89 posts • joined 10 Jun 2009
Re: @Neill Mitchell
I can convert my music from iTunes to MP3 any time I want. Is your bitterness and disingenuous argument the results of your inability to convert from mp4 to mp3? If that is the case then the walled garden is more accurately surrounding your ability to comprehend, rather than Apple's business model.
This may be a big issue to you, but I suspect it's more because you've CHOSEN to make it a big deal, rather than an issue that really affects your life from day to day. If you want to be perpetually pissed off then go ahead, but the outrage seems to be self invented rather than a real problem that consumers are upset about (witness the record sales announced yesterday). And spare me the inevitable "sheep" argument, the consumers are buying what works for them, just like any other purchase they make.
How else could they compete with Apple
I mean if they quit working with Apple then they couldn't get inside information to steal Apple's ideas, and we'd be left with the pre-iPhone crap that ALL phone manufacturers pumped out before '07.
No, that's not what they told you.
It's what you heard. They said there were no viruses on the Mac, and they were 100% correct.
Corporations are going to be buying these?
I hate to burst your bubble, but corporations are NOT going to be buying these things. RIM has peaked, much better options are available in Android and iPhone, this tablet will flop HUGE.
Bad drivers so you ban all cars? Hardly a correct analogy. How about "poorly designed cars leading to accidents, thus vetting the cars for basic safety first which causes a reduction of accidents"? When you put it that way it doesn't seem so unreasonable, and if you could put away your blind Apple hatred for a minute maybe you could at least concede that point?
Maybe that's the point
How could a Windows user even remotely claim that using Windows will change your life? I think that is their point, that Windows is exceedingly average, and once they started using a Mac they realized how much better it was.
They're all the same, except the Mac user actually has a legitimate reason to crow!
"white people NEED to meet people who use Windows to justify themselves spending an extra $500 for a pretty looking machine.""
- This is the perfect example of why it happens. Someone doesn't understand someone else's choice, comes up with a patently stupid explanation, and is surprised when people respond to correct his stupidity.
A few questions
"blindly defend their computers"? Are you sure it's blindly, or are they doing it with full knowledge of what they're talking about?
I think what many fail to realize is that people who use Macs, like them, and can't believe how much better they are than what they have been using (my experience) are frustrated when they see inaccurate information tossed around about Macs. (Incompatible with peripherals, just a toy, locked down, etc.). When they see inaccurate things written about the product they now enjoy so much they feel like correcting the error, and often times that is what comes across as rabidly "defending" the company.
The iPhone SHOULD have had them from day 1? Seems a bit presumptuous that your opinion should be the way it is, doesn't it? A new platform, rushing to get to production, do we wait for ALL features to be ready on day 1, or do we get it out the door and improve it over time?
People bought them by the shitload because they loved the product as a whole, not because they focused on one small feature of the overall product. Jeez, if you don't even understand that concept then why am I talking to you?
And the realization dawns on people. . . .
Funny how Google is allowed to do this and people see the real point. Without maintaining some control they run the risk of ruining their brand. Now Apple does the same thing, to a greater extent mind you, and Apple is evil.
I know all the arguments about Jobs being a control freak, they just want your money, etc. I'm sure there's a grain of truth in them too, but the real reason Apple does it with Mac, iPhone, etc. is they want to maintain the user experience with their products and maintain their brand.
Nothing against Google doing this, I see why they do it, but maybe the world could calm down and not rip on Apple for having the same motivations.
Oh come on
Apple is set to surpass MS in revenue pretty soon. They've already passed them in market cap. Your attempt to hide behind those numbers pretty much fails from the outset.
And FYI, the phone business of 2010 is not the same as the desktop business of 1884. But feel free to insert your head into the sand and live in the land of denial.
We seem to see a lot of anti-Apple posts by you lately? Fortunately we can agree on one thing. I too chose my computer and phone based on the functionality it provides, and I chose Apple. Your lack of understanding on why people choose Apple products continues on yet another thread. It may help you to sleep at night to think of Apple users as fools who buy shiny beads, but the reality is you obviously don't understand why Apple users buy their products or are so happy with them.
"being perfectly happy with those I currently have, which fulfill my needs perfectly"
- Wow, the same thing said by countless Mac converts who used a Mac for a length of time and found that the Mac was even better than the solution they were previously "happy" with. As someone else said, you just don't get it and trying to explain it to you is a waste of time.
