Miracle-tech that could fix almost everything
You mean "duct-tape?"
545 publicly visible posts • joined 7 Oct 2008
Question not the actions of Jobs; for it is he who bringeth light from the dark. It is Apple who can do no wrong; and if fallibility be shown, let word of infallibility instead go forth across the lands. Those unbelievers who do not 'get it' shall be smited; and the smiting shall be merciless; and shall be conducted at Internet cafés, and at comic-book conventions, and by those fanbois who understand not other technologies that provide equally good experience but at a cost of fewer shekels.
Yay, for it is written that Jobs of Cupertino is the One True Steve, The Real Steve, All You Other Steve Jobs are just immitatin'. Death (or at least, a less evangelical following) to the heathens of Google; and of Microsoft; and of those from the far off lands of Nokia. Apple will take care of it. You are free, to do as they tell you.
Believe in Steve, for it is He.
[Hmm, didn't the Bible say something about a poisonous apple? Ah no, that was Sleeping Beauty]
Spot on article, and it reminds me yet further of The Perplexing Case of Jobs.
Why, with all of computing history against him, does Steve Jobs persist in pushing a closed, restrictive platform? Sure, it has worked in the short (and maybe even medium) term but in the long run it's only ever going to be a losing strategy.
Maybe that's enough for him.
It's always nice to see an Amiga story. Sadly I haven't turned on either my A500 or A1200 in a decade because they were simply becoming obsolete, but I would love to see the platform make a resurgence.
Amigas always appealed to those who were more tech-savvy than PC owners, more creative than Mac owners (shock!) but more sociable than the *nix brigade ... oh, and gamers. ;-)
"As it becomes more difficult to pigeonhole devices into categories so arguments about what makes a fair comparison will proliferate, but few would argue with the conclusion that the iPad is really, really, good at surfing the web from the sofa."
So? Quantcast was right in the first place: there's no point in comparing an iPad with mobile phones. Compare it with other tablets if you must. There are some out there and clearly the iPad will win on the traffic stakes, if only because their owners like things pretty / bandwidth hungry.
Why not compare it with laptops, since it's apparently going to destroy them? Well, probably because it would fail - even against Macbooks.
Junk article by El Reg here. Really bad science, and I think perhaps you knew that before you published...
There is one reason alone why my company tried iPhones and returned back to Blackberries: typing. It's one thing to receive e-mails but typing a message of any meaningful length does not work well on a touch-screen (and I include my beloved Android in that too).
It's the one thing I miss about my old HTC Windows Mobiles with the slide out keyboard. The GUI was a dog and the haptic feedback on the 'droid is good but you can't make up for a real keyboard with real keys.
Hence the icon: "You owe me a new keyboard..."
This entire notion that HD content needs protection is absolute rubbish. Exactly how does a few more pixels justify content controls where none existed before?
Answer: they don't, but licence-holders are using it as a smokescreen to expand their control further, at the expense of viewers.
They're only a burden because there are so many of them. Thanks to 'Call Me' Tony Bliar's socialist call for 50% of the population to go to University, the value of a degree has been correspondingly eroded. University was always traditionally supposed to be for the academics, and while it might seem lovely and inclusive to get everyone doing it, a large portion of the courses for these new students are entirely useless and will not pay for themselves over the working life of the person concerned.
"...unless Google/AdMob can bring in the US Federal Trade Commission to pinch hit for them..."
The likelihood of the FTC calling it for Google would be based on whether or not the mePhone has the right to be a closed platform. So far, Steve is banking on the fact that it is, and it has.
Eventually, however, that argument will be broken. And it will only have to fall apart once, on one aspect of the law, for the rot to have set in and Apple's closed-platform philosophy will begin to unravel.
It is, at best, a short-to-medium term strategy. It may have worked over the past few years but it is utterly unsustainable.
Yes, the world is awash with would-be bloggers but that rather misses Alistair 7's point, the only part you didn't address: "a high level of journalistic output."
What is being alluded to here is not the quantity of information, nor even its very existence. Yes, if an event happens on the other side of the world then bloggers will be there in force to tell you about it. Instantly. With mobile phone pictures. Big deal.
What's missing is the quality; the dispassionate, reasoned, balanced and insightful commentary that comes with years of experience, training, contacts and knowledge. Trying to elevate Joe Blogger to the level of an Alistair Cooke or Walter Kronkite is laughably insulting. It's the development of a story and the reasoned argument of points you'd never have thought of that makes a good newspaper great.
Facts don't make a newspaper, the editorial does.
It's also the reason why the Murdoch press is so corrosive; because just feeding people what they expect is like a form of information incest, where anything new and unexpected is dismissed, irrespective of how relevant it is.
And that's why I only half agree with Steve Jobs, because while his commentary is spot-on, he'd quite happily sell space to the shit-serving gutter press and then we're back to square one.
"...acceptance of the iPad is proof..."
What acceptance? What proof? The world's gimp-like fanbois lapping up Steve's dribble is hardly a new paradigm.
"And then they run to the press and tell people about this oppression..."
Which, funnily enough, doesn't happen on other platforms. Must be coincidence.
"Microsoft is a follower not a leader"
Exactly right. Time was when they could do no wrong except in the eyes of techies who viewed their products with distrust and disdain.
