...and it was MS who sent a "humorous" bunch of flowers, as though the whole thing was some whimsical jape that they were in on, rather than being the stinking bag of moose balls that caused the whole thing in the first place with a decade of ineptness.
...they can be so fecking glib about inflicting that diseased anal wart on us for so long, and making my life as a web designer about 64,000x harder than it needed to be.
While Apple's motives may well be mostly self-interest now, Adobe only has itself to blame for giving Apple the excuse to do this. The simple fact of the matter is that on OS X, Flash runs like a weeping bag of rancid dog's cocks when compared to the Windows version, even on the same hardware.
Why?
Adobe is currently trying to make much of how the speed deficit is not of their making, and that Apple doesn't expose the necessary APIs for hardware acceleration in the same way Windows does. This may be true, but hardware acceleration was only recently introduced in version 10. What, then, is the reason that previous versions of Flash ran so poorly under OS X, when the question of hardware acceleration was irrelevant?
Also, they conveniently ignore that fact that the Flash plug-in is the #1 cause of crashes in Mac browsers. How is that instability related in any way to the availability of hardware acceleration?
Please clarify exactly when you've been required to pay any money to update your iPhone OS?
You're probably referring to iPod Touch customers who have to pay (but are not *required* to update) but whether you're conflating the two due to ignorance or weasley-ness is unclear.
It's rather amusing when so many like to beat on Apple for allegedly poor legacy support, and yet here they are as the only major smartphone supplier whose latest and greatest OS still runs on their first model.
Seriously. It's bad enough having one proprietary runtime to fucking deal with while calming down idiot marketeers who get a hard-on about building websites entirely in Flash. We don't want another. Competition here isn't good, it just makes for a bigger bag of dogs' cocks.
I hope to Buddha's balls that HTML5 gets it's shit together quickly.
Dear Numb Nuts, please explain how Apple could possibly provide support for an installation of their OS that has been altered in order to run on non-Apple hardware?
As someone else pointed out, Apple is not in the OS business, they are in the computer systems business. Hardware. Software.
Apple doesn't want to sell copies of the Mac OS to run on other people's hardware any more than it wants to sell hardware that just runs someone else's OS.
Where have you been while history was happening? The previous guys at Apple tried licensing the OS and it very nearly killed the company.
As long as it is within the law (and this is exactly what this case set out to prove) then Apple is entitled to write whatever conditions into their EULA that they like. It's not as if they are permitting certain companies to do this, and were somehow being anticompetitive just towards Psystar. Apple doesn't allow *anyone* to do this, as is their legal and moral right. Apple doesn't *have* to let you do anything with their software. Wishing it were different doesn't make it so.
Note that the comment about PearPC is irrelevant. Just because Apple hasn't sued them yet, doesn't mean they condone what they are doing.
This isn't about the Hackintosh community. Those who chose to install Mac OS X on non-Apple hardware will be in the same situation that they were before this ruling. Yes, they are breaking the EULA, but the sum total of Apple's response to these people will be to deny them support.
This is about slapping down a company who thought it was OK to take Apple's property and try and cut Apple out of the hardware revenue to which they were due.
Mac OS X is not sold as a stand-alone product like Windows. It is sold as an update-able component of an Apple hardware system.
You are entitled to not like this, but Apple is also entitled to slap you down for breaking the terms of the license to which you agreed when you opened the box.
As the judge said, if you don't like Apple's terms, don't use Apple's products. There are other options.
I was a student, then lived and worked in Cov for about 15 years, and still work with a lot of people in the area. This was a big deal for the general self-esteem of the City after companies like Jaguar and Massey Fergusson closed their operations there.
...for a PM who was actually democratically elected. That an outgoing PM can simply hand the office over to his mate to have a play with is fucking obscene.
And no, I didn't agree with it when John Major got in on a similar ticket, but he did at least get his own mandate at the next election, which is more than the fat gawping chancer we've got at the moment is going to manage.
This is the most appalling example of commercial prostitution I think I've ever seen. When the Simpsons did the "Mapple" episode, it was funny *because* it wasn't official and didn't show undue reverence.
Microsoft aren't going to pay for an episode that rips the piss out of Windows 7, so how on earth is McFarlane and co. going to come out of this undoubtedly sycophantic puke-fest with any shred of credibility?
...and since Windows is now a commoditised innovation vacuum, they're not likely to get one anytime soon. If MS are having to try this hard to sell the 'benefits' then it probably means there aren't actually that many real benefits to be had.
The loss of PS2 compatibility isn't new. It was only the 1st and 2nd versions of the original PS3 that would play PS2 games (as I recall the 1st gen used hardware support, the 2nd gen used a mix of hardware and software emulation). The 120Gb PS3 I bought in February only plays PS1 games (and PS3 ones, obviously!).
"the part where their strategy fails is in the marketing."
Are you sure it's not in the part where they make shitty, uninspiring products? Just asking.
[snips a whole heap of stupid]
"what apple do well that Microsoft don't is getting people to want to buy their products."
Here we go again, another silly nerd who doesn't see the value in things that *WORK* and are *EASY TO USE* and thinks that getting people to buy Apple's products is the result of 'simple' marketing voodoo, rather than a lot of bloody hard work by a lot of bloody clever people.
"I often feel like either I'm going mad or the world around me is going mad"
I think you can take your pick.
"the question is where were the microsoft ads on TV saying, wow, look at this really fucking cool thing that you can do?
They weren't there!"
Y'know there's a reason they weren't there, sparky.
This has been said before all over the place, but before the iPhone, name ONE phone (smart or otherwise) that was advertised simply by showing how it worked? And I'm not just talking about a simulated screenshot while some model draped it over her tits, or some tool in an Armarni suit showed that he could hold a phone and look punchably smug at the same time.
I mean working. Actually working. I'll let you get back to us when you have that lengthy list.
"MS missed a trick on this, their platform was essentially open"
You're confusing a platform that's open with a platform that was never fucking popular enough to really find out how Microsoft would deal with 60,000 applications running on it.
