1604 posts • joined Thursday 18th June 2009 14:54 GMT
It's come out subsequent to this article, but that's Jobs' line. Specifically:
"Sun (now Oracle) supplies Java for all other platforms. They have their own release schedules, which are almost always different than ours, so the Java we ship is always a version behind. This may not be the best way to do it."
Not only is Apple hoping to offload the task, but it's showing the closest it gets to contrition.
Realistically, you can see how Sun would go out of their way to ensure continuity of Java on Windows but Oracle might not care about OS X. So I think there is a real risk here.
You seem to be arguing that if Apple strip Java from OS X (very likely), while it remains possible for someone else to build Java for OS X (which it will), but nobody supplies a binary for OS X, then there'll be a problem. And not just for you, but for lots of very big companies and projects for which Java is a part they wouldn't want to lose, like Eclipse, OpenOffice, Firefox, etc.
What exactly do you think the probability of that is? In the US, the Mac is 20% of consumer purchases and 10% of all computer purchases. I strongly suspect that either Oracle or some trustworthy third party will supply a simple Java binary installer. Exactly the same as on Windows, where — at the absolute worst — your customers presumably manage to install two pieces of software instead of one to use your one.
Playing the same game as streaky...
This isn't a problem for because everybody involved in Open Source knows that it isn't. The original story was rubbish because everybody involved in Open Source knows that it is.
Admittedly I've gone a bit further there, by assigning two extreme and fabricated opinions (both false, by the way) to group think rather than just one. But that's the sort of thing you can do when unevidenced bare assertions are acceptable provided vague reference to a thinly defined group is attached.
What Mac users can't use Java software? All shipping versions of OS X contain Java. The article speculates that OS X v10.7 may ship without Java but notes that Apple have instead made it explicitly possible to install your own.
OS X has a BSD-sourced POSIX layer and ships with an X11 window manager. The supplied compiler remains GCC, at least while Clang can't parse C++.
This means that customers using Macs will not be able to use Java software as soon as it stops being possible to build it using GCC for a POSIX OS with X11. When do you expect that to happen?
Some developers care. Definitely not all. And I can't think of a reasonable way to estimate the proportions, other than arbitrarily picking whatever numbers either of us thinks will help our argument.
And people are accusing Jobs' arithmetic of being wonky
Announced price of the SIM-free 3G Samsung Galaxy Tab, with 7" screen: £529. Double that: £1058. Add 20%: £1269.60.
Your feeling is that £1269.60 is cheaper than the SIM-free 3G iPad, which also is £529?
In the current generation, the Air is 1.36 kg, the 13.3" MacBook Pro is 2.04kg. So the latter is 50% heavier. I guess it may actually work the other way to that which Tony Smith suggests: if you've stripped out all the weight then what you're left with is smaller, so you can shrink the case. If you keep the screen the same size, that obviously means reducing the depth.
That's if you're brutally functional about it. In reality, most electrical gadgets sell better if you can generate an emotional bond between the purchaser and the device. Hence why adverts nowadays are full of words like 'experience'. It's still essentially a trade-off with the one design aspect being played against the others, but making devices better looking helps to improve sales. Apple are just one of the companies that understands this and definitely didn't discover it.
My post said "the Mac can run all current software, it just isn't the cheapest way to run Windows software". Your argument is that I'm obviously wrong because a suitable Mac would have an associated cost. I suggest you think a little harder about the conversation.
I'm typing this on a 2006 Core Duo MacBook Pro with 2GB RAM. I'm able to work quite happily with Windows XP running through either Parallels or VirtualBox. At work I have a 2008 iMac. Basically the same comment applies there, but substitute Windows 7 for Windows XP.
Macs are the most compatible computers
They ship with Apple's GUI and an X server. You can then install Parallels or VMWare or whatever and run Windows apps alongside your OS X and X11 apps, right there on the same desktop. The issue isn't whether the Mac can run the software you want, it's whether it is cost effective to do so — especially if you're having to buy a Windows licence after already having bought the whole computer.
Not really true
Actually the iPhone was entirely about function; a web browser that works well, on the move, with then groundbreaking data prices. Mobile Safari was, in 2007, a quantum leap beyond what anybody else had managed in terms of mobile web browsing. The risk was that Apple had misunderstood its customers in the sense that the customers for a mobile phone manufacturer aren't the people that use the phone but the mobile operators that carry it.
There's also the phone salesperson problem, in that they tend to be atypically free of insight into what customers actually want beyond reeling off tick sheets of features and trying to push more expensive tariffs. I suspect Microsoft are about to face this problem also.
