1606 posts • joined Thursday 18th June 2009 14:54 GMT
But if he was thinking of the Distance Selling Regulations...
... then it seems a bit odd to single out the UK, given that they are an EU directive. From Google alone, I can find some case law that The Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 have been used to quash restocking fees based on the prohibition of terms "requiring any consumer who fails to fulfil his obligation to pay a disproportionately high sum in compensation;", but without a proper law library at my disposal it's difficult to find anything more specific than that. And the standard Sale of Goods Act and Unfair Contract Terms Act bits prohibit a restocking fee for faulty merchandise, but that isn't really relevant.
Don't believe the propaganda
Although Apple products hold their value quite well, I doubt you'd end up paying £500 for a device that originally cost £500 and is now two generations out of date.
If you're looking for a cost argument for this hack (which I don't for a second believe that the team responsible considered at all), it's to repurpose a hand-me-down handset.
Besides the plentitude of freeware within the App Store
There's macupdate, versiontracker, tucows, etc, etc. In summary: Apple still list and provide free software, lots of people outside of Apple continue to list and provide free software.
Your conclusion is unsupportable.
It's not a package manager
It's a lot simpler than that. It's just applications. In fact, it's just an application storefront that can download and install the things. And keep track of your licences. But there's no uninstallation and no dependency tracking — though per the admissibility rules there are also no dependencies. But it's a technical difference nonetheless.
This is news because (i) it's the first major push to create an electronic store for desktop software; and (ii) some people fear it points to a locked-down future for Apple's desktops. I don't agree with them, but nevertheless it makes the story more interesting for a bunch of people. The story also contributes to the iOS versus Mac OS narrative.
Compared to a Linux package manager, the newsworthy differences are infrastructure (ie, paid apps, lots of commercial developers and commercial release cycles) and prominence. You're right that, technologically, there's nothing new here.
Not tied to iTunes (the software)
The App Store is a separate program, though it does use your iTunes login. Sadly the linked terms and conditions (http://www.apple.com/legal/itunes/uk/terms.html) still make such heavy reference to iOS devices that I strongly suspect some sort of error at Apple's end. Taking them at face value:
"(i) You may download and sync a Product for personal, noncommercial use on any device You own or control.
(ii) If You are a commercial enterprise or educational institution, You may download and sync a Product for use by either (a) a single individual on one or more devices You own or control or (b) multiple individuals, on a single shared device You own or control."
It's a bit weird that they seem to want you to be a commercial enterprise or educational institution before you can share your software on a shared device, but I doubt you can cherry pick the bits you want so I'd expect it to end up being install on one device for as many users as you want or install on as many devices as you want but only for one user. A reference elsewhere limits each device to carrying software linked to up to five iTunes accounts, but that's even deeper within iOS-worded territory.
I suspect that "That's simply because unlike a BlackBerry, with the iPhone you actually can browse the net!!" was the AC's explanation of why his claim can be seen to potentially have objective validity.
Alternatively, see the NetApplications report for December (http://www.netmarketshare.com/operating-system-market-share.aspx?qprid=8) — iOS browser share is 1.69%, BlackBerry is 0.13%. So if the statistic were 'user of an iOS device' (rather than explicitly an iPhone) versus 'user of a BlackBerry', you'd expect to see exactly 13 times as many of the former falling for scams, all other things being equal.
Bigger than you think
I think latest figures are something of the order of 5% of all computers worldwide, 10% in the US across all sectors but something like 25% at retail. Previous statistics from people like 2d Boy have suggested that Mac owners are responsible for around 40% of revenue of indie software in a straight Windows vs OS X comparison.
That all being said, OS X users account for only around 8% of usage of Steam according to Valve. It's unclear what they contribute as a share of revenue, but a very large portion of Steam content is unavailable to Mac users so the comparison is probably hard to calculate in a fair manner.
In any case, a new consumer oriented means to purchase software for Macs only is of real interest to the community. The Mac share of potential customers definitely isn't negligible, even though it may be small.
Another use for their VirtualPC purchase, perhaps?