"and there is no reason that they couldn't have setup an apps store equivalent"
Just like there's "no reason" they couldn't have written a decent mobile OS by now, and "no reason" they couldn't have written a successor to XP that didn't suck dog's cock, and "no reason" they couldn't have made an MP3 player that didn't want to make you stab yourself in the eyes with a spork. You seeing any kind of trend here yet?
" it should have been to point out the strengths it had over the iphone OS last year, or the year before..."
Yeah. That's one of those *really* long lists again, isn't it?
The problem with you, and all the other boo-hoo merchants that get wet pants over the iPhone's popularity, is that you don't understand one simple thing.
NO ONE CARES WHAT YOU THINK.
That's right. Your opinion is not the same as that held by the majority. Apple cares about the majority. Apple knew that the majority didn't give enough of a toss about cut-and-paste for it to stop them being blown away by the tight collection of things that the iPhone does really well.
By the time the iPhone was approaching mass appeal and something like the lack of cut-and-paste might start to get noticed, hey presto, iPhone OS 3.0 arrives and everyone who cares about cut-and-paste now has it.
I've had phones with many more features before, but only 10% of them were useful/useable. The iPhone has maybe 20% of the feature set of most other phones, but they are ALL useful and people use them ALL the time.
Having a web browser that isn't made from the smeg inside Beelzebub's foreskin is just one example.
"use Windows Mobile 6.5 to onramp iPhone converts to Windows Mobile 7.0"
How in the name of <$DEITY> would an iPhone user be tempted to convert? WM 6.5 isn't even going to be as good as iPhone OS 1.0. WM 7 isn't out for at least another year but will only be as good as iPhone OS 3.0 is now, if MS is lucky. By then, of course, we'll have iPhone OS 4.0 and it won't matter anyway.
Uncle Fester's guffawing at the iPhone when it was announced just keeps getting funnier and funnier the more MS thrashes about without a fecking clue of what to do.
You clearly have no idea what "anti-competitive" means.
And you are grossly disingenuous (or just a colossal doofus) to suggest that if you change phones that you wouldn't be able to just copy your music files (you know, the ones easily accessible in your iTunes *music* folder) into whichever location the Palm Pre is using for its own music player / sync software.
Oh, except that Palm has been too cheap / stupid / shady to actually develop their own.
_THIS_ is the entire point. Please can you stop talking arse now.
You, and everyone else bleating about anti-competitive behaviour, might want to take a look at the history books and understand what it really means.
MS got slapped by the DOJ (although that 'slap' amounted to little in practical changes to their behaviour) because they were actively trying to prevent other companies from having the same access to the OS (Windows) as their software division (Office, etc.) and trying to stop certain competing 3rd party products from being a success full stop.
For Apple to deserve the "anti-competitive" tag, they would have to be doing something like trying to stop Pre from making their own media player/library manager. Clearly they are not doing any such thing. The iTunes software isn't an OS component. There's nothing to say Apple has to support any device in iTunes other than the one it was designed for. Likewise there's nothing to stop Palm making their own software to do the same job. They could even read the iTunes library information if they wanted to. But they couldn't be arsed, and instead are acting like whiney little bitches because Apple, surprise-sur-friggin'-prise, won't let them follow their parasitic little business model.
"artificially created dominance of the software music player domain"
Artificial? So, what you're saying is that there *wasn't* a wide choice of MP3 players and jukebox software to choose from before iTunes came along (which at the time, Apple was laughed at for being late to the party, BTW)? You can bitch about choice all you like. The fact is that people have lots of choices. You just don't like the choice that most of them are making.
"The whole point is that Palm initially shipped the Pre set up such that it worked fine with iTunes without _having_ to fake any USB IDs."
No, it just worked because Apple wasn't making rigid checks for non-Apple devices during the handshaking process.
"Then Apple shipped an iTunes update which specifically identifies the Pre - using its correct USB ID - and refuses to work with it"
That's because Pre are the only dumbasses to go down the shady route of spoofing a USB vendor ID instead of doing it the right way and using the provided XML file like other manufacturers do.
"despite the fact it would work fine if Apple didn't specifically prevent it from working."
Work fine, says who? Pre?
Pre Marketing Droid : "Oh don't worry. Just a few undocumented APIs we've reverse engineered (*cough* stolen by our ex-Apple engineers) really well. Works a treat. No chance of us borking your library by writing data back that iTunes doesn't understand. Uh-uh. No chance of that at all... What's that? How do I know? ... uh... ooh! Look over there! Shiny thing!"
Let's just straighten out a little history that you seem keen to have 'revised'.
iTunes came first. It was just a music jukebox app. It did (and still does) just play music from whatever source you have, other than online stores which are protected and locked down at the behest of the record companies.
When the iPod was launched, iTunes (Apple software) gained the ability to sync the music library to the iPod (Apple hardware).
Please explain exactly why Apple has any obligation to support 3rd party hardware in a software system that has been successful with consumers *PRECISELY* because it's a simple, single-vendor environment that doesn't force people to deal with incompatibilities?
You know, incompatibilities caused by stupid crap that companies like Microsoft (PlaysForSure / Zune) and Pre (unauthorised use of undocumented APIs) pull because they're too lame to build products that enough people want to buy?
well it's slightly different;. Google Video actually launched before YouTube. Google knew why they wanted a video sharing site, but it just so happened that another site gained more traction, so they bought them. I genuinely believe that Microsoft has no idea why it wants to do a lot of the things it does, other than feeling the "need" to compete.
@ Tom Paine Wasn't the 'Troll' actually meant to be James Hetfield? I seem to remember Lars being portrayed as a small crawling creature scuttling up and down JH's body...
My ass... at first I was just looking at the search page and thought "yeah, well there's only so many ways you can lay out a form like that - I'd probably do something similar" but then I hit 'search' on both sites and.... uh... someone's been a naughty boy!
I don't know if Farecast looked the same before MS got hold of it, or if it's not so clear cut as to which site came first, but to suggest that someone came up with the same things like the sliders to modify the flight times completely independently is utter bullshit.
