I think that the definition of "enough money" is relative.
<span style="line-height:1.231;">Apple went into the phone market only expecting to get a relatively small percentage, and yet that was "enough money" for them at the time.</span>
Now when we're talking about markets with billions of potential buyers, even a smaller profit per device can become "enough" <img alt="1wink.gif" id="user_yui_3_10_0_1_1372623738393_689" src="http://forums-files.appleinsider.com/images/smilies/1wink.gif" style="line-height:1.231;" name="user_yui_3_10_0_1_1372623738393_689">
I dunno. <span style="line-height:1.231;">At this stage of iPhone existence, customers shouldn't have to use an unpolished version for a year or two while a new UI designer gains experience. The smartest thing to do would be to wait to deploy it until it's more polished. Apple already got one black eye with their maps going out a bit too soon. That should be a wakeup call to not rush something out.</span>
Good point. It is nice to see things put in that people have asked for (and jailbroken to get) for years now.
As for "copying", <span style="line-height:1.231;">most consumers don't care one whit about who came first, so I don't think F and I worry about it either.</span>
Oh I agree that they shouldn't rush something out. And I hope they don't (or are able to polish it up enough by sept/oct). My point is with the amount of time they had to do this re-design I don't think we'll fully get where they're going until iOS 8 or 9. Ive said this was just the beginning. Manton Reece, who used to work with Scott Forstall at Apple has a podcast called Core Intuition. He's actually been quite positive about iOS 7 (while agreeing its far from finished). What he's said now on several podcasts is how amazed he is at what Federighi, Ive & Co. were able to accomplish in just 6-8 months.
Sure I don't think anyone at Apple cares whether they're accused of copying or not. But I get annoyed with those who rip on iOS 7 (even though its still in beta) and say Scott Forstall needs to be brought back. There's features we're getting in iOS 7 that we should have gotten under Forstall and we never did. I think iOS was stagnating under him. Either he was out of new ideas or he was coasting on its success. I read through some of Forstall's videotape deposition from the Samsung trial and you get this sense of arrogance and that Forstall really hated Android and felt it was a complete ripoff of iOS. I wonder if perhaps he was so blinded by that hatred he didn't realize Android was passing iOS by in some respects.
Of course Apple can survive. I've spoken to a number of iOS users, and all of them carefully explained that they didn't want a neatly laid-out UI with thin fonts and flat style. They were perfectly happy with the way iOS 6 looked. I couldn't understand it. Now Apple has unveiled iOS 7, and the same people are excited about the new look. They won't be able to go back to the old look, but they don't mind. I don't understand that either. So you see, that's two things I have failed to understand, while Apple are so on the pulse that they know exactly when to make the change, and with pleasure and great applause. I can only look on and gape.
Of course Apple can survive. I've spoken to a number of iOS users, and all of them carefully explained that they didn't want a neatly laid-out UI with thin fonts and flat style. They were perfectly happy with the way iOS 6 looked. I couldn't understand it. Now Apple has unveiled iOS 7, and the same people are excited about the new look. They won't be able to go back to the old look, but they don't mind. I don't understand that either. So you see, that's two things I have failed to understand, while Apple are so on the pulse that they know exactly when to make the change, and with pleasure and great applause. I can only look on and gape.
Obviously people are going to be happy with what they have. IF they have a good enough car from Ford, for instance. But things move on, and if Ford - in the same price range - produces a better looking car then they would equally, or preferably, like that.
Any particular reason you couldn't ask politely for a citation, or offer a counterargument without going "angry guy"? There's a handful of members who seem to always be looking for a fight instead of a discussion. We can change the tone here if enough of us choose to make an effort at it.
The tone will change when you and the other shills leave and don't come back. You aren't looking for a discussion. You're looking to spread misinformation and you'd like everyone to pretend that you deserve the same respect as honest posters. You don't. You're a professional liar and deserve nothing but contempt.
