Glass
Jul 11, 03:48 PM
They will. Microsoft doing this will definitely cause Apple to be less stingy with the R&D and get some great small products to market.
God, I really hope that Leopard is more of an upgrade than Tiger was.
You don't think tiger was a significant upgrade? wtf?? lol.. it was packed with new features.
God, I really hope that Leopard is more of an upgrade than Tiger was.
You don't think tiger was a significant upgrade? wtf?? lol.. it was packed with new features.
JAT
Apr 30, 09:03 AM
I have to wonder how many people discussing audio quality buy their movies from iTunes vs Blu-Ray.
Just asking since apparently those people are so concerned with getting optimal performance from their media.
Not to take this off topic - but too many people have been duped by all the streaming serves and cable companies to believe they're getting a true HD experience when, in fact, they aren't because of the astronomical bitrate difference between what can be streamed vs delivered by hard media at current.
Not me. Most movie viewing comes from my collection or from Netflix. Netflix BDs in the mail, that is. And over half of the reasoning for that is the audio. I had great audio before great video.
Currently trying to decide how to begin purchasing music again. I've been out of the market for years, except for a couple CDs here and there and about 6 downloads, ever. Should I hunt down 24/96? Should I upgrade my TT and focus on vinyl? Or is CD going to have to be good enough? Possibly even some downloads for the kids' stuff to save cash.
Just asking since apparently those people are so concerned with getting optimal performance from their media.
Not to take this off topic - but too many people have been duped by all the streaming serves and cable companies to believe they're getting a true HD experience when, in fact, they aren't because of the astronomical bitrate difference between what can be streamed vs delivered by hard media at current.
Not me. Most movie viewing comes from my collection or from Netflix. Netflix BDs in the mail, that is. And over half of the reasoning for that is the audio. I had great audio before great video.
Currently trying to decide how to begin purchasing music again. I've been out of the market for years, except for a couple CDs here and there and about 6 downloads, ever. Should I hunt down 24/96? Should I upgrade my TT and focus on vinyl? Or is CD going to have to be good enough? Possibly even some downloads for the kids' stuff to save cash.
lilo777
Apr 23, 01:15 AM
This is exactly what I am saying. They aren't making devices for people who demand to have the latest and greatest regardless of the consequences. They make devices that work and meet their internal standards.
What you don't understand is that Apple makes a device that meets their goals and standards. They don't want to ship a phone that gets four hours of battery life because they know that very few people will be happy with that.
Of course people may want something different, which is why, strangely enough, Apple isn't the only phone manufacturer in the world. You are not forced to buy Apple if you don't like their philosophy.
Well, it looks like we actually agree. I just wanted to make this point clear that Apple cares only about profits (as all companies) which puts iOS users in a position where they have very few options: Apple way or highway. It's different with Android.
Then leave these forums. Clearly apple-related news is not for you. Clearly you want a phone that apple does not provide. Why are you even here? The truth is, nobody is stopping you from buying that android with 4 hours of battery life if it is more suited to your tastes. You are not entitled in any way to force Apple to make a device that suits your needs. Go buy the Thunderbolt. Enjoy it.
Are you saying that only people who love each and every Apple decision should post here? Probably not but you sound like it. I thought we were just discussing the merits of tech gadgets here.
What you don't understand is that Apple makes a device that meets their goals and standards. They don't want to ship a phone that gets four hours of battery life because they know that very few people will be happy with that.
Of course people may want something different, which is why, strangely enough, Apple isn't the only phone manufacturer in the world. You are not forced to buy Apple if you don't like their philosophy.
Well, it looks like we actually agree. I just wanted to make this point clear that Apple cares only about profits (as all companies) which puts iOS users in a position where they have very few options: Apple way or highway. It's different with Android.
Then leave these forums. Clearly apple-related news is not for you. Clearly you want a phone that apple does not provide. Why are you even here? The truth is, nobody is stopping you from buying that android with 4 hours of battery life if it is more suited to your tastes. You are not entitled in any way to force Apple to make a device that suits your needs. Go buy the Thunderbolt. Enjoy it.
Are you saying that only people who love each and every Apple decision should post here? Probably not but you sound like it. I thought we were just discussing the merits of tech gadgets here.
Unorthodox
Oct 18, 05:07 PM
Pssh.
That nothing.
I made 600 million profit selling lemonade on my street just last week.
That nothing.
I made 600 million profit selling lemonade on my street just last week.
more...
DotCom2
Apr 14, 12:21 PM
PLEASE have battery drain fix!
PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE!
PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE!
awideseaofeyes
Aug 15, 06:18 PM
does anyone know a rough date for its release?
more...