Like I say, I don't know the history of the two sites/technologies but Microsoft's track record at being "inspired" by other people's work isn't great...
Bzzzzzzzzzzzttt!!! Sorry, you must leave the pitch immediately, thankyou for playing.
Seriously, you're not very good at this, are you?
How in the name of Farquar does viewing the same website somehow suddenly, magically, use more bandwidth on, say, an iPhone than it does on a MacBook? Same files, same graphics, same everything.
Were you just sat on the toilet at some New Media Douchebag conference one day, and when you looked over at the toilet roll it said above it "Tech Journalism Degrees. Please take one."?
What you, and every other donkey who's short-stroking it over the lack of Flash on the iPhone seems to forget, is that Adobe can't even get Flash to run properly on a fucking MAC let alone the iPhone. I have a 2GHz dual core G5 PowerMac and 2.6GHz dual core MacBook Pro and they both run Flash like geriatric shite. The MacBook Pro fares slightly better, presumably due to whatever scant Intel optimisations that have made it over from the Windows version, but if I boot the MacBook Pro into Windows XP I get almost double the frame rate on the same hardware.
The best thing I ever did was disabling Flash in Safari; I got a responsive browser back.
If a 2.6GHz dual core struggles with Flash, what hope has even the latest 600MHz processor in the new iPhone? People should try thinking about this and *understanding* it before they start demanding Flash on the iPhone as though it's simply Apple's petulance that's keeping it from appearing.
"Apple insist you use their hardware why should Microsoft be any different"
Ahem. 1990 called and wants its argument back. Apple makes no such demands whatsoever. Every port on an Apple Desktop or Laptop is industry standard. Has been for years. On the very rare occasion that a proprietary port has been used (usually video connectors shrunk for space reasons on a laptop) there has been an adaptor available from Apple to connect to any 3rd party monitor, VGA or DVI.
"developing sound quality and user friendliness in media playing mobile phones"
Are you serious? I had a K800i before my iPhone, and it was an awkard piece of crap at the best of times. The way music storage was organised made it too confusing to know where the hell anything was, and it was bogged down with insanely pointless "features" like Video DJ. WTF?
I've missed the video camera occasionally, but that's it. I found myself having to use it again the other day after 12 months of iPhone, and I couldn't do a thing on it. Nothing made sense!
Clearly no-one at Y! has a friggin' clue what they're doing, let alone even the most basic understanding of what people use Y! for. They have persistently failed to get a grip on the bot problem (stupid captcha systems just made it more irritating for real people to use the rooms) and have completely neutered the profile system (pissing off a whole boatload of roleplayers) and now they want people to ditch their Y!360 pages, which were sold as the next big thing, and return to profile pages even though they have a fraction of the functionality?
Hello? Have they heard of fucking with customer trust, and why it's a Very Bad Thing?
They're dead.
That is all.
Paris, because she's slowly fucking herself into oblivion too.
...because his Dad lets him play simple (and not-so-simple) games on it.
My son was 3 when I got my iPhone last summer, and he was immediately fascinated by it. As a result, I would download suitable games (like pair matching, boxes, Labyrinth) or applications (drawing, doodling, flick book etc) and let him play under supervision. He's gradually progressed to more complex games so that he now knows more about chess (Deep Green) or projectile physics (Cannon Game) than most 4 year-olds probably have a right to.
He also now expects everything to have a multitouch interface...
Anyway, he's now responsible enough for me to allow him to use the phone without me looking over his shoulder all the time (although I'm never out of the room) but occasionally he does get lost, usually by accidentally pressing on a banner in an ad-supported app. So far, he always tells me when it's happened and comes to me to fix it, but there's always the chance he could end up seeing something inappropriate.
Parental controls would mean he could safely play at times other than when I am free to supervise him, which is not that often.
... "Ron Howard accuses Pope of scuppering Dan Brown movie" and not "Ron Howard realises he's made another shitbag of a film based on Dan Brown's OTHER ridiculous entry for his junior school's creative writing competition"...?
Despite what Apple may say about the majority of apps being approved quickly (and I'm not saying they aren't) things are getting bad enough now that people are going to get an overall impression that the system is broken, and these problems need to be stamped on. Fast.
Apple are doing something they can't afford to, which is to give their competitors an opportunity.
All Microsoft, Palm, Blackberry et al have to do is point to a few of these issues, make some noise about how their system isn't like that and they'll like get some mindshare from that alone. Microsoft has already taken a pop at this by saying they will have a transparent approval process where the dev can track their app's progress.
I'm actually surprised Apple has allowed it to get this far, but when a prominent user like Trent Reznor speaks out in the way he did recently, someone high up at Apple really needs to take notice and go kick the crap out of somebody to make sure this gets sorted for good.
If it really is bank errors that are causing the delays, and not some internal Apple screw-up, then Apple should fight for the devs to get interest paid on the outstanding amounts.
Ok, revisionism again... I should say "an **unsupported** 8 year-old operating system"
You're right; age is no indicator of usefulness alone. But XP has been EOL'd. If the OS you're using has a roadmap and support plan going into the future, then that's fine. But running mission critical / niche software (the target audience we are told this is all about) that requires an OS which is classed as obsolete by the *vendor* is just plain dumb because, at worst, it means you are using dead software and if you come across a bug in the app you have no chance of getting it fixed, and at best even if the vendor is still around they are only going to able to fix bugs in the app itself. If they come up against a bug in the OS then you're screwed. Either way it's a bad idea.
Microsoft should come up with some compelling reasons for people to upgrade, and businesses shouldn't be expecting Microsoft to keep dragging their arse along in the 20th Century.
Oh, and I'll take your 21 year-old OS and raise you to 39 years. Little thing called Unix... last I heard it was running Mac OS... ;)
No ivory tower here, and I don't even run a network (at least not any more). I'll retract my use of the word "tightfisted" (although it *is* still the perfect description for some businesses who refuse to invest in their tools) but the basic problem remains unchanged. Microsoft has a choice when it comes to forward-looking development or backwards compatibility, and they choose compatibility every time. This is clearly a problem within Microsoft. But at the same time, how long do businesses really expect Microsoft to keep extending the life of an OS which is, in software terms, ancient when it comes at the expense of being able to develop for the future?