I think the article points to something I've never considered: most of these cheap Android phones are used as little more than feature phones. I would love to know how they determined that. I am sure there are less people that use the iPhone as a feature phone, but I am equally sure there are people that do. It really just depends on the criteria.
Since you could surf the web and and play sad little games on a feature phone, at what point are you using a smartphone as a smartphone?
The tone will change when you and the other shills leave and don't come back. You aren't looking for a discussion. You're looking to spread misinformation and you'd like everyone to pretend that you deserve the same respect as honest posters. You don't. You're a professional liar and deserve nothing but contempt.
Translation: The tone will change when people who disagree with anonymous ( et al). are hunted out of the forum by their angry reactions to any criticism of Apple.
The it will be all sweetness and light. That is, unless a normal punter turns up at what he thinks is a normal consumer site, and offers a tepid criticism of the iPhone 5s, which he opines normally very good but he is not that happy with the battery life.
Be gone with you heretic troll will be the theme, who paid you! Samsung or Microsoft? and off the normal punter goes, wondering if Apple is really the cult he always heard it was.
On here, it is.
AI is still better than the competition in terms of it's stories, however any competitor which enforced proper forum rules would start to win share.
I can't see tagging ever getting to iOS 7, though i would like it.
Interesting how small improvements make such differences. Tags are basically labels, and have been around for years. In Mavericks they have a decent UI - you can change the label/tag on save - and suddenly they are brilliant. ( no sarcasm, they are).
matter of taste. I see no value in tagging. I open files either from recent lists from app or i search with spotlight. iOS and OS X have spotlight.
Okay fair enough, I've never had a problem with security or malware but I'm sure users who don't know what their installing have. I put a lot of blame on Google for this, their should be a much larger scrutiny when allowing apps into Google Play. I no longer buy Android or iOS phones for personal use as I like supporting platforms with low market penetration. I have recently put in a preorder for a Jolla phone and I will also probably buy a Nokia Lumia EOS with the 40 MP camera when it's finally released. Work phone wise, well I really didn't have a choice there, as they are issued to me by my firm. This time around they gave me a BB Z10, no complaints though as it does everything I need a phone to do and I really dig the interface. It also has a great file-manager app that can access my work servers via VPN, which is probably the only criteria I have in a work phone.
As you might have guessed I love owning phones that are very unique, if I see to many of the same phone on the street chances are I will never buy one, MeegOS was one of my favorite mobile OS's of all time so the new Jolla phone is probably a good match for me.
BB Z10 is a very decent phone with very good OS. I am sorry they are being pushed aside. It's their fault, of course, but still, I think this phone and OS deserves at least a chance.
Th plan date is not the release date. The release date was 1995 which is mid 1990's. What it is not is early 1990's. The licensing program really got going in 1995-1997 and was abandoned only when Steve Jobs came back.
In no sense then, would a program which started in a limited fashion in 1995 and lasted until 1999 or so ( although most clones were curtailed in 1997/98) be called early 1990's. Early 1990's is wrong. I should probably have said, mid-to-late 1990's but guess what: I am commenting below the line not above it.
The stats above the line need to be fact checked more rigorously than those below it. So go take that forensic abilities of yours and apply it to DED's original comments.
Your correction was dead wrong. If there were prototypes available in 1994, the licensing started in early to mid 1990's and calling it late 90's is dead wrong. In other words, the licensing starts way before release. If you are going to go off and correct people's facts, you better get your corrections right and you missed on several. This is the one that is indisputable and not really source based (no one knows how much Android or WP developers are actually making for example). So while the article was wrong, so was your correction.
Interesting piece that seems based on the premise that Google wants to be Apple.
The difference as I see it is that Google want breadth of users to maximise the number of gmail/youtube/play/&c. users (users = data ad revenue) while Apple want to, and more often than not manage to, punt high end devices to those that can afford them.
Every flavour of Android 'works' in that scenario for Google.
Like most of the features that Apple supposedly lacks, such an API is available in iOS.
