669 posts • joined 5 Jan 2011
"Every year when the new iPhone are announced, all the paid comments start showing up again from "new" users."
You need to adjust your tinfoil hat Andy. It's chocking off your blood supply.
Re: iphone cow
Re NFC, my belief is Apple didn't want it. There is no use case where iBeacon technology can't be used instead. But in the end their hand was forced because they had to work with the Banks and credit card companies. In case it's not clear, VISA and Mastercard have established a superior position because of acceptance, their physical cards are known and accepted, and not for their business of extending credit. If you have no need of a physical card that tie-in is broken and there will be enhanced competition and many more providers will be able to extend credit. Not least Apple themselves. This fact has not been lost on the credit card companies and is why payments has always been such a difficult nut to crack. IMO the credit card companies have only co-operated because Apple has agreed to their own NFC based transaction authentication solution. You will be able to use Bluetooth to make payments, but that will be treated as cardholder not present. But why, really why should that be the case? An iOS authentication app can be fully secured and registered just as well as your average bank access security key generator app. If access to your bank account is governed by one of those, a payments solution can be integrated just as effectively and securely (or insecurely based on your POV re-smart mobe security - my point being that the Financial Institutions have already accepted a level of security that any payment app can match, so are only pretending to be concerned because they are protecting their oligopoly positions).
Re: Nintendo Wii mania
@John Baily for the first part of your comment, I couldn't agree more. And guess what, when you do measure lifetime sales that it's clear Apple have been gaining an increasing lead in the premium space. They have consistently sold between 33% more to 100% more handsets than Samsung have sold Galaxy line handsets. Indeed the difference has become so great, Samsung have this year relabelled all their handsets Galaxy, so in future reports, their sales being bested in the high end market will be obscured.
"And you imagine we care because?"
Well I care because I have an app start-up. All the evidence is I stand to make twice the revenues from Apple, so we are coding for iOS first (and yes that is even though Android has much higher market share).
"And if they sell out in the first weekend, and have no stock for a month.. that is actually poor supply chain management. Not success."
You are half correct. As it is a bad idea to run out of stock. However you are underestimating the unique pressures of the balance that has to be struck for a company facing an opening weekend where there is a massively high initial spike. Apple actually have what is generally acknowledged as the best and most powerful supply chain management in the business, bar only probably only Samsung.
"What would be the number that causes you to concede that either model is in fact, a flop?"
Well the 6 plus is a bit more niche, so there's no point in taking its' sales levels in isolation as they will be expected to be less than the 6. This model is about mining the seam as the smartphone market matures.
Combined, anything less than 10 million will be a major disappointment and I think would be considered a flop by Apple, though they would never publicly say obviously.
Re: Don't follow the way this works
Well that would seem most fair. However, if you owned shops and made a new product that would pull customers into said shops, would you turn down the opportunity to generate a bit of buzz for your shop visitors, or allow your shops to be a damp squib of inactivity where there is no defined time a customer knows he/she will be able to find the product in the place? It's Apple's choice and an understandable one. They will be dripping supplies into the shops as well, also while there are unfulfilled online orders. That IMO is a bit more unfair. But then on the other hand diverting stock around is a big logistical problem, so it isn't entirely unreasonable to arrange for it to be trickled across a variety of supply routes.
Re: Nintendo Wii mania
From the article.
"Naturally, she [apple's PR] didn't reveal any numbers to back up that Apple claim"
Why naturally? Apple are about the only company that DO confirm launch weekend sales figures. They always have done. And as a listed company, they are legally bound to ensure the data they give is accurate. Additionally most of their sales figures are the figures for sales to end customers, since slightly more than 50% are sold via Apple stores, and the figures for those Sales are into customers hands. Samsung by contrast a) don't reveal their sales figures b) have let the market be mislead by their partners (tablet sales that weren't where figures issued by their favoured market research partners were vastly inflated and Samsung opted not to let the world know) c) report their sales into trade channels - which during a launch period are generally going to be about 1/3 higher.
"This is standard Apple operating practice, restrict initial supply and announce delays due to unexpected high demand.
Every. Single. Time."
It might be a surprise to you but opening weekends start with very high sales, production lines start with relatively lower yields and take time to build up stock. You don't commission factories to output at a capacity that will suit your opening weekend. That would be a ridiculous waste. And you can't spend too long building up stock or you will be losing time launching you next gen. to your competitors. So there is a natural conflict there. You don't know the exact level of initial orders or the rate of decay from the opening weekend peak. So you build up a bit of stock, produce at a rate close to what you estimate average longer term sales will be, and fulfil the peak orders backlog from the opening period as quickly as you can. With a product like the iPhone you won't be able to match that initial peak demand. They will try to though. Many customers aren't nearly so tribal as commenters on this forum and it's madness not to do your best to make the sales as quickly as possible or you will simply be losing a proportion of your sales to your competitors. Anyone who understands retail knows this meme "they deliberately restrict sales" is pure lunacy.
