For the record, I don't hate Apple. They make tremendous products. I also am not an "average" consumer; I am capable of writing my own software applications, and have done so for multiple platforms. The attitude towards putting your own software on the device is just far far superior for Android, so I prefer that. I never know when I might want to develop my own app (even if it is, literally, just for myself). In fact, I've already had a few ideas kicking around. (I love my Xbox too, but I'm not too happy about the "barrier to entry" for developing your own Arcade games. The SDK is $100. That eliminates the possibility of "tinkering", even if you never release the software - unless you are made out of money. Boo.)
The next gen iPhone has been leaked: http://gizmodo.com/5520164/this-is-apples-next-iphone One last comment on the Android vs. iPhone argument. I think the biggest loser here is actually Microsoft. Google is going for what would have been the Microsoft target audience. And now Android has a massive head start against Windows Mobile 7 both in terms of market share as well as in terms of technology.
This article responds to the article about disgruntled developers - I like the comment about Android being a "geek ghetto" (not sure if it's true, just a funny description). http://counternotions.com/2010/04/13/suicidal/ To my point earlier about iphone customers:
I find this adobe drama interesting, and this blog is pretty harsh on Adobe (as well as critical of Apple). http://www.devwhy.com/blog/2010/4/12/its-all-about-the-framework.html From the user comments - one of the prices of being open:
Well, these are interesting articles. I don't know why Apple is so much against flash (on the web). Maybe someone from Adobe pissed in Steve Job's serial...I don't know. Apple can of course decide to not support flash. The story regarding Flash CS5 is different though. I don't think this has much to do with making the iPhone more stable or making it easier to further advance the iPhoneOS. To me it's obvious that the real target is Android here. If developers use tools like Flash CS5, then they could easily compile one app for multiple platforms which means that Apple would soon lose an important competitive advantage. Now, developers would have to completely rewrite their app for another platform, which is a lot of work and not profitable as long as the Android users don't buy a lot of apps. So Apple tries to keep Android small as long as it has the upper hand. It is a very smart move if you ask me. Developers will have to stick to the iPhone if they want to make money. If it works, Android and other platforms will have a very hard time catching up. It's kinda like when Microsoft managed to make the proprietary DirectX the de-facto standard for gaming and thereby virtually eliminating 3d games from other platforms. Ironically, this whole diversification with mobile devices could mean a rebound for OpenGL...
I'm pretty sure that you can develop your own app for the iPhone. Only if you want to sell them via the app store do you have to pay the annual $100 fee. The iPhone SDK is available for free (only works on a Mac though).
OK, in preface, I love Apple stuff. I have an iMac, an iPhone, and multiple iPods. But this is pretty dang funny.
It's real simple, we've reached a point where the technology on both the hardware side and on the internet side is so advanced that there is no need for 3rd party plug-ins. Adobe Flash is one of the few external pieces of software that ships with every Mac. Apple is dependent on Adobe to update Flash, maintain performance, patch it regularly. It's a dependency they don't want to have, and given the advancement of web technologies feel they can try to break. Look at it this way, with Snow Leopard Apple made their entire operating system 64-bit. Flash has to ship with OS-X, and Adobe dragged their feet on re-writing the plug in to 64-bit. So Apple has two options, they can delay the release of their operating system to accommodate Adobe or they can make their software engineers write a work around. They ended up going with a work around, where Flash is sandboxed inside Safari and runs in 32-bit. It might seem trivial but it's resources that are pulled away from doing other important things. That in a nutshell is why Apple wants to kill Flash and in my opinion Flash is already really irrelevant. It's biggest legitimate use is in video and even there the underlining codec is h264 which Apple is pushing people to use in HTML5. So the migration away from Flash is very easy because the source file is already compatible with alternate methods. This is how YouTube is able to serve video to the iPhone, they just serve it in a different player. Once you acknowledge that you can also start to debate about which method is better. Most HTML is written with the intent to downgrade gracefully. A website can have it's style removed down to text and images and still remain functional. This is something Flash doesn't offer, it's an all or nothing deal. Moving towards HTML5 one can code video to play by default in HTML5 on compatible browsers (Chrome and Safari) and switch to Flash in other browsers. This can be done today without problems and with very little code. Ultimately since the things Flash can do can be achieved without Flash it's much better to ditch this technology. Flash is essentially a gateway between your computer and the internet. It's an open door that allows websites to execute code without your approval. This is how these pops that take over your entire screen are done. How the scam virus warnings that look like Windows system windows are done. It's all done in Flash, and if Flash get's access to hardware accelerators there is the chance for some nasty viruses to be made. Moving to HTML5 essentially closes that door, it let's content live on the net and be interpreted by your borwser. It also let's the browser/os maker have the ability to immediately close bugs and exploits without having to be dependent on a 3rd party. Adobe Flash is basically a modern version of RealPlayer, and sooner or later regardless of Apple it's going to die out to the way being put forward by the web standards guys.