If someone's business depends on software which is so poorly maintained that it *requires* an 8 year-old operating system, then I would suggest that they have a slightly bigger set of problems...
The biggest millstone around the neck of Microsoft, its developers and its customers, has been its insistence on legacy compatibility. Instead of making a clean break with the past in the name of a lean codebase and an advanced, stable architecture, it just keeps layering on thick gobs of backwards compatibility. And for what? So tight-fisted businesses can run antique software? Bad trade-off.
Apple knew they had to make this decision for OS X, and they grasped the nettle. True, OS 9 was a much bigger bag of washing than the NT-based 2000/XP but the pain was no less of an impact because of that. There was plenty of howling and indignant rage that the (somewhat) beloved OS 9 should be tossed out, but it was Apple's way or the highway, and most people chose Apple's way. The platform has been rejuvenated because of that.
Samsung UN55B8000 55" LED TV (Widescreen, 1920x1080, HDTV)
LG Electronics 42LH30 42" LCD TV (Widescreen, 1920x1080, HDTV)
Samsung UN55B8500 55" LED TV (Widescreen, 1920x1080, HDTV)
Sony BRAVIA KDL-40EX400 40" LCD TV (Widescreen, 1920x1080, HDTV)
Samsung UN40B6000 40" LED TV (Widescreen, 1920x1080, HDTV)
103 posts • joined Thursday 6th September 2007 22:37 GMT
Page:
Ian Davies
Quite right → # ↑
Posted Monday 8th March 2010 16:27 GMT
In Microsoft sends flowers to IE6 funeral
Anyone who thinks that web design finishes with Photoshop doesn't know what the feck they're talking about.
Ian Davies
Oh dear. → # ↑
Posted Sunday 7th March 2010 22:21 GMT
In Microsoft sends flowers to IE6 funeral
Someone else who thinks that HTML is 'code' and that adding a few pre-built Javascript widgets to their pages in Dreamweaver makes them a 'developer'.
Ian Davies
Yyyyyyyeesssss... → # ↑
Posted Saturday 6th March 2010 16:44 GMT
In Microsoft sends flowers to IE6 funeral
...and it was MS who sent a "humorous" bunch of flowers, as though the whole thing was some whimsical jape that they were in on, rather than being the stinking bag of moose balls that caused the whole thing in the first place with a decade of ineptness.
So. How about *you* RTFA, eh?
Ian Davies
I'm glad... → #
Posted Friday 5th March 2010 19:35 GMT
In Microsoft sends flowers to IE6 funeral
...they can be so fecking glib about inflicting that diseased anal wart on us for so long, and making my life as a web designer about 64,000x harder than it needed to be.
Ian Davies
Java? → # ↑
Posted Thursday 4th February 2010 11:31 GMT
In Researchers penetrate last bastion of Windows security
Seriously?
Ian Davies
Yeah... → #
Posted Wednesday 3rd February 2010 10:01 GMT
In JooJoo men strike back at CrunchPad suit
" it's larger, higher-resolution screen will be the device's biggest advantage over Apple's iPad"
and the stooopid name JooJoo will be the device's biggest disadvantage against *everything*
Ian Davies
Move along, people... → #
Posted Tuesday 2nd February 2010 10:36 GMT
In Chinese tablet maven threatens iPad suit
...nothing to see here.
Ian Davies
Adobe's own fault → #
Posted Saturday 30th January 2010 20:58 GMT
In Adobe heats up iPad Flash bash
While Apple's motives may well be mostly self-interest now, Adobe only has itself to blame for giving Apple the excuse to do this. The simple fact of the matter is that on OS X, Flash runs like a weeping bag of rancid dog's cocks when compared to the Windows version, even on the same hardware.
Why?
Adobe is currently trying to make much of how the speed deficit is not of their making, and that Apple doesn't expose the necessary APIs for hardware acceleration in the same way Windows does. This may be true, but hardware acceleration was only recently introduced in version 10. What, then, is the reason that previous versions of Flash ran so poorly under OS X, when the question of hardware acceleration was irrelevant?
Also, they conveniently ignore that fact that the Flash plug-in is the #1 cause of crashes in Mac browsers. How is that instability related in any way to the availability of hardware acceleration?
Ian Davies
Correction required → #
Posted Tuesday 5th January 2010 08:40 GMT
In Samsung's Galaxy stuck in history
Please clarify exactly when you've been required to pay any money to update your iPhone OS?
You're probably referring to iPod Touch customers who have to pay (but are not *required* to update) but whether you're conflating the two due to ignorance or weasley-ness is unclear.
It's rather amusing when so many like to beat on Apple for allegedly poor legacy support, and yet here they are as the only major smartphone supplier whose latest and greatest OS still runs on their first model.
Ian Davies
So unlike them → #
Posted Tuesday 15th December 2009 10:13 GMT
In Microsoft China accused of pilfering webcode
Copying and stealing from a market sector leader? Not Microsoft's style, surely?
Ian Davies
Jesus Fucking Christ → #
Posted Friday 4th December 2009 00:46 GMT
In Microsoft's Silverlight 4 - Flash developers need not apply
Why????
Seriously. It's bad enough having one proprietary runtime to fucking deal with while calming down idiot marketeers who get a hard-on about building websites entirely in Flash. We don't want another. Competition here isn't good, it just makes for a bigger bag of dogs' cocks.
I hope to Buddha's balls that HTML5 gets it's shit together quickly.
Ian Davies
@RTNavy → #
Posted Monday 16th November 2009 21:58 GMT
In Apple wins attack of the clones
Dear Numb Nuts, please explain how Apple could possibly provide support for an installation of their OS that has been altered in order to run on non-Apple hardware?
As someone else pointed out, Apple is not in the OS business, they are in the computer systems business. Hardware. Software.