"If by some freak Apple sell say 10,000,000 and they are sold out for the next month then even the most ardent Apple Haters might (through gridded teeth) admit it was a success."
Of course they will sell over 10m on the opening weekend, they sold nearly 9 million of the 5S and have increased sales by a third with each successive generation. Most people don't realise this because Samsung's PR dept are actually damned good at spinning out news stories that can be quite misleading. So those reports of the Samsung S5 outselling the 5S on the launch weekend a) naturally didn't point out the upwards curve for all smartphone sales and the fact that because it launched considerably later, the performance wasn't in relative terms so good (this will be clear once the iPhone 6 opening weekend sales figures are available). B) worse, were spun based on comparison of sales levels through mobile operators. Apple sell HALF their handsets through their own Stores (and the majority of the tech press blithely reported the PR spun "news" with no investigation) c) as noted above Apple quote sales to end-users figures, not sales to channel and d) S5 sales figures were in fact bad enough Samsung had a secret emergency sales crisis meeting, news of which leaked out.
Take all that into account and you find this, by Asymco, is the more insightful analysis:
Keep an eye out for the Asymco analysis after the iPhone 6 launch if you want a nun distorted view. Or you can just continue to read the Register and get a wholly distorted anti Apple propaganda.
Re: Vaporpus Sapphire
@JDX got there first.
Re: Vaporpus Sapphire
More forthcoming about what ? A screen material they never told anyone or promised anyone they were going to release, not being released ? How inconsiderate of them.
Re: Is the default for apps to want everything?
I'm perfectly capable of putting in the email address of anyone I want to message and there is NO need for access to my entire contact list. There was a time, only a few years ago, when a man's contact list was considered and extremely valuable and personal thing. The assumption I would give mine up at the touch of a button, without first asking my contacts if they want there details to be given out to a third party lacks integrity. Just because kiddies reaching puberty in the Facebook generation have got accustomed to thinking nothing of giving away the contact details of others, so they can set-up multi-player death matches, and do so without asking their friends permission first, doesn't mean to do so isn't thoughtless or rude.
Re: Is the default for apps to want everything?
YO, which I hasten to add I only downloaded because I was gobsmacked that an app that bad could raise so much finance and I wanted to check if it really could be that bad... Yep.
On install it very politely asked for permission to send push notifications.
Then next said
"YO needs access to your contacts. Give it over f**ker." or words close to that effect (they may not have been the precise words but how my brain interpreted them given the abruptness of the message and lack of explanation).
Needless to say I declined and found the app still worked perfectly well. Or rather, worked worked as intended, which means my last sentence is in fact a lie. Left me with a sour taste all round. OK YO, so having lied to me about your need for access to my contacts list, I'm going to post messages like this in public places warning others of your bad attitude.
The thing I find slightly annoying is they will have my contact details because one or other of my friends is bound to have granted access.
Re: Apple DOES NOT benefit the mobile payments space
"Fascinating. I guess that means they'll be turning off geolocation then?"
Clever, if sarcastic. Except...
1) Apple don't know when you have made a payment and don't know when you are at place x that you have made a payment.
2) They are extremely explicit that they do not track your location and if you have e.g. find my iPhone or other such services switched on, they purge all cached data and also that any data cached at their servers is encrypted and inaccessible by them in the same way as most good security systems user passwords are inaccessible by employees. This is made completely clear in the security white paper
available here: http://www.apple.com/ipad/business/docs/iOS_Security_Feb14.pdf
This security white paper has been hailed by the Security Expert, Steve Gibson as one of the best and most privacy protecting security implementations he has witnessed. They are setting themselves up in contradistinction to Google on security and see it is a differentiating factor where they can establish clear blue water with regards to what user's want.
Re: Apple DOES NOT benefit the mobile payments space
"We are not in the business of collecting your data. So, when you go to a physical location and use Apple Pay, Apple doesn’t know what you bought, where you bought it, or how much you paid for it."
Eddie Cue, onstage, in front if the world's media, yesterday.
Re: It's all about the screen size
"The only difference is it means Apple know exactly what you have been buying whereas before only your bank knew."
Bit of an assumption there Duke. Actually Apple are making a feature of their payment tech that they know nothing about the transaction. That was a key point made by Tim Cook yesterday. They have targeted privacy as a key axis on which to compete with Google in full knowledge Google can't match them and continue to make money. They also keep your name and contact details away from the merchant also. Which is a step more private than today's credit cards and a hell of a lot more private than Google wallet.