By the way guys, I wasn't calling people here Apple haters, but you should see sites like Engadget, Gizmodo, etc. Haters is a mild term there. I just find it amusing that people slam Apple for having a "walled garden" when plenty of other manufacturer's do and they don't get anywhere near the same level of hate. I think DDR did a pretty good job of mentioning why Apple doesn't like Flash. Not to mention how the latest version of Flash for mobile phones is now pushed back to sometime in the 2nd half of 2010. It's about a year late now. Seeing how poorly Adobe dealt with Flash on Mac's why should Apple be beholden to an even crappier mobile version?
It's a part of having the crown, everyone wants to knock you. With the iPhone Apple went from being the little dog that was making a comeback to being the king. So now anything negative they do get's magnetized. They do some things badly but they've done a lot of good for the internet. They open sourced WebKit which is used in Chrome and in pretty much all the mobile web browsers. They didn't have to do that, think back to when Microsoft destroyed Netscape. They didn't open source a thing, they actually slowed down IE development because there was no competition. BTW I fully expect Apple to try and sue Gizmodo out of existence.
Man, you ain't kidding. We could've had this same discussion 20 years ago about the Mac: closed system, rigidly controlled interface... I'm an iPhone owner, and the walled garden of the App Store doesn't bug me nearly as much as it's being locked to AT&T, even after your contract expires. As a former GSM developer, that's plain odious to me. After my contract expires, I should have the freedom to pop out the AT&T SIM and put in a T-Mobile SIM or any other GSM network's SIM.
It'll be interesting to see if the things that hurt Apple back then end up getting them again. In the 80s it was expensive hardware (the iPhone is priced comparably to other smartphones) and a lack of software (App Store is the leader... for now at least). Will it potentially be something else this time? You said it. While their coverage footprint seems to have finally gotten decent enough, the number of dropped calls I suffer from is mind-numbing. I can count the number of drops I had on one hand during my five years with Sprint. Even before your contract is up, you can unlock phones from most other makers and take them abroad to use with a different SIM.
Since we were talking about Android - some caution about the devices: http://money.cnn.com/2010/04/21/smallbusiness/google_android/ And I thought this quote was funny: http://news.cnet.com/8301-30685_3-20003006-264.html And finally, just a little fanboy funny anecdote: Goldman on Apple: Yes, We’re Stickin’ to That ‘Neutral’ Rating
This is why Apple products do well, if a 100 year old woman can use this, anyone can. [ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ndkIP7ec3O8"]YouTube- Virginia's new iPad[/ame]
I talked to our Director of High Performance Computing Operations today about his iPad, and he made a good case for a tablet. In summary? The smartphone is a comms device, but the tablet is an entertainment device. Books, music, magazines, etc. In fact, he's thinking about eliminating his laptop since between the tablet and the phone he can do everything he uses the laptop for. (It's a convincing argument, since I mostly just use my laptop for email and websurfing. I could replace it with a desktop machine at work for computing, and a tablet for portable entertainment.) Does the iPad support movies and/or user uploaded videos? Can I rip a DVD and upload it to the device to watch later?
Personally, I replaced my desktop with my laptop, so an iPad certainly won't replace my laptop. It could replace netbooks though. Speaking of which, I'm really interested in how Google's Chrome OS will stack up. It might be the biggest loser here. I just can't see how anybody would still buy anything netbook-like when he could buy an iPad, so Chrome OS might be dead on arrival. Google owns the cloud though, so there might be the unique selling proposition. However, Apple is also working on a massive infrastructure right now. If they make it free of charge and easier to use than MobileMe, then they'll own the sub-notebook market (for now). BTW, I've just read an article today, making the point that Apple could become the next AOL if it doesn't open up...there were some good arguments there. It basically said that the technological advantage of the iPhone is gone by now and that by keeping the gated internet approach à la AOL, they'll ultimately lose out as people want freedom. In Ferbuary, 20 big players in the phone business (including Deutsche Telekom, China Mobile, AT&T, Vodafone, Orange, Sprint, Telefónica and Verizon) came together to develop an open standard for cell phone apps. It'll basically be a competitor for Apple's app store. Apple still has a major advantage because it has all the cool apps, but should they not open up and continue to force content providers out, they'll happily go to the competition. And when I want to read my "Spiegel" magazine via my cell phone, it won't be an iPhone.