You can download software directly from the WebOS store that will run all previous Palm OS apps.
I think Microsoft's main problem will be that normal people are apathetic or, at worst, antipathetic towards the Windows brand and mobile phones are something they're constantly told they should feel emotional towards. I doubt that many people, when offered Google or Microsoft, will opt for Microsoft.
Rip off as in idea theft?
If so then I disagree. The physical aspect of the game (ie, things collapsing as proper rigid bodies, things shattering) and the smart move of positioning it as a puzzle game in which half of it is figuring out how to do the level make it more than just a copy of another game. It stands on the shoulders of many other titles, but that's not exactly 'rip off' territory.
Big features of CS5
As I recall, Creative Suite CS5 brings:
• that automatic clone tool type thing so that you can select objects and have them automatically removed and the background filled in with meaningful photographic detail;
• proper Cocoa ports and 64bit support for the Mac across the suite;
• an iPhone compiler for Flash, which the App Store police banned and then unbanned.
Those are, I think, all the 'big' ones. No doubt bullet point two cost a considerably larger amount of development time than would appear to be obvious to an end user.
It's not really the same as IE was though, is it?
WebKit attempts to subscribe to all relevant standards and is frequently updated and corrected when variations are found. Extensions it supplies are minor things that are easily removed. The engine is open source and used by multiple vendors.
Internet Explorer, in the days before Firefox, was stagnant and explicitly aiming for non-standard aims. The extensions were things like ActiveX which were designed to be all but impossible to remove from a website without a rewrite. This was all controlled by a single company with a vested interest in locking out all other vendors.
Diversity is a good thing, but let's not pretend that the one thing is the same as the other. In the same way, hyperbole is a bad thing, but I'm not going to pretend that this is anything like the same as the stuff churned out by Opera.
But, in its defence...
... all out-of-copyright books available from Amazon (more than a million, I think) are free on the Kindle, from anywhere in the world, for as long as you want. Where Kindle editions come out they also tend to appear at the same time as the hardback, but at a tiny little bit less than the paperback price. Furthermore, as the review says, you can carry round 900 big books if you want. I'm the sort of person that tends to hop from book to book, so just the reduction of three or four into a Kindle-sized package is a major win for me. Being able to put any old document on there is also a massive boon versus printing whenever you want to take away something more than about 20 pages long.
Me? I ordered one while Amazon were listing the New Yorker as being available for £3/issue rather than the £6-ish I pay from the newsagent. But at some point it was withdrawn, prior to Kindles actually shipping in the UK. So I'm quite annoyed, but such other magazines as are available seem to be similarly cheaper.
I was wondering that
I'm pretty sure "we're nicer to the community" isn't a legal defence to patent infringement. But I guess Google are going belt and braces, i.e. (i) you should find in our favour; and (ii) even if you don't find in our favour, damages should be nominal.
Do they even have the concept of nominal damages in US courts?
It was a dog's dinner that nobody bought. Also, I don't care what anybody says — I like the Office ribbon.
A selective retelling
MIT Media Lab did the first serious work on eBooks, starting in the mid 90s and leading to the eInk screens that everybody uses in book readers now.
The multi-touch interface you see on the iPhone and iPad grew out of work begun at FingerWorks during the late 1990s. Apple purchased FingerWorks in 2005.
I guess Microsoft aren't scared of anybody else poaching him...
... or, you know, even considering to employ him were he to ask.
The arguments would probably be...
(1) touch allows direct manipulation; people prefer direct manipulation because it's one or two fewer metaphors depending on how you count — no 'if you move the mouse, the cursor follows, the cursor can be used to press buttons', just press the button;
(2) touch allows multiple people to interact with the device simultaneously;
(3) touch opens up new types of interaction and simplifies others.
The only obvious things I can think of for (3) are page layout and clay-style modelling. I'm completely on the fence about the idea, myself. I can see it being useful in design industries where you frequently want people to be able to gather round something and work together, but I can't see it being useful in the slightest to a writer, a musician or a programmer. Just thought I'd post such arguments in favour as I can muster.
It's not really 40% though, is it?
A bunch of JPEGs, PNGs and GIFs were converted to the new format and, across the lot of them, they saw an average 39% saving. A meaningful test would have been to compare it to JPEG only, since otherwise an unknown proportion of the argument is the senseless "we switched from lossless to lossy and saved a lot of space, hence our lossy format is the best format".
Likely to damage the Android brand? Or the 'tablet' brand?
