Don't touch, children.
It's just nasty Mr Microsoft using sweeties to tempt you back to his house and never let you out. Say no, run away, and tell mummy when it happens.
504 posts • joined 12 Mar 2007
It's just nasty Mr Microsoft using sweeties to tempt you back to his house and never let you out. Say no, run away, and tell mummy when it happens.
Perhaps they wanted to throttle back the mutual hate stories, and this was an easy off-the-record way.
But I believe Steve Jobs is quite often seen out and about, at the shops, with his family, etc, just like a regular guy. (Except he has no number plate on his car.)
Before iPhone there wasn't a smartphone that looked like iPhone, and Android looked nothing like iPhone. Now most smart phones look like iPhone, especially Android ones. Don't tell me that isn't copying. Users should be grateful to Apple for showing HTC how to make a usable phone.
On the other hand I used to have one of those nice Kodak instant picture cameras until Kodak lost to Polaroid's patent case. I still have a few pictures from it to prove it wasn't an illusion. So perhaps keep some of your favourite snaps as a memento of your HTC phone, in case they have to stop supporting it.
And Apple don't stop you installing any browser you like on your Mac, either. iPhone is not a user programmable platform, and neither is your car or your TV.
...which means Opera says it's not actually a browser, just a dedicated app for visiting the Opera mini web servers.
In fact, Opera could simply deliver access to Opera mini servers under Safari couldn't they?
No need for an App, and they bypass all Apple's approval process.
I bet it would be just as fast.
Doesn't this mean Microsoft is tightening its grip on the platform, leaving even less scope for OEM partners to innovate, and effectively making them irrelevant intermediaries between Microsoft and contract manufacturers in the far east. Dell and HP have already ceded product development on PC's if favour of picking options from proposals prepared by contract suppliers.
Won't the potential "OEM partners" therefore forsake Microsoft for Android, or roll their own Linux or BSD derivative smartphone (as Apple and Google have done)?
So isn't MS once again trundling along years later copying Apple's product, just as they did with Windows. But this time they will soon copy Apple's business model too. The talk of OEM partners will turn out to be illusory, just as it did for media players. And won't the platform still be flop, just as Zune is?
MS can't go on for ever subsidizing all their other businesses from Office and Windows. Even today it's doubtful entertainment and devices has ever made any money, allowing for 2007's $1.1B special Xbox adjustment, and for a fair share of the enormous but vague costs lumped into "corporate level activity" in Microsoft's accounts ($5-7B annually).
The Register explained how IE9 only gets 55% on ACID3, and isn't committed to fully implementing HTML5, and how MS speaks weasel words when asked about these things.
This new piece seems to be saying what Microsoft wants you to think they're doing, not what they actually are doing.
It looks more like the first embrace of another "embrace, extend, smother" cycle than capitulation on open standards. Hopefully it will finish off IE once and for all, given IE9 won't run on XP.
This ad is going to sell more iPhones than it does Microsoft Windows Phone 7 Series phones.
If browser plugins are adequately sandboxed and restricted to API's that don't threaten privacy or security, and battery life has been improved sufficiently, I see no reason why not. Of course the plugin itself would be delivered by Apple, not Google. (Like Chrome, Safari on Mac already runs plugins in a separate process.)
p-code came after the late 60's o-code, used in BCPL.
Elegant and expressive BCPL was sidelined by its illiterate bastard C derivative, which blighted my entire career even more than Microsoft the destroyer did. Forgive them Lord, for they knew not what they did.
Yes, this is also precisely Java and the JVM all over again, among others. In o-code days machine memory was about 10^5 bytes; today it's about 10^10. So with each order of magnitude increase, we've seen a new attempt at the same problem. Microsoft's is proprietary, natch. Maybe this LLVM iteration will finally stick, with Google's backing.
And for those not paying attention at the back of the class, this is the only way you're going to be able to distribute compiled code on the next generation of platforms without going via the platform owner's provenance-auditing app store. And a good thing too. Live with it, and get off Apple's case.
So the market is brutal. VC's, the carriers and Jon Rubinstein have been lucky enough to live their dream for a couple of years.