Is the article online because sounds a little silly. The iPhone never really had a technological advantage - but it still has an advantage in terms of overall user experience. AOL died because people stopped needing it for their dial-up ISP - I don't see how that is analogous. And I don't think AOL ever had any hip cache' - it was something people adopted because it was convenient and easy not particularly special - sort of like Dell.
That is pretty much what I liked about it as soon as I saw it. Web browsing is incredibly fast and easy (guess I have been lucky not to run into any wifi issues - ran speedtest, and I'm seeing speeds of 22/16 on a 35/20 connection, which is the highest I've seen of any device that I have connected via wifi) Its far more covenient for reading than a laptop, and in some cases preferable to the 24inch monitor on my desktop (longer documents). Also found that I started reading things I didn't read before like comics. I can keep it on the couch if I want to respond to IMs, or check a matchday thread while watching a game There are quite a few apps that do some functions a lot more elegantly than I would on a computer (listening to KROQ or Pandora, checking weather) Gaming has stepped up considerably from the iPhone/Touch as well. You can upload your own videos using iTunes (and convert with Handbrake for any incompatible video). There are also some streaming apps which I haven't tried yet, which let you access videos on your computer, and the upcoming Sling app for iPad. Two things I would really like are a forward facing camera, and multitasking (the save state in OS4 will do just fine).
http://www.ftd.de/it-medien/it-tele...pples-erfolg-kommt-vor-dem-fall/50104333.html Yeah it is still online, but in German. It's from the German offshoot of the Financial Times. The term "technological advantage" came from me though. They were basically talking about the whole package which was unique until shortly. As for AOL dying out: You're right, but people have stopped needing Apple for their mobile internet experience...when that happens and you offer less content than your competitor, you'll eventually lose. I don't fully agree with the article either though, because while Apple offers less content in principle (due to the fact that they're the gate keeper and ban a lot of content) they do still have a lot more content and it's getting more every minute. So it'll be very hard to catch up (especially with the change in Apple's license agreement). But should Android or some other competitor ever come close to Apple in terms of quality apps, then I could easily see the whole thing collapse. The European publishers might be such a risk. If they get their act together (they seem to be determined, but it's still a big if IMHO) and move all their content to Android, it could be a major blow for the iPhone/iPad in Europe.
You seem to be ignoring the hardware component and the incredible brand loyalty they have. They are what Sony used to be for TVs. Android equipment needs to do more than just provide apps. This argument also ignores the cool factor that Apple seems to have going. Will it some time die out? Probably - but I personally think they still have a lot of growth to go yet.
I don't see Android catching up in this incarnation. Device diversity, and lack of quality control is a major obstacle in getting app development on Android to rival the App Store.
I agree about the cool factor, but it doesn't help Apple much on the desktop market, does it. Pretty much everybody agrees that Microsoft sucks and that Windows is horrible compared to Mac OS X, and yet most people buy PCs because they're cheaper or because they want to play games, or because they have to use certain apps that are only available on Windows. And again, I don't want to bash Apple, I just want to point out areas where I see problems ahead. For the time being, Apple is doing fine and I'm sure that the iPad will do its part so that the growth can continue. Here's the scenario I see: Apple will grow, but Android will grow faster, simply because of a bigger variety in products/networks and because of the lower price point. The catching up can take several years, but once Android has a certain critical mass, it'll accelerate while Apple will slow down or even lose market share, unless Apple has opened up more by this point. What could of course also happen is Apple introducing some new feature that will propel them ahead once more...
I disagree with you here - most people don't believe Mac OSX is better because most are clueless about Macs and just don't know any better. As more and more folks use ipods, iphones, ipads, they are going to start considering buying macs as well for their next home computer. I personally think there's tons of growth potential for them in this area.
Cautionary points about apple http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704830404575200362577226100.html?ru=yahoo&mod=yahoo_hs
While you still have brand loyalty in Europe, it just tends to be much stronger in the States, and less about electronic gadgets and other stuff. I have basically never met an apple fanboy, in my live, and i Have plenty of people who only use a macbook, but non-apple cell phone, or an iphone / ipod and a windows/linux laptop. One of my few friends who actually had both iphone and macbook is considering getting rid of the phone because she doesn't use it so much for anything else than smsing and calling but still pays a lot for it. The last observations are annecdotatle, sure, but I can find you a few examples for the first.