Ice age, basic science, title fail
We're still in an ice age. That'll be why there's big sheets of ice at the north and south poles.
But then of course why let a little science fact get in the way!
19 publicly visible posts • joined 7 Feb 2008
Perhaps if you want to make a fuss about selective quoting you might actually like to read my comments.
I was and have been explicitly talking about examples where a person with an app WHICH PROVIDES CONTENT (in caps to help you there) has decided to not produce an Android app.
Perhaps you might want to read the part of my comment that points out that for Angry Birds that ad driven model is fine but if you have a CONTENT DRIVEN app (helped you there again) then the business model doesn't work for Android.
It's almost like I read the whole of the Rovio article and understood it, agreed with it and used it to illustrate why the Android model is a problem for CONTENT DRIVEN apps.
Almost like I had a clue.
"If you are any good at writing apps you can sell on Market Place just as well as on the App Store."
What if you aren't an App developer?
What if as I described you are a non-developer who wants to make his content available but would prefer that having created all the content he might actually get some money back for his efforts? As a prime example a friend spent money to pay for IPhone development and has made his money back. He investigated Android as he is keen to sell his content to as many people as possible.
Upon investigation it became apparent that he would likely in fact end up paying for the right to have his content on there as he would have the developer overhead with next to no chance of getting the cash back from the store. Once again check out what people with successful apps on Android say about "Paid content". That's what he used as the basis of making his decision
I fully expect Android handsets to outnumber Apple handsets given they are cheaper to buy. The ability of developers to make money from any eco-system is about the perceived value of the Apps they sell.
As you say you haven't bought any Apps. If I decided to become a developer of mobile apps as a full time job I would certainly consider the willingness of people to pay on that platform.
I suggest you read the article interviewing the Angry birds developers
"Android is growing, but it’s also growing complexity at the same time. Device fragmentation not the issue, but rather the fragmentation of the ecosystem. So many different shops, so many different models. The carriers messing with the experience again. Open but not really open, a very Google centric ecosystem. And paid content just doesn’t work on Android. "
As jailbreaking is not perceived as the norm for iOS people feel more confident (rightly or wrongly) in the chances of their App not being pirated. Angry Birds can make money through the advertising due to the frequent use.
A purveyor of a less frequently accessed but useful content resource based app is not going to see any return.
They avoided Android as having done the research they decided that spending the money on having a team of developers write an Android app to go alongside their existing successful IPhone app was not a sensible investment of cash as they were unlikely to see sufficient money come back from that version. Whereas with the IPhone app they would (and indeed have).
This wasn't a "Fart" app or indeed a technology focused app but instead an app that wrapped up their produced content so that it could be accessed on the go. To repackage that content into Android format would require them to hire a team of android developers who would obviously want paying for their services.
As per the article from the Angry Birds developers <http://technmarketing.com/iphone/peter-vesterbacka-maker-of-angry-birds-talks-about-the-birds-apple-android-nokia-and-palmhp/
"paid content just doesn’t work on Android."
That if you are paying to develop an app is a pretty persuasive argument/perception from anyone's perspective.
Say what you like but I know through personal experience of a number of people who have decided against developing versions of their applications for Android because horror of horrors they want to be able to make return on their investment.
Android already has the reputation of being for freetards whilst iOS provides a method of actually making at least the cost of your development back.
I'm quite aware that the cyclists were being twats.
What you "seem to be missing" is that he carried out an action that deliberately endangered them. I quote "Knowing they wouldn't hear me coming..." so if he knew they wouldn't hear him coming then he chose to deliberately and knowingly take an action that would endanger them because they annoyed him.
Slow people on the tube annoy me because they aren't paying enough attention to where they are going. By your logic I could shout really loudly at them and cause them to fall onto the tracks because after all they were guilty of "just being tedious, stubborn, pricks and causing other people annoyance because you can".
Call me an old whiny but I thought causing people deliberate harm was a bad thing. I joke about taking out a pointy stick to get past slow walking pedestrians. I don't actually do it....
He risked doing some people some serious injuries. So because they were cyclists it's ok.
So if it had been a group of black/asian/foreigners that he didn't like would it have been ok too?
Last time I checked the "laws" it was illegal to intentionally endanger someone (which also makes a cyclist endangering peds or cars illegal too).
The comments on here aren't terribly far from the type of comments that you would expect to hear from some loony religous fundamentalist (which should encompass most of the Mail's readership)
It's good to know that such a large proportion of the El Reg readership would happily sign up to a lynch mob if required. Must be hard to fit passengers into your cars what with all the pitchforks and torches...
Think a couple of red mist drivers may have missed the point about him having caused people to crash. Swap out the cyclists part of the story, replace with elderly drivers who drive too slow. Hahaha I caused the old dear to crash into a hedge and risk death. How we laughed!
Hmmm drivers saying that cyclists have no right because they pay no road tax...
If you want to not pay road tax why not get a car that is exempt from road tax, or should they not be allowed either.
I actually had this message on my elite a month ago. Within ten minutes I had the UPS label to send off and within a week I had my Xbox back. Best customer service I've had in a while. It was the first issue I've had with the console.
My Xbox is the only console that I play these days down to one simple fact. Quality of games. I'm sure the PS3 has now most of the games but when I came to upgrade to the next gen of consoles the Xbox range was better.
On the whole 360 moonwalk dillema. 360 would indeed leave you facing in the direction you started but a moonwalk goes backwards?
"Free Internet gaming is the founding cornerstone of multiplayer gaming nowadays, there is strictly no reason for me to go pay to play for an average, if interesting, RTS, when I can play Supreme Commander or a host of other good ones online for nothing.
Talk about shooting yourself in the foot."
Presumably like they shot themselves in the foot with Halo 3 and all the money they get from the 100's of thousands who play that on-line every day for a fee
Paris because she knows all about on-line money