Re: It's all about the screen size
That's a quote out if context. Not that Steve Jobs said anything else on that, the context being the market had no reply to the iPad for a good two years. Steve Jobs was right. All the 7 inch alternatives (play book HP's touch pad) crashed and burned. The thing that changed, was, due in large part to the influence of the iPhone and the iPad in, mobile devices became so embedded in our lives, we have become so addicted to their presence, we have become akin to drug addicts speaking a shot however we can get it. 7" tablets are a point of tension between two contrary desires. The desire for an effective interface to a virtual online world and the desire (which didn't exist to anything like the extent it does now when Jobs gave that quote) to have it with us the maximum amount of time possible. So 7" tablets are actually evidence of the complete success of Jobs approach to mobile computing and the extent we are prepared to compromise to get it. We are prepared to go as far as possible whilst retaining mobility. Jobs view of the size requirement for the iPad was a snapshot of how at the time we wouldn't have considered using an iPad much outside of a couch setting. It could be carried around but was not thought of as something that would mostly be used on the move. And the iPad was clearly a roaring success. What has happened is users have become addicted enough they want iPad functionality but whilst actually on the move. They aren't prepared to have to wait until they reach the couch or chair setting before they get their next shot.
Re: It's all about the screen size
"No one but the most rabid fanbois are buying a $350+++ watch that looks like an iPod Nano with limited capability"
- I remember you having the same attitude to the iPad.
"Doesn't matter how many customers Apple has - Visa and Mastercard have far more customers, and they've had a horrible time getting retailers to switch to pay-bonk."
-Visa and MasterCard are jumping at what Apple are offering because Apple aren't vying to get a cut, they are using it instead as a feature advantage to sell more phones.
"This is all about screen size, and trying desperately not to lose more market share to the Android sellers."
- So desperate they have seen off Samsung from the high-end, the only sector of the market where you can make real money, to the extent that Samsung now have falling profits and market share. Apple's share of the high-end of the market continues to grow. What that means is they have users who actually pay for things, so for example developers still earn on average twice from the AppStore for their apps as they will earn from the Google play store across all of the Google Android base. And it's true that as smart phones with touch screens have become embedded in our daily life, the user has been prepared for and in larger numbers wanted something bigger. Though don't forget, average out sales over a device's lifetime and you find the iPhone has always outsold equivalent Samsung's Galaxy range by a factor of between 6:4 and 2:1 with the 5s - also a smaller screened phone - doing even better against Samsung than either the 5 or 4s.
"I was thinking if they continued on the same path as the iPhone 5s, they would end up being the next Blackberry or Nokia - a once dominant phone maker reduced to rubble."
- Are you referring to the path that has lead them to be the most valuable company in the world, ahead of Enron ? That path ?
Oh dear, a security company "expert," selling secure messaging software and who has incentives to see security flaws everywhere, mischaracterises the nature of the iOS co-operative model.
The whole point is an extension is just like any existing app running in a sandbox, except it can be run "apparently" in view context of another app (so not necessarily occupying all of the screen). There isn't any direct inter-app data exchange. When an app extension is run, iOS just provides a view into another extension app sitting in it's own sandbox. This is logically no different from any other app running.
Data exchange is always mediated by iOS, and is done pretty much one of two ways, saving a file at a mutually accessible file container location that is external to both Apps and messaging iOS with a URL that can be provided to the host app (this is in no way essentially different to existing apps being able to grab data from dropbox using the dropbox API).
The one additional risk, if it can be called that, is if the messaged app fails to securely process the contents of a URL, but since the URL's are provided by approved apps and no code is installed into a host app, if any extension providers misbehave, they can be killed, expunged by Apple. And indeed the same risk *already exists when any App processes URL's provided via email links or acquired from anywhere else* So this doesn't add any new category of attack vector either and is in fact safer than the existing ability for a user to open URL's from emails within an app.
So in reality, the fact there are app extensions ads no more risk than any OS enhancement. There's always the possibility of a latent security hole somewhere with any new added functionality, but really, the design Apple have implemented is very very secure and offers no more risk just because the words "app extension" are used. In important ways the words are simply a misnomer.
@Trevor. Well for a start if you read my comments carefully I haven't actually said queuing means Apple is for that fact alone qualified as cool. What I have said it that it's likely to be a pretty good indicator. And the reason for my careful wording is, wait for it, I agree with you.
Queuing is not of itself not an indicator that x is queuing because y is cool. Nor do I disagree on your point about brand tribalism. I simply wouldn't say cool and brand tribalism are mutually exclusive. The presence of one far from rules out the presence of the other. And indeed brand tribalism isn't in and of itself cool.
Let's say, for arguments sake, James Bond is cool. He is at the centre of a social effect for that reason. He has a number of people in his circle and they all agree he is cool. Some follow him about, some, may even be cool themselves and don't follow him about. If out of every 20 people in his social circle, one is a fawning sycophant, then that hardly makes James Bond uncool. Far from it, it is totally consistent with him being cool. Uncool people tend not to get fawning sycophants following them about.
Now what do you think the population of iPhone users who queue is versus the total population of iPhone users? Additionally though queuing doesn't in and of itself indicate cool, given the above point, I I find it hard to substitute other reasons for the phenomena of Apple's brand tribalism. Clearly the iPhone 6 will not be a bad movie and attraction of the queue is not a purely social experience. It is being triggered by something and there is something about the nature of that thing that has seeded and continues to seed this rather interesting group psychological phenomena.
Your a clever chap so I'm sure you see my point, and at the end of the day, it does rather seem you are trying to simply dismiss the fact people queue outside Apple shops as evidence of anything other than a kind of disassociated social effect without root cause and that is simply, as it were, sui-generis. Hardly the explanation of a scientist.
