codyc815
Apr 26, 04:50 PM
However Apple lost my custom today. All these stories about putting the release date back and rumors about a 'small' update.....
Wth, Apple didn't push a release date back, there was never a release date. Just because you assume they'll introduce something the exact same time they did last year and they don't, that's not their fault.
Wth, Apple didn't push a release date back, there was never a release date. Just because you assume they'll introduce something the exact same time they did last year and they don't, that's not their fault.
iliketyla
Mar 29, 04:19 PM
Ah... dude... yes they have had suicides there... 11 attempts in 5 months out of 300,000 employees.
You do realize this is lower than the US actual suicide rate of 11 per-100K per-year.
Sorry... but I hate it when people and the press use "drama" to make a point and in reality... the Chinese workers at Foxconn are no different than your average US citizen.
Link please.
You do realize this is lower than the US actual suicide rate of 11 per-100K per-year.
Sorry... but I hate it when people and the press use "drama" to make a point and in reality... the Chinese workers at Foxconn are no different than your average US citizen.
Link please.
digitalbiker
Aug 4, 09:33 PM
It seems to me that the future of running Windows on our Macs is to not run Windows on our Macs.;)
Actually, I think Apple would be far more successful in letting Microsoft develop a better version of Virtual PC for OS X. Then people could run their Windows apps at near native performance. The machine would be a little safer from a virus infection stand point and Apple wouldn't have MS all over their back with lawsuits.
Microsoft would make money on their software and Apple would make money on their hardware as well as software.
Whats wrong with that! Everyone is happy. No revolution or bloody war. Just plenty of apps and great hardware.:D
Actually, I think Apple would be far more successful in letting Microsoft develop a better version of Virtual PC for OS X. Then people could run their Windows apps at near native performance. The machine would be a little safer from a virus infection stand point and Apple wouldn't have MS all over their back with lawsuits.
Microsoft would make money on their software and Apple would make money on their hardware as well as software.
Whats wrong with that! Everyone is happy. No revolution or bloody war. Just plenty of apps and great hardware.:D
Mac'nCheese
Apr 9, 08:38 PM
Same brand scientific calculator, two different answers. :rolleyes:
What mode are they in? From a quick search:
If you choose to use a calculator to solve the math problem, your calculator must be in scientific notation. Only a calculator in scientific notation will follow PEMDAS and the order of operations. A non-scientific calculator will yield an incorrect answer.
What mode are they in? From a quick search:
If you choose to use a calculator to solve the math problem, your calculator must be in scientific notation. Only a calculator in scientific notation will follow PEMDAS and the order of operations. A non-scientific calculator will yield an incorrect answer.
MacNut
Apr 14, 09:22 PM
So do you think the best idea is to just cut everybody equally?
To me that is mind-bogglingly simplistic.
We have to be intelligent enough to identify areas of need vs. those that are operating at a decent level of efficiency.
Here's an example ...
I work at a university that is undergoing cuts. But some departments actually make the university money. Does it make sense to cut departments that generate income as much as departments that don't? At least the people in charge here understand the difference and aren't applying "across the board cuts".If something is making money why would you cut it? You expand on it to make even more money. Trim the programs that are dead weight and is sinking the rest of the ship. Government gets into a mentality that once a program is created no matter how much it might fail they have to keep it around to stroke their ego. They can never admit that something might not be working.
To me that is mind-bogglingly simplistic.
We have to be intelligent enough to identify areas of need vs. those that are operating at a decent level of efficiency.
Here's an example ...
I work at a university that is undergoing cuts. But some departments actually make the university money. Does it make sense to cut departments that generate income as much as departments that don't? At least the people in charge here understand the difference and aren't applying "across the board cuts".If something is making money why would you cut it? You expand on it to make even more money. Trim the programs that are dead weight and is sinking the rest of the ship. Government gets into a mentality that once a program is created no matter how much it might fail they have to keep it around to stroke their ego. They can never admit that something might not be working.