The crippling blow for Palm is that they sold 900,000 phones, but end users bought only 400,000. Adding in opening inventory, the channel is stuffed with product to last at least 4 months, probably 6-12 as sales taper off. Palm needs to live on life support for another couple of years if it is to live. It's not so bad; Apple had to put the last Lisa production into a landfill, despite being the forerunner of every Windows and Mac PC in the world. Apple had to slog away selling beastly OS8 and 9 Macs for years while OS X developed. And look how many years Microsoft has to keep things like search, Xbox, Zune etc. on life support in the hope they will grow enough to support the company in its dotage.
WebOS got a free pass to the market with the unsatisifed demand created at other carriers by Apple with its AT&T exclusive. Now that demand can also be served by Android, Microsoft Windows Phone 7 Series, and maybe even iPhone. Carriers are never going to order enough volume of the next Palm product to drive economies of scale.
Big lesson for Rubinstein: "monkey see, monkey do" won't turn you into the alpha male. You can't take a shortcut to an established market; it'll gobble you up and spit you out. Steve Jobs took twenty years of successive development and repositioning of the underlying engineering to achieve iPhone (including a reverse takeover of Apple by Next). iPhone was launched at the earliest moment it was technologically doable, and it was positioned far away from existing products.
I haven't worn a wrist watch since 1999. Is that an accessory you need with a Blackberry, along with the case and screen protector? How manly and technical you must look!
I use my unprotected iPhone very heavily, and yes, there are a couple of little scratches on the glass if I look carefully via reflected light. But what's wrong with that? It doesn't affect "business use". Professional tools do end up battered, but they still have to work. Have you ever seen a pro photographer use their camera in a protective case?
And Apple hasn't banned these or said they'll make you sterile, they've just stopped reselling them. You can still buy them elsewhere. As a company they don't defend their use. So not reselling them in the company shop is simply acting with integrity. Nothing more.
(Of course it's easier to "act with integrity" when your stinking rich!)
This wasn't a commitment to selling phones in large volume. Google just told HTC what to make, branded a batch of HTC phones and switched on Android multitouch to draw out Apple into a patent fight with the sacrificial, patentless, HTC. The worst that can happen is Apple's patents stand up in court and little HTC is emasculated. Plenty of bigger manufacturers will make Android phones if need be. With a bit of luck, one or more Apple patents will be invalidated, and everyone can get on with copying iPhone properly.
you can subscribe to the product-security list at lists.apple.com and know about these things just as fast as the Register.
I presume some of the vulnerabilities also apply to other Webkit browsers such as Chrome, and on mobile platforms (RIM, Nokia).
Scrap 1 & 2.
Tack local TV onto the front of BBC3 & 4 each evening.
Save lots of money.
Let the masses discover that BBC1's main job has been to brainwash us that the 3 "main parties" represents us, and that the current incumbent represents the majority of us.
Actually, I wouldn't mind if the BBC was internet and radio only. Buy just the TV programmes I want to watch. Which is approximately none. An even bigger saving.
Yes, let's see some real hardware doing this in a punter's sweaty hands on Youtube. Even Windows Phone 7 is a long way from that. MS has tried to spoil competitors' business for decades by pre-announcing a product which is "better" but doesn't actually exist. And when it does finally arrive years later than promised, it has little resemblance to the original spoiler announcement. And this isn't even an announcement. At least Sculley never pretended Apple were about to ship the Knowledge Navigator in 1987. Or maybe MS Courier is not going to ship for 23 years either.
Apple have shown MS that their business model no longer works properly. MS needs to do something in a hurry. What quicker than having some designers cobble up Flash -sorry- Silverlight renderings of dream handheld products, then building them by implementing Flash -sorry- Silverlight over the top of an old OS. Until they discover what's involved in producing seamless innards behind the UI, which in the case of iPad has had twenty years continuous development since NextStep 1.0.
@Matthew Collier - I believe Freesat requires any licensed PVR box to encrypt HD when saving to disk, but the live pause buffer isn't encrypted, so you can't save it. EPG tied to encryption again. Easy operation or no DRM, but not both.
Do you guys really think design for manufacturing is so easy, that it's easy to ramp up from zero to a million a month of a new single piece of plastic, let alone an entire hi-tech product featuring hundreds of such components, built to the highest quality standards in the business? (You do know that every Apple product is washed in unicorn tears, don't you?)