One thing we should be able to agree on is given this exchange and discussion of cool, for sure, neither of us are.
Queuing is a real and tangible cost in time and comfort. So there is real and actual energy going in, for some reward real or psychological. If the reward is psychological, then that rather indicates the perception of cool. Since cool is not a tangible good, I can't see much else other than a perception by a significant portion of the community, can qualify it. I think your demand for an absolute measure of cool accords more tangibility to the concept than can ever be found. If the reward is physical then that means they are simply anticipating the iPhone 6 will be tangibly an extremely fucking amazingly good phone to a degree that makes it worth queuing. Take your choice (or a proportion of each) :)
Of course,I've simplified a bit, as there is some evidence the cost of queuing isn't quite what many assume. For some the reward for queuing is fungible, whether by the vehicle of publicity, or the click-through obtained from getting the first phone to use to video a smash test on the pavement outside the store or many other similarly weird ways of making money.
OK Trevor, so let's call it "the thing that is measured by the number of people queuing outside your shop raised to the power of the length of time they have been prepared to queue, but which we don't know what it is, but which Samsung don't have any of even if it is a something."
If we are going to anthropomorphise companies. I would say if you have people queuing outside your shops for weeks to buy the stuff you make, before you have even shown the world what that stuff is, it's a pretty good sign you're the cool kid already. But hey, I'm a techie and so tend to look for empirical evidence for things like cool, which is probably missing the point. I don't know. It's all very confusing.
What is very clear though, is that, by this measure, Samsung don't have any.
Re: The unfairness goes much deeper
The value of your search data is high enough, other companies are going to extreme lengths to get hold of it. Now down at my local Costa Coffee, when I use the O2 WFi service and do a search, Google report HTTPS has been disabled by my ISP. It seems O2 are deliberately breaking HTTPS connections to Google, so they can spy on my search habits. They already know who I am through my login with my Costa Card, but this extra is a wholly unacceptable grubby practice. O2's argument will be "we are providing the service so are free to do this" but in my book they are no more free to do so than a restauranteur is free to put a spy camera in his loos. This kind of big business blatant disregard for the customer is truly depressing and tiresome. And it does make me wonder if they make money from providing this data to customers like Costa (or keep it for themselves, I don't know what the arrangement is) just how good are their Chinese walls between the "public" WiFi business and the private residential ISP business (They have now sold that to Sky, so there is now less of an issue, but who can say what they were doing before the sale?). Clearly there will have been a conflict and temptation to cross index all the data
Anyway, at least, in my case, this all too tiresome further example of corporate rogering of customers has been good for DuckDuckGo.
Re: 'To date, no regulator has objected to our search tactics'.
No, he's being categoric. He can read their emails and see all their searches. Even it though most don't directly use Google Mail, there is likely a co-worker or contractor somewhere copied in and forwarding some work-load to a home email address or storing draft reports in Google drive such that Schmidt can be sure. Wouldn't it be strange if an unfriendly regulators predilection for prostitutes and young boys is exposed, to just the right people who could bring that person down, but hey Google, a private company who have probably almost the whole world's contact list network would never do such a thing; even though there are no guarantees they wouldn't and they certainly have the means to excerpt such influence and massage the supply of information through mutual contacts. Oh and that regulator who has no obvious personal weaknesses. Hell! He's so good the man deserves a new job. Contacts x,y or z should be just the ticket, affect introductions etc.
Of course I have no indication or evidence any of these suggestions are remotely true. But if they were, that would make Google more powerful than any single private entity in the US military-industrial complex; including Blackwater. Oh and they are separated from seizing such power by, er, an open door, so there's no temptation there then.
Re: "Antitrust" ... misused as regularly as "Antisemitism".
Google claim their algorithms are applied equally to all sites, with no special cases. But here's the problem: what if Google decree it is in the customer's interest that the algorithm selects universally and without discrimination for sites beginning with a Y and ending in an E and in Google's opinion that serves user interest best. Hmmm Vimeo isn't going to fare so well but YouTube will do just fine. Ok well perhaps that's a bit too crude and Google would never do that (even though we have no way of knowing for sure), because, if we did know, it would be clearly indefensible; perhaps the algorithm selects for sites with video's that have the most comments. Oh wow, wadaya know; again YouTube comes out on top.
Now let's say Vimeo adapt their website, encourage lots of commenting and just happen to meet the criteria, such that they are favoured by Google's algorithm (even though they can never be sure because the algorithm is secret). But hold on, Google, who tweak their algorithms all the time, suddenly "decide" user interest is best met by prioritising Video's where image analysis indicates they have been taken from an angle indicating the video is a selfie, and oh, since video comments are asinine and put right minded people off, they will be de-prioritised. This algorithm change is applied equally to all websites and without discrimination. Google say "hand on heart, we are just doing what the users want most" and since that is a matter of opinion and video comments are truly asinine, who's to argue? And YouTube it just so happens has many more selfie videos than Vimeo. But honest guv it's all being done in the best interests of the user, selfie videos are really popular these days and the word has even made it into the Oxford English Dictionary and everything.