VirtualPC built a full-software x86 emulator and sold it for the purpose of running Windows on PowerPC Macs, were bought by Microsoft and their core technology is used in the XBox 360 (a PowerPC machine) to run original XBox (an Intel machine) software. If it's not completely PowerPC wedded, is it possible they could use the x86 emulator the same way Apple used Rosetta, to support old x86 apps on the ARM platform?
It's also a fantastic opportunity to emphasise Win32 as the past and .NET as the only way onward.
I wonder how companies like Adobe are going to take the news, being famously bad at keeping up with software transitions.
"The biggest reason for this consumer adoption is the robust developer adoption Android has engendered." has to be one of the worst pieces of analysis ever published by El Reg. Android phones tick more feature boxes and come at a lower cost. That's the end of it.
Why are people surprised?
Apple ship every device with a USB cable and a wall plug that exposes a USB socket. So the USB charging route is already what they provide. Whether the European standard mandates a male or female micro-USB or whatever, it's just an extra cable. Doesn't change anything about the software stack or the device hardware.
There's a rumour Apple will add a USB socket to the next iPad rather than continuing to supply it as an optional accessory, but that's an orthogonal issue and any such socket would likely be restricted to use with digital cameras, keyboards and audio in/out devices just as the current accessory is.
The dock connector does more than micro USB
It also carries things like analogue video and line level analogue audio, which facilitate the majority of docks. Replace it with micro USB and you'd either have to add a variety of extra ports or require many docks to add USB, memory and digital-to-analogue hardware.
Of course proprietary is bad and proprietary and licensed worse, but it's like saying that Microsoft should have replaced win32 with POSIX. The two may overlap in some usage patterns but otherwise are designed to provide very different functionality.
A backlight would be a very bad idea
E Ink screens are completely opaque. They don't let any light through. The complete effect of a back light would be some light seepage around the edges and no change to the page. It's like asking for a backlight on a book, if the pages were made of cardboard. What you want is a front light, and it's substantially easier to get close-to-constant lighting across the page if you don't attach that to the device. In summary: with a Kindle you're in exactly the same position as you are with a real book.
You're attacking a straw man
The popular press is very slightly right of centre, as have been all the governments here since 1979. It's Tony Blair that attempted to extend the detention limit for terror suspects to 90 days and Tony Blair that essentially made all offences arrestable. "You're either with us or against us" is a refrain of the right, as demonstrated by George W Bush.
Political beliefs may cost you your job but in the general case that's nothing to do with either the left or the right. The mainstream looks poorly upon extreme political beliefs of either leaning and people tend to try to avoid controversy.
Only once in the last year have the EDL managed a protest without a UAF counter protest, which was September 11 2010 in Oldham. The EDL again attacked a police car.
The normal pattern is that the EDL outnumber the UAF, such as on January 23 in Stoke-on-Trent when 1,500 EDL supporters turned up versus 300 UAF supporters. I guess that wasn't enough UAF supporters to care about because the EDL again attacked the police.
@kissingthecarpet, anonymous coward
It's not newsworthy, but I think this sort of thing is why I'm not currently employed in a school...
Speech isn't really the issue
You're free to do or say whatever you want, but the state will intervene if you commit a crime. In this case I think the anti-EDF sentiment is likely more justified by their history of violent marches surrounded by a litany of other public order offences, including direct attacks on police. Wikipedia seems to list 19 in the last 16 months.
I still don't understand the ribbon hatred
It just moves everything back into drop down menus, with the caveat that menu entries are buttons rather than text. Which is good because people can recognise images a lot more quickly than words. I guess the only caveat is that if you have automatic hiding disabled then the drop down menu doesn't automatically, ummmm, undrop.
Not really with you on pricing
Even ignoring the introduction of the Home and Student Edition as a replacement for the Student Edition in 2007, which significantly increased the number of people eligible to buy the cheapest version, Office Small Business Edition 2003 launched at $449. Whereas the comparable Home and Business edition for 2010 launched at $279.99.
It is difficult to think of reasons to continue buying it, however. Any copy from the last 10 years will do and there are so many other options now.
