I used the pwnage tool to jailbreak my first generation iPhone so that I could give it to my son to use. I, like many others that used the jailbreak found that the pwnage tool left the iPhone in a piss poor state, slow and even more buggy than an untouched iPhone.
The pwnage tool did serve a purpose, it let me unlock the handset and it remained unlocked after upgrading to 2.0.1, then 2.0.2 and finally 2.1.
After restoring the proper firmware the iPhone performed much better (2.0 at the time) with less crashes and much more responsive.
The pwnage tool is fine for a way to unlock non 3G iPhones but you wouldn't want to leave it on there.
get rid of that awful, dated g5 looking mesh dock!!! and change some of those stupid icons!!!
I had to go 2 days with the default "look" of the iphone with the update to 2.1, and it was painful... seriously, add the ability to get rid of the text under the icons, choice of docks, user wallpaper as background, and ability to change icons... that would take away the need to jailbreak for a lot of folks...
speaking of icons... avatron's air sharing icon takes the cake for the WORST iphone icon... EVER...
and one more thing... shed the shackles to at&lame... let there be choice!!!
get rid of that awful, dated g5 looking mesh dock!!! and change some of those stupid icons!!!
I had to go 2 days with the default "look" of the iphone with the update to 2.1, and it was painful... seriously, add the ability to get rid of the text under the icons, choice of docks, user wallpaper as background, and ability to change icons... that would take away the need to jailbreak for a lot of folks...
speaking of icons... avatron's air sharing icon takes the cake for the WORST iphone icon... EVER...
and one more thing... shed the shackles to at&lame... let there be choice!!!
I like the dock look, but I agree that Apple should offer customization options. I would agree that BossPref and WinterBaord are probably the most common reason why people jailbreak their iPhones. Even offering these as App Store download would be great. There are lots of slick designs, but the most creative I've seen is the vending machine.
I see no point in unshackling from AT&T just to get a huge lawsuit from them for doing so and still only be able to use 3G on their network and only their network.
on how arrogant and ego chest pounding they become in thinking they are outsmarting the company that produces the operating system.
They want you to break it. They fix it without locking it down and you break it again. Apple knows the areas in which they could lock it down and shut you out yet you think you're smarter then them.
I'm glad they keep your egos satisified and you continue to buy the products. It's great free-press and much more.
on how arrogant and ego chest pounding they become in thinking they are outsmarting the company that produces the operating system.
They want you to break it. They fix it without locking it down and you break it again. Apple knows the areas in which they could lock it down and shut you out yet you think you're smarter then them.
I'm glad they keep your egos satisified and you continue to buy the products. It's great free-press and much more.
it's the "hacker way"... bring on the challenge!!! and the job offers...
on how arrogant and ego chest pounding they become in thinking they are outsmarting the company that produces the operating system.
They want you to break it. They fix it without locking it down and you break it again. Apple knows the areas in which they could lock it down and shut you out yet you think you're smarter then them.
I'm glad they keep your egos satisified and you continue to buy the products. It's great free-press and much more.
I really don't want to disagree with you because I don't believe in Jail Breaking in any manner but if it's as easy as it seems to be than Apple's security into their core programming isn't as secure as it should be.
Nobody knows what else a Jail Broken phone opens up but the developers that wrote the Jail Break. I want my phone secure and not Jail Broke. At least I have (at this point) a small bit of comfort Apple is keeping my data on my phone secure.
I was a little sad when I read that Steve Wozniak Jail Broke is 3G iPhone. It really lowered my level of respect I had for him.
If someone else exercising freedom and/or curiosity lowers your level of respect for them, that says more about you than it does about them. As long as they're not hurting you, try letting others do their own thing without being all judgmental.
Jail Breaking a phone was not even an option on the table for me until 30 minutes ago when I found out that updating my 2G iPhone that was replaced by a 3G model was bricked until I activated it. I am going to jail break it just so I can still use it as an iPod. WTF was Apple thinking on this?
I swapped SIM cards per Apple Support and it didn't work. Nice move on Apple's part. If this jail break thing works, they are getting a $donation$ from me.
I thought Apple's official position on this was that you COULD use your old phone as an iPod.
You'll have to explain to me why marketshare is more important than profit.