Clearly I have provided some crude example algorithmic rules to illustrate the point, but the point is, hopefully, clear: Google's claim that they don't discriminate against competitors with their algorithms and apply their rules universally is spin, on a spinning top, on a roundabout, it means less than absolutely nothing; It is disingenuous and treats the people they are saying it too as fools. But it appears some people swallow the line anyway. So Google it seems, do in certain key regards, understand their audience.
As a Mac user who has never thought he is immune to such attacks (though one who would be right to think he is less likely to be on the receiving end of such attacks), it rather seems to me the issue is more the number of commenters who like to think Mac owners like to think x, y or z.
Narrow minded generalisations targeting one or other group are just so damned tedious, and rarely show any insight into anything other than the keyboard wanking habits of the author. But perhaps that's just me making a narrow minded generalisation, albeit one not targeted at any clear or partisan group.
Re: More hints please
I could write software "to launch nuclear warheads." The interesting thing is not so much if software has been written but who owns the machine it has been installed on how it was installed and (most importantly for my missile launcher software - what it is linked to.)
If, when it returns to base for a recharge, the plastic waste compartment is full of sticky matted red fluff, assume no.
"If it is the former, HP and Meg deserve to go to fiery hell for being taken for a pair of mugs."
Agree completely, but also, if the case is dismissed, even more deserve to go to fiery hell for trying to stripe-up Mike Lynch. It would mean she quite literally was prepared to send someone to prison to save her job. If Mike Lynch sold her a pup photo presented it well, and it turned out Autonomy was actually the pup grown into an ugly old dog, it is perfectly fair and can be argued he is simply a salesman making a one off sale where he doesn't care about maintaining future relations and did a good job for Autonomy shareholders. If he personally directed a co-ordinated effort to deceive and mis-categorise accounts, he deserves to be punished (though the auditors should of course, have picked this up during due diligence). However there would have to be evidence he co-ordinated an effort to deceive. You can't hold a CEO liable for any minor fraud that might be uncovered as in a company above a certain size, you are always going to have bad actors somewhere (most usually in the form of a rogue salesman or someone cheating on their expenses) that will mean there has been some accounting activity that can be considered fraudulent.
People forget Meg Whitman was on her second major unplanned write-down. One multi-billion dollar write-down seems careless. Two looks like rank incompetence and a sacking offence. In this context facing an impossible to deliver message in the annual analysts call she casts accusations at Autonomy, and yet doesn't back them up with a shred of evidence. The story becomes a giant distraction from the fact of a second, politically "impossible" to manage write down.
Over time it emerges the legal case against Autonomy is a fraction of the actual write-down. And it takes HP so much time much time to produce the case it rather appears they may be attempting to cook up a legal case after the event - surely if you are accusing a company and it's executives of illegal activity you do so only if you already have actual evidence for your accusation? So it has turned out Whitman did achieve the impossible, but in wholly the wrong way as a CEO. She successfully distracted the press from her rank incompetence. With an army of accountants working to her direction she has only been able to produce a case amounting to a small fraction of the write-down. More damning HP's own accountants have not to signed off on the case HP have produced. It rather appears as though the accountants themselves don't see it as watertight. The prima-facial evidence is that Whitman produced this lawsuit as a distraction from her own rank incompetence.
The real story here is how a CEO has managed to so successfully manipulate the media and avoid being hauled over the coals as she should be for the write down HP themselves are no longer in the main attributing to illegal activity (in the original press release on the matter they were making bold sweeping statements).
Sure. HP can go ahead with the court case against ex Autonomy execs. They may even truly believe it. But HP's incompetence is a rather different matter. Whitman should be sacked now.
After using the Aeropress for some time, I've come to the conclusion it can produce the very highest quality brew (some other devices can produce brew as good, but not better), however it requires technique to do so, roughly, IMO, equivalent to the level of technique required to cook the best scrambled egg (so not too difficult, but not so easy it can be done in a mindless zombie state). Other solutions (most notably those that will cost a couple of thousand) can do it more consistently where less "technique" is required. The same tequnique required to ensure it does a great job is partly a function of its flexibility which is also what makes it so much fun to experiment with.
"Peak Apple Apple's stock today inched toward the company's record high as investors eager for new products pushed shares over $100 apiece."
I don't understand, is that supposed to be The Register trolling itself? Apple reaching their peak AGAIN?
Re: Shipped vs "in users hands"
And yet developers building apps for iOS make on average twice the revenue per app as they do from their apps when placed on the Google Play AppStore and Apple revenues are far higher than any of their competitors. Seems that 11% who want iOS are a far better business proposition than that 80+ percent, most of whom have found one day they have an Android handset (if most are even aware of that).
Probably true. But still likely to be another record launch quarter for Apple.
Is that irony bypass making Jasper feel a bit *peaky* I wonder ?