"Uniform Type Identifiers (or UTIs) are strings which uniquely identify abstract types. They can be used to describe a file format or an in-memory data type, but can also be used to describe the type of other sorts of entities, such as directories, volumes, or packages." UTIs were introduced in iOS 3.
Likewise, developers may choose to implement their own keyboard layout making said layout a universal option. That developers have not chosen to do so speaks less of iOS than of users who do not confuse variety with choice.
Furthermore, file management is available on iOS. Indeed, there are dozens, if not hundreds, of file managers that allow a user to download and install a variety of objects on their iPhone. In my opinion, Tagging is the future of file management. Tagging has quickly become my favorite feature of OS X 10.9 Mavericks.
I fail to understand how any rational, reasonable person could conclude that the iPhone isn't years ahead of the competition considering the dozens of features implemented in iOS that Android simply does not offer.
Interesting. So what I meant is a universal way for Apps to open appropriate UTIs from other Apps, essentially the reverse of "Open In" (which "pushes" a file, as opposed to "pulling" it).
So if I'm in Mail, and click "Insert Photo", it not only shows me all my albums, but also other apps (displayed as an album) that have appropriate UTIs. This could also allow document insertion.
Actually, I think "Insert Document" would be huge for Mail, if it allowed me to access various types of documents tagged with UTIs (.pages, .doc, .pdf, .numbers, etc.) stored in my apps, or even to access iCloud. Currently, these apps allow me to "push" my documents to Mail, but the workflow would be much more efficient if you could "pull" the data instead.
Currently, some third-party apps allow importing of Photos from the Photos app. So clearly this is possible. But it would be nice if it was opened to third-parties.
As for your question about the difference between a tablet and notebook, this file management example is just one expression of a broader philosophical difference between Apple and Microsoft on tablets. Apple's uses the term "post-PC" to describe computing devices that aren't the classic "personal computer" as we knew it over the last 30 years. Things like iPhones, iPods, iPads, and AppleTV are examples of this. They are purposeful information processing devices. Apple TV, for example, lets me rent and watch HD movies and TV shows over the Internet (iTunes), right on my TV. iPad lets me run apps, surf the web, read email, read magazines, play games, message and FaceTime friends. A lot of those things were previously only possible with a personal computer. Why not just make personal computers? Because the post-PC devices are simplified, curated, ultra-portable, and maintenance free. When people who have never used any kind of computer pick up and just start using iPads, that's Apple's post-PC vision paying off.
Microsoft's is not interested in replacing the PC with a post-PC device (you could argue that Surface RT is just like the iPad, but it's not bold enough at shedding its PC-era design cruft, such as the classic desktop, and ends up being a half-hearted attempt at a post-PC tablet) The odd thing is that Microsoft groks the post-PC idea, and they in fact sell a post-PC device: the Xbox. It's based on a PC, but Microsoft won't, for example, allow it to operate outside of the walled garden of (signed) Xbox games and Xbox Live content. You can't side load any app or game not approved by Microsoft, and you can't even surf the web, or use a mouse and keyboard. It's deliberately limited in purpose. It's not a PC.
I see what you're saying. But I think WP8 also qualifies as a "post-PC" OS. Unlike WinRT, it has no traditional desktop environment. Like in iOS, files don't exist outside of apps. WP8 also mimics the iOS method of handling email attachments, and actually appears to be more restrictive than iOS by predefining the types of files that one can attach (http://www.windowsphone.com/en-US/how-to/wp8/people/email-attachments-faq). Although WP8 does give you the option of sideloading apps like on a PC, on balance it behaves more like iOS than android. Among the mobile OS's, I would say that android borrows the most concepts from "traditional" computing, while WP8 lies somewhere between that and iOS.
