In other words, we really don't know why sea levels dropped, but other things in the world happened, so that must be why, and of course man is responsible, but we really can't say how.
Wow, that was helpful!
9 posts • joined 6 Jan 2010
http://www.theregister.co.uk/Design/graphics/icons/comment/fail_32.png This article significantly misrepresents iPad sales for the quarter. While the numbers are correct, the implication that Apple's iPad sales are disappointing is stupid. People waited to buy iPads because they knew the iPad 2 was coming out, likely with cameras and other upgrades. Plus, Apple can't come close to keeping them in stock and can't build them fast enough.
Meanwhile, Samsung and Motorola can't even sell what they can build. That's a far cry from claiming that Apple is losing sales or feeling the pressure from competitor's tablets. The only reason Apple's iPad sales weren't higher is that they didn't have any more units to sell.
Apple isn't using "dubious legal nonsense and dirty tricks." Apple has filed lawsuits to protect its IP. Whether the courts agree remains to be seen, but such is the state of our current patent systems – they simply weren't designed for software and technology advances. If you have ever read a patent, it states in somewhat general terms what the innovation is designed to do. Often that doesn't seem terribly different from what other patents do, and the subtle difference can have wide-reaching effects.
And therein lies the problem. Almost all of these patent disputes involve patents which describe "a method of delivering text messages to mobile devices", or "a method of managing power systems", etc. The devil is in the details, but most of these patents are so broad that it is almost impossible not to violate someone else's patent when building a mobile phone, computer, developing software, etc.
Apple is also legally bound to protect its IP, otherwise it becomes public use and Apple won't have a leg to stand on. Apple has a duty to its shareholders to protect its IP, so it really has to file these suits.
I don't think it's much of a surprise that your phone keeps a record of your location, especially when you have location services built into the OS and apps.
But how about railing on Google for its Android software talking to the mother ship several times an hour with your location data, unique phone ID, etc.?
Microsoft has real problems because its products are mature. Who really needs a new version of Office, Exchange, or Server? Companies can keep what they have and soldier on for years without upgrading. The only new licenses needed to be bought would be when buying new hardware, and many times not even then.
Plus, Microsoft has shown little ability to improve Windows, Office, etc. without bloating the software, forcing dramatic increases in hardware requirements. Microsoft is NOT diversified, not for a company of its size. It has three profit centers, which are all related, and nothing in the mobile devices market which anyone wants (Windows Mobile is a joke). Microsoft also can't get out of its own way when updating/redesigning/changing its software – it seems to do everything design-by-committee-and-focus-group, much like GM did in the 1980s, 1990s, and early 2000s – during which time GM went from being the auto industry's powerhouse with 60%+ of the US market to barely surviving with less than 25% of the US market.
The iPod market is not topped out. It won't grow at the pace it did 2-5 years ago, but it's still growing. The iPhone and iPad markets will continue to grow by leaps and bounds, and the iPad is redefining personal computers and devices. Competitors won't be able to keep up with Apple because of patents and innovation which Apple can deliver and third party companies can't, because Windows and Android/Chrome simply can't be as seamless and integrated as the iPhone OS is.
HP has the best shot, but I have yet to see HP actually develop good software, so I doubt it will be able to take WebOS and make it be a true competitor to iPhone OS.
Google will never catch Apple because Google can't ever get the "beta" tag off of its software products. Android is already fragmented, with owners of phones unable to update to new versions of Android (unlike the iPhone). And this is only going to get worse as time goes on. Google is notorious for jumping into a new arena, then getting bored and letting whatever half-baked product it released to sit and stagnate. Android is the next to experience Google's wandering eye.
"Microsoft's research is developing tremendous ideas" – that's funny. What new idea has come out of Microsoft research, ever? Apples R&D developed the iPod, iPhone, and iPad. Microsoft developed a Big Ass Table for $10,000 which uses 1980s projector technology. Vista had to drop virtually everything new just to get it out the door years behind schedule. Windows 7 Mobile will be so far behind the curve when it is finally released at the end of 2010 (IF Microsoft makes that goal) that it will be laughed at by any other smartphone, let alone the iPhone.
Yeah, great stuff coming out of Microsoft these days.
Paul, Apple doesn't rush products into production. That's one of the reasons Apple pulled out of Macworld – it didn't want to be held to artificial product introduction deadlines.
Apple frankly has shown little concern over iPhones being jailbroken beyond tossing a few more barriers into the mix when an update comes out. Why? Because most people have not need to jailbreak their iPhones/iPods/iPads. The vast majority of people can get the functions they need from an existing app and not have to worry about downloading a virus, having a systems crash, etc. Most iPhone users probably don't even know they could jailbreak their iPhone, and if they looked up how to do it, quickly slam their browser window shut and go back to happily playing their games.
There will always be a small number of geeks who want to hack anything they're not supposed to hack, just so they can say they did it and maybe install some porn or change the OS theme. So Apple lets them have their fun, ignores it, and it goes away very quickly.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/Design/graphics/icons/comment/fail_32.png While it may be that there are moons around Cobot-9b with life, this is nothing more than speculation by these scientists! Facts: They found a gas giant plant orbiting a sun similar to our Sun. Uh, that's about it. They haven't even found a moon yet.
Sure, I think there's life out there on other planets. But to concoct a story based on Avatar-Star Wars moon life just because a big ball of gas has been found in a solar system far, far away does not life make.
Consumers shouldn't look at the device?!? That's what the consumer is buying. They're not buying an ecosystem, a theory, a distribution model, or anything but a device. The Nexus One will either do what consumers want, and do it better or less expensively than its competitors, or people will buy something else.
I didn't buy my iPhone because Apple has a great ecosystem for working with mobile phone providers and hardware developers. I bought my iPhone because it was by far the best at handling the tasks I need to do. FAR better than my old RAZR and Palm Vx with TomTom combo.
What's interesting is that Google is trying to become Microsoft, and Microsoft wants to become Google. Apparently neither company must think that their business models are going to be viable for growth in the future, because they both seem very willing to jump into something completely different.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019