Piggie
Apr 23, 05:45 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_6 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8E200 Safari/6533.18.5)
Yeah a 1024 x 1024 icon is amazing considering I would bet a significant amount of 1024 x 768 monitors are still being used. Imagine not being able to view an icon in its entirety on a five-year-old monitor!
Indeed they are, and still being sold today.
They are called iPad's ;)
Yeah a 1024 x 1024 icon is amazing considering I would bet a significant amount of 1024 x 768 monitors are still being used. Imagine not being able to view an icon in its entirety on a five-year-old monitor!
Indeed they are, and still being sold today.
They are called iPad's ;)
iScott428
Mar 29, 04:49 PM
Do you two have any hard data to suggest this is actually true in this case? Considering this company is planning to expand to the US and China, what evidence do you have suggest that its dangerous?
I am sure I could find some, but really you do not believe that battery production has some nasty byproducts? For instance it does more environmental damage to make Hybrid car batteries and get them into the vehicle than the car would ever save on energy usage through its life.
I am sure I could find some, but really you do not believe that battery production has some nasty byproducts? For instance it does more environmental damage to make Hybrid car batteries and get them into the vehicle than the car would ever save on energy usage through its life.
Raidersmojo
Aug 4, 11:35 PM
Originally Posted by digitalbiker
After Paris. Nov. 23, 2006 to be exact. Too bad you Aussies don't celebrate Thanksgiving. It is all about eating, drinking and watching football.
Speaking of Football, NBC Premieres Sunday Night Football this Sunday night at 8PM East - 5PM West live from Canton Ohio. John Madden is inducted into the Hall of Fame on Saturday and then shares the booth with Al Michaels in their new HD premiere broadcast pitting the Oakland Raiders against the Philadelphia Eagles. Let the games begin.
We get 10 exhibition games this month from the three broadcast networks. Whoopie.
__________________
Go raiders :cool: :D
After Paris. Nov. 23, 2006 to be exact. Too bad you Aussies don't celebrate Thanksgiving. It is all about eating, drinking and watching football.
Speaking of Football, NBC Premieres Sunday Night Football this Sunday night at 8PM East - 5PM West live from Canton Ohio. John Madden is inducted into the Hall of Fame on Saturday and then shares the booth with Al Michaels in their new HD premiere broadcast pitting the Oakland Raiders against the Philadelphia Eagles. Let the games begin.
We get 10 exhibition games this month from the three broadcast networks. Whoopie.
__________________
Go raiders :cool: :D
emotion
Aug 11, 10:12 AM
will there be a third party company that offers these upgrades to consumers?
They are already available, these are standard PC parts now remember.
http://www.microdirect.co.uk/ProductInfo.aspx?ProductID=14564&GroupID=1674
They are already available, these are standard PC parts now remember.
http://www.microdirect.co.uk/ProductInfo.aspx?ProductID=14564&GroupID=1674
toddybody
Apr 7, 01:00 PM
it was a joke in reference to your snarky comment relax.
Hey bro look on the bright side atleast we have bing now on appstore!
Thanks for the good news pal:) Ha ha!
PS: and this is my last rant on the subject...the 1199 vs 1799 is a big diference, no question... but that isnt attributable to a discrete GPU. Youre talking a larger footprint (more alum/mobo/battery/etc), bigger display with higher res, CPU bump, and HDD. All Im saying is that at 1199, Apple should bless it's entire MBP line with discrete GPU's (didnt say it had to be a 430m with 2GB of VRAM)...save the integrated for MBA/MB
Have a great afternoon!
Hey bro look on the bright side atleast we have bing now on appstore!
Thanks for the good news pal:) Ha ha!
PS: and this is my last rant on the subject...the 1199 vs 1799 is a big diference, no question... but that isnt attributable to a discrete GPU. Youre talking a larger footprint (more alum/mobo/battery/etc), bigger display with higher res, CPU bump, and HDD. All Im saying is that at 1199, Apple should bless it's entire MBP line with discrete GPU's (didnt say it had to be a 430m with 2GB of VRAM)...save the integrated for MBA/MB
Have a great afternoon!
