's the next Steve Ballmer… a non-technical executive who messed up once-great company.
I will wait until you eat your word. It shows that the average joe can't run Apple. No vision. And you can't hide that racist tone can you? Ghetto/urban?
This is 1 good app in a sea of great apps in the App store. Apple can't go and buy every single app just as a defensive move so others can't snatch them up. What would Apple do with the app? You know they have no interest in going into the search business? As long as they provide a great app store, more and more transformative apps will appear including Google's apps.
That's a silly non-argument. Does one have to be a CEO to criticize another CEO? What do you do for a living? Are you allowed to comment on someone's performance if you're not in the same profession?
That has nothing to do with smarts, it's just the reality based on facts.
No, but if you had a ounce of humility, knowledge, or perspective- taking into account Cook's impressive accomplishment throughout his career- then you wouldn't go so far as calling him "an idiot", even if you have to disagree with any particular decisions he's made (if he's even made those decisions, since all your hate is focused on a rumored acquisition, and generalizing Cook's entire existence based on this rumor). Most people have a bit more class and insight than calling someone like Tim Cook, who SJ sought fit to appint as Apple's CEO, and who has dramatically increased Apple's success during his tenure, an "idiot".
I didn't claim otherwise. I am well aware of the current sad state of "privacy" policies. I was trying to point out to [@]mstone[/@] that just because it can't be shown that Google hasn't sold your data doesn't mean it hasn't been shared with whatever government wants to see it as long as that government has a legal loophole that permits surveillance. I was responding to him, and he was talking about Google, but I am aware this applies to Facebook, Apple, Microsoft, etc.
I am aware of that already. But thanks for the requisite "but but but Apple does it too!" post. I expected nothing less from you
Anyone else interested in the online privacy topic should watch this documentary (it's on Netflix): http://tacma.net
For what it's worth: Now that this app is free it also is deemed a "demo" app when you go to download the language packs... yeah, a "free" demo app now. It's effectively had its balls cut off. A better solution from a different developer must be in the wings... Google just bought another dead end product.
What would be better? If Apple bought Google or if Google bought Apple?
Obviously Apple buying Google would be better. They could shut the company down and give the money to the shareholders.
Or together, they could create the singularity. This will consist of a self-driving android wearing Google Glasses that watches films, listens to music, creates music, worships God, watches tv, reads your favourite websites, does your errands, argues, has sex, looks after your family and pets, carries out charitable works and goes on holiday for you so you don't have to.
Your reminders are permanently empty and you have no more need to do anything, say anything, to think or to feel.
Obviously Apple buying Google would be better. They could shut the company down and give the money to the shareholders.
I wouldn't necessarily call that a good outcome. It's also a waste of money, and it's once again unlikely that the DOJ would approve of such an acquisition. The same would be true for Google buying Apple.
Not for a minute do I think Apple should buy Google; I was simply answering the other poster's question. Apple and Googles’ cultures don’t mix; Apple has one of excellence and Google one of shoddiness and theft.
I like that word, shoddiness.
The best choice is for them to remain independent entities that cooperate. Google's strengths are not Apple's and vice versa. It was great when they worked together: they pretty much wiped out Microsoft. But, to paraphrase Steve Jobs: "we didn't enter the search business."
You could also paraphrase Mr Jobs and say "but we did enter the ad business". That does make tight cooperation a bit more problematic. It's hard to say how much importance Apple is putting on ad revenue as a future driver.