Marketshare helps to determine how many quality developers there are. Apple's sales show that the iPhone can get a good slice of marketshare. The phone market is broken up amongst different phone models, different OS's, and even major different versions of the same OS for different levels of phone.
If Apple could manage to get a 15% marketshare in smartphones, that would be one of the largest percentages out there, once you count Symbian as the several different OS's that it almost is. Developers converge on a large marketshare. This is what hapened with Windows vs the Mac over the years.
Right now, the iPhone is the "BIG THING", but if Apple can't get a decent percentage of the market, it will cease to be.
This all ties into profits. A popular device can command more money for the manufacturer, thus greater margins. As the market grows in size, sales should increase at least at the same rate, hopefully at a greater rate.
Look to how the Mac is now doing vs PC's. We are getting more developers back all the time, as marketshare has increased several times over the past few years.
If the Mac kept its 2.8% marketshare in the US, and it's just barely over 1.5% worldwide, Apple would be selling quite a few less units than it's selling now, with less developers and less reason for people to buy new ones.
Less sales, less profits, less R&D, less company stability.
I like the dock look, but I agree that Apple should offer customization options. I would agree that BossPref and WinterBaord are probably the most common reason why people jailbreak their iPhones. Even offering these as App Store download would be great. There are lots of slick designs, but the most creative I've seen is the vending machine.
I see no point in unshackling from AT&T just to get a huge lawsuit from them for doing so and still only be able to use 3G on their network and only their network.
While some of those are cute, the others are a mess, and hard to read.
Anyway, I can't really understand why someone would want to jailbreak a phone because of icons. That really seems to be a childish thing to do. Really, who cares? I used to put that kind of junk on my Mac years ago, when doing it first became possible, but quickly dropped it. None of those desktops has any long term readability.
Marketshare helps to determine how many quality developers there are. Apple's sales show that the iPhone can get a good slice of marketshare. The phone market is broken up amongst different phone models, different OS's, and even major different versions of the same OS for different levels of phone.
If Apple could manage to get a 15% marketshare in smartphones, that would be one of the largest percentages out there, once you count Symbian as the several different OS's that it almost is. Developers converge on a large marketshare. This is what hapened with Windows vs the Mac over the years.
Right now, the iPhone is the "BIG THING", but if Apple can't get a decent percentage of the market, it will cease to be.
This all ties into profits. A popular device can command more money for the manufacturer, thus greater margins. As the market grows in size, sales should increase at least at the same rate, hopefully at a greater rate.
Look to how the Mac is now doing vs PC's. We are getting more developers back all the time, as marketshare has increased several times over the past few years.
If the Mac kept its 2.8% marketshare in the US, and it's just barely over 1.5% worldwide, Apple would be selling quite a few less units than it's selling now, with less developers and less reason for people to buy new ones.
Less sales, less profits, less R&D, less company stability.
I don't agree that marketshare is "priority number 1" as the OP stated. Marketshare is great to have, but not at the cost of profits or weakening a brand or product in the long run. Apple was able to survive and then later thrive with its low marketshare because it maintained high profits and low margins, so even in time of drought it could still maintain itself. For comparison, Dell has excellent marketshare in the US, but they have done it by choosing high volume with low profits. I don't see how anyone thinks this is a better choice for Apple.
While some of those are cute, the others are a mess, and hard to read.
Anyway, I can't really understand why someone would want to jailbreak a phone because of icons. That really seems to be a childish thing to do. Really, who cares? I used to put that kind of junk on my Mac years ago, when doing it first became possible, but quickly dropped it. None of those desktops has any long term readability.
I usually stick with the basic setup because it's the most usable, but there does seem to be a lot of people who want to experiment with options or want something that is their own. I haven't heard about it since the first iPhone came out, but it seems to be popular with teenagers. But would changing your icons and theme be as cool if it was a default option and not a jailbroken one?
I don't agree that marketshare is "priority number 1" as the OP stated. Marketshare is great to have, but not at the cost of profits or weakening a brand or product in the long run. Apple was able to survive and then later thrive with its low marketshare because it maintained high profits and low margins, so even in time of drought it could still maintain itself. For comparison, Dell has excellent marketshare in the US, but they have done it by choosing high volume with low profits. I don't see how anyone thinks this is a better choice for Apple.
Not #1. Unless you can do that without damaging your margins. Apple has allowed lower margins this quarter by lowering the price of the iTouch by so much. They had to do that to keep sales up. Sometimes, you have no choice.