Perhaps you should listen more closely
Since this is a common phrase used by Windows to Mac switchers (myself included over 6 years ago) maybe you should realize this is not an attempt to sound cool, but a common perception of those who have actually used both extensively. This is what the switch feels like and that is why it is described that way. The fact that you don't understand it means you're still simply toiling in "the dark" as many of us were not so long ago.
Your anti-elitism stand has become the new elitism. Apple users are so fiercely loyal because most have used the alternatives and made the choice to stick with Macs because they like them better. Most Apple haters haven't used Macs for any length of time and are arguing out of a position of ignorance on what the platform has to offer. It's like describing the color blue to a blind person. I know what blue looks like, but I can't describe it to you. You're blind and until you can see what I see describing it is a pointless exercise.
You need to learn your history
Apple was not saved by Microsoft. They would not have gone bankrupt without MS' help. That's an old misconception by people who don't understand what really went on.
You also don't understand why people by Apple products. Saying they buy them for the brand and the look of the case is utterly ridiculous. Your ignorance on topics relating to Apple seems to be fueled by your dislike of the company and thus a lack of effort to dig a little deeper to understand the facts.
wow, hallucinate much?
So in an article that at no point mentions Apple, you have somehow managed to work up a good fashionable case of Apple hatred? It's Apple's fault? Really?
Why would Apple want this blocked? Apple published Facetime as an open standard so anyone can use it. Apple WANTS this adopted by as many people as possible.
Time to dial down the frothing at the mouth blind hatred of Apple and start to see the world a bit more clearly.
Except that what you just said is not true
You can get a new battery installed on any of those devices. Problem solved. Rant defused.
Doubt this will get published
I have one and love it. No problems whatsoever. Only advice, advice I would have given anyway, is get a case to protect your $600 phone. The bonus is the case you get now insulates you from this problem (assuming you would have had the problem at all). I am completely happy with mine and I think the issue has been overblown by Android fanboys.
I'm loving this
Looks like the Android fanbois are going to have to eat a little crow and admit Google is starting to go the same route as Apple, or just be accused of being hypocrites.
"behavior that is preventing Apple making greater market gains"
How are they being prevented? Their year over year increases in sales in computers have been double the industry rate. iPods have a huge percentage of the market. iPhone growth has been explosive, and based on the interest in pre-orders for iPhone 4 it continues to grow. iPad has leaped off to stellar sales numbers so far.
Apple is making great market gains and the share price and financial health of the company are reflecting that fact. Simple fact is they haven't done anything illegal and THAT is why they won't get punished for it. All of this clamor is from competitors who are realizing the tables are turning on them and they are hoping government intervention will bail them out.
An American corporation? Really?
Maybe we should put BP in charge of it and see how well they do? Let's not get started on making fun of American corporations when it's not a uniquely American phenomena.
As for "you should be at liberty to blah blah blah". While I understand that you may want that freedom to do that, Apple has an interest in making sure that nothing ruins the customer experience by causing battery drain, crashing, system slowdown, etc. If they allow a known POS app on their device they run the risk of getting a black eye in public perception of their products. They made a perfectly good decision, even admitted by the person who wrote this article, it's just that it pissed off a VERY small minority of tech geeks who probably actually care less about freedom, and more about bashing Apple. Let's be honest, those same tech geeks didn't like Apple before this because they didn't understand why Apple products engendered so much love from their users (hence their use of the denigrating, innacurate term "fanbois").
You may not like Apple's decision, but it IS a decision made with the end user's experience in mind. You don't think Apple didn't realize they'd take a lot of heat for this stand, do you? And you're really not foolish enough to think that Apple wants to "control" you, do you? What possible benefit would they have in "controlling" you? Their is absolutely no motive to do this except to protect their product's reputation considering the possible negative PR fallout from taking this stand, so they might actually be taking a principled stand rather than this BS line about control that everyone is tossing about.
I'm not a blind Apple supporter and think they can do no wrong. There's several things I'd change about Apple, but their decision to not allow Flash was not wrong. They have good solid reasons and they are sticking to their guns. This is not new territory for Apple, they are still the renegade that makes unique decisions that unemployed internet pundits don't always agree with.
Your reply is dishonest at best
"The amount of bile you seem to be spouting at anyone who doesn't appear to like Apple as much as you"
No, sorry, but that is not what he said. You don't have to like Apple, but his beef (and mine) is with blind haters of Apple, and the Reg does appear to be full of them. Many of them who rant on Apple also appear to have swallowed the anti-Apple koolaid and their arguments are lame at best, and downright dishonest at other times. Your reply is a perfect example. You mis-characterized his plainly clear argument and then tried to use that to take the moral high ground. Perhaps being honest and accurate should be your first steps and then you can help take the speck out of your brother's eye?