Now Apple can do no wrong (coincidentally except in the eyes of techies, for different but related reasons) and have a 28% margin on everything they make. Overpriced? Certainly, but you have to admire it nonetheless.
So there's your target, Mr Ballmer, although the comment about slipping into a black turtleneck perhaps should refer to you slipping into another role...
"Hundreds of tech reviews..." including fanboi bloggers and PR placements?
"and all positive..." So if I find a single negative one I can call you a liar? How about ten? Twenty?
"cant make enough of the damn things...." because the cheap Chinese workforce insist on topping themselves.
"The iPad is a success..." On what twisted measure?
"you missed the point..." There's a point to the infernal box?! And you know what it is? If so, do please share because - short of being a rather fetching fashion statement - the rest of us are buggered if we know what it is!
"It's fashionable to bash Apple now, but the company didn't start the fire, and suing isn't going to help put it out."
Quite right. Apple-bashing is my third favourite hobby after downloading porn and not getting out enough :-) but it's unfair to blame The Steve because iTunes has been a success.
Perhaps their beef is with the ubiquitous link between iPods and iTunes, for which I have some sympathy. I refuse to install that horrible software on my PC, instead going for WinAmp and ml_ipod (heartily recommended) but we techies are a minority in a world of consumers demanding plug-and-play. In that sense, there is a very strong example of vendor lock-in and this litigation is perhaps not a reaction against the success of iTunes but of the iPod.
Still, Andrew's point remains, and I can't help thinking of a spiteful face / nose argument resulting in the self-induced removal of the latter...
Working on the basis that Anglo-Saxon governments tend to keep an eye on each other (and they do), it's curious to note how little the Australian Labor party has been paying attention to the (mis-) fortunes of the UK Labour party.
The issue of civil liberties was an issue here (though not the biggest) but it was symptomatic of a government ploughing on with ideas regardless of the views of those who elected them. "Tony knows best, dear. Now shut up."
When a government ignores the electorate, invariably the electorate demands to be noticed again by voting in the opposition - even if the opposition have some glaring faults. The next Australian federal election comes within a year. Can they stall the firewall until then? It worked for UK ID cards...
"If Mono is allowed on the iPad, having it on Android as well will mean that developers can save time and effort porting their apps between devices."
But why would you want to port it anywhere? iPad is the only platform for the future. Apple knows best. You are free, to do as they tell you.
</creepy_sarcasm>
Were the iPhone any better, then yes. But it isn't. So no.
I would like to see a third figure quoted for mobile phones alongside standby and talk-time: screen drain. Most of the time I use my phone it's not for talking but the big ol' screen is drawing power nonetheless. These days that's fairly critical.
Seriously, fuck off, the lot of you. This British obsession with deriding itself ad infinitum is becoming as tedious as hell. Yes, the logo is dreadful. Absolutely dire. But these, simply, are not. They're imaginative and different, and most importantly kids love them (for it is children who will be buying the merchandise).
The logo made it easy to bash the games. If they'd had a better design for that, these mascots would have gotten nowhere near the grief they're getting now. What did you want? A lion? Possibly named 'Leo'? Maybe a Trafalgar Square pigeon shitting on everyone? Show some imagination.
Grow up, support your games, or refer to my original instruction. Pick one.
Chiltern Railways have had this for a few years, and it works well. However, despite being a techie, I do prefer the printed paper version (still bar-coded) as a sheet of A4 is somewhat less prone to running out of power.
Chiltern, however, are unusual amongst UK Train Operating Companies (that's TOCs to the insider) in that they're well-organised, efficient and provide a decent service. Some of the others make you want to put Bob Crow in charge of renationalisation...
"But up in First things are much calmer..."
They wish! I don't tend to fly that far forward, but do grace a number of the frequent flyer forums. There you will find regular postings of disbelief from those who have paid top dollar for the quality of First or Club class, only to find that some thoughtful chap has brought along little Horatio as well, and that the blighter is running amok throughout the cabin.
You think it's bad in economy; it's got to be worse when your seat costs £3,000...
I see that no-one has yet run smash-bang into missing the point and recommended avoiding doing the crime if doing the time seems unappealing. Then I noticed that it's only 8:20am on the US east coast.
When you do wake up, my good colonial friends, remember that the question here is not whether McKinnon should be punished, but whether a British subject should be extradited to the US for a crime committed while he was in his home country - and the fact that, were the situation reversed, the UK would have no ability to remove a US citizen from America with the same evidence. We usually blame Tony Bliar [sic] for that piece of faux-anti-terrorism.
"...interest built on emotional..."
And with that, good scribe, I think you have hit upon the real reason for the pro and anti-Apple camps. It's pure emotion.
Why do more women I know have iPhones than men? Because women are more emotional creatures than men and like how it looks, feels and responds to them. Bollocks to parallel processing (and anyway, isn't that when two roads run alongside each other?)
Why do Reg-reading techies generally have disdain for Apple's products? Because technically and functionally they're fairly average (in certain aspects much worse) than most other gadgets but they do come with a hefty price tag to pay for an emotional connection that doesn't rate too highly anyway.
Clearly all those years making cute characters in CGI animation at Pixar did Steve Jobs no harm at all.
Having paid a substantial wedge for that glorified sundial, I wonder if the buyer was aware of the haughty, supercilious and downright irritating Patek Philippe adverts that condescendingly state "You never actually own a Patek Philippe, you merely look after it for the next generation."
Gutted....