It would be astounding if the entire production chain didn't cough and splutter repeatedly for the first month or two, and Apple will have planned for that. Of course there is risk over the first ship date right up until it happens. Most manufacturers ship out the first trial production batch, then nothing for a couple of months before volume production starts, then production coughs and splutters for a couple more months before flowing freely. Apple's hollywood-style hardware product launches are unique, extraordinary, and higher risk.
The idea that a narcissistic Steve Jobs farts about in an ivory tower creating artificial shortages or feeding the media with false rumours to generate demand by hype is childish. Despite unknown popularity, an initial run-rate must be selected, factories must be built or booked, and supplies scheduled, 6 months to a year ahead of time. These are severe problems that Apple always appears to execute effortlessly (not to mention breeding the unicorns). But behind the scenes, thousands of people must be working and worrying like crazy to make it happen.
Apple is actually a most straightforward and transparent company. You can take what they say at face value. But they don't say much!
There will soon be 100 million iPhone platform devices deployed, and each holds more detailed real time knowledge of someone's private life than any PC. What a target. Apple is rightly paranoid about this ending with the kind of out-of-control disgrace that Microsoft's Windows platform continues to be, (e.g. allowing the hijacking of millions of PC's in botnets).
It appears some apps have been logging GPS+WiFi data to their servers, to create parallel databases to skyhookwireless.com like placeengine.com, bypassing the privacy and security controls of the iPhone OS Location Services (which I believe uses skyhookwireless). We geeks have already got our WiFifofum apps, which will continue to work, and we can always jailbreak, register as iPhone developers, or carry a more geeky and hackable pocket device. Apple seems to be taking the cautious approach of saying that the low level WiFi data currently being extracted from the OS is off-limits for app store apps. Innocent local-only wifi detector apps have become roadkill in a decision to ban a larger category.
So far I haven't seen Apple doing anything that isn't in end user interests on a hundred million strong consumer platform. But I'm certainly as vigilant of Apple's actions as I can be, given my limited, but above average, knowledge.
Microsoft's OS is a monopoly tax on PC's, and frightfully boring and tedious in truth. This story is pre-choreographed hype from Microsoft based on preparations made last year. Exactly the same techniques were used with Vista ("Microsoft's fastest product launch ever: nearly 40 million copies sold in the first 100 days"), plus an extra one. Techniques used:
1. Channel stuffing (MS has done this with so many products, including Xbox and Zune): the count is the number of copies and OEM installs sold to distribution and to OEM partners. Attractive one time deals encourage them to buy ahead. We aren't told how many are still in the channel, unsold to users.
2. Bundling: pretty hard to buy the PC you want without W7, and often there's a downgrade right to XP. Still counts as a W7 sale even if it's never installed.
3. (the enormous one) Recording months of Vista sales before WIndows 7 release as "Windows 7 with a temporary Vista install licence". Under GAAP accounting rules, Microsoft is not allowed to recognise these sales until the entire deliverable has shipped. And Hey Presto, months of Vista sales before W7 launch can be counted as W7 sales after launch. This deferred revenue amounted to $1.7B, which at $50 a pop for Vista OEM licenses amounts to 34 million or so Vistas sold before release being called Windows 7's sold after release.
4. New with W7: pre-selling a full retail copy of W7 Home Premium (transferrable from machine to machine rather than tied to a single machine install) for just over £40 including delivery (a quarter of the price of the corresponding Vista edition). Anyone with a brain who knows they are locked in with MS will have bought this, and anyone in the trade is likely to have bought as many as they could get away with (officially max 3 per customer, I think). A full copy for less than the OEM license price.
The iPhone's success stems from the way it's designed, and that includes tight control over installed software. Apple doesn't allow any third party language systems that dynamically download and run unprovenanced code.
Adobe knows it, and that's why they are making development tools to translate Flash apps into native apps that can be passed through the target platform's provenanced app delivery network. THere are already Flash Apps translated for the iPhone.
There's no doubt that every handset maker has copied iPhone slavishly, and without some legal IP protection, neither Apple, nor Microsoft, nor Nokia would be viable companies. This is just business. To stay in business you have to use the US patent system the way it is, not the way it "should" be, and years ago Apple was royally shafted by Microsoft over the Mac. They've learned their lesson, and in general studiously avoid the perils of patent litigation or of licensing their crown jewels. Tech patents operate by mutually assured destruction of megacorps with large patent portfolios.