Dr Kevorkian94
May 4, 08:02 PM
Doing it through the app store mares it more advertised and more users will be able to just upgrade. Whereas before u had to somehow hear about it and then take a drive to the store. Now it's easier and more advertised but you now have these "problems". So it will probably be available in the app store but u can burn it to a disc if u want, or purchase it from a apple store. But apple wants the primary distribution point to be the app store.
HypersonicXIV
Apr 25, 08:42 AM
Oh wow, I am excited just at the thought that they might hopefully be heading in this direction, regardless of when it finally happens.
I'm a programmer and spend my day looking at text in an IDE on a couple of 27" cinema displays. When I look at my iPhone 4 and see how amazingly crisp and clear text is on the retina display and then look back to my computer screen, I weep quietly inside.
The 27" screens are beautiful, but the retina display on my phone just shows how amazing they could be.
I�m interested in what Apple will do with the 15� MBP. If Apple doubled the resolution of the 1440x900 display, then going from a 1680x1050 MBP to this new 2880x1800 MBP means an increase in DPI but a decrease in viewable information.
Hopefully they will include a scaling ability as well for those who don't mind shrinking everything down to fit more on the screen as well (which would address the problem mentioned above).
There is lots of potential for screens with such a high DPI :D
I'm a programmer and spend my day looking at text in an IDE on a couple of 27" cinema displays. When I look at my iPhone 4 and see how amazingly crisp and clear text is on the retina display and then look back to my computer screen, I weep quietly inside.
The 27" screens are beautiful, but the retina display on my phone just shows how amazing they could be.
I�m interested in what Apple will do with the 15� MBP. If Apple doubled the resolution of the 1440x900 display, then going from a 1680x1050 MBP to this new 2880x1800 MBP means an increase in DPI but a decrease in viewable information.
Hopefully they will include a scaling ability as well for those who don't mind shrinking everything down to fit more on the screen as well (which would address the problem mentioned above).
There is lots of potential for screens with such a high DPI :D
*LTD*
Apr 5, 07:13 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Mobile/8G4)
Who the hell at Toyota thought this was a good idea?? It was remarkably unprofessional of them to begin with.
You don't establish business relationships by breaking the other's EULA. This is frankly, shocking from a company such as Toyota.
Who the hell at Toyota thought this was a good idea?? It was remarkably unprofessional of them to begin with.
You don't establish business relationships by breaking the other's EULA. This is frankly, shocking from a company such as Toyota.
kirk26
Apr 20, 07:50 AM
You are so right. I'm thrilled with Apple's brainwashed minions, and even happier that I began loading up on Apple stock over a decade ago.
Little did I realize they would bring us shareholders so much wealth. To think that I bought a load of shares when it was under $20 per, then kept adding each year since, brings a huge grin.
At this point everything I buy is nearly free. And when they screw up the masses still buy it. Nothing could be sweeter.
Ahh, I see that you just joined this site just to troll, huh?
Little did I realize they would bring us shareholders so much wealth. To think that I bought a load of shares when it was under $20 per, then kept adding each year since, brings a huge grin.
At this point everything I buy is nearly free. And when they screw up the masses still buy it. Nothing could be sweeter.
Ahh, I see that you just joined this site just to troll, huh?
3N16MA
Mar 28, 12:06 PM
My 3GS is working just fine -- I'm more than content to wait for a real refresh to the iPhone (not some garbage update that keeps the same flawed form factor re: antenna and use of a shattering glass back).
Most people claiming they'll switch won't -- rebuying your Apps for the Android marketplace represents a non-insubstantial hidden cost to switching for many people.
The iPhone 4 was a real refresh considering it was the first redesign in 2 years. The 3Gs was a smaller refresh than the iPhone 4 yet you still own one.
Most people claiming they'll switch won't -- rebuying your Apps for the Android marketplace represents a non-insubstantial hidden cost to switching for many people.
The iPhone 4 was a real refresh considering it was the first redesign in 2 years. The 3Gs was a smaller refresh than the iPhone 4 yet you still own one.
kavika411
Apr 15, 08:18 PM
I didn't miss it, you did. here, I'll bold it, underline it and put it in red so it's easier for you to catch ...