I suggest you obtain a dictionary. I looked up 'toy' in mine and it seemed not to mention anything about your arguments re: (i) Steve Jobs; (ii) whether a device is locked down, (iii) its price or (iv) a repeat of its price. It seemed to go with a toy being "an object, esp. a gadget or machine, regarded as providing amusement for an adult". Has a netbook ever amused someone? If so then it's a toy.
Maybe you could argue that it's merely a toy? Then the presence of VNC and office productivity applications would appear to prove you wrong. E.g. it has at least one program that can open, edit and save Word files, displaying each page of A4 at very close to A4 size and with which I can interact with via either a soft or a physical keyboard. That's indisputably a full productivity application.
Possibly you want to say that most people use it as no more than a toy, that its problem is a combination of its demographics and the majority of the software available for it? In that case it would seem odd that the productivity applications are the biggest sellers.
So, it is exactly like any other computer in being a toy. It is by no measure merely a toy and use for more serious purposes seems to be common.
Re: Re: Sales figures say otherwise.
I think you've lost sight of your argument. Are you now arguing that releasing the first product that consumers notice in a particular product area and achieving Playstation-level sales immediately doesn't make that arguably a defining product of the year?
I accept that it's more difficult to establish the iPad as a causative factor in the ongoing demise of the netbook — I'd put the blame there more on a general lack of direction within the market. El Reg originally dubbed them small, cheap computers and all you can say about them now is that they're definitely still computers.
Sales figures say otherwise
As widely reported, if you (somewhat artificially, but bear with me) count the iPad as a computer then Apple jump from being America's fourth largest computer supplier with around 7% of the market to being America's largest computer supplier with around 25% of the market. Like the product or not, that would appear to be a major splash and a product that is likely to have substantially overshadowed niche parts of the computer market.
Given that those are numerical facts and you supply no evidence whatsoever, I'm inclined to agree with El Reg's assessment.
One day we'll all reminisce...
"Remember the period 2000—, when Microsoft attempted to gain market traction with tablet computers at CES every single year?"
And how many years did it take Nokia to ship a phone with a colour screen?
The iPhone had a colour screen from day one.
Please understand the actual point that I'm making.
The browser that comes with iOS is entirely open and, even if it weren't, third-party browsers are available — including Opera Mini. Your claims are verifiably false.
I'd agree, but...
... the nag screen every time I launch the thing to log in to some online service for high scores and achievements that I don't care about and hence am not willing to give my contact details to already caused me to uninstall Angry Birds.
iTunes does just work out of the box
It fulfils the purposes of syncing your phone, allowing you to purchase music, apps, etc and - if you have one - slowing your Windows PC to a grinding halt. It just works and it just works slowly.
OS X 10.6 includes a faster, neater rewrite of QuickTime (operating in parallel for now, until codec support improves), the Windows version of Safari eventually became a proper Windows application and iTunes appears to use the outdated Carbon framework even on OS X so there is hope for a dramatic fix in the near future. Not that it's much comfort.
So then you'll never buy any product?
This is how Apple works: every year a new version of the product, with a bunch of features not present in the preceding iteration. Most other manufacturers do the same thing, but by supplying the improvements as and when they're available rather than sticking to an annual launch cycle. In any case, any product you buy will be 'less' than the current product a year later by at least one metric that interests you.
Not just that
Mozilla aren't promising improvements, they're promising to match Chrome.
"We're hoping to be as good as the competition in the future, in the areas we're willing to talk about" isn't much of a sales pitch.
A thoroughly uninteresting game
It's not that you can't achieve art in a self consciously constricted piece of genre media, it's just that they seem cynically to have sat down and decided what game the sort of audience that puts a lot of weight on graphics would want to buy.
Fragmentation basically isn't an issue here. I'll bet that if Apple do anything then they'll increase the pixel count by an integer multiple, just as on the iPhone. So you don't even get scaling artefacts on software that was hand designed to the pixel on a lower resolution device.
This being the Internet and all
There's probably a whole bunch of people that feel very strongly about apostrophes ready to point out that "Nick Cave and the Bad Seeds Murder Ballads" (reading the cover exactly as printed) is a statement, not a title.