First Apple were sued by Nokia and Kodak over iPhone. Nokia is trying to extort a cross license to iPhone patents that Apple doesn't want to share, in exchange for not charging Apple-specific extortionate fees for its own industry standard freely licensed patents. It's likely a settlement will be reached without actually testing Apple's patents in court.
So Apple are going for HTC as their best target with the smallest patent portfolio, to get a final decision made by the courts that can be used against other iPhone copiers. Advantage one: Apple don't need to negotiate, because HTC has nothing Apple needs. Advantage two: HTC is Microsoft's leading handset partner for Windows Phone - resolving this this can only slow MS down. Advantage three: Google is trying to control the smartphone business almost by stealth - via HTC Google can be forced to show their hand, and probably to indemnify Android licensees, becoming seen as the new Microsoft.
With a delay between ordering and fulfilment, Dell gets to buy the components for your machine at a lower price. You may think that computer prices only fall by 10-15% a year, but in fact the machine specs at those price points also improve considerably over that year, so the price of individual components falls much more rapidly. The delay Dell imposed by "not building your computer till you specify and order it" can actually save Dell 3-5%. Conversely, it can move your careful price comparison 3-5% against Dell by the time you take delivery.
Delivery time is of the essence when pricing a computer.
A lorryload of phone components gives you even more options.
And the removable battery is such a joy.
"So it does!" said Pooh. "It goes in!"
"So it does!" said Piglet. "And it comes out!"
"Doesn't it?" said the Blackberry owner "It goes in and out like anything."
When I signed up for an O2 iPhone 3G, they said they were just rolling out 3G in the south west. Ha ha ha. That was 18 months ago. Still neither 3G nor even EDGE. So it's £35 a month for unlimited GPRS round here. (In fact in a few places there's not even GPRS - voice only). No wonder O2 love the iPhone. At least I've got some Apple shares to recoup a tiny portion of the gouge.
It's back to my founder membership of Virgin at £0 a month for me with an unlocked iPhone. Equally crap service but zero monthly cost. Just pay for the calls, and the data used (negligible on GPRS). The way it should be.
That's why you'll have to translate your Flash solution into a Cocoa application (with Adobe's tools) and submit it to the App store if you ever want to see it on iPhone/iPad. You'll get the benefit of the only properly functioning marketplace for mobile app developers.
H264 is the obvious alternative to Flash for video, not Quicktime. That's what Youtube, Vimeo and Hulu are implementing. Try enabling youtube.com/html5 and see how nice the videos can be.
The app is of no interest to Google, and not much interest to iPhone users since iPhone OS got global search last year. So it must be the hire Google wanted, not the app. Once you've hired him, what's the best thing to do with his old job and app? Have him quit and take the app off the market, of course.
Now if Google bought up and killed, say, all the turn by turn navigation apps, we'd have a story.
It's called "qualifying sales leads", and the survey shows it's been done brilliantly. Tyre kickers turned away in droves, keen buyer numbers tripled. All from one media event. Apple could only be disappointed if they had expected 40% of the population to buy within 3 months.
FUD overlayed on positive figures. Just like the unexpectedly low price, now overlayed with "don't buy it yet, Apple will slash the price within 2 months".
Just accept that it's going to succeed, and like iPhone, it's not going to be easy for competitors to copy properly.
Apple could do an Xbox and subsidise with billions to get it started at $249. But they won't need to. It's faster, thinner, lighter, brighter, safer, easier, more fun and twice the battery life of a netbook.
This is Apple's store (like Tesco). Apple's not objecting to the same App being sold elsewhere, with the same name, or winning prizes elsewhere, they're just saying "stay on topic in our iPhone App store with your merchandising materials".
Just like Tesco saying "sell as many packets of Macvities digestive as you like at Sainsbury's, but please don't place merchandising materials in Tesco stores that say how good your digestives are when bought from Sainsbury's."