But despite the fact that a few people here don't agree, marketshare is very important in an industry where your company, and its sales, depends on other companies to interface with you on hardware and software.
People love the car analogy, using BMW and other car companies as examples.
But that doesn't work, because it's easy to design a car to use the gas that's already on sale, use the same roads, the same air for the tires, etc.
Apple depends on the good will of software and hardware companies. Without them, the Mac is a bust.
If the market for computers is 10 million a year, and a company has 2 million of that, while the other has 8 million, they will get by, because four times the sales still leaves an additional 20% of the market to develop and sell to. That could still be very profitable.
But if that company's sales rise to 3 million in a market of 100 million, they now have only a 3% marketshare, and very few companies will see a profit in developing and selling to them. There are exceptions, of course. In certain areas that company may still have a big percentage of users, and so, there, they will see plenty of software and hardware. Others areas will dry up, making it more difficult to sell product there.
They also become less competitive because they may not get the pricing for materials, manufacturing and such, that bigger makers get, putting them at a disadvantage pricewise.
It isn't just the numbers of units sold. Marketshare plays a very big part in the world of computers. Many OS's died out, because there was little software available for them.
I usually stick with the basic setup because it's the most usable, but there does seem to be a lot of people who want to experiment with options or want something that is their own. I haven't heard about it since the first iPhone came out, but it seems to be popular with teenagers. But would changing your icons and theme be as cool if it was a default option and not a jailbroken one?
Not #1. Unless you can do that without damaging your margins. Apple has allowed lower margins this quarter by lowering the price of the iTouch by so much. They had to do that to keep sales up. Sometimes, you have no choice...
I agree with everything you've said, but the OP said priority number 1, which is why I asked posted my initial question.
We talk about the iPhone in terms of the OS or the product as a whole, but we don't usually look at the fact that both generations of the iPhone and iPod Touch run the same OS on the same main hardware. Symbian runs on many more units, but it also runs on many more models that offer completely different HW setups. I would think this would be an important factor for developers. I would think this would be an important factor for developers to consider knowing that they can build one app that works on every single mobile OS X device. That seems to be a powerful motivator. Could that be a reason why Apple choose to under-clock the processor so much, instead of just using a cheaper CPU that more closely matched the current speed?
PS: Apple does make quite a few of the popular apps for the Mac. I wonder if they'll continue do so as they increase in popularity knowing it will pull in more developers. iLife development has slowed, but there was the whole porting OS X to a mobile platform that did take up considerable resources.
I agree with everything you've said, but the OP said priority number 1, which is why I asked posted my initial question.
We talk about the iPhone in terms of the OS or the product as a whole, but we don't usually look at the fact that both generations of the iPhone and iPod Touch run the same OS on the same main hardware. Symbian runs on many more units, but it also runs on many more models that offer completely different HW setups. I would think this would be an important factor for developers. I would think this would be an important factor for developers to consider knowing that they can build one app that works on every single mobile OS X device. That seems to be a powerful motivator.
Yes, that's exactly what I said. here is a lot of splintering in the Symbian market. The same thing exists, to a lessor extent, in the Win Mobile market, but this time it just the different hardware functionality.
Quote:
Could that be a reason why Apple choose to under-clock the processor so much, instead of just using a cheaper CPU that more closely matched the current speed?
You'll have to explain that a bit more, I'm missing something.
I always thought it was because underclocking a processor uses less power than running a lower version at full speed. That would be an advantage. Also, if Apple later needed a higher speed, they wouldn't have to change the design much, just clock it higher, and adjust the cooling part of the design. It would be cheaper to continue using the same parts for many more devices.
Quote:
PS: Apple does make quite a few of the popular apps for the Mac. I wonder if they'll continue do so as they increase in popularity knowing it will pull in more developers. iLife development has slowed, but there was the whole porting OS X to a mobile platform that did take up considerable resources.
I suppose it depends on what part of the market the apps play to. Developers come out with competition to Apple's apps. Some do very well, because Apple isn't moving in certain areas.
We can look at Aperture, and Lightroom. Lightroom is doing very well.
Comments
The pwnage tool did serve a purpose, it let me unlock the handset and it remained unlocked after upgrading to 2.0.1, then 2.0.2 and finally 2.1.
