What's new? Batteries are not user replaceable on £30 Casio watches. I really don't see the issue.
46 posts • joined 12 Jun 2009
Just as how those useless 'cookie banners' have ruined the web (and haven't helped anyone's privacy) , the EU now want to saddle all our phones with an awful USB connector that always seems to take 3 attempts to connect. Apple already offer a micro-USB adapter that I doubt anybody bothers to use. How is this even a problem? All phones come with a charger. Saying accessories won't work etc is fair enough, but then neither will my apps if I switch from Android to iOS.
No wonder the EU hasn't produced an Apple, a Microsoft or a Google.
I have found Android tends to slow down over time, this is likely to be a software design problem (like the messages app loading all 3,000 of them into memory when I just want to read the latest) - at a guess. Part of me thinks it's probably down to Android running mostly Java software - is geek-bench written in Java, or did they use C/++?
So this will only people who play games, even then the G4 has more pixels to push, so who knows.
Always on, like your TiVo box? Like your NAS box? Your Nexus 4? iPad? DVD Player? Kindle? Even your Xbox 360 (how the hell do you think it turns on via the controller?)
My Xbox 360 is always online never mind always on (I presume you know the difference) - giving this developers this guarnetee will creative new possibilities for gameplay, who doesn't have an always on connection these days? Really? I mean, really? Not the type of people you'd expect to be buying a brand new games console.
Still, luddites can choose to go and live in a Faraday cage if they wish,
By its nature, native apps will push new boundaries (the way Flash did) and HTML5 will come along 5-10 years later with an open version. That's what happens when you have the likes of Apple, Google and Microsoft all trying to make their platform attract users and developers. How would I crop and compress an image in HTML5 for example? Send push notifications? One day, but by then who knows what native software will be doing that HTML5 can't.
HTML5 also behaves very differently across different mobile platforms and OS versions. The dream of write once run on iPhone and Android hasn't been realised yet, so you end up with something that uses the lowest common denominator in order to work. Yes it costs more, but I unless it's a very simple app, writing 2 apps for each platform will always result in a better end product.
Then there's the connectivity problem - until we have fast internet everywhere, on all our devices, native apps that can download their content will be needed. Can your HTML5 connect to the internet and download the latest content automatically every night?
I have worked with webby tools such as Phone Gap, and Appcelerator but in the end I had to learn Objective-C and go native. I don't regret that. I have total control over the interface, how and when I load resources, and what thread I do processing on. I get errors when I make a typo, and Core Data makes working with massive datasets very easy. If I want scrolling, I don't need to write my own physics or get a framework, if the client asks me to generate a PDF and upload it to a web service, I can. If I suddenly need to play a video on a spinning 3D cube, I can.
In short there are no limits when you go native (except app store restrictions but they affect all apps). HTML5 might be fine for small apps (which arguably should be web sites anyway) but when you are approaching a long-term large project, it's just not there yet, and to be honest I don't see why the two need to compete. The web is a totally different paradigm to native software, any dev who thinks he/she can 'reuse their skills' will be in for a nasty surprise.
I too have an iPad and a Nexus 7. As expected the Nexus 7 feels a lot cheaper than the iPad, but that's no surprise since it was. No matter which Android tablet I use I always seem to play 'hunt the power button' for slightly too long. Nothing beats the obviousness of the iPad's home button.
What the Nexus 7 is good for is browsing the web, reading or watching a video when out and about, it fits in my back pocket. Google Now is also very handy, telling me when to leave for meetings etc. I've tried to do some Office word doc editing and quickly gave up. If only the Beeb would release an iPlayer that can download on Android....
I remember reading comments on here when the original iPhone was announced claiming how the N95 would walk all over it, because it had a better camera, SD slot, GPS, etc etc. What matters is, how well does the software works with the hardware and online services?
I like the design and will probably getting one. Samsung et al keep making these screens bigger in the way Gillette keep adding more blades to their razors. That's not innovation!
Android only needs 4 cores to run fast because it's so slow and bloated - seriously, we use these devices to check Facebook, not to render the next Toy Story.
Windows Phone is more like a sports motorbike, with Android being a big fat, gas guzzeling 4x4. The bike's engine will be far smaller, but it will no doubt accelerate more quickly, and have a higher top speed than the wagon.
We should be judging devices based on how well they perform, not on the numbers.
Also lack of SD card is a GOOD thing. Users don't want to have to decide where to install apps, or even think about that sort of thing. It adds too much unwanted complexity. Microsoft's motto here, quite rightly is KISS - "Keep it simple, stupid".
I did enjoy this article and it raised some interesting questions, but surely if the author's hypothesis is correct then we'd already have seen Macs taking over the enterprise since Office was released for it in 2001 (not forgetting there was Office 98 for classic MacOS and of course the very first version of Office was for Mac).
What's the betting only the 4 core Office products will be available for the iPad (Word, Excel, PowerPoint and OneNote) - to get Outlook (that's the crucial business app) and the other myriad of products you'll need a Windows 8 PC. Yes the iPad can access exchange, but can it do all the labels, meeting requests (with room allocation), tasks, out of office replies etc that Outlook does?
I like the fact that it syncs conversations between my iPad and iPod. The abaility to send decent quality photos and videos is nice too. It just proves it's all about ease of use, as Android has had Google Talk built in for years but nobody I know uses it to replace SMS. My phone is Android so I revert to SMS when I'm away from WiFI. I can't see Apple ever release an Android client for iMessage....
The GPS receiver on the iPhone seems to eat a lot of battery life, I wouldn't be happy with an application that drained my battery just so it could show me an ad! Seeing as battery life is the the reason they give for now allowing multitasking, I'd hazard a guess that it's the same reason here.
I have an iPhone 3GS on 02. I live with someone who has a Nokia 5800 02. Their phone can have full 3G signal while my iPhone has one bar and intermittently switches to standard GPRS. The iPhone doesn't seem to have a very good 3G radio. I still wouldn't swap any day, the Nokia's interface is laughable. But the iPhone may be to blame when it comes to network issues.
Leo Laporte from the podcast This Week In Tech said he experienced unexpected data changes with AT&T while in China - don't know how widespread that is, but there seems to be some sort of issue with the amount of data the iPhone uses, or reports that it has used.
I've used a Nokia of various types since 2001, but when my second N95 broke with the same fault, I swore I'd never use them again. So now I have an iPhone, and I'm not regretting it.
They have lost the plot with quality assurance. On a plus side, their 5800 gets much better 3G signal than my iPhone 3G S - so they can make decent radio chips still. Shame about everything else.
Firefox has demonstrated that there is competition in the browser market. Google, a search engine used by the vast majority of internet users, prominently displays a chrome icon on its home page. There isn't much different to Microsoft prominently displaying an IE icon on their Windows desktop.
As for opera, there's a reason why no one uses that browser, it's crap!
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019