Part of the problem is that people are bringing platform presumptions across from the PC market (instead of, for example, the games console market or traditional retailing), and part of the problem is that no other company has made the sustained commitment required to replicate Apple's setup. It's like a Tesco with no Sainsbury's, Asda or Morrisons to compare against. The most obvious candidates with the appropriate resources were Microsoft and Nokia, but (a) they don't get it and (b) they don't sustain any initiative for long enough to be trusted and (c) they are actually greedier than Apple with their attempts at content distribution and lazier in fighting the consumer's corner against big content publishers.
Apple must be constantly dumbfounded by the incompetence of their competition.
What's wrong with tethering your iPad to your phone (maybe even to your iPhone). If you're out of range of WiFi, you're out, so you must have your phone with you anyway. Don't need a 3G iPad.
Apple was deferring huge amounts of iPhone earnings because of obscure accounting rules (now revised) reducing their apparent results for the past two years. The restatement simply brings their accounting into line with everyone else's. They have restated all their previous accounts using the new rules. Earnings really have grown 50% year over year on a comparable basis. Apple's P/E (price/earnings) ratio is now more or less the same as the others (MSFT, DELL, HP), but they aren't growing at all. Now if Apple had the same silly price/earnings ratio as Amazon (growth 27% YOY), the share price would be $850, not $200!
Despite combining usability with tight controls more effectively than its competitors, this shows iPhone could do better, e.g. providing an outgoing firewall, and overall paranoia settings (e.g. "nobody sees my address book without my say-so"). These are relatively small OS changes. Equally, the existence of the app store review process, app sandboxing, and and app kill switches shows that iPhone is probably the only current candidate smartphone to be a viable proposition for universal adoption. It's certainly been exposed to hacker scrutiny a couple of orders of magnitude greater than any other phone platform, for which iPhone users and Apple investors everywhere should be extremely grateful. That's a multi-year process that any competitor will need to complete before taking the iPhone crown.
Contrary to AC, it is not possible for someone with temporary physical access to install an app on an iPhone without either wiping it completely first, or knowing the user's Apple ID password. A spy app, however puny, would also be killed and pulled from the App store long before it became a significant threat to the ordinary phone user, even if it did evade the review process.
If I entrust data (such as address book , emails etc) to a web service (such as webmail) thenFlash content (within, say, an email) can do what it likes with my data if they are both served from the same domain. Web sites should host unvetted scripted content from a separate domain so its scripts are sandboxed.
Adobe's is putting self-interest before user security in not implementing any mechanism to enforce security. Maybe users should be implementing their won Flash security. I'm with ClickToFLash, and I hope Flash never comes to iPhone.
. . . is a service for content owners publishing through the iTunes store. Apple does not try to be a walled garden distributor of video and audio content, but does ensure availability of content in a form that meets Apple's user experience requirements and works on Apple's devices. Apart from that, Apple strongly encourages freely licensable standard format content with no DRM.
said the hospital spokesman, "there's an obvious hole in the patient's argument".
That's what I use, with a diskless airport extreme. And it does lots of other nice stuff as well as being a time machine backup (including running an iTunes server, which is more than a Time Capsule does). And you can RAID the drives, and you can replace them every 2-3 years, which is, frankly, the prudent thing to do.
Other than that, don't stack your time capsule; ideally put its conductive rubber base on a nice cool sheet of aluminium (baking tray?).
It's not the user who buys the phone, it's the carrier (even when you buy it from the Apple store, the carrier pays most of the price). The way governments have set up the mobile business, Apple isn't selling iPhones to punters, it's selling high ARPU punters to carriers.
But Apple is in the business of creating and managing the end-user experience, which steps on territory the carriers regard as their own. Locking down 99% of devices is an essential component of Apple's power to persuade carriers to cede control of the user experience.
I used to have a jailbroken iPhone, but I can no longer be bothered. I'll wait for Apple to add conveniences like SBsettings, and if they don't, too bad.
As regards Apple keeping apps off the phone, they do accept the vast majority. That's why there's so much garbage. They have made writing software a viable business for the small developer; something it hasn't been for the preceding 20 years, although a handful may have struck lucky.
I have one, also at 1571 firmware in a Macbook Pro; silent and fast. It sometimes has problems on Macbook Pros, the later firmware has even more problems, and there will certainly be upgrades to the firmware needed. I need to run with hibernate mode disabled (never did like it anyway). Check Crucial and Apple support forums before you take the plunge. I suspect Indilinx will iron out the problems eventually.