But not me, because I'm a fan.
No, they're not cancelling it. One of Boris' first moves was to cancel the existing contracts, but TfL have subsequently put new agreements in place at least up until 2013. It's all a Blairite public private partnership, so the messages about lifespan and cancellation tend to be a bit confused and never completely definite.
Well into diminishing returns now, surely?
I'm curious how often Steve does this
Where 'this' is announcing a product they expect to be able to manufacture without actually being completely certain yet. Assuming it has occurred more than just this once, I'd hate to be someone downstream in Apple's design team.
It wasn't pre-release hype. Apple continued to follow the line that the web browser is how people deliver applications for the iPhone for the first full year of sales. The jailbreaking community and various aggressive blogs forced their hand, and I assume that App Store revenues have cemented their change in direction. However, it's a sign of their attitude in general that I almost feel I have to say that they're dedicated to keeping the browser completely open.
See my post history on other threads for my willingness to jump in when people are making unsupported claims or overreaching on an issue, but on this issue I think the analysis is correct: here Apple are damaging their consumers, damaging their own reputation and damaging the marketplace. Their controlling tendency is going to cost them, even if it takes death by a thousand cuts rather than a single, watershed moment. If I were a serious content producer I would continue to pursue an iPad distribution channel for the simple reason of market share; I would nevertheless ensure that everything I produce is easily portable elsewhere. Pragmatically I'd want to fully embrace the iPad to maximise profits right now, but I'd certainly have an exit strategy in place.
Leave Nixon out of this
He may have conspired to pervert the course of justice (and quite probably wasn't entirely mentally sound) but he ended the war in Vietnam and began normalisation of relations with China. It's unlikely that anybody even slightly more liberal would have been able to retain any sort of political power even just for visiting a communist country. Even pre-Republican wave Clinton gave him a decent eulogy.
On the contrary, the original post opens "Honestly, with growing examples of this, it's a wonder any developer wants to take the risk on the platform." — it therefore takes one factor in the decision process and proceeds to a conclusion with no further evidence. The post alone doesn't make a complete argument and I guess that somebody (not me, by the way) didn't like that.
If I were to suggest that because Oracle are suing Google over Java, it's a wonder any developer wants to take a risk on the platform then I would much more obviously be talking biased rubbish but would have stated exactly as much of an argument.
Is anybody talking about Apple?
I really don't see how Apple are at all relevant to this discussion. I can also think of other major OS owners that admit defects, making this not refreshing or different at all. Microsoft are one such.
It didn't go for more than the Turing papers
Highest bid on the Turing papers: £240,000
Highest bid on the Apple 1: £133,250
The Turing papers had a higher than £240,000 reserve, so weren't sold. The Apple did sell.
I can't comment on scarcity, but I'd also imagine that an Engima machine that's "has had some restoration" is worth less than one that was still all original. Especially as there seem to be surprisingly many of the things about — at least in comparison to Apple 1s.
Personally, I'd still pay more for the Enigma.
You're out of date
Apple did charge for iPod updates in the past on the cited grounds of accounting regulations. They've subsequently said that they've found an accounting way to avoid having to do that. iPod owners have received recent major version upgrades for free, just like iPad owners.
I really don't think he is going to the High Court
The High Court is a court of first instance for sufficiently important civil cases and may hear appeals from county courts (which are also purely civil). It doesn't hear criminal cases.
On the other hand...
Apple's multitasking tablet is still on the market before most of the big name competitors and they've managed to grab a 95% market share from their eight months on the market so far.
But I'm sure things would have been better if they'd done them your way around.
Apple always support at least the current and previous generation device
So I'd suggest your definition of a legacy device is someone excessive. At any point that you buy an iOS device, you're guaranteed at least a year of software support from Apple — which is a year more than 99% of other phone manufacturers. Though it's difficult to guess what the other tablet manufacturers will do.
I'd guess that this is the same as all the operators that'll give a free XBox, PS3, television or whatever. The calculation is that they'll still make a profit (probably on an individual basis, definitely over the whole group) even if you cancel in very short order.