Then I'll refer to the definition so you might know what that word means ...
pri�ma�ri�ly (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/primarily) �adverb
1. essentially; mostly; chiefly; principally
Then I'll give you an example that demonstrates a different perspective on wealth ...
I am a graphic designer. My primary focus is on creating print and web solutions for my clients. While I do get paid, money is neither the source of my production and creativity, nor the material with which I work. It is a by-product of my labors, not the sole focus of them.
Thus I have a different perspective on money and wealth than itcheroni.
I hope that clarifies that for you.
Your inability and insecurity to come within even the same area code of your own prior rhetorical question - choosing the greener pastures of everything-unrelated-to-something-you-started-but-can't-finish - says everything.
Unlike you, I don't need to have "the last say." On this Friday night, I leave it to you to finish. Feel free to finish with something more relevant than your last posts, such as the syllabic definition of boredom, or a picture of a skateboarding dog.
Then I'll refer to the definition so you might know what that word means ...
pri�ma�ri�ly (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/primarily) �adverb
1. essentially; mostly; chiefly; principally
Then I'll give you an example that demonstrates a different perspective on wealth ...
I am a graphic designer. My primary focus is on creating print and web solutions for my clients. While I do get paid, money is neither the source of my production and creativity, nor the material with which I work. It is a by-product of my labors, not the sole focus of them.
Thus I have a different perspective on money and wealth than itcheroni.
I hope that clarifies that for you.
Your inability and insecurity to come within even the same area code of your own prior rhetorical question - choosing the greener pastures of everything-unrelated-to-something-you-started-but-can't-finish - says everything.
Unlike you, I don't need to have "the last say." On this Friday night, I leave it to you to finish. Feel free to finish with something more relevant than your last posts, such as the syllabic definition of boredom, or a picture of a skateboarding dog.
citizenzen
Apr 14, 09:48 PM
Did I suggest that? I think not.
Well, you provided a cautionary tale in response to my suggestion.
That's why I asked how you felt about it.
Please note ... I asked.
If something is making money why would you cut it?
That's my question.
Well, you provided a cautionary tale in response to my suggestion.
That's why I asked how you felt about it.
Please note ... I asked.
If something is making money why would you cut it?
That's my question.
babbit
Apr 18, 03:32 PM
LG was first (before iPhone) to release smart phone with capacitive screen and UI that looks suspiciously close to iPhone. Here is Prada:
http://www.itechnews.net/wp-content/uploads/2007/01/PRADA-Phone-LG-KE850-1.jpg
If Apple prevails in court. LG would be stupid not to sue Apple (and they would probably get more money considering iPhone volumes).
The iPhone 1 was announced before the Prada phone. Patent dates showed iPhone implementation of a capacitive touchscreen phone at least a year before LG showed their Prada phone in 2006. The Prada shipped in small shipments before the iPhone, so that is their only claim that it was technically released before the iPhone even though real shipments occurred months later. Technically, if Apple wanted to, they could have sued LG.
Also, the Prada isn't a smartphone. It can't load apps. It doesn't even have a qwerty keyboard. You input text through the phone dialer like old school SMS.
http://www.itechnews.net/wp-content/uploads/2007/01/PRADA-Phone-LG-KE850-1.jpg
If Apple prevails in court. LG would be stupid not to sue Apple (and they would probably get more money considering iPhone volumes).
The iPhone 1 was announced before the Prada phone. Patent dates showed iPhone implementation of a capacitive touchscreen phone at least a year before LG showed their Prada phone in 2006. The Prada shipped in small shipments before the iPhone, so that is their only claim that it was technically released before the iPhone even though real shipments occurred months later. Technically, if Apple wanted to, they could have sued LG.
Also, the Prada isn't a smartphone. It can't load apps. It doesn't even have a qwerty keyboard. You input text through the phone dialer like old school SMS.
Unorthodox
Aug 2, 03:59 PM
How can we get a hold of that keynote that Macrummors said will cover?