Apple doesn't want to sell copies of the Mac OS to run on other people's hardware any more than it wants to sell hardware that just runs someone else's OS.
Where have you been while history was happening? The previous guys at Apple tried licensing the OS and it very nearly killed the company.
Ian Davies
@Rolf Howarth and Daniel Jarick. → #
Posted Monday 16th November 2009 13:06 GMT
In Apple wins attack of the clones
Nailed it.
Ian Davies
Hasn't taken long... → #
Posted Monday 16th November 2009 13:06 GMT
In Apple wins attack of the clones
...for the stupid to crawl out of the woodwork.
As long as it is within the law (and this is exactly what this case set out to prove) then Apple is entitled to write whatever conditions into their EULA that they like. It's not as if they are permitting certain companies to do this, and were somehow being anticompetitive just towards Psystar. Apple doesn't allow *anyone* to do this, as is their legal and moral right. Apple doesn't *have* to let you do anything with their software. Wishing it were different doesn't make it so.
Note that the comment about PearPC is irrelevant. Just because Apple hasn't sued them yet, doesn't mean they condone what they are doing.
This isn't about the Hackintosh community. Those who chose to install Mac OS X on non-Apple hardware will be in the same situation that they were before this ruling. Yes, they are breaking the EULA, but the sum total of Apple's response to these people will be to deny them support.
This is about slapping down a company who thought it was OK to take Apple's property and try and cut Apple out of the hardware revenue to which they were due.
Mac OS X is not sold as a stand-alone product like Windows. It is sold as an update-able component of an Apple hardware system.
You are entitled to not like this, but Apple is also entitled to slap you down for breaking the terms of the license to which you agreed when you opened the box.
As the judge said, if you don't like Apple's terms, don't use Apple's products. There are other options.
Ian Davies
This is shitty → #
Posted Wednesday 11th November 2009 10:31 GMT
In Ericsson R&D pulls out of Coventry
I was a student, then lived and worked in Cov for about 15 years, and still work with a lot of people in the area. This was a big deal for the general self-esteem of the City after companies like Jaguar and Massey Fergusson closed their operations there.
Bunch of arse.
Ian Davies
I would settle... → #
Posted Friday 6th November 2009 01:25 GMT
In Brown declines to resign
...for a PM who was actually democratically elected. That an outgoing PM can simply hand the office over to his mate to have a play with is fucking obscene.
And no, I didn't agree with it when John Major got in on a similar ticket, but he did at least get his own mandate at the next election, which is more than the fat gawping chancer we've got at the moment is going to manage.
Ian Davies
Just awful → #
Posted Wednesday 14th October 2009 10:42 GMT
In Microsoft ropes in Family Guy to pimp Windows 7
This is the most appalling example of commercial prostitution I think I've ever seen. When the Simpsons did the "Mapple" episode, it was funny *because* it wasn't official and didn't show undue reverence.
Microsoft aren't going to pay for an episode that rips the piss out of Windows 7, so how on earth is McFarlane and co. going to come out of this undoubtedly sycophantic puke-fest with any shred of credibility?
Ian Davies
People need a reason to upgrade... → #
Posted Tuesday 15th September 2009 21:17 GMT
In Microsoft harries XP-loving biz customers on to Windows 7
...and since Windows is now a commoditised innovation vacuum, they're not likely to get one anytime soon. If MS are having to try this hard to sell the 'benefits' then it probably means there aren't actually that many real benefits to be had.
Ian Davies
Have MS ever heard the phrase → #
Posted Tuesday 15th September 2009 01:08 GMT
In Bing shines Silverlight on visual search
"Swimming against the tide"?
Ian Davies
@AC first post → #
Posted Friday 11th September 2009 04:36 GMT
In Apple gives Palm the boot - again
That post is so stuffed full of stupid it makes my brain hurt.
Ian Davies
uh... → #
Posted Monday 31st August 2009 16:23 GMT
In Apple joins expanded HTML 5 leadership team
... Microsoft' has an "interoperability and standards strategy"...? Who knew?
Or is the strategy to simply not have any interoperability or standards?
Ian Davies
PS2 compatibility → #
Posted Friday 28th August 2009 22:27 GMT
In Sony explains PS3 Slim's loss of Linux option
The loss of PS2 compatibility isn't new. It was only the 1st and 2nd versions of the original PS3 that would play PS2 games (as I recall the 1st gen used hardware support, the 2nd gen used a mix of hardware and software emulation). The 120Gb PS3 I bought in February only plays PS1 games (and PS3 ones, obviously!).
Ian Davies
"The Rolls-Royce of browsers" → #
Posted Tuesday 25th August 2009 22:18 GMT
In Mac OS X Snow Leopard First Look
"Opera"...?
Is that a joke?
Ian Davies
@DR → #
Posted Thursday 20th August 2009 20:36 GMT
In Microsoft to encircle Google and Apple with Windows Mobile split
"the part where their strategy fails is in the marketing."
Are you sure it's not in the part where they make shitty, uninspiring products? Just asking.
[snips a whole heap of stupid]
"what apple do well that Microsoft don't is getting people to want to buy their products."
Here we go again, another silly nerd who doesn't see the value in things that *WORK* and are *EASY TO USE* and thinks that getting people to buy Apple's products is the result of 'simple' marketing voodoo, rather than a lot of bloody hard work by a lot of bloody clever people.
"I often feel like either I'm going mad or the world around me is going mad"
I think you can take your pick.
"the question is where were the microsoft ads on TV saying, wow, look at this really fucking cool thing that you can do?
They weren't there!"
Y'know there's a reason they weren't there, sparky.
This has been said before all over the place, but before the iPhone, name ONE phone (smart or otherwise) that was advertised simply by showing how it worked? And I'm not just talking about a simulated screenshot while some model draped it over her tits, or some tool in an Armarni suit showed that he could hold a phone and look punchably smug at the same time.
I mean working. Actually working. I'll let you get back to us when you have that lengthy list.
"MS missed a trick on this, their platform was essentially open"
You're confusing a platform that's open with a platform that was never fucking popular enough to really find out how Microsoft would deal with 60,000 applications running on it.
