3 posts • joined Thursday 2nd June 2011 10:45 GMT
They're probably going to find out how many of their more lucrative Google+ users were only there because of all the useful services Google provided, like Google Reader.
I certainly have reduced my Google dependence to just Mail, Calendar and Translate and would simply have to find alternatives to those if Google decide they can't monetize them as much as their shareholders' greed demands.
They're whittling away services that I use and, instead of channelling me into their Google+ centred world, it's just making me less of a Google user. I cannot be (I know I'm not) alone in this.
So, just for future reference, does anyone know of a decent online shared Calendar app?
1. “after 20 minutes, I've put it back in the box confident I'll never want to touch it again. ”
Why? I've used several devices and they all perform much the same function with a few differences. I've not ever found a compelling reason to claim the iPad does it all so much better, lovely device though it is. Is it at all possible that you are simply more familiar with the iOS way and everything else just feels a bit wrong? Familiarity bias.
2. “And without content, neither Microsoft nor Google have much of a story.”
What is this nebulous concept of “content”? Do you mean iTunes? Is that it? Very little of what I, and I suspect many others, use a tablet for is watching movies and listening to music. Most of what I use it for is reading articles, watching internet content (available almost equally on any web-connected devices except with big limitations on, crucially, the iPad) and interacting with social networks. How does the iPad do any of this stuff “better”?
Don't get me wrong, I'm not bashing the iPad, but I am questioning the oft-stated claim that it does this stuff somehow better. As far as a range of sources of content goes both Android and Windows blow iOS out of the water. And, of course, an Intel Surface tablet will also run iTunes.
Impossible to find out anything about the service without an account.
Napster will never be getting my business until I can see what their "18 Million tracks" includes.
It is frankly ridiculous that the only way you can browse their catalogue is to sign up with a credit card. I don't expect to be able to play tracks for free; I'm quite comfortable with the subscription model, but the only way to entice me to stump up is to show me what music you have.
Spotify only has 15 million tracks because they've imported hundreds of cheap live albums, remixes and, worst of all, karaoke CDs. Sorry, Spotify, you are just insulting me. How can I tell Napster isn't just the same? At least Spotify allows you to browse, and even listen to, their catalogue before signing up.
Also, Napster claims to offer an MP3 store (http://www.napster.co.uk/product_info.html) but can anyone work out how to access it without signing up for a paid subscription?
- Geek's Guide to Britain INSIDE GCHQ: Welcome to Cheltenham's cottage industry
- 'Catastrophic failure' of 3D-printed gun in Oz Police test
- Game Theory Is the next-gen console war already One?
- BBC suspends CTO after it wastes £100m on doomed IT system
- Peak Facebook: British users lose their Liking for Zuck's ad empire