The main page transforms, via dark magic, into a of constantly updated text portal.
Legend has it that one MR member gets sucked into the swirling portal of dark magic and is trapped in a parallel universe for eternity.
This happens once per keynote.
The main page transforms, via dark magic, into a of constantly updated text portal.
Legend has it that one MR member gets sucked into the swirling portal of dark magic and is trapped in a parallel universe for eternity.
This happens once per keynote.
MikeTheC
Nov 25, 10:46 PM
All this talk about Palm needing to modernize their OS, or it is outdated, or needing to re-write is absolutely hilarious.
On a phone, I want to use its features quickly and easily. When I have to schedule an appointment, I want to enter that appointment as easily as possible. When I want to add something to my to-do list, I want to do it easily and quickly. And first and foremost, I want to be able to look up a contact and dial it as quickly as possible.
A phone is not a personal computer. I couldn't care less about multitasking, rewriting, "modern" OSes (whatever "modern" means). "Modern" features and look is just eye candy and/or toys. A mobile phone is a gadget of convenience, and it should be convenient to use. Even PalmOS 1.0 was convenient. It was just as easy to use its contact and calendar features as any so-called "modern" OS is today.
I would really like to know how "modernizing" the OS on my phone would help me look up contacts, dial contacts, enter to-do list entries, and entering calendar entries any better that I could today.
Again, I repeat: a phone is not a personal computer. There's no point in treating it as such.
The same point could largely be made about cars, but I don't think either of us would want to be driving a Model T or Model A Ford these days, would we?
The term "Modern" as applied to operating systems has little to do with the interface per se. It primarily concerns the underpinnings of the OS and how forward-looking and/or open-ended it is. Older operating systems, if you want to look at it in this way, were very geared to the hardware of their times, and every time you added a new hardware feature or some new kind of technology came out, you wound up making this big patchwork of an OS, in which you had either an out-dated or obsolete "core" around which was stuck, somewhat unglamorously, lots of crap to allow it to do stuff it wasn't really designed for. Then, you wound up having to write patches for the patches, etc., ad infinitum.
Apple tried to go the internal development route, but that didn't work because their departmental infrastructure was eating them from the inside out at the time and basically poisoned all of their new projects. They considered BeOS because it was an incredibly modern OS at the time that was very capable, unbelievably good at multitasking, memory protection, multimedia tasks, etc. However, that company was so shaky that when Apple decided not to go with them, they collapsed. One of the products which was introduced and sold and almost immediately recalled that used a version of BeOS was Sony's eVilla (you just have to love that name -- try pronouncing it out loud to get the full effect).
Ultimately, they went with NeXT's BSD- and Mach-Kernel-based NeXTStep (which after a bunch of time and effort and -- since lots of it is based on Open Source software, there were a healthy amount of community contributions to) and hence we now have Mac OS X.
I'll leave it to actual developers and/or coders here to better explain and refine (and/or correct) what I've said here, should you wish greater detail beyond what I am able to -- and therefore have -- provided above.
The whole point of going with a modern OS implemented for an imbedded market (i.e. "Mac OS X Mobile") is it gives you much more direct (and probably better implemented and/or better-grounded) access to modern technologies. Everything from basic I/O tasks that reside in the Kernel to audio processing to doing H.264 decoding to having access to IPv4 or IPv6, are all examples of things which a modern OS could do a better job of providing and/or backing.
From what I understand, PalmOS is something that was designed to first and foremost give you basic notepad and daily organizer functionality. When they wrote, as you say, PalmOS 1.0, they happened to implement a way for third parties to write software that could run on it. This has been both a benefit and a bane of PalmOS's existence. First off, they now have the same issues of backwards-compatibility and storage space and memory use/abuse that a regular computer OS has. I said it was both a benefit and a bane; but there's actually two parts to the "bane" side. The first I've already mentioned, but the second is the fact that since apps have been written which can do darn near any conceivable task, people keep wanting more and more and more. And this then goes back to the "patchwork" I described earlier in talking about "older" computer OSs.