Re: 75 million
Best practice usually dictates it is best to know what you are talking about before taking the piss Andy.
It's perfectly possible to be an arsehole and right.
Completely right. Personally though I recommend using the Aeropress coffee maker. It has geek credentials (designed by the Stamford University engineering professor who designed the Aerobie flying disk), is low cost, fast, convenient and makes awesome coffee. While it makes a great smooth, relatively acid free cup Americano or Latte, it doesn't make a true espresso. But having said that it does make a strong syrupy "espresso like" filter coffee drink that can best be described as it's own form of strong coffee. Like espresso it is an excellent base for Americano or Latte.
Espresso has been around a long time and so has tradition behind it, but in all honesty I slightly prefer the Aeropress version. Perhaps due to the physics of the way the Aeropress works, it seems, for my taste, to produce a more consistent purer strong coffee. The Aeropress is basically like a big syringe plunger which ensures hot water gets pushed through the grounds under pressure, which means the coffee can be made with water at a lower temperature, can be made faster, while less acid and bitterness is released into the brew. Because the resulting brew is paper filtered it is very pure and the brew can be stored in the fridge for a couple of days just fine. Plus the Aeropress offers endless ways to tinker with the process and is far better than e.g. a French Press for avoiding the mess of sodden coffee grounds.
If your into coffee I recommend getting one. Even if it doesn't turn out to be your coffee making device of choice, it's great fun to experiment with and at the price it's difficult to go wrong. At worst you will have the best highly portable coffee maker available for ensuring very good coffee brewing capability is always available to you when travelling.
Re: Of course we don't want a referendum about Scotland.
If you Scotts want a divorce and leave the house and set up their own bank account. We agree a split in the accounts and there's no problem.
If you want a divorce and demand we should remain joined at the hip with a joint bank account and financial guarantees, but gradually wake up to not having the leverage, and leave muttering obscenities to yourself, then you are being a bit annoying, but also there is no problem.
If you want a divorce, and insist on the account transferred into joint names, with financial guarantees before leaving and having said you are going, refuse to leave and have hissy fits, then yes there is a problem. I want a clean divorce. Just leave already, you are affecting voters UK wide.
So actually I don't want a referendum in the UK, but reserve the right to have one should the Scottish Nationalists press demands of the remaining UK instead of making a clean break of it. Of course, in practice we won't have one, but in principle it is fair if such demands are being made.
Re: ... the English should be able... to vote about separating from Scotland
AbelSoul. Of course we don't want a referendum about Scotland. You can do what you like. Just don't come back in the door two hours after leaving saying, "oh, sorry but, we are just expecting our banks to be underwritten by a currency union, sign here will you" and then two hours later again "oh, sorry, sorry to interrupt again, ha, it just seems we seem to have forgotten the additional 4% of Scotts employed by the UK national government above the average public sector employment rate, just sign here to guarantee their jobs will you?" then two hours later again saying, "sorry, sorry, we really are leaving, but it seems, ha, this is really quite embarrassing, it seems we are no longer in the EU and, you see, that means we need special treatment re: immigration. We've been left a bit short of jobs and were just wondering if we could have freedom of movement to take some of yours. Oh, and that whole charging for education at Scottish colleges thing, when anyone else in the EU got free places and we could go for free to yours? Clerical error. Sorry won't happen again. We're good aren't we? Good yes? Great, see you for the barbie on Saturday, got to be at your place, it's raining here."
Re: "you are assuming the English would vote to keep the union..."
I think the most pressing issue is why, when I was a kid, there used to be a *lot* more ginger Scotts than there are today. Seriously, either there is some extremely dangerous genetic terminator doing the rounds, or Scottish men are far more softy Southern than they make out and have been adopting women's hair treatments; probably with a manicure, shampoo and head-massage.
Re: "you are assuming the English would vote to keep the union. Where's the evidence of that?"
@Jedit. Sources please.
Where polls were conducted across the UK the data I've found (admittedly now a little old) says the opposite:
"what do you imagine should happen if Scotland or Northern Ireland were to vote to leave the UK, but the English voted to keep them within it?"
That's not the issue. Of course the English shouldn't be able to vote to keep the Scotts in. However if the Scott's are voting about leaving and demanding (ha ha ha) a currency union, the English should be able, at the same time, to vote about separating from Scotland and/or avoiding a currency union (which would mean the B of E continuing to underwrite Scottish banks). Many Scott's don't realise that more English want them to leave than want them to stay. Polling firm Survation polled North and South of the border discovered that little factoid.
Here's a suggestion. Since which country should continue with or "inherit" EU membership seems arbitrary, why not have Scotland leave the union, stay in the EU and the remaining UK exit the EU? Seems to me if we assume a "Yes" vote North of the Border (big assumption I know) and on the basis of the polls South of the border, the majority will be happy.
Going to Amazon and buying their home brand Kindle Fire is a bit like going in MacDonald's and thinking, I know, I'll buy their home brand cookery book.
My advice. Buy a good chair.