I see what you're saying. But I think WP8 also qualifies as a "post-PC" OS. Unlike WinRT, it has no traditional desktop environment. Like in iOS, files don't exist outside of apps. WP8 also mimics the iOS method of handling email attachments, and actually appears to be more restrictive than iOS by predefining the types of files that one can attach (<a href="http://www.windowsphone.com/en-US/how-to/wp8/people/email-attachments-faq" style="line-height:1.231;" target="_blank">http://www.windowsphone.com/en-US/how-to/wp8/people/email-attachments-faq</a>;
). Although WP8 does give you the option of sideloading apps like on a PC, on balance it behaves more like iOS than android.
Yeah, but we're talking about tablets, aren't we? I mean technically smartphones are post-PC devices. But tablets vs ultra portables was the subject. If MS had put WP8 on its Surface, then it would truly be a post-PC device. As it stands, it's just a refresh of MS' decades-old view of tablets-are-just-PCs.
Your correction was dead wrong. If there were prototypes available in 1994, the licensing started in early to mid 1990's and calling it late 90's is dead wrong. In other words, the licensing starts way before release. If you are going to go off and correct people's facts, you better get your corrections right and you missed on several. This is the one that is indisputable and not really source based (no one knows how much Android or WP developers are actually making for example). So while the article was wrong, so was your correction.
No. The first licensed clone sold in 1995. In no sense of the word is that early 1990's. It is mid 1990's. And I said that in my correction to your correction.
You are clutching at straws with the prototype and when licensing agreements are formed or made - that funny argument is used by Android fans to prove that Android is older than the iPhone. It's ludicrous there, and here. The Mac was licensed - that is sold to customers from 1995 on.
I also pointed out that I should have said mid to late, but late 1990's is clearly more correct than early 1990's as most of the licensed macs were sold in the later 1990's - i..e past 1995. DED is still wrong. I am still more correct. And I am below the line. Get that forensic ability working above the line.
As for the rest, if you have other issues with my error of fact - rather than logic - then go for it. I even included links.
Yeah, but we're talking about tablets, aren't we? I mean technically smartphones are post-PC devices. But tablets vs ultra portables was the subject. If MS had put WP8 on its Surface, then it would truly be a post-PC device. As it stands, it's just a refresh of MS' decades-old view of tablets-are-just-PCs.
The post I was referring to talked about post-PC devices in general and brought up the xbox, but if we're just talking about tablets then sure, the MS offerings (especially Win RT) try to straddle the fence between traditional PCs and post-PCs.
Ho-hum. Nice article - well-presented, well-argued, and thoughtfully pro-Apple.
So what?
I love Apple - have 10s of 1000s of dollars of computer, entertainment, software, and peripheral stuff - all good and play well together - over a couple of decades. The vast majority of my friends do not and they let me know it - and my other small group of Apple friends as well (that they get the abuse not join in to give it to me).
But we live in a world of mediocrity - especially the consumers. Not only mediocre, but fickle, spiteful, and petty - like fans in the music industry. It is said that for big-time money-infested, fluff acts - madonna, bieber - their fans categorize their likes as: 30% actually like the music, 50% like that they have friends that talk passionately about that music; 20% like that they have friends that go to events about that music. Such is with smart phones.
The key is to maintain that loyal following who truly understand the life-affirming nature of the Apple eco-system and hope it remains profitable. The anti-key is to care or pretend to care about what Android is doing - that is what those followers of Android who spitefully covet Apple (probably some but not many) want. Stay the course. Applaud Apple when they do good, and be supportive (but honest) when they need guidance - like a good family - because that is what we are and that is only thing that will save us.
A bigger issue for the definition of "Android" is that it's not just the 66 percent of Google Play users that have no access to a modern version of Android; it's also the majority of the growing, "white box" market that is outpacing Samsung and the other Android licensees that everyone identifies as "Android."
Comments
Sure I don't think anyone at Apple cares whether they're accused of copying or not. But I get annoyed with those who rip on iOS 7 (even though its still in beta) and say Scott Forstall needs to be brought back. There's features we're getting in iOS 7 that we should have gotten under Forstall and we never did. I think iOS was stagnating under him. Either he was out of new ideas or he was coasting on its success. I read through some of Forstall's videotape deposition from the Samsung trial and you get this sense of arrogance and that Forstall really hated Android and felt it was a complete ripoff of iOS. I wonder if perhaps he was so blinded by that hatred he didn't realize Android was passing iOS by in some respects.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sennen
A good editor would do wonders for DED's articles.