Then people want multimedia, and color screens, and apps to take advantage of it, and they want Palm to incorporate DSPs so they can play music, and of course that brings along with it all of the extra patching to then allow for the existence of, and permit the use of, an on-board DSP. And now you want WiFi? Well, shoot, now we gotta have IPv4 as well, and support for TCP/IP, none of which was ever a part of the original concept of PalmOS.
And even if you don't want or need any of those features in your own PDA, I'm sorry but that's really just too bad. Go live in a cave if you like, but if you buy a new PDA, guess what: you're gonna get all that stuff.
And at some point, all of this stretches an "older" OS just a bit too far, or it becomes a bit absurd with all the hoops and turns and wiggling that PalmOne's coders have to go through, so then they say, "Aw **** it, let's just re-write the thing."
Apple comes to this without any of *that* sort of legacy. Doubtless there will be no Newton code on this thing anywhere, but what Apple's got is Mac OS X, which means they also have the power (albeit somewhat indirectly) of an Open Source OS -- Linux. And in case you weren't aware, there are already numerous "imbedded" implementations of Linux -- phones, PDAs, game systems, kiosks, etc. -- all of which are data points and collective experience opportunities which ALREADY EXIST that Apple can exploit.
So no, having a "modern" OS is not a bad thing. It's actually a supremely awesome thing. What you're concerned about is having something that is intuitive AND efficient AND appropriate to the world of telephone interfaces for the user interface on the device you'd go and buy yourself.
All I can say, based on past performance, is give Apple a chance.
Now, here's a larger picture thought to ponder...
If Apple goes to market with the iPhone, then this is going to open up (to some extent) the viability of a F/OSS community cell phone. And this is a really good thing as well because it represents a non-commercial, enthusiast entrance into what up until now has been a totally proprietary, locked-down OS-based product world. It has the potential to do to cell phones what Linux has inspired in Mac OS X.
On a phone, I want to use its features quickly and easily. When I have to schedule an appointment, I want to enter that appointment as easily as possible. When I want to add something to my to-do list, I want to do it easily and quickly. And first and foremost, I want to be able to look up a contact and dial it as quickly as possible.
A phone is not a personal computer. I couldn't care less about multitasking, rewriting, "modern" OSes (whatever "modern" means). "Modern" features and look is just eye candy and/or toys. A mobile phone is a gadget of convenience, and it should be convenient to use. Even PalmOS 1.0 was convenient. It was just as easy to use its contact and calendar features as any so-called "modern" OS is today.
I would really like to know how "modernizing" the OS on my phone would help me look up contacts, dial contacts, enter to-do list entries, and entering calendar entries any better that I could today.
Again, I repeat: a phone is not a personal computer. There's no point in treating it as such.
The same point could largely be made about cars, but I don't think either of us would want to be driving a Model T or Model A Ford these days, would we?
The term "Modern" as applied to operating systems has little to do with the interface per se. It primarily concerns the underpinnings of the OS and how forward-looking and/or open-ended it is. Older operating systems, if you want to look at it in this way, were very geared to the hardware of their times, and every time you added a new hardware feature or some new kind of technology came out, you wound up making this big patchwork of an OS, in which you had either an out-dated or obsolete "core" around which was stuck, somewhat unglamorously, lots of crap to allow it to do stuff it wasn't really designed for. Then, you wound up having to write patches for the patches, etc., ad infinitum.
Apple tried to go the internal development route, but that didn't work because their departmental infrastructure was eating them from the inside out at the time and basically poisoned all of their new projects. They considered BeOS because it was an incredibly modern OS at the time that was very capable, unbelievably good at multitasking, memory protection, multimedia tasks, etc. However, that company was so shaky that when Apple decided not to go with them, they collapsed. One of the products which was introduced and sold and almost immediately recalled that used a version of BeOS was Sony's eVilla (you just have to love that name -- try pronouncing it out loud to get the full effect).
Ultimately, they went with NeXT's BSD- and Mach-Kernel-based NeXTStep (which after a bunch of time and effort and -- since lots of it is based on Open Source software, there were a healthy amount of community contributions to) and hence we now have Mac OS X.