I had a knee problem a couple of years back. Due to an op that went wrong it swelled up like a balloon and became crazy painful. Being self employed I continued working but with my knee propped up. This put my back out. Badly. The two things, the knee and the back played off each other. Eventually the knee problem healed. But the painful back remained.
I used to be sceptical about the many reports you hear of x, y or z, being unable to work because of a bad back. While I remain sceptical of many cases, I now understand just how bloody painful it can be and how absolutely a bad back can destroy your ability to work, even when your work is confined to being done at a desk. I learned first hand, for example, that even spending prolonged periods lying down, whilst giving respite, can lead to deterioration of the problem.
I was beginning to despair as I could no longer afford the lost days work. Someone suggested I get a better quality office chair. My existing office chair already gave me back support and I was sceptical changing it would make much of a difference. I figured the cause of the problem had been my knee and my existing chair had adjustable lumbar support and since I was beginning to feel the pinch didn't feel I should be spending the money.
Anyway, I was ready to try anything. I went to John-Lewis and spent literally an hour moving from office chair to office chair to check which one felt best, decided there was no point in half measures and placed no limit on my budget. I ended up opting for a Herman Miller Sayl chair. It felt better for me than even the more expensive Herman Miller Aeron, the gold standard of healthy office chair design. I wasn't going to muck about, and was perfectly prepared to purchase the Aeron if need be. But the Sayle just felt marginally better for me and the engineering principles behind the subtle design of the "suspension cable" back appealed to my engineering mind (as you sit back in the Sayl, your own body weight causes the "cables" to subtly lift the small of the back).
I was stunned by how quickly my back improved. In fact it went from feeling extremely painful to better than it had felt since my teenage years (I'm now in my forties), in a period of just three days.
Now I've become a good office chair evangelist. It's difficult to convey just how transformative and revelatory the effect of a properly adjusted, well fitted chair can be. If you have back problems, don't hesitate, don't buy just anything, but test out the best chair for you. Make sure it can be adjusted and has a tilt back mechanism where the power required to tilt it can be adjusted and fine tuned (whilst looking to my eyes "slobby", being able to tilt back is good for your back). Lastly, don't let price be a factor. The best adjustable chair for you may be cheap and/or may be expensive, but you need to be able to try them out before buying.
Re: "A spokesman for Apple told El Reg..."
Rather seems Apple are getting criticised for not going further than already having implemented the features Google are only just getting around to implementing. Adults have full and complete control over all aspects in-app purchases. They can ensure passwords are always required or turn them of entirely. Apple made the changes last year in response to criticism from authorities in the US. Additionally anyone can get a refund for any in-app purchase made in error.
Apple are way ahead of Google in that regard just as they always have been for all manner of app permissions. They have, for example, now implemented a family sharing feature so families don't get hit multiple times for each kid they have that wants an app.
Re: 8 years for 15K
What pisses me off, is just this morning, again my bank trousered late payment fees for a credit card non-payment for an account I had set up and expressly requested the balance be transferred automatically at the end of the month. When I phoned up to complain, I had barely begun to say what the problem was and the operator had already started telling me "very sorry sir we will reverse the charges and have in fact already started to do so" Call me cynical but it was almost as though they were expecting the call and had the apology script already on the screen. No I'm not being a cynic. Happenings the drop money into the banks open pocket are far too frequent an occurrence for it to be an error. If it were truly an error, then sometimes things would happen that are in my favour. But they never are.
I wonder how many other customers have been scammed because they haven't had time to phone or haven't read their statements properly. We get annoyed about these scammers. But really who is worse? Someone who is scammer who is taking thousands, from the old weak and vulnerable, or a bank cynically working the margins as close to the line as possible diverting millions into deep trouser pockets and away from the old weak and vulnerable. Technically legal, but morally, rotten. Robbers and thieves the lot of them.
Re: slagging off the competition
"re. your other assertion about developers preferring IOS ... Sure, the margins may be higher on IOS but the size of the Android market often more than makes up for that."
You seem to have misunderstood what it means to say developers are earning on average twice the amount per app on iOS than Android.
Here's the background data for that one:
Re: slagging off the competition
Quite right. The difference is though, the I'm a PC, I'm a Mac ads hit the spot, because they traversed the period Windows Vista was on sale. Some of the Samsung ads are quite good but don't hit the spot in the same way. iOS generally has higher satisfaction ratings than Android and as a result more existing Android users are switching to iOS than iOS users are switching to Android. Re the wall-hugger ads, smartphone battery life in general, for all smartphone users, is crap and everyone knows that. iPhone battery life is actually relatively good and Samsung seem to be making a play about having replaceable batteries and also the new reserve low power battery mode. But few people carry round replaceable batteries, Samsung users feel just as afflicted by short battery life as iPhone users and all other smartphone users and in any case the subset of iPhone users who are like the subset of Samsung users who would carry a spare battery, have the highly effective option of the Morphie Juice Pack.