"and there is no reason that they couldn't have setup an apps store equivalent"
Just like there's "no reason" they couldn't have written a decent mobile OS by now, and "no reason" they couldn't have written a successor to XP that didn't suck dog's cock, and "no reason" they couldn't have made an MP3 player that didn't want to make you stab yourself in the eyes with a spork. You seeing any kind of trend here yet?
" it should have been to point out the strengths it had over the iphone OS last year, or the year before..."
Yeah. That's one of those *really* long lists again, isn't it?
The problem with you, and all the other boo-hoo merchants that get wet pants over the iPhone's popularity, is that you don't understand one simple thing.
NO ONE CARES WHAT YOU THINK.
That's right. Your opinion is not the same as that held by the majority. Apple cares about the majority. Apple knew that the majority didn't give enough of a toss about cut-and-paste for it to stop them being blown away by the tight collection of things that the iPhone does really well.
By the time the iPhone was approaching mass appeal and something like the lack of cut-and-paste might start to get noticed, hey presto, iPhone OS 3.0 arrives and everyone who cares about cut-and-paste now has it.
I've had phones with many more features before, but only 10% of them were useful/useable. The iPhone has maybe 20% of the feature set of most other phones, but they are ALL useful and people use them ALL the time.
Having a web browser that isn't made from the smeg inside Beelzebub's foreskin is just one example.
Therefore, the iPhone wins.
Ian Davies
Are they serious? → #
Posted Wednesday 19th August 2009 21:22 GMT
In Microsoft to encircle Google and Apple with Windows Mobile split
"use Windows Mobile 6.5 to onramp iPhone converts to Windows Mobile 7.0"
How in the name of <$DEITY> would an iPhone user be tempted to convert? WM 6.5 isn't even going to be as good as iPhone OS 1.0. WM 7 isn't out for at least another year but will only be as good as iPhone OS 3.0 is now, if MS is lucky. By then, of course, we'll have iPhone OS 4.0 and it won't matter anyway.
Uncle Fester's guffawing at the iPhone when it was announced just keeps getting funnier and funnier the more MS thrashes about without a fecking clue of what to do.
Ian Davies
@ Rob 103 → #
Posted Wednesday 5th August 2009 22:16 GMT
In Palm slams Apple, hoodwinks iTunes
You clearly have no idea what "anti-competitive" means.
And you are grossly disingenuous (or just a colossal doofus) to suggest that if you change phones that you wouldn't be able to just copy your music files (you know, the ones easily accessible in your iTunes *music* folder) into whichever location the Palm Pre is using for its own music player / sync software.
Oh, except that Palm has been too cheap / stupid / shady to actually develop their own.
_THIS_ is the entire point. Please can you stop talking arse now.
Ian Davies
@market share → #
Posted Wednesday 5th August 2009 17:49 GMT
In Palm slams Apple, hoodwinks iTunes
You, and everyone else bleating about anti-competitive behaviour, might want to take a look at the history books and understand what it really means.
MS got slapped by the DOJ (although that 'slap' amounted to little in practical changes to their behaviour) because they were actively trying to prevent other companies from having the same access to the OS (Windows) as their software division (Office, etc.) and trying to stop certain competing 3rd party products from being a success full stop.
For Apple to deserve the "anti-competitive" tag, they would have to be doing something like trying to stop Pre from making their own media player/library manager. Clearly they are not doing any such thing. The iTunes software isn't an OS component. There's nothing to say Apple has to support any device in iTunes other than the one it was designed for. Likewise there's nothing to stop Palm making their own software to do the same job. They could even read the iTunes library information if they wanted to. But they couldn't be arsed, and instead are acting like whiney little bitches because Apple, surprise-sur-friggin'-prise, won't let them follow their parasitic little business model.
I hope Palm get's their arse kicked.
Ian Davies
@Adam Williamson → #
Posted Wednesday 5th August 2009 11:09 GMT
In Palm slams Apple, hoodwinks iTunes
No. You're wrong.
"artificially created dominance of the software music player domain"
Artificial? So, what you're saying is that there *wasn't* a wide choice of MP3 players and jukebox software to choose from before iTunes came along (which at the time, Apple was laughed at for being late to the party, BTW)? You can bitch about choice all you like. The fact is that people have lots of choices. You just don't like the choice that most of them are making.
"The whole point is that Palm initially shipped the Pre set up such that it worked fine with iTunes without _having_ to fake any USB IDs."
No, it just worked because Apple wasn't making rigid checks for non-Apple devices during the handshaking process.
"Then Apple shipped an iTunes update which specifically identifies the Pre - using its correct USB ID - and refuses to work with it"
That's because Pre are the only dumbasses to go down the shady route of spoofing a USB vendor ID instead of doing it the right way and using the provided XML file like other manufacturers do.
"despite the fact it would work fine if Apple didn't specifically prevent it from working."
Work fine, says who? Pre?
Pre Marketing Droid : "Oh don't worry. Just a few undocumented APIs we've reverse engineered (*cough* stolen by our ex-Apple engineers) really well. Works a treat. No chance of us borking your library by writing data back that iTunes doesn't understand. Uh-uh. No chance of that at all... What's that? How do I know? ... uh... ooh! Look over there! Shiny thing!"
Let's just straighten out a little history that you seem keen to have 'revised'.
iTunes came first. It was just a music jukebox app. It did (and still does) just play music from whatever source you have, other than online stores which are protected and locked down at the behest of the record companies.
When the iPod was launched, iTunes (Apple software) gained the ability to sync the music library to the iPod (Apple hardware).
Please explain exactly why Apple has any obligation to support 3rd party hardware in a software system that has been successful with consumers *PRECISELY* because it's a simple, single-vendor environment that doesn't force people to deal with incompatibilities?
You know, incompatibilities caused by stupid crap that companies like Microsoft (PlaysForSure / Zune) and Pre (unauthorised use of undocumented APIs) pull because they're too lame to build products that enough people want to buy?