A good editor wouldn't publish Dilger's trash "articles." They're not news articles. They're ego-stroking for Apple fans.
He really has only ever written one story: Apple is awesome! Microsoft/Google/(Insert Latest Company to Compete Against Apple Here) sux!!!!
Quote:
Originally Posted by poglad
Of course Apple can survive. I've spoken to a number of iOS users, and all of them carefully explained that they didn't want a neatly laid-out UI with thin fonts and flat style. They were perfectly happy with the way iOS 6 looked. I couldn't understand it. Now Apple has unveiled iOS 7, and the same people are excited about the new look. They won't be able to go back to the old look, but they don't mind. I don't understand that either. So you see, that's two things I have failed to understand, while Apple are so on the pulse that they know exactly when to make the change, and with pleasure and great applause. I can only look on and gape.
Obviously people are going to be happy with what they have. IF they have a good enough car from Ford, for instance. But things move on, and if Ford - in the same price range - produces a better looking car then they would equally, or preferably, like that.
Thats the problem with consumer surveys.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy
Any particular reason you couldn't ask politely for a citation, or offer a counterargument without going "angry guy"? There's a handful of members who seem to always be looking for a fight instead of a discussion. We can change the tone here if enough of us choose to make an effort at it.
The tone will change when you and the other shills leave and don't come back. You aren't looking for a discussion. You're looking to spread misinformation and you'd like everyone to pretend that you deserve the same respect as honest posters. You don't. You're a professional liar and deserve nothing but contempt.
I think the article points to something I've never considered: most of these cheap Android phones are used as little more than feature phones. I would love to know how they determined that. I am sure there are less people that use the iPhone as a feature phone, but I am equally sure there are people that do. It really just depends on the criteria.
Since you could surf the web and and play sad little games on a feature phone, at what point are you using a smartphone as a smartphone?
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse
The tone will change when you and the other shills leave and don't come back. You aren't looking for a discussion. You're looking to spread misinformation and you'd like everyone to pretend that you deserve the same respect as honest posters. You don't. You're a professional liar and deserve nothing but contempt.
Translation: The tone will change when people who disagree with anonymous ( et al). are hunted out of the forum by their angry reactions to any criticism of Apple.
The it will be all sweetness and light. That is, unless a normal punter turns up at what he thinks is a normal consumer site, and offers a tepid criticism of the iPhone 5s, which he opines normally very good but he is not that happy with the battery life.
Be gone with you heretic troll will be the theme, who paid you! Samsung or Microsoft? and off the normal punter goes, wondering if Apple is really the cult he always heard it was.
On here, it is.
AI is still better than the competition in terms of it's stories, however any competitor which enforced proper forum rules would start to win share.
Quote:
Originally Posted by asdasd
I can't see tagging ever getting to iOS 7, though i would like it.
Interesting how small improvements make such differences. Tags are basically labels, and have been around for years. In Mavericks they have a decent UI - you can change the label/tag on save - and suddenly they are brilliant. ( no sarcasm, they are).
matter of taste. I see no value in tagging. I open files either from recent lists from app or i search with spotlight. iOS and OS X have spotlight.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Relic
Okay fair enough, I've never had a problem with security or malware but I'm sure users who don't know what their installing have. I put a lot of blame on Google for this, their should be a much larger scrutiny when allowing apps into Google Play. I no longer buy Android or iOS phones for personal use as I like supporting platforms with low market penetration. I have recently put in a preorder for a Jolla phone and I will also probably buy a Nokia Lumia EOS with the 40 MP camera when it's finally released. Work phone wise, well I really didn't have a choice there, as they are issued to me by my firm. This time around they gave me a BB Z10, no complaints though as it does everything I need a phone to do and I really dig the interface. It also has a great file-manager app that can access my work servers via VPN, which is probably the only criteria I have in a work phone.