I'm laughing too
at anyone who actually thinks the iPad is a big iPhone.
Did you even read the article?
AT&T was hacked, NOT Apple. And exactly what legal shenanigans are you talking about? The one where Gawker Media bought stolen property? The one where a blogger tried to hide behind the journalistic shield law after committing a crime?
Maybe you should understand technology and legal matters better before commenting on either of them. Or at least be honest and just say "I blindly hate Apple" and leave it at that.
Maybe you should all try reading it again?
It does NOT ban anyone else other than Apple. It bans sending device data (hardware data, location data, etc. that is NOT related to content being viewed) without the consent of the user. . . . .Those BASTARDS at Apple want you to give your consent. How dare they!!
Second, it prohibits advertiser entities who are engaged in the business of creating mobile hardware/software (i.e. Admob which is owned by Google (Android)) because they don't want Google stealing their data to compete with Apple. They did enough of that when Eric was on the board and then release their derivative copy called Android (have you noticed every phone looks like an iPhone rip off?)
Sorry to you folks who want to see evil everywhere, but these two prohibitions are completely reasonable.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't a whole other army of visionaries such as yourself say the same thing about the iPhone? Forgive me if I don't take your analysis too seriously.
Who's the fanboi?
Your points are not exactly comforting, although I suspect you thought it would defuse his criticism.
1. You ability to install a large number of apps seems to be limited by the low memory allocation, even based on your own description. 177Mb may seem like a fair amount, but a few executables of over 10Mb and a few in between 1-10Mb will quickly eat up that storage space.
2. You seem very excited that you managed to run the phone over the weekend with no restarts? I hope this is not the pinnacle of Android success?
"The rest of your points are either vague or irrelevant. The OS isn't any more technical than the iPhone, and to claim the fonts look cheap is just stupid."
- I would guess that you just don't like his criticism and so you dismiss it rather than address it head on. It makes me think he has a point that you carefully attempted to sidestep through ridiculing him.
"You're a classic fanboi"
-Kind of the pot calling the kettle black isn't it? You seem no less the fanboi?
Your self deception seems more intentional!
"They could have gone for the big iPad-style PR push, but that would have ended in a major fail because they'd have undoubtedly struggled to keep up with consumer demand and the support overhead."
- Your whole post smacks of self delusion. In effect you are saying that they purposely did not try to sell their product because they were too incompetent to project consumer demand, nor staff for support appropriately? I think the only thing well thought out and planned was your defense of Google in the face of disappointing sales results.
"it's different from the "pay hundreds of people to queue outside Stores and sell a million devices in the first weekend" approach that Apple took"
- I think this sentence alone reveals the real substance of your post. If you honestly think Apple paid those people to cue outside the store then you should consult a doctor and have your head removed for your posterior orifice!
What a crock of sh!t. A quicker way to summarize your post is "I hate Apple!".
I work in a tech area and know a lot of tech savvy people and our opinion of your and your friends opinion is "meh". Haters hate it, the rest are waiting to get their hands on one first.
Why do people use this tired argument?
One person said, "Why do we think Apple is doing anything new here?"
I guess I have two answers for that. First is why would they have to do anything new? This seems like a red herring argument that works for those naturally predisposed to hate Apple.
Second is we think it's new because it IS new. Show me another tablet that is ultra thin, damned near idiot proof, easy to use, a joy to use, with 140,000 apps on launch day, 10 hours of continuous video playback, both fun for play and still capable of productivity, ultra portable, wirelessly connected via wifi and (optionally) 3G, etc, etc?
While I know where you were trying to go with your pseudo argument I think you should try and understand how Apple has been working for much of the last decade. They are looking at things people are grudgingly using (love the idea, implementation sucks) and rethinking/redefining them into something enjoyable to use. While certain aspects of a tablet, or media player, or touch screen have been around, I don't recall anything that worked as easily and seemlessly as this. Time will tell whether it's a success, but I think they made an admirable first attempt. When it hits rev 2 then they'll have the minor objections cleaned up and then they will continue grabbing market share with a fine product.
Except the iPhone DOES multitask. Try listening to a song and browsing the web, listening and reading email, listening and playing Scrabble. All work. It's just that it is selective at what it allows to multitask.
Try getting your facts straight before you post again.
No, like after the iPhone announcement MS comes out with a demo of a TABLE with a touch surface. . . . a TABLE. Can you put a table in your pocket and make phone calls on it?