Ian Davies
I'd like to see... → #
Posted Monday 3rd August 2009 12:14 GMT
In Microsoft ditches Windows 7 E plans
...a ballot screen that shows each browser's performance in the Acid3 test. That might help consumers to make a more informed choice.
"Question 1 : Would you like a browser that works?"
Ian Davies
Visual voicemail... → #
Posted Thursday 30th July 2009 14:27 GMT
In O2 does Apple-flavour customer service
...has been out of action all week for me. Pretty poor.
Ian Davies
@Charles Manning → #
Posted Tuesday 28th July 2009 09:20 GMT
In Foxconn answers critics over suicidal iPhone engineer
Agreed. +1
Ian Davies
@paul 27 → #
Posted Friday 24th July 2009 14:33 GMT
In Microsoft shutters YouTube clone
well it's slightly different;. Google Video actually launched before YouTube. Google knew why they wanted a video sharing site, but it just so happened that another site gained more traction, so they bought them. I genuinely believe that Microsoft has no idea why it wants to do a lot of the things it does, other than feeling the "need" to compete.
Ian Davies
"Doesn't work on IE6" → #
Posted Thursday 23rd July 2009 14:02 GMT
In ISP redesign unites the web in nausea
so... not all bad then?
Ian Davies
@Jamie Jones → #
Posted Thursday 23rd July 2009 13:37 GMT
In Microsoft shutters YouTube clone
Ah, that'll probably be it. I'm on Safari but I've never bothered installing Silverlight... at least I don't think I have...
Ian Davies
Just tried it → #
Posted Thursday 23rd July 2009 09:35 GMT
In Microsoft shutters YouTube clone
"Your browser or operating system is not supported"
Strange... I've never had that message on YouTube.
And they're the overwhelming market leader.
hmm...
But there's no link between the two facts, and you'd be a fool and a Microsoft exec to see one.
Ian Davies
Troll? → #
Posted Monday 20th July 2009 21:23 GMT
In Metallica sticksman gloats over Napster downfall
@ Tom Paine Wasn't the 'Troll' actually meant to be James Hetfield? I seem to remember Lars being portrayed as a small crawling creature scuttling up and down JH's body...
"Metallica GOOD"
"Napster BAD"
Ian Davies
"Independent Development" → #
Posted Friday 26th June 2009 09:22 GMT
In Microsoft's Bing in travel trouble
My ass... at first I was just looking at the search page and thought "yeah, well there's only so many ways you can lay out a form like that - I'd probably do something similar" but then I hit 'search' on both sites and.... uh... someone's been a naughty boy!
I don't know if Farecast looked the same before MS got hold of it, or if it's not so clear cut as to which site came first, but to suggest that someone came up with the same things like the sliders to modify the flight times completely independently is utter bullshit.
Like I say, I don't know the history of the two sites/technologies but Microsoft's track record at being "inspired" by other people's work isn't great...
Ian Davies
Whiskey Tango Foxtrot? → #
Posted Monday 15th June 2009 20:36 GMT
In Palm politely cuts Pre tether
"in fact bigger screens consume a lot more bandwidth"
Wait. What?
What? What? What? What? What? What? What? What??????
Bzzzzzzzzzzzttt!!! Sorry, you must leave the pitch immediately, thankyou for playing.
Seriously, you're not very good at this, are you?
How in the name of Farquar does viewing the same website somehow suddenly, magically, use more bandwidth on, say, an iPhone than it does on a MacBook? Same files, same graphics, same everything.
Were you just sat on the toilet at some New Media Douchebag conference one day, and when you looked over at the toilet roll it said above it "Tech Journalism Degrees. Please take one."?
Christ on a bike...
Ian Davies
Flash *IS* Bad → #
Posted Saturday 13th June 2009 16:21 GMT
In Apple's big week: the good, the bad, the ugly
What you, and every other donkey who's short-stroking it over the lack of Flash on the iPhone seems to forget, is that Adobe can't even get Flash to run properly on a fucking MAC let alone the iPhone. I have a 2GHz dual core G5 PowerMac and 2.6GHz dual core MacBook Pro and they both run Flash like geriatric shite. The MacBook Pro fares slightly better, presumably due to whatever scant Intel optimisations that have made it over from the Windows version, but if I boot the MacBook Pro into Windows XP I get almost double the frame rate on the same hardware.
The best thing I ever did was disabling Flash in Safari; I got a responsive browser back.
If a 2.6GHz dual core struggles with Flash, what hope has even the latest 600MHz processor in the new iPhone? People should try thinking about this and *understanding* it before they start demanding Flash on the iPhone as though it's simply Apple's petulance that's keeping it from appearing.
Ian Davies
@AC second post → #
Posted Wednesday 3rd June 2009 23:51 GMT
In Microsoft takes hard line on Win 7 hardware
"Apple insist you use their hardware why should Microsoft be any different"
Ahem. 1990 called and wants its argument back. Apple makes no such demands whatsoever. Every port on an Apple Desktop or Laptop is industry standard. Has been for years. On the very rare occasion that a proprietary port has been used (usually video connectors shrunk for space reasons on a laptop) there has been an adaptor available from Apple to connect to any 3rd party monitor, VGA or DVI.
Go on, have another go.
Ian Davies
Excuse me? → #
Posted Monday 1st June 2009 13:55 GMT
In Sony X-Series Walkman
"developing sound quality and user friendliness in media playing mobile phones"
Are you serious? I had a K800i before my iPhone, and it was an awkard piece of crap at the best of times. The way music storage was organised made it too confusing to know where the hell anything was, and it was bogged down with insanely pointless "features" like Video DJ. WTF?
I've missed the video camera occasionally, but that's it. I found myself having to use it again the other day after 12 months of iPhone, and I couldn't do a thing on it. Nothing made sense!
Ian Davies
They're dead → #
Posted Monday 1st June 2009 11:19 GMT
In Yahoo! shuts! failed! social! networking! site!!