Note also the potential problem of flash drives slowing down with use.
Ever watch "Pirates of Silicon Valley"? After those days, Gates, the hyper competitive game player, knew it was true, and hired the best (cosmetics) marketers and (smoke and mirrors) accountants to propel the undeserving MS upwards. But Gates also knew his limits and stepped lightly off MS at the peak. Ballmer never did get a thing, and MS is now thundering faster and faster downhill. Gates no longer cares; Ballmer barely knows.
But Windows is still a monopoly, and in business terms successive releases are simply a repaint of the monopoly revenue engine. Since nearly all Microsoft's earnings come from Windows & Office (the rest is a loss making business), it's very hard psychologically for them to cut prices. Yet that is what they should have done with Windows 7. A flat $29 price for an individual OEM (i.e. non-transferrable) Win 7 upgrade.
Microsoft's profitable core is the enterprise desktop, and everything else is just fungal growth feeding off this core revenue. MS will go further down before any turnaround, so Ballmer will be kicked out, even if he truly does know a way forward (no sign yet).
. . . if/when Payola comes to Spotify. The music biz was always willing to pay for its songs to be played to us; why should Spotify be any different?
My Macbook Pro 2.26GHz boots up to the Snow Leopard desktop in 14 seconds. Since I shut it down less than once a month, it's an acceptable delay.
But 15 years ago, my SE/30 booted up Mac OS 6 to desktop ready (from ram disk) in under a second.
If switching to W7 saves $160 and releases $600 of billable time per year, XP must have been really bad.
Talking of frugal, Apple just announced education can license Snow Leopard (with Exchange integration), iLife and iWork for down to $20 a seat. What's the corresponding MS bundle? Does it do music, photo, video?
Should have been public info from the start. It's outrageous that RoyalMail only makes £1.6M annually out of withholding it; its true value to UK PLC is at least a hundred times greater, but that can only be realised by making it freely available.
Intel and MS have done very well from their monopolies, but the whole industry is now set up for a huge fight, with these two handcuffed to their legacy products & business model and the market moving on. With its low licensing costs, ARM is effectively the "open source" CPU architecture corresponding to unix/linux the "open source" OS, and (could it be?) to Webkit, the open source browser/renderer engine which together are already gobbling up the mobile and consumer markets.
Probably Wintel's only strategy is to hold on to margins and accept dwindling market share. All attempts to move forward (by Intel to new architecture, and by MS to new OS) have failed so far. Why should it be any different now? They would have to be reborn as minnows. Instead they might become the main meal at a feeding frenzy led by Google, Apple, TSMC, Samsung.
Will Intel be forced to re-license ARM to keep their fabs busy? Will MS be forced to use Webkit or a Unix OS core in their handhelds? The entire world will soon realise that these two are already cursed to "live in interesting times". No wonder Intel's legal counsel jumped ship to Apple.
Then there's PowerPC.
Intel and MIcrosoft have earned fat monopoly profits for many years, but we can now see Apple has executed a brilliant decade long business plan to attack those margins while preserving its own.
For those that haven't spotted it, Apple could be a threat to Intel's profitability, now that Apple has its own in-house chip design team (via the PA Semi acquisition), and a complete OS and application stack that can be built for Intel, for ARM or even for PowerPC (to which Apple has IP rights). Apple must be feeling mighty pleased with themselves over this hire as smartphone and PC markets merge, and Apple's own processors go into their first shipping product (the "tablet").
Apple has had prepay arrangements with most of the flash manufacturers to ensure preferential access to future supplies. Here's the press release for the first such deal; there have been more since:
Anyone with a billion to spare in 2005 could have done it. Apple needed to do it, because otherwise someone else with deep pockets could have killed the iPod business; the more ancient among us may remember DEC cornering the world market for a new generation of DRAM and hence cornering the market for large memory mainframes.
Putting TomTom against Navigon & any others.
Having tried with Navigon, I have to say Google maps with route marked, positition tracking and satellite photos does a very good job for free if you have cellular data service.
. . just MS buying some Silverlight installs out of OS/Office monopoly revenues.
That's because they're suddenly having to work for their living at their underlying trade, instead of being beancounter plus sales narcissists.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2017