Or how about all the user interface elements MS has copied from OS X and put into Vista/Winblows 7? POORLY copied interface elements that notoriously required you to have a screaming high end computer in order to take advantage of (Aero anyone?)?
Or the ZUNE? (I think that one speaks for itself. Maybe Ballmer can "squirt" you some details if you're not familiar with it).
If I recall correctly the new mouse got good reviews implemented multitouch on the mouse (where was MS with there multitouch mouse again?) And how exactly does their mouse "fuck up your keyboard"? I've heard that it may be draining batteries faster than normal but that is hardly "fucking up your keyboard".
Quite a bit of hyperbole coming out of your mouth. Tell me, are you a paid MS schill or just an uninformed consumer?
I call bullshit
You built an ARM based touchscreen phone yourself and you can even get facts straight about the iPhone? I find that hard to believe. The iPhone DOES allow background tasks, just not 3rd party background tasks. And if all you think the iPhone is repackaged commodity parts then you obviously are stuck on spec sheets and don't live in the real world. The iPhone was a HUGE innovation in mobile phones, and believe it or not they didn't have to have one new hardware feature to be innovative. You're going to have to dig a bit deeper into why the iPhone is a success because you obviously don't get it.
Funny you should mention disingenuous
I wonder if you might want to rewrite your post to avoid the title yourself. 40 million iPhones is still 40 million iPhones. Your attempt to carve it into separate models in order to lessen the iPhone's impact is the very definition of disingenuous.
As usual with Apple haters, you continue to focus on old school metrics and fail to see the big picture. Deny it as much as you want, but even the other manufacturers know they must find a way to match the iPhone or die. They are all busting their hump to turn out copycat models and all failing miserably. Nokia is starting to feel the pain, Palm has a few nails in the coffin, and we'll probably see in retrospect that Blackberry has peaked. The iPhone isn't perfect, but manipulating statistics to to try and deny the iPhone's global impact is pathetic. If you don't like them then don't buy them, but face reality and realize that iPhone is here to stay and is going to continue to turn the mobile market upside down.
Riiigggt. . . .
It's a shame you are too myopic to see a great meld of hardware and software. It's a shame your idea of "open" trumps the common sense goal of "useful".
I thought the same thing
I thought was unnecessarily vague too.
On a side note, I'm going to toss an idea out there. Maybe the scientists could practice transparency? It seems that many of the skeptics (there are NO deniers, just skeptics) have asked for this for years and the pro AGW crowd still won't do it. Why is that? (Please don't quote CRU like excuses like "our contract says we can't do it, but I don't have a copy of the contract".
Maybe you had a point in there, I can't tell. Perhaps you should learn to command the English language before you go on a rant about how stupid someone else is?
Did you copyright that because I'd like to borrow it for personal use? Not the whole thing really, just the last line. I love the brevity of it.
Nothing to see here
So this is NOT an issue with iPhone security, but rather user security. First they jailbreak their phone and SSH is installed and then they fail to change the default password? iPhones that have not been jailbreaked are not affected? Sounds like Apple doesn't have a security problem at all, but rather the hacker crowd who wanted unfettered access to their phone. Too bad they weren't smart enough to protect themselves by following a basic security process of changing the default password.
Perhaps you should get off your high horse and realize this is not a case of "Apple fanbois defending this sick company". The simpleminded theories of profit protection and "locking down hardware" don't really hold up to the light of day. It seems more likely that they are trying to protect the integrated user experience by funneling apps through an approval process (admittedly flawed yet) that can help weed out apps destined to cause issues with the overall experience. Try to be a little more forward thinking than just labeling people fanbois because they actually understand a few things that you apparently don't. First is that open doesn't necessarily mean better. Second is that WinMob is a POS. Can't speak to S60, but Winblows Mobile is truly behind the times. Third, is the iPhone doesn't lead customer satisfaction rankings for no reason.
It's an imperfect system right now, but I think it's the best out there at this point.
I'm sorry, but I don't agree that revenue stream is the only reason they try to stop jailbreaking. While the revenue from the app store is a welcome addition, it is relatively minor compared to the level of effort required to create this ecosystem. I think the more likely answers are reducing bogus warranty claims due to jailbreaking fiascos and preserving the iPhone "experience" for the customer.
Those that say Apple is afraid of free, open source apps should take a look at how many apps are free on the app store. Even those that cost money are ridiculously cheap. Revenue stream from the sale of apps is unlikely to be the majority motivator in this game they're playing.