After restoring the proper firmware the iPhone performed much better (2.0 at the time) with less crashes and much more responsive.
The pwnage tool is fine for a way to unlock non 3G iPhones but you wouldn't want to leave it on there.
I had to go 2 days with the default "look" of the iphone with the update to 2.1, and it was painful... seriously, add the ability to get rid of the text under the icons, choice of docks, user wallpaper as background, and ability to change icons... that would take away the need to jailbreak for a lot of folks...
speaking of icons... avatron's air sharing icon takes the cake for the WORST iphone icon... EVER...
and one more thing... shed the shackles to at&lame... let there be choice!!!
get rid of that awful, dated g5 looking mesh dock!!! and change some of those stupid icons!!!
I had to go 2 days with the default "look" of the iphone with the update to 2.1, and it was painful... seriously, add the ability to get rid of the text under the icons, choice of docks, user wallpaper as background, and ability to change icons... that would take away the need to jailbreak for a lot of folks...
speaking of icons... avatron's air sharing icon takes the cake for the WORST iphone icon... EVER...
and one more thing... shed the shackles to at&lame... let there be choice!!!
I like the dock look, but I agree that Apple should offer customization options. I would agree that BossPref and WinterBaord are probably the most common reason why people jailbreak their iPhones. Even offering these as App Store download would be great. There are lots of slick designs, but the most creative I've seen is the vending machine.
I see no point in unshackling from AT&T just to get a huge lawsuit from them for doing so and still only be able to use 3G on their network and only their network.
They want you to break it. They fix it without locking it down and you break it again. Apple knows the areas in which they could lock it down and shut you out yet you think you're smarter then them.
I'm glad they keep your egos satisified and you continue to buy the products. It's great free-press and much more.
on how arrogant and ego chest pounding they become in thinking they are outsmarting the company that produces the operating system.
They want you to break it. They fix it without locking it down and you break it again. Apple knows the areas in which they could lock it down and shut you out yet you think you're smarter then them.
I'm glad they keep your egos satisified and you continue to buy the products. It's great free-press and much more.
it's the "hacker way"... bring on the challenge!!! and the job offers...
on how arrogant and ego chest pounding they become in thinking they are outsmarting the company that produces the operating system.
They want you to break it. They fix it without locking it down and you break it again. Apple knows the areas in which they could lock it down and shut you out yet you think you're smarter then them.
I'm glad they keep your egos satisified and you continue to buy the products. It's great free-press and much more.
I really don't want to disagree with you because I don't believe in Jail Breaking in any manner but if it's as easy as it seems to be than Apple's security into their core programming isn't as secure as it should be.
Nobody knows what else a Jail Broken phone opens up but the developers that wrote the Jail Break. I want my phone secure and not Jail Broke. At least I have (at this point) a small bit of comfort Apple is keeping my data on my phone secure.
I was a little sad when I read that Steve Wozniak Jail Broke is 3G iPhone. It really lowered my level of respect I had for him.
If someone else exercising freedom and/or curiosity lowers your level of respect for them, that says more about you than it does about them. As long as they're not hurting you, try letting others do their own thing without being all judgmental.
Whenever they hack the iPhone, they show Apple what security holes exist on the iPhone.
Then Apple patches those holes.
The Hacker community complains then creates another hack.
But Apple will repeatedly close those security holes - breaking the hack.
It is a useful tit-for-tat.
For Apple, it is an opportunity to improve security on the iPhone.
Jail Breaking a phone was not even an option on the table for me until 30 minutes ago when I found out that updating my 2G iPhone that was replaced by a 3G model was bricked until I activated it. I am going to jail break it just so I can still use it as an iPod. WTF was Apple thinking on this?
I swapped SIM cards per Apple Support and it didn't work. Nice move on Apple's part. If this jail break thing works, they are getting a $donation$ from me.
I thought Apple's official position on this was that you COULD use your old phone as an iPod.
If so, this must be a bug.
You'll have to explain to me why marketshare is more important than profit.
Marketshare helps to determine how many quality developers there are. Apple's sales show that the iPhone can get a good slice of marketshare. The phone market is broken up amongst different phone models, different OS's, and even major different versions of the same OS for different levels of phone.
If Apple could manage to get a 15% marketshare in smartphones, that would be one of the largest percentages out there, once you count Symbian as the several different OS's that it almost is. Developers converge on a large marketshare. This is what hapened with Windows vs the Mac over the years.