As you might have guessed I love owning phones that are very unique, if I see to many of the same phone on the street chances are I will never buy one, MeegOS was one of my favorite mobile OS's of all time so the new Jolla phone is probably a good match for me.
BB Z10 is a very decent phone with very good OS. I am sorry they are being pushed aside. It's their fault, of course, but still, I think this phone and OS deserves at least a chance.
Your correction was dead wrong. If there were prototypes available in 1994, the licensing started in early to mid 1990's and calling it late 90's is dead wrong. In other words, the licensing starts way before release. If you are going to go off and correct people's facts, you better get your corrections right and you missed on several. This is the one that is indisputable and not really source based (no one knows how much Android or WP developers are actually making for example). So while the article was wrong, so was your correction.
The difference as I see it is that Google want breadth of users to maximise the number of gmail/youtube/play/&c. users (users = data ad revenue) while Apple want to, and more often than not manage to, punt high end devices to those that can afford them.
Every flavour of Android 'works' in that scenario for Google.
Interesting. So what I meant is a universal way for Apps to open appropriate UTIs from other Apps, essentially the reverse of "Open In" (which "pushes" a file, as opposed to "pulling" it).
So if I'm in Mail, and click "Insert Photo", it not only shows me all my albums, but also other apps (displayed as an album) that have appropriate UTIs. This could also allow document insertion.
Actually, I think "Insert Document" would be huge for Mail, if it allowed me to access various types of documents tagged with UTIs (.pages, .doc, .pdf, .numbers, etc.) stored in my apps, or even to access iCloud. Currently, these apps allow me to "push" my documents to Mail, but the workflow would be much more efficient if you could "pull" the data instead.
Currently, some third-party apps allow importing of Photos from the Photos app. So clearly this is possible. But it would be nice if it was opened to third-parties.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Suddenly Newton
As for your question about the difference between a tablet and notebook, this file management example is just one expression of a broader philosophical difference between Apple and Microsoft on tablets. Apple's uses the term "post-PC" to describe computing devices that aren't the classic "personal computer" as we knew it over the last 30 years. Things like iPhones, iPods, iPads, and AppleTV are examples of this. They are purposeful information processing devices. Apple TV, for example, lets me rent and watch HD movies and TV shows over the Internet (iTunes), right on my TV. iPad lets me run apps, surf the web, read email, read magazines, play games, message and FaceTime friends. A lot of those things were previously only possible with a personal computer. Why not just make personal computers? Because the post-PC devices are simplified, curated, ultra-portable, and maintenance free. When people who have never used any kind of computer pick up and just start using iPads, that's Apple's post-PC vision paying off.
Microsoft's is not interested in replacing the PC with a post-PC device (you could argue that Surface RT is just like the iPad, but it's not bold enough at shedding its PC-era design cruft, such as the classic desktop, and ends up being a half-hearted attempt at a post-PC tablet) The odd thing is that Microsoft groks the post-PC idea, and they in fact sell a post-PC device: the Xbox. It's based on a PC, but Microsoft won't, for example, allow it to operate outside of the walled garden of (signed) Xbox games and Xbox Live content. You can't side load any app or game not approved by Microsoft, and you can't even surf the web, or use a mouse and keyboard. It's deliberately limited in purpose. It's not a PC.
I see what you're saying. But I think WP8 also qualifies as a "post-PC" OS. Unlike WinRT, it has no traditional desktop environment. Like in iOS, files don't exist outside of apps. WP8 also mimics the iOS method of handling email attachments, and actually appears to be more restrictive than iOS by predefining the types of files that one can attach (http://www.windowsphone.com/en-US/how-to/wp8/people/email-attachments-faq). Although WP8 does give you the option of sideloading apps like on a PC, on balance it behaves more like iOS than android. Among the mobile OS's, I would say that android borrows the most concepts from "traditional" computing, while WP8 lies somewhere between that and iOS.