And kudos to the person who had the foresight to point out that jailbreaking is only desirable to a fraction of 1% of iPhone owners. Most people don't care about it at all. It's a problem in search of an audience that cares. Don't get me wrong, I don't like some of their app store policies, but I haven't seen anything yet that makes me want to jailbreak my phones.
iPhone's days are numbered? Sorry, but I think you're living in fantasyland. Android may do very well, but it's perceived strength is also its Achilles heel. The fact that it can be put on anything means the user interface can never be perfected and tuned as well as the iPhone's OS is to the iPhone's hardware. I think the iPhone is here to stay and deservedly so. It's a great phone and I am one of those people who is fully satisfied and thus given the iPhone the highest customer satisfaction ratings.
I don't understand the reasoning
I'm an Apple user. Converted from Winblows in 2004 and never going back. I have 2 iPhones for my wife and I. Although I have no desire to jailbreak my phone, I really don't understand why Apple wastes time and resources on this cat and mouse game. Although I'm sure the haters will come up with simplistic (and false) theory about Apple being control freaks, I believe there has to be some deeper reasoning behind it. Maybe they've done some cost analysis of devoting resources to this game versus making jailbreaking easy (and paying increased warranty claims due to fools messing with the phone) and decided it makes financial sense to the business to go this route. Maybe they worry the iPhone experience will be "diluted" if multiple app stores vie for customer's attention?
I doubt they'll ever explain it in a statement (a pity) but it would be interesting to know their reasoning.
Somewhat erroneous article
The statement "The Kindle DX may be dominating the e-book market" is not true. iPhone/iPod touch are the leaders by a huge margin.
Cue the Haters!
"There is no technical reason why other devices shouldn't be allowed to sync with iTunes"
- It is not Apple's job to make a synching application for all 3rd party hardware. Palm can suck it up and write their own and Apple will not have an issue with that. You know how I know that for a fact? RIM wrote their own synching software and it synchs with iTunes media and Apple does nothing to prohibit this.
"I think the time is coming when Apple's business practices need to be questioned."
- Apple has done NOTHING unethical here. Again, Palm violated the USB Implementers rules, not Apple. And, again, Apple is not required to write the synch software for 3rd party hardware.
"Locking competitors out of the iTunes store. . . is anti-competitive."
- Are you kidding me? Did you read this before you submitted? We are talking iTunes application vs. iTunes store. Please understand what you are discussing before posting.
"40 apps per person sounds an extremely high average, particularly as a lot of people don't bother with apps at all or at least very few apps on their iPod touches, and many don't even bother on the iPhone.
No, this is just another figure pulled out of thin air by Apple's marketing dept. to keep their hype machine rolling, despite the actual real world crappiness of their hardware."
Oh come on! 40 does not sound high at all. I would say it's right on the money. I have about 60 I've downloaded, some I've deleted, but I probably have about 40 on my phone now and it seems like a similar experience with others I know. It seems obvious that your anti-Apple bias might be blinding you to the fact that no hype machine is necessary on the iPhone. It is a real juggernaut and that's because people like the phone!
@It wasnt me
"So, average 40 apps per user. I call BS.
I know about 20 people with iPhones, and Id say the average is about 5 apps downloaded."
Now I have to call BS on you. I know tons of people with iPhones and they have TONS of apps. An average of 40 per user definitely sounds about right.
Are you serious?
"If this was Microsoft they'd already have said "Monopoly" and thrown away the key."
Perhaps you should learn what the word "monopoly" means before posting again.
Forget the UK
Zune HD is not coming ANYWHERE! The Zune brand and products are both stillborn. Sorry, but MS couldn't innovate their way out of a wet paper bag. . . .
The really scary thing is the Swedish Stock exchange
Never mind the heavy handed and unlawful decision by the courts that seemed to ignore the facts that no copyrighted material is hosted by TPB, the scarier issue is how the stock exchange suddenly decided to kick TPB suitor off the exchange. Funny how this happened right when it would be most detrimental to a potential acquisition and could hasten the end of TPB. Why is no one investigating the uncannily time sensitive decision to do this? I personally believe they (they copyright lobby and their government slaves) are trying put multiple nails in TPB at one time in the hope that a disruption of even a few weeks will be enough to shake them out of business for good.
Democracy is dead, put on your tinfoil hats and run for the hills!
- Review Reg man looks through a Glass, darkly: Google's toy ploy or killer tech specs?
- MEN WANTED to satisfy town full of yearning BRAZILIAN HOTNESS
- +Comment 'Stop dissing Google or quit': OK, I quit, says Code Club co-founder
- Nokia: Read our Maps, Samsung – we're HERE for the Gear
- Ofcom will not probe lesbian lizard snog in new Dr Who series