Not this one specifically, but is there a real risk that the usual sales department garbage will indelibly associate all these quite rubbish ~£200 tablets with either the Android brand or the concept of a tablet in general and reduce the market for one or more of the [probably] pretty decent machines from Samsung and Apple? This is the same reason that clothing fashion changes so quickly, I've always thought — the people who do things very poorly for the purposes of being cheap tarnish the concept generally so that the decent lot have to continually move on.
You'll be waiting more than 18 months
If Apple see good ideas elsewhere, they'll simply incorporate the good ideas into their own products. See e.g. Sherlock/Watson or iBooks/Delicious Library/Classics, those being the first two examples that jump to mind.
And if it's just navigation that's an issue, you can solve that with any of the web-based front ends. Hopping to a specific product within the app store is just a URL away, and I'd be highly surprised if they didn't have exactly the same thing on the Google Marketplace, it not exactly being an innovation.
More likely they're gearing up to launch their own device?
Just speculating, of course, but the Kindle has proved that they can organise design and production of their own devices and that they have a platform that allows them to sell the things. I'm not sure what they'll do about the screen though — presumably if they went Android it'd be an LCD-type affair, which would severely complicate the Kindle message to consumers.
Different orientations are useful
In the iPad's mail app, for example, both orientations keep the email page a comfortable width, the difference being that in landscape mode you get to see your inbox down the left hand side whereas in portrait there's a button near the top that shows the inbox as a pop up.
Although the iPad would do you fine at the minute, with one of its four hardware switches being dedicated to disabling any device rotation features, I think the next OS update is rumoured to demote that switch to being 'mute' like on the iPhone (a stupid duplication of something you can already achieve with the volume button in my opinion, but what do I know?). Though it'll still be there as a software setting if the iPhone is the model.
At a guess
Because the student-targetted model, and the one within the price ranges of the devices in this group test (with student discount, anyway), is the MacBook and that doesn't have the 15-ish" screen that would be required to match the criteria for this group test.
The MacBook Pro has a 15" option, but it's well outside of the price range being considered.
Pointing towards positioning Apps as channels?
You know, with iAds available for commercial breaks if you want to set one up all on your own? We're already in the position where anything the iPhone or iPad can stream can be pushed on to the AppleTV (without being left going on the phone/tablet, apparently), making them supersmart remote controls — I can't help feeling Apple is hoping to sneak functionality in past the networks.
Best hardware update ever. I'm hoping they roll this into the Touch and iPhone - though the software orientation lock has made both a lot more usable. If there was also some way to disable shake to undo then we'd really be getting somewhere...
As for the Nano? It looks like a flop to me. I can't imagine the screen being sufficiently more helpful than no screen at that size and the Shuffle has its buttons back, making it once again usable. Even in your pocket, when you're not looking.
So, yeah, Nano sales to rival AppleTV sales?
Objective-J may be a sign of things to come?
By porting Chinatown Wars
You know, the DS game that was originally designed to meet Nintendo's strict limits on sex, drugs and violence. Since it was released on the iPod and iPhone months ago, it's clearly acceptable.
And there remain no limits on the Mac side, obviously.
They'd probably port because...
... Mac users are, on average, more affluent than Windows users and Mac users are much more likely to want entertainment products, owing in part to its near absence from the corporate world.
Valve's recent port of Portal (also quite dusty) received 1.5 million downloads in the first week, though it was free. No doubt whatever back-end tools DMA used, which were multiplatform even at the time, have facilitated an OS X port for a negligible cost and they're hoping to generate a reasonable amount of new revenue without doing any substantial work while also dipping their toe in the Mac gaming waters.
Suggest you read e.g. the page you're currently on
The argument that people don't shout when Apple do things appears not to stand up to scrutiny.
I'm typing this on my MacBook Pro
Though I could have typed it on my iPhone or my iPad. In any case, I'd be typing the same: the new Apple TV is no tangible improvement over the old one and will not succeed. It fails to completely eliminate any single other box while not really improving on what those boxes already do. The Apple TV and iBooks (which are being outsold 60:1 by Kindle books, I hear) prove that there are areas in which Apple simply fails; they're nowhere near being the unstoppable media juggernaut that content producers and consumers fear.
The best feature of the Apple TVs? They prove that people don't just buy anything Apple put out.
Costs more than the iPad?
I appreciate it has a few more features, but it also has a lower resolution screen so even the tickbox feature crew aren't going to be completely appeased. Presumably this is the cost inefficiency of using x86 rather than ARM and ViewSonic's hope is that people are going to care about Windows in a tablet? The ARM + Android devices are going to walk all over this and I doubt even Apple are going to be that bothered by this particular one.