@Ratfox, the iPhone sells about twice as much, over previous years about 1/3 more. Consistently has done. You just would never guess it from reading The Register "Peak Apple" articles. You hear headlines about The Samsung S whatever outselling the iPhone at launch, but that is only because it is the launch month. At all other times they are usually far behind.
Additionally app developers make on average twice the revenue from iOS apps than Android apps make on the Google play store (that's about 4 times the revenue per active user)
Models per manufacturer is almost irrelevant, because most manufacturers shipping low cost Android handsets are making virtually zero profit (at least those outside china. Stats for China only suppliers are scarce). In fact last year, combined, all smartmobe manufacturers other than Samsung and Apple made less than zero profit. Samsung are primarily making their profit from the Galaxy range, which is why they held a sales crisis meeting late last year when it was clear sales were dipping.
Samsung recently have rebranded ALL there handsets as "Galaxy" range. In my view this is to obscure their worsening position in high-end handset market and to start reporting numbers for total number of mobes shipped, so they can still try and look like they are still performing well relative to Apple by publishing "bigger" figures.
The truth is the handset market is now like the Netbook market became. Wafer thin margins that will massively raise risk and strangle innovation. Android is playing the same role as Windows did for Netbooks and the promise to manufacturers that they can differentiate on top of it with their own UI implementation is slowly being withdrawn as it is being shown to bring fragmentation problems and as Google has now established a large enough user base they can start to dictate terms.
These market characteristics have lead Benedict Evans to point out it is best not to think of the smartphone maker as a single market, but rather a set of markets, some being worth a lot more than others. There's only one that is really worth being in, and that is the high-end market, and Apple continue to steadily expanding within it and continue to increase their domination of it. I know many El Reg readers don't like to hearing this and swallowed The Register's "Peak Apple" analysis that was based on nothing more than wishes, but it's the truth.
So this really illustrates The Register's nature as defined by negativity. Sure it's a mildly interesting tidbit. Yet Apple completed their WWDC conference this year, which was highly successful and packed full of genuinely interesting tech news and future direction for their platform yet there was barely a mention of what had occurred. Instead we have been witnessing a swing to the old and crusty. The Register has been focussing increasingly on an old fashioned IT administrator crowd. It's becoming like a bunch of ex-PC-World magazine journalists shaking a stick at the "Idiot young'uns who don't know how real computing is done." This has attracted the bitter cynical PC junior administrator crowd, many of whom were only ever really slightly more specialist PC system users tasked with little more responsibility than having to wipe the arses of other less Aspergic users, and bitter for having to do so. Now the world is moving on and job specs are shrinking further as IT infrastructure moves to the cloud, food for the bitter is getting squeezed out of the near empty toothpaste tube in the form of The Register articles.
Re: Samsung unclear about why the rebrand had taken place
"The term “Galaxy” – which was once solely the high end brand in the Samsung range – now embraces all of its Android phones, with the Ace and Grand Neo now becoming the Galaxy Ace and Galaxy Grand Neo."
Most probably because with their sales dip the brand distinction was making it clear they have been getting their arses whooped by Apple in the high-end market. They were selling at best 2/3 the number of Galaxy handsets as Apple have iPhones and now, with their ongoing sales dip and going from a vintage S4 release to a not so vintage Galaxy S5 release, while Apple have gone from a not so vintage 5 release to a vintage 5S release, it will have dropped to more like about 1/2 the number. They also know Apple seized the initiative in a number of technology areas: 64 bit computing, full finger finger print scanner, iBeacons, soon to be released handover features. They also know with the forthcoming larger iPhone the battery life will be massively improving, because one of the advantages of a larger handset is a relatively larger compartment space for the battery.
However they are still killing it with cheaper handsets (though of course facing stiffer competition in China), so I suspect this is a typical bit of Samsung obfuscation of the shipment figures to help protect their credentials with the tech press (they have already reported their sales dip as temporary and recovering by next quarter for two quarters in a row and can't say the same thing next time). Expect them to now make all sorts or press releases with implied (but invalid) comparisons of Galaxy sales figures.
Agreed. I think the indies should team up with another provider like e.g. Vimeo, who have always provided far higher streaming quality than YouTube and call Google's bluff. The independent labels are where the centre of cool is. Surely music is it's own promotion. Boring old Google couldn't hope to survive the loss of cool if the independents went elsewhere. Just look at the instant transformative effect music has on a product. Apple have understood this for some time and have been masters at exploiting the instant lift music can provide. C'mon indies, have faith in your power, go with someone else. Google will come running back to you.
A couple of reminders of just how effective music can be in advertising
Re: Serious biz users don't want Samdung Fandroid or iDrone Crapps
What do you find your iPhone doesn't do well that your Blackberry does? My business is app development and I would be interested to understand where there are weaknesses/opportunities etc.
- Infosec geniuses hack a Canon PRINTER and install DOOM
- Feature Be your own Big Brother: Monitoring your manor, the easy way
- Boffins say they've got Lithium batteries the wrong way around
- In a spin: Samsung accuses LG exec of washing machine SABOTAGE
- Phones 4u slips into administration after EE cuts ties with Brit mobe retailer