Right now, the iPhone is the "BIG THING", but if Apple can't get a decent percentage of the market, it will cease to be.
This all ties into profits. A popular device can command more money for the manufacturer, thus greater margins. As the market grows in size, sales should increase at least at the same rate, hopefully at a greater rate.
Look to how the Mac is now doing vs PC's. We are getting more developers back all the time, as marketshare has increased several times over the past few years.
If the Mac kept its 2.8% marketshare in the US, and it's just barely over 1.5% worldwide, Apple would be selling quite a few less units than it's selling now, with less developers and less reason for people to buy new ones.
Less sales, less profits, less R&D, less company stability.
I like the dock look, but I agree that Apple should offer customization options. I would agree that BossPref and WinterBaord are probably the most common reason why people jailbreak their iPhones. Even offering these as App Store download would be great. There are lots of slick designs, but the most creative I've seen is the vending machine.
I see no point in unshackling from AT&T just to get a huge lawsuit from them for doing so and still only be able to use 3G on their network and only their network.
While some of those are cute, the others are a mess, and hard to read.
Anyway, I can't really understand why someone would want to jailbreak a phone because of icons. That really seems to be a childish thing to do. Really, who cares? I used to put that kind of junk on my Mac years ago, when doing it first became possible, but quickly dropped it. None of those desktops has any long term readability.
Marketshare helps to determine how many quality developers there are. Apple's sales show that the iPhone can get a good slice of marketshare. The phone market is broken up amongst different phone models, different OS's, and even major different versions of the same OS for different levels of phone.
If Apple could manage to get a 15% marketshare in smartphones, that would be one of the largest percentages out there, once you count Symbian as the several different OS's that it almost is. Developers converge on a large marketshare. This is what hapened with Windows vs the Mac over the years.
Right now, the iPhone is the "BIG THING", but if Apple can't get a decent percentage of the market, it will cease to be.
This all ties into profits. A popular device can command more money for the manufacturer, thus greater margins. As the market grows in size, sales should increase at least at the same rate, hopefully at a greater rate.
Look to how the Mac is now doing vs PC's. We are getting more developers back all the time, as marketshare has increased several times over the past few years.
If the Mac kept its 2.8% marketshare in the US, and it's just barely over 1.5% worldwide, Apple would be selling quite a few less units than it's selling now, with less developers and less reason for people to buy new ones.
Less sales, less profits, less R&D, less company stability.
I don't agree that marketshare is "priority number 1" as the OP stated. Marketshare is great to have, but not at the cost of profits or weakening a brand or product in the long run. Apple was able to survive and then later thrive with its low marketshare because it maintained high profits and low margins, so even in time of drought it could still maintain itself. For comparison, Dell has excellent marketshare in the US, but they have done it by choosing high volume with low profits. I don't see how anyone thinks this is a better choice for Apple.
While some of those are cute, the others are a mess, and hard to read.
Anyway, I can't really understand why someone would want to jailbreak a phone because of icons. That really seems to be a childish thing to do. Really, who cares? I used to put that kind of junk on my Mac years ago, when doing it first became possible, but quickly dropped it. None of those desktops has any long term readability.
I usually stick with the basic setup because it's the most usable, but there does seem to be a lot of people who want to experiment with options or want something that is their own. I haven't heard about it since the first iPhone came out, but it seems to be popular with teenagers. But would changing your icons and theme be as cool if it was a default option and not a jailbroken one?
If it gets to the point that Apple doesn't satisfy my needs and there is a better alternative I'll consider switching Vendors.
Edit.
I was a little sad when I read that Steve Wozniak Jail Broke is 3G iPhone. It really lowered my level of respect I had for him.
LOL, WTF? That's the dumbest shit I ever heard.
I don't agree that marketshare is "priority number 1" as the OP stated. Marketshare is great to have, but not at the cost of profits or weakening a brand or product in the long run. Apple was able to survive and then later thrive with its low marketshare because it maintained high profits and low margins, so even in time of drought it could still maintain itself. For comparison, Dell has excellent marketshare in the US, but they have done it by choosing high volume with low profits. I don't see how anyone thinks this is a better choice for Apple.
Not #1. Unless you can do that without damaging your margins. Apple has allowed lower margins this quarter by lowering the price of the iTouch by so much. They had to do that to keep sales up. Sometimes, you have no choice.
But despite the fact that a few people here don't agree, marketshare is very important in an industry where your company, and its sales, depends on other companies to interface with you on hardware and software.
People love the car analogy, using BMW and other car companies as examples.
But that doesn't work, because it's easy to design a car to use the gas that's already on sale, use the same roads, the same air for the tires, etc.
Apple depends on the good will of software and hardware companies. Without them, the Mac is a bust.
If the market for computers is 10 million a year, and a company has 2 million of that, while the other has 8 million, they will get by, because four times the sales still leaves an additional 20% of the market to develop and sell to. That could still be very profitable.
But if that company's sales rise to 3 million in a market of 100 million, they now have only a 3% marketshare, and very few companies will see a profit in developing and selling to them. There are exceptions, of course. In certain areas that company may still have a big percentage of users, and so, there, they will see plenty of software and hardware. Others areas will dry up, making it more difficult to sell product there.
They also become less competitive because they may not get the pricing for materials, manufacturing and such, that bigger makers get, putting them at a disadvantage pricewise.
It isn't just the numbers of units sold. Marketshare plays a very big part in the world of computers. Many OS's died out, because there was little software available for them.
Look to Amiga, Atari, BE, etc.
The same thing holds true for the phone.
I usually stick with the basic setup because it's the most usable, but there does seem to be a lot of people who want to experiment with options or want something that is their own. I haven't heard about it since the first iPhone came out, but it seems to be popular with teenagers. But would changing your icons and theme be as cool if it was a default option and not a jailbroken one?
Just wonderful.
LOL, WTF? That's the dumbest shit I ever heard.
yes, quite unlike your comment, right?
Not #1. Unless you can do that without damaging your margins. Apple has allowed lower margins this quarter by lowering the price of the iTouch by so much. They had to do that to keep sales up. Sometimes, you have no choice...
I agree with everything you've said, but the OP said priority number 1, which is why I asked posted my initial question.
We talk about the iPhone in terms of the OS or the product as a whole, but we don't usually look at the fact that both generations of the iPhone and iPod Touch run the same OS on the same main hardware. Symbian runs on many more units, but it also runs on many more models that offer completely different HW setups. I would think this would be an important factor for developers. I would think this would be an important factor for developers to consider knowing that they can build one app that works on every single mobile OS X device. That seems to be a powerful motivator. Could that be a reason why Apple choose to under-clock the processor so much, instead of just using a cheaper CPU that more closely matched the current speed?
PS: Apple does make quite a few of the popular apps for the Mac. I wonder if they'll continue do so as they increase in popularity knowing it will pull in more developers. iLife development has slowed, but there was the whole porting OS X to a mobile platform that did take up considerable resources.
I agree with everything you've said, but the OP said priority number 1, which is why I asked posted my initial question.
We talk about the iPhone in terms of the OS or the product as a whole, but we don't usually look at the fact that both generations of the iPhone and iPod Touch run the same OS on the same main hardware. Symbian runs on many more units, but it also runs on many more models that offer completely different HW setups. I would think this would be an important factor for developers. I would think this would be an important factor for developers to consider knowing that they can build one app that works on every single mobile OS X device. That seems to be a powerful motivator.
Yes, that's exactly what I said. here is a lot of splintering in the Symbian market. The same thing exists, to a lessor extent, in the Win Mobile market, but this time it just the different hardware functionality.
Could that be a reason why Apple choose to under-clock the processor so much, instead of just using a cheaper CPU that more closely matched the current speed?
You'll have to explain that a bit more, I'm missing something.
I always thought it was because underclocking a processor uses less power than running a lower version at full speed. That would be an advantage. Also, if Apple later needed a higher speed, they wouldn't have to change the design much, just clock it higher, and adjust the cooling part of the design. It would be cheaper to continue using the same parts for many more devices.
PS: Apple does make quite a few of the popular apps for the Mac. I wonder if they'll continue do so as they increase in popularity knowing it will pull in more developers. iLife development has slowed, but there was the whole porting OS X to a mobile platform that did take up considerable resources.
I suppose it depends on what part of the market the apps play to. Developers come out with competition to Apple's apps. Some do very well, because Apple isn't moving in certain areas.
We can look at Aperture, and Lightroom. Lightroom is doing very well.