HMRC is Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs (ie, the tax man)
So the subtext to the article is "aren't the public bodies inefficiently run?" and/or "aren't they wasting our taxpayer pounds by sticking to the technology of 1994?". You know, plus people tend to get angry about issues surrounding the efficiency of the collection of taxes generally...
I'm not sold on the widescreen aspect ratios
They make these things look a very uncomfortable shape when you're in portrait orientation. I think the point of widescreens is that wider feels more natural to a point; as soon as you rotate it 90 degrees all you've achieved is extremely uncomfortable thinness.
Any news on a 4:3 Android tablet?
I think you've missed the point
Apple said they weren't counting upgrade purchases. So the number of deactivations is probably the published number of new activations subtracted from the unpublished number of all activations.
Moving from an iPhone 3 to an iPhone 4 counts as an upgrade.
Maybe you could...
... take advantage of the 28 days of statutory paid holiday a year we get in the UK versus the 0 they get in the US to obtain the extra £20 that seems to be your sticking point?
Giving Apple the absolute strongest benefit of the doubt, for the purposes of discussion, I'll guess that the padding is insurance against exchange rate variations over the coming year given that part of Apple's product launch strategy is not to change prices for the duration of that iteration of the product.
It seems to vary from state to state
Presumably when states set their own sales tax they also set the rules covering the mechanisms by which those taxes are collected. Per Amazon:
"The amount of tax charged depends upon many factors, including the identity of the seller, the type of item purchased, and the destination of the shipment. [...] Items sold by Amazon.com LLC, or its subsidiaries, and shipped to destinations in the states of Kansas, Kentucky, New York, North Dakota, or Washington are subject to tax."
So it sounds like Kansas, Kentucky, et seq, all impose the local sales tax irrespective but the other 45 states quite probably don't.
I think the difference is that when you're streaming video latency isn't really a problem and somebody has already done a lot of work in advance to compress the stream. To view your MBP through an AppleTV you'd probably need a real time encoder, likely swallowing a large portion of your processing resources, and still have to watch everything a few seconds behind. Or, I guess, at a very low frame rate if a trivial encoder was used.
The amount of bandwidth required for uncompressed video is one of the reasons that monitors are almost the only thing left using a task-specific connector to the computer, rather than just moving to USB.
I think it's ended up being £99. Which is above the amount that $99 would convert to, but I've made no calculations for tax so probably isn't all that bad.
That said, it sounded like you could stream content only from iTunes, at 99 cents (probably 59p ala the app store?) a pop, so that's me lost as a customer. If it was iTunes + iPlayer, 4OD, etc then I'd probably buy and occasionally rent a film to Apple's benefit.
It seems to take 720p resolution photos
My guess: apps uploaded to the App Store contain a list of flags that dictate which bits of hardware they require to work. One such flag is 'device has a stills camera', another is 'device has a movie camera'. There is no 'device has any camera whatsoever', so if the iPod Touch had become the first iOS device with a movie camera but not a stills camera then Apple would have pushed developers of apps that just need a camera preview (eg, those augmented reality apps that bloggers love) into an extremely tenuous position.
I guess it may also be to do with lower level software implementation issues, especially given that Apple seem to have a lot of difficulty finishing versions of iOS nowadays. There was a prominent section of the keynote dedicated essentially to "we are still going to update the iPad's version of the OS at some point, honest".
LCD tablets don't cut it for eBooks
Subjective, of course, but that LCD screens are unreadable in direct sunlight and really very bright when in low light (like, you know, when in bed) has made the iPad quite useless as an eBook reader for me, even with speedy PDF rendering and a surplus of other book sources (in terms of iBooks plus the Kindle app and all the other usual Android/iOS suspects). The AMOLED on my Nexus One was better in the latter case when I switched from black on white to white on black given that OLED black is really black, but that felt like a really odd way to read. And I'm a person that's grown up with computers.
I've a Kindle scheduled to arrive in the next few days, I'm hoping eInk does the trick.
Quite a turnaround
From rebadging iPods to possibly the most credible competitor to the iPad in five years. That said, I thought the Palm Pre was going to be the big thing versus the iPhone, so probably Android is the one to watch, again?
- World's OLDEST human DNA found in leg bone – but that's not the only boning going on...
- Lightning strikes USB bosses: Next-gen jacks will be REVERSIBLE
- Pics Brit inventors' GRAVITY POWERED LIGHT ships out after just 1 year
- Microsoft teams up with Feds, Europol in ZeroAccess botnet zombie hunt
- Storagebod Oh no, RBS has gone titsup again... but is it JUST BAD LUCK?