I'll leave it to actual developers and/or coders here to better explain and refine (and/or correct) what I've said here, should you wish greater detail beyond what I am able to -- and therefore have -- provided above.
The whole point of going with a modern OS implemented for an imbedded market (i.e. "Mac OS X Mobile") is it gives you much more direct (and probably better implemented and/or better-grounded) access to modern technologies. Everything from basic I/O tasks that reside in the Kernel to audio processing to doing H.264 decoding to having access to IPv4 or IPv6, are all examples of things which a modern OS could do a better job of providing and/or backing.
From what I understand, PalmOS is something that was designed to first and foremost give you basic notepad and daily organizer functionality. When they wrote, as you say, PalmOS 1.0, they happened to implement a way for third parties to write software that could run on it. This has been both a benefit and a bane of PalmOS's existence. First off, they now have the same issues of backwards-compatibility and storage space and memory use/abuse that a regular computer OS has. I said it was both a benefit and a bane; but there's actually two parts to the "bane" side. The first I've already mentioned, but the second is the fact that since apps have been written which can do darn near any conceivable task, people keep wanting more and more and more. And this then goes back to the "patchwork" I described earlier in talking about "older" computer OSs.
Then people want multimedia, and color screens, and apps to take advantage of it, and they want Palm to incorporate DSPs so they can play music, and of course that brings along with it all of the extra patching to then allow for the existence of, and permit the use of, an on-board DSP. And now you want WiFi? Well, shoot, now we gotta have IPv4 as well, and support for TCP/IP, none of which was ever a part of the original concept of PalmOS.
And even if you don't want or need any of those features in your own PDA, I'm sorry but that's really just too bad. Go live in a cave if you like, but if you buy a new PDA, guess what: you're gonna get all that stuff.
And at some point, all of this stretches an "older" OS just a bit too far, or it becomes a bit absurd with all the hoops and turns and wiggling that PalmOne's coders have to go through, so then they say, "Aw **** it, let's just re-write the thing."
Apple comes to this without any of *that* sort of legacy. Doubtless there will be no Newton code on this thing anywhere, but what Apple's got is Mac OS X, which means they also have the power (albeit somewhat indirectly) of an Open Source OS -- Linux. And in case you weren't aware, there are already numerous "imbedded" implementations of Linux -- phones, PDAs, game systems, kiosks, etc. -- all of which are data points and collective experience opportunities which ALREADY EXIST that Apple can exploit.
So no, having a "modern" OS is not a bad thing. It's actually a supremely awesome thing. What you're concerned about is having something that is intuitive AND efficient AND appropriate to the world of telephone interfaces for the user interface on the device you'd go and buy yourself.
All I can say, based on past performance, is give Apple a chance.
Now, here's a larger picture thought to ponder...
If Apple goes to market with the iPhone, then this is going to open up (to some extent) the viability of a F/OSS community cell phone. And this is a really good thing as well because it represents a non-commercial, enthusiast entrance into what up until now has been a totally proprietary, locked-down OS-based product world. It has the potential to do to cell phones what Linux has inspired in Mac OS X.
Yank in UK
May 8, 06:50 AM
This is easy to see
MobilMe Becomes Free
MobilMe gets laden with 1Ads
All part of the Apple strategy
I would be happy to keep paying $99/year for adfree Mobilme
MobilMe Becomes Free
MobilMe gets laden with 1Ads
All part of the Apple strategy
I would be happy to keep paying $99/year for adfree Mobilme
ncvrumors
Mar 26, 09:56 PM
Taking the cloud fight to Google.
FourCandles
Nov 2, 12:08 PM
It will be interesting to see if this makes it to the OS X App Store.
OneMike
May 7, 11:54 AM
MobileMe is great to me.
Other then when it was FIRST launched and they kept extending the trial for like 4 months. I seldom if all have issues.
Other then when it was FIRST launched and they kept extending the trial for like 4 months. I seldom if all have issues.
No comments:
Post a Comment