6 posts • joined Monday 24th August 2009 14:20 GMT
author has good taste
Pat Metheny - great taste in music exhibited by the author.
An operating system is what it's creators want it to be
Why do people think that it is a god given right to have equal access to platforms created by Microsoft and Apple. These are commercial entities and they have created operating systems to make money - for no other reason. We live in a free society - which means any person or collection of persons, are able to create a product and take it to market. Anyone who disagrees with this premise is arguing against one of the fundamentals of capitalism.
One can only assume those people are unemployed or work for the public sector because anyone who has a job for a business is really a hypocrite if they think that Microsoft or Apple are not entitled to leverage competitive advantage by using the products they themselves create. At a nuts and bolts level, this is all about senior individuals in a job making decisions about their own products to add best value to their company and make a profit - doing this is their commercial duty to their shareholders and it is their ethical duty to the staff that depend on their decisions to provide the foundations on which they can build their careers. Of course Microsoft and Apple would like to own the browser on their platform. Sony own the browser built into the Playstation - I don't see a choice of Chrome or Mozilla there - and why should there be: Playstation is owned by Sony.
I would argue that over time, the browser will disappear and merge into the operating system. The mainstream browsers should all be much of a muchness when we get to IE10. And in most people's mind they won't give 2 hoots what browser they are using to access the web. They'll only be concerned with which device they'll be using when they access it. I expect vendors of any operating system to follow suit. Apple have blurred the lines and a sharp legal mind will soon easily argue that the browser is now necessarily part of the operating system.
Apple will easily lock users in to Safari as they surround it with more cloud based services.
Microsoft will do the same with IE. And why shouldn't they - we pay them to write operating systems, and we expect their operating systems to continue to evolve with the Internet. The shift to the cloud is a natural part of this. Making the browser transparent is a huge part of providing intuitive and secure access to the web while acknowledging that for most people, accessing the web is why they buy a computer now.
So any vendor should be entitled to sell a computer with a built in operating system that provides great web access out of the box, and having invested a great deal of money developing that operating system they naturally want to protect their investment by giving their own browser a significant advantage.
Sorry but I've seen the future - and Mozilla and Firefox did not exist and everyone was using computers that looked like giant iPhones.
State of the art
Would make the best movie introduction to the culture. It's not a massive story, so would be ideally placed to introduce the culture and set the scene for follow on movies. I think the story would appeal to a lot of people which would enhance the popularity of the larger stories.
Use of weapons could be the sequel as Diziet Sma is in both stories...
Is what Apple will tie this small developer up in. It doesn't matter who is right or who is wrong, this developer will not be able to afford to keep up with Apple's defence lawyers who will quickly turn the tables. Not unless they get some support from the likes of Google.
On their own, FutureTap don't stand a chance against Apple - HOWEVER, there is a chance that Apply may be looking to purchase FutureTap - by owning this patent, they give themselves a chance of dictating what the price for FutureTap will be. Apple may be the bad guys here, but they are certainly not stupid, and copying someone else's design so accurately will have been done as part of a larger less sinister plan - such as purchasing FutureTap.
If Apple don't now go on to purchase FutureTap the patent application will make no sense and they run the risk of Google jumping on this and using it to make an awful lot of anti Apple noise - i.e. if Google now bought Future tap it'd be a cheap way to buy in to what could turn out to be a major bit of bad ballsache for Apple.
Apple know that as well - and surely, by now they know there best bet of securing their cornering of the mobile apps market is by getting a stranglehold over the most innovative developers before they release their wares on Android - and FutureTap are one such developer.
it's just a mobile phone
why bother - there are loads of great mobiles phones on the market with better specs that the iphone - why bother wasting valuable hours out of your life just to carry the electronic equivalent of a Louis Vitton handbag? By now everyone's got them so the iphone cool gesture is meaningless by now anyway and if it's purely the badge you're after, then just like a Louis Vitton handbag - you can pick up a near perfect copy direct from most pavement traders in any tourist destination. ...
- Product Round-up Smartwatch face off: Pebble, MetaWatch and new hi-tech timepieces
- Geek's Guide to Britain The bunker at the end of the world - in Essex
- FLABBER-JASTED: It's 'jif', NOT '.gif', says man who should know
- If you've bought DRM'd film files from Acetrax, here's the bad news
- VIDEO Herschel Space Observatory spots galaxies merging