Yeah, but we're talking about tablets, aren't we? I mean technically smartphones are post-PC devices. But tablets vs ultra portables was the subject. If MS had put WP8 on its Surface, then it would truly be a post-PC device. As it stands, it's just a refresh of MS' decades-old view of tablets-are-just-PCs.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steven N.
Your correction was dead wrong. If there were prototypes available in 1994, the licensing started in early to mid 1990's and calling it late 90's is dead wrong. In other words, the licensing starts way before release. If you are going to go off and correct people's facts, you better get your corrections right and you missed on several. This is the one that is indisputable and not really source based (no one knows how much Android or WP developers are actually making for example). So while the article was wrong, so was your correction.
No. The first licensed clone sold in 1995. In no sense of the word is that early 1990's. It is mid 1990's. And I said that in my correction to your correction.
You are clutching at straws with the prototype and when licensing agreements are formed or made - that funny argument is used by Android fans to prove that Android is older than the iPhone. It's ludicrous there, and here. The Mac was licensed - that is sold to customers from 1995 on.
I also pointed out that I should have said mid to late, but late 1990's is clearly more correct than early 1990's as most of the licensed macs were sold in the later 1990's - i..e past 1995. DED is still wrong. I am still more correct. And I am below the line. Get that forensic ability working above the line.
As for the rest, if you have other issues with my error of fact - rather than logic - then go for it. I even included links.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pendergast
Yeah, but we're talking about tablets, aren't we? I mean technically smartphones are post-PC devices. But tablets vs ultra portables was the subject. If MS had put WP8 on its Surface, then it would truly be a post-PC device. As it stands, it's just a refresh of MS' decades-old view of tablets-are-just-PCs.
The post I was referring to talked about post-PC devices in general and brought up the xbox, but if we're just talking about tablets then sure, the MS offerings (especially Win RT) try to straddle the fence between traditional PCs and post-PCs.
Ho-hum. Nice article - well-presented, well-argued, and thoughtfully pro-Apple.
So what?
I love Apple - have 10s of 1000s of dollars of computer, entertainment, software, and peripheral stuff - all good and play well together - over a couple of decades. The vast majority of my friends do not and they let me know it - and my other small group of Apple friends as well (that they get the abuse not join in to give it to me).
But we live in a world of mediocrity - especially the consumers. Not only mediocre, but fickle, spiteful, and petty - like fans in the music industry. It is said that for big-time money-infested, fluff acts - madonna, bieber - their fans categorize their likes as: 30% actually like the music, 50% like that they have friends that talk passionately about that music; 20% like that they have friends that go to events about that music. Such is with smart phones.
The key is to maintain that loyal following who truly understand the life-affirming nature of the Apple eco-system and hope it remains profitable. The anti-key is to care or pretend to care about what Android is doing - that is what those followers of Android who spitefully covet Apple (probably some but not many) want. Stay the course. Applaud Apple when they do good, and be supportive (but honest) when they need guidance - like a good family - because that is what we are and that is only thing that will save us.
Yeah - what can you do?
Android is Star Wars.
Apple is Star Trek.
Two value systems, never shall the two meet.
And that works well.
Apple's not the evil, Internet spanning empire and Google first law isn't to "avoid contact with lesser companies until they're ready".
Originally Posted by AppleInsider
A bigger issue for the definition of "Android" is that it's not just the 66 percent of Google Play users that have no access to a modern version of Android; it's also the majority of the growing, "white box" market that is outpacing Samsung and the other Android licensees that everyone identifies as "Android."
Catastrophic fragmentation. Low-quality junky Android phones undercutting Samsung.
Google just doesn't care. All they care about is ad revenue. 96% of Google's revenue is from ads.
Keep remembering that little factoid, and everything Google does actually makes sense.
(Except that little $12.5 billion Motorola patent-grab. Should have done your due diligence, Larry.)