Clearly no-one at Y! has a friggin' clue what they're doing, let alone even the most basic understanding of what people use Y! for. They have persistently failed to get a grip on the bot problem (stupid captcha systems just made it more irritating for real people to use the rooms) and have completely neutered the profile system (pissing off a whole boatload of roleplayers) and now they want people to ditch their Y!360 pages, which were sold as the next big thing, and return to profile pages even though they have a fraction of the functionality?
Hello? Have they heard of fucking with customer trust, and why it's a Very Bad Thing?
They're dead.
That is all.
Paris, because she's slowly fucking herself into oblivion too.
Ian Davies
@AC (wanker) → #
Posted Wednesday 6th May 2009 20:11 GMT
In Apple fine-tunes app censorship
ahhh... the first mistake of the ignorant: to mistake uncomplicated for unsophisticated
Ian Davies
I'll tell you why a 3 year-old would have an iPhone... → #
Posted Wednesday 6th May 2009 19:28 GMT
In Apple fine-tunes app censorship
...because his Dad lets him play simple (and not-so-simple) games on it.
My son was 3 when I got my iPhone last summer, and he was immediately fascinated by it. As a result, I would download suitable games (like pair matching, boxes, Labyrinth) or applications (drawing, doodling, flick book etc) and let him play under supervision. He's gradually progressed to more complex games so that he now knows more about chess (Deep Green) or projectile physics (Cannon Game) than most 4 year-olds probably have a right to.
He also now expects everything to have a multitouch interface...
Anyway, he's now responsible enough for me to allow him to use the phone without me looking over his shoulder all the time (although I'm never out of the room) but occasionally he does get lost, usually by accidentally pressing on a banner in an ad-supported app. So far, he always tells me when it's happened and comes to me to fix it, but there's always the chance he could end up seeing something inappropriate.
Parental controls would mean he could safely play at times other than when I am free to supervise him, which is not that often.
Ian Davies
@John Tserkezis → #
Posted Tuesday 5th May 2009 17:53 GMT
In Apple drives iPhone app developers to the brink
A dickweed troll comment if ever I saw one.
Ian Davies
So it's... → #
Posted Tuesday 5th May 2009 14:21 GMT
In Ron Howard accuses Pope of scuppering Dan Brown movie
... "Ron Howard accuses Pope of scuppering Dan Brown movie" and not "Ron Howard realises he's made another shitbag of a film based on Dan Brown's OTHER ridiculous entry for his junior school's creative writing competition"...?
Curious.
Ian Davies
This needs some serious fixing → #
Posted Tuesday 5th May 2009 13:20 GMT
In Apple drives iPhone app developers to the brink
Despite what Apple may say about the majority of apps being approved quickly (and I'm not saying they aren't) things are getting bad enough now that people are going to get an overall impression that the system is broken, and these problems need to be stamped on. Fast.
Apple are doing something they can't afford to, which is to give their competitors an opportunity.
All Microsoft, Palm, Blackberry et al have to do is point to a few of these issues, make some noise about how their system isn't like that and they'll like get some mindshare from that alone. Microsoft has already taken a pop at this by saying they will have a transparent approval process where the dev can track their app's progress.
I'm actually surprised Apple has allowed it to get this far, but when a prominent user like Trent Reznor speaks out in the way he did recently, someone high up at Apple really needs to take notice and go kick the crap out of somebody to make sure this gets sorted for good.
If it really is bank errors that are causing the delays, and not some internal Apple screw-up, then Apple should fight for the devs to get interest paid on the outstanding amounts.
Do the right thing, Apple.
Ian Davies
@Steven Knox → #
Posted Monday 27th April 2009 21:29 GMT
In Windows 7 gets built in XP mode
Ok, revisionism again... I should say "an **unsupported** 8 year-old operating system"
You're right; age is no indicator of usefulness alone. But XP has been EOL'd. If the OS you're using has a roadmap and support plan going into the future, then that's fine. But running mission critical / niche software (the target audience we are told this is all about) that requires an OS which is classed as obsolete by the *vendor* is just plain dumb because, at worst, it means you are using dead software and if you come across a bug in the app you have no chance of getting it fixed, and at best even if the vendor is still around they are only going to able to fix bugs in the app itself. If they come up against a bug in the OS then you're screwed. Either way it's a bad idea.
Microsoft should come up with some compelling reasons for people to upgrade, and businesses shouldn't be expecting Microsoft to keep dragging their arse along in the 20th Century.
Oh, and I'll take your 21 year-old OS and raise you to 39 years. Little thing called Unix... last I heard it was running Mac OS... ;)
Ian Davies
@ Duncan Robertson → #
Posted Monday 27th April 2009 14:10 GMT
In Windows 7 gets built in XP mode
No ivory tower here, and I don't even run a network (at least not any more). I'll retract my use of the word "tightfisted" (although it *is* still the perfect description for some businesses who refuse to invest in their tools) but the basic problem remains unchanged. Microsoft has a choice when it comes to forward-looking development or backwards compatibility, and they choose compatibility every time. This is clearly a problem within Microsoft. But at the same time, how long do businesses really expect Microsoft to keep extending the life of an OS which is, in software terms, ancient when it comes at the expense of being able to develop for the future?
If someone's business depends on software which is so poorly maintained that it *requires* an 8 year-old operating system, then I would suggest that they have a slightly bigger set of problems...
Ian Davies
Some people never learn → #
Posted Monday 27th April 2009 12:14 GMT
In Windows 7 gets built in XP mode
The biggest millstone around the neck of Microsoft, its developers and its customers, has been its insistence on legacy compatibility. Instead of making a clean break with the past in the name of a lean codebase and an advanced, stable architecture, it just keeps layering on thick gobs of backwards compatibility. And for what? So tight-fisted businesses can run antique software? Bad trade-off.
Apple knew they had to make this decision for OS X, and they grasped the nettle. True, OS 9 was a much bigger bag of washing than the NT-based 2000/XP but the pain was no less of an impact because of that. There was plenty of howling and indignant rage that the (somewhat) beloved OS 9 should be tossed out, but it was Apple's way or the highway, and most people chose Apple's way. The platform has been rejuvenated because of that.
Page: