How is having the latest OS even a feature if its a step back (apple maps)? if look isn't important why do apple fans always brag about "oh iphones look premium"? Couldn't come up with a single feature ios has that android doesn't have huh? Yea, its a pain in the ass to manually copy links from safari and pasting them on to chrome on my iPad. is it too much to ask to allow the users to set default apps (maps, browsers etc.)?
It does use Android as it's OS so yes it's a Android device, what it isn't is a Google device.
No, it does not use Android. It uses a fork of the software that is the open source part of Android. It's not an Android device. It's not allowed to be marketed and sold as an Android device. And, most importantly, it does not use the Google ecosystem, which is the only relevant point when comparing marketshare of mobile platforms, and the defining point as to whether a device is an Android device.
And, by the way, there are plenty of Android devices that are not Google devices. Most in fact.
"When you take an Android device out of the box, you have to sign up to nine accounts with different vendors to get the experience iOS comes with," he said. "They don't work seamlessly together."
Anyone besides mstone taken the time to figure out what he may have meant by this? I'm not sure it's right, either.
Originally Posted by Rayz
"Hello, Security? Yeah, could you send someone upstairs? Make sure he's big and make sure he's got a bathrobe or something..."
"Hi, this is Security here. We've received your complaint about the naked man in the middle of a firestorm and we'd like to let you know that we're working on the situation right now. Your complaints are very important to us, please stay on the line."
*mellow muzak*
Originally Posted by KDarling
It's like you have some kind of weird forum version of Munchausen-by-proxy syndrome. You make up your own attacks against Apple ahead of time, and then cry foul over them.
Sounds to me like he has written a generalized version of, oh, what happens every single time Apple releases a new product with a new feature.
How is having the latest OS even a feature if its a step back (apple maps)? if look isn't important why do apple fans always brag about "oh iphones look premium"? Couldn't come up with a single feature ios has that android doesn't have huh? Yea, its a pain in the ass to manually copy links from safari and pasting them on to chrome on my iPad. is it too much to ask to allow the users to set default apps (maps, browsers etc.)?
There would be more (I'm sure there are more, but I'm not about to waste my time researching and cross referencing features to satisfy such a lame argument from you.) but Google and Samsung have been so busy stealing from Apple.
(Edit: BTW, are we talking features that actually ship on most Android phones today? Because, you know, most of those "features" are theoretical on most phones. I know you wanted to ignore that point, but it won't go away.)
Feature fetishes aside, having spent some time using Android, it's not really a matter of feature counts, it's a matter of Androids fundamental paradigms being clunky, and most of the hardware it runs on cheap crap.
Apple Maps is a huge step forward and all objective evidence indicates that it's as good or better than Google maps in every important way. Best of all, it gets Google off your phone if you don't want it their
And, does a premium quality exterior shell cease being premium quality simply because it's nearly the same as last years? You have a very confused notion of quality vs. superficial appearance, but, that doesn't surprise me. You have some very confused notions, altogether.
And likewise the readers here enjoy it when you so clearly have nothing of substance to add to a topic that you reduce your posts to mere name-calling.
Funny stuff. As usual, you have trouble keeping up.
That's a lame excuse for Apple not suing Google. Oracle sued Google for using Java in Android even though google doesn't profit from android. Apple knows they have absolutely no chance of beating Google in a court room. That's why they are suing a Korean company in a court 10 miles from their HQ with local Jury. If Android was stolen, SJ would have sued Google way back in 2009. Its crazy everyone on Apple sites claim "Google stole android" yet no one can show any concrete proof.
Oracle has no option but to sue Google because their lawsuit involves operating system internals (SDKs). There's no way they could sue Samsung or others over things in the Android development environment.
Apple, OTOH, is using hardware and user interface design patents -- things which are directly visible in the products made using Android. So even though it could very well be that, technically, a user interface patent violation stems from something within Android itself (and not from what Samsung has added to it), a non-technical person would only see it as Samsung's product itself violating the patent.
So the proof is in the fact that a number of products built using Android have had user interface design patent cases filed against them.
Funny stuff. As usual, you have trouble keeping up.
I find it funny that this forum is the highlight of your day. Keeping up with the pointless threads on this forum is not something to brag about. You're a puppet and this forum knows exactly how to pull your strings.
Only at AI do people believe Apple prevailed in that case. In the outside world, the court records are sufficient evidence of what happened in the court.
The situation with Xerox v Apple is very much like Apple v Microsoft: in both cases a license agreement nullified most claims, with the remainder dismissed under other factors, such as failing on an "originality basis":
Where exactly did I say that Apple prevailed in anything? What I said is that, Apple actually gave Xerox _something_ for access to their labs. Whereas Microsoft didn't give anything in exchange for the same privilege.
Did Apple get a great bargain? No question. Should Apple have patented the things they added to enhance the ideas they learned from Xerox so that they could effectively use them in the case against Microsoft? Yes, but it's a moot point now. Live and learn.
It does use Android as it's OS so yes it's a Android device, what it isn't is a Google device.
Once you fork an OS it's disingenuous to call by that former OS's name. You can say it's based on such-and-such OS, but saying it is that OS simply isn't true.
Once you fork an OS it's disingenuous to call by that former OS's name. You can say it's based on such-and-such OS, but saying it is that OS simply isn't true.
Thanks that's a much better explanation than anonymouse.
I know, it started out with DaHarder and went downhill from there. That's an accomplishment, downhill from there.
Thanks to igriv, MacRulez, Mars 123 for leading the descent. Good job! See you later this morning after the Samsung dance numbers.
Is it me, or do some of these posters act like they're atheists shouting to convince christians not to be christians...and worse, shouting in a library, not in a christian church. And the people in the library are like, "shut the f*** up!"
And with an iPhone, you need a phone plan, an Apple ID (with a credit card, so you can buy apps), a google account so you can read your mail, a Dropbox account so as to make a lot of the apps useful. What's the difference?
Why do you need a Google account?
Did you see Google are dumping open source CalDav support in favour of their own closed calendar API?
More of the usual hypocritical behaviour.
Now run along and drink your KoolAid and do a few more 'Google is not evil' chants.
If you don't want the free storage, you don't have to sign up. Note that in iOS you get NOTHING for free (I am paying $100 a year for iCloud storage, which is more expensive than dropbox and google drive (both of which I have), and worse than either one. For office docs SkyDrive is way better (and you get plenty of storage for free with Office 365).
I've got Skydrive and Dropbox and FREE iCloud, I've got iPhones and Android phones, where did the ridiculous idea come from that because you use one thing, you can't use another?
Comments
How is having the latest OS even a feature if its a step back (apple maps)? if look isn't important why do apple fans always brag about "oh iphones look premium"? Couldn't come up with a single feature ios has that android doesn't have huh? Yea, its a pain in the ass to manually copy links from safari and pasting them on to chrome on my iPad. is it too much to ask to allow the users to set default apps (maps, browsers etc.)?
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69
It does use Android as it's OS so yes it's a Android device, what it isn't is a Google device.
No, it does not use Android. It uses a fork of the software that is the open source part of Android. It's not an Android device. It's not allowed to be marketed and sold as an Android device. And, most importantly, it does not use the Google ecosystem, which is the only relevant point when comparing marketshare of mobile platforms, and the defining point as to whether a device is an Android device.
And, by the way, there are plenty of Android devices that are not Google devices. Most in fact.
Originally Posted by AppleInsider
"When you take an Android device out of the box, you have to sign up to nine accounts with different vendors to get the experience iOS comes with," he said. "They don't work seamlessly together."
Anyone besides mstone taken the time to figure out what he may have meant by this? I'm not sure it's right, either.
Originally Posted by Rayz
"Hello, Security? Yeah, could you send someone upstairs? Make sure he's big and make sure he's got a bathrobe or something..."
"Hi, this is Security here. We've received your complaint about the naked man in the middle of a firestorm and we'd like to let you know that we're working on the situation right now. Your complaints are very important to us, please stay on the line."
*mellow muzak*
Originally Posted by KDarling
It's like you have some kind of weird forum version of Munchausen-by-proxy syndrome. You make up your own attacks against Apple ahead of time, and then cry foul over them.
Sounds to me like he has written a generalized version of, oh, what happens every single time Apple releases a new product with a new feature.
deleted
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mars123
How is having the latest OS even a feature if its a step back (apple maps)? if look isn't important why do apple fans always brag about "oh iphones look premium"? Couldn't come up with a single feature ios has that android doesn't have huh? Yea, its a pain in the ass to manually copy links from safari and pasting them on to chrome on my iPad. is it too much to ask to allow the users to set default apps (maps, browsers etc.)?
Not that it matters, but here: http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2013/03/five-features-we-wish-android-would-borrow-from-ios/
There would be more (I'm sure there are more, but I'm not about to waste my time researching and cross referencing features to satisfy such a lame argument from you.) but Google and Samsung have been so busy stealing from Apple.
(Edit: BTW, are we talking features that actually ship on most Android phones today? Because, you know, most of those "features" are theoretical on most phones. I know you wanted to ignore that point, but it won't go away.)
Feature fetishes aside, having spent some time using Android, it's not really a matter of feature counts, it's a matter of Androids fundamental paradigms being clunky, and most of the hardware it runs on cheap crap.
Apple Maps is a huge step forward and all objective evidence indicates that it's as good or better than Google maps in every important way. Best of all, it gets Google off your phone if you don't want it their
And, does a premium quality exterior shell cease being premium quality simply because it's nearly the same as last years? You have a very confused notion of quality vs. superficial appearance, but, that doesn't surprise me. You have some very confused notions, altogether.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacRulez
And likewise the readers here enjoy it when you so clearly have nothing of substance to add to a topic that you reduce your posts to mere name-calling.
Funny stuff. As usual, you have trouble keeping up.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mars123
That's a lame excuse for Apple not suing Google. Oracle sued Google for using Java in Android even though google doesn't profit from android. Apple knows they have absolutely no chance of beating Google in a court room. That's why they are suing a Korean company in a court 10 miles from their HQ with local Jury. If Android was stolen, SJ would have sued Google way back in 2009. Its crazy everyone on Apple sites claim "Google stole android" yet no one can show any concrete proof.
Oracle has no option but to sue Google because their lawsuit involves operating system internals (SDKs). There's no way they could sue Samsung or others over things in the Android development environment.
Apple, OTOH, is using hardware and user interface design patents -- things which are directly visible in the products made using Android. So even though it could very well be that, technically, a user interface patent violation stems from something within Android itself (and not from what Samsung has added to it), a non-technical person would only see it as Samsung's product itself violating the patent.
So the proof is in the fact that a number of products built using Android have had user interface design patent cases filed against them.
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse
Funny stuff. As usual, you have trouble keeping up.
I find it funny that this forum is the highlight of your day. Keeping up with the pointless threads on this forum is not something to brag about. You're a puppet and this forum knows exactly how to pull your strings.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacRulez
Only at AI do people believe Apple prevailed in that case. In the outside world, the court records are sufficient evidence of what happened in the court.
The situation with Xerox v Apple is very much like Apple v Microsoft: in both cases a license agreement nullified most claims, with the remainder dismissed under other factors, such as failing on an "originality basis":
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_v_microsoft#Court_case
Where exactly did I say that Apple prevailed in anything? What I said is that, Apple actually gave Xerox _something_ for access to their labs. Whereas Microsoft didn't give anything in exchange for the same privilege.
Did Apple get a great bargain? No question. Should Apple have patented the things they added to enhance the ideas they learned from Xerox so that they could effectively use them in the case against Microsoft? Yes, but it's a moot point now. Live and learn.
Once you fork an OS it's disingenuous to call by that former OS's name. You can say it's based on such-and-such OS, but saying it is that OS simply isn't true.
deleted
Thanks that's a much better explanation than anonymouse.
Unless he clarifies what he means by that statement, I think we've come to the conclusion that it's just some number he pulled out of... Thin air.
So he can be an analyst now?
post deleted...don't want to encourage the brats in the classroom.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flaneur
er
I know, it started out with DaHarder and went downhill from there. That's an accomplishment, downhill from there.
Thanks to igriv, MacRulez, Mars 123 for leading the descent. Good job! See you later this morning after the Samsung dance numbers.
Is it me, or do some of these posters act like they're atheists shouting to convince christians not to be christians...and worse, shouting in a library, not in a christian church. And the people in the library are like, "shut the f*** up!"
:-)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flaneur
er
I know, it started out with DaHarder and went downhill from there. That's an accomplishment, downhill from there.
Thanks to igriv, MacRulez, Mars 123 for leading the descent. Good job! See you later this morning after the Samsung dance numbers.
I laughed out loud.
deleted
Quote:
Originally Posted by igriv
And with an iPhone, you need a phone plan, an Apple ID (with a credit card, so you can buy apps), a google account so you can read your mail, a Dropbox account so as to make a lot of the apps useful. What's the difference?
Why do you need a Google account?
Did you see Google are dumping open source CalDav support in favour of their own closed calendar API?
More of the usual hypocritical behaviour.
Now run along and drink your KoolAid and do a few more 'Google is not evil' chants.
Quote:
Originally Posted by igriv
If you don't want the free storage, you don't have to sign up. Note that in iOS you get NOTHING for free (I am paying $100 a year for iCloud storage, which is more expensive than dropbox and google drive (both of which I have), and worse than either one. For office docs SkyDrive is way better (and you get plenty of storage for free with Office 365).
I've got Skydrive and Dropbox and FREE iCloud, I've got iPhones and Android phones, where did the ridiculous idea come from that because you use one thing, you can't use another?