TheSpaz
Aug 15, 02:31 PM
Spring-loaded folders in the dock. So you can drag a file onto a folder in the dock and have it spring open - like in the Finder.
Oh. I thought it would be how fast the dock unhides when you hover over it.
Oh. I thought it would be how fast the dock unhides when you hover over it.
Mac'nCheese
Apr 24, 09:39 AM
I just found that the person that was beat up was transgender and this was a hate crime. How come this is not all over the news? I guess hate crimes are okay now by black people but if a white person did this it would be the end of the world.
MSNBC was reporting this late last night. I think that part of the story just wasn't known right away and hopefully it will be part of the story now. If it was black on white or vice versa, it would have been obvious on the video, too, and you're right, the Easter riots would be in full effect by now.
MSNBC was reporting this late last night. I think that part of the story just wasn't known right away and hopefully it will be part of the story now. If it was black on white or vice versa, it would have been obvious on the video, too, and you're right, the Easter riots would be in full effect by now.
more...
jsw
Aug 15, 02:32 PM
also how about ability to have bookmarks in a click menu, like yahoo toolbar, where it can be shared among a login on your .mac acct? across all your computers, ie laptop and workstation?
You can already sync bookmarks with .Mac, as well as access them online.
You can already sync bookmarks with .Mac, as well as access them online.
longofest
Sep 30, 07:42 AM
I get about the same drop rate or worse in the DC Metro area. I also have friends on AT&T that have their text messages go to the wrong person. Thinking seriously of getting a Verizon BB and an iPod Touch to replace my iPhone. :(:(:( Sorry :apple:
I get very good reception in the DC metro area (NoVA). I estimate only 1-5% dropped calls, which is acceptable to me.
I get very good reception in the DC metro area (NoVA). I estimate only 1-5% dropped calls, which is acceptable to me.
more...
savar
Oct 23, 08:58 AM
Why would they make such a stupid move? I can tell you this much, they have just lost my support as a vendor! How do they expect me to to sell a $300 copy of windows to a home user just so he can use Microsoft's O/S on his Mac? Oh well I'm sure they know what they are doing or do they?!?!?
:confused:
So this is true?? I suppose this isn't any different than Apple saying that you can't run Mac OS X on non-Apple hardware, is it?
:confused:
So this is true?? I suppose this isn't any different than Apple saying that you can't run Mac OS X on non-Apple hardware, is it?
kazmac
May 3, 08:43 AM
just confirmed with Apple...hopefully they'll remove that.
Anyway, looking forward to the spec bumps for the Mini, the Air and the Pro.
And really hope that everyone's iMacs will behave and be okay this time around.
Anyway, looking forward to the spec bumps for the Mini, the Air and the Pro.
And really hope that everyone's iMacs will behave and be okay this time around.
more...
graphite13
Nov 3, 07:22 PM
The nicest thing about a Cocoa app is that it looks and behaves like every other Cocoa app. There is a sort of consistency in behavior. Things that look almost like a Cocoa app, but don't quite behave that way annoy me.
But what'll make VMware faster is the better support for multi-core processors and allowing the VM to take advantage of that.
But what'll make VMware faster is the better support for multi-core processors and allowing the VM to take advantage of that.
ScottInTheOC
Mar 16, 02:32 PM
Is this at the spectrum?
Yes this was at Irvine Spectrum. The Apple guy said to try again tomorrow.
Has anyone heard from Mission Viejo??
Yes this was at Irvine Spectrum. The Apple guy said to try again tomorrow.
Has anyone heard from Mission Viejo??
more...
stefman
Oct 24, 09:27 AM
It was about time......runs to get credit card :D :D :D :D
SciFrog
Oct 26, 08:21 PM
The 80k PPD is a 32 core AMD system...
more...
ChazUK
May 1, 05:34 AM
And the differences between iPad / iPod / iPhone are orders of magnitude less than the differences between the ultra-high and ultra-low ends of what is being counted as Android "phones".
You do realize that there are a set of minimum requirements that an Android phone must adhere to to be granted access to Android Market?
I don't know how long you have been into Smartphones but smartphone marketshare has always been calculated this way, even in the old days of Symbian and Windows Mobile which also ran on non smart phone PDA's.PDA's were excluded from smart phone market share despite running the same OS.
"Smartphone OS" market share has been around before Android and iOS even existed as a platform and isnt some tool to belittle Apple's perceived performance in any way. Its just a metric in a sea of metrics that count things to different cirteria.
You do realize that there are a set of minimum requirements that an Android phone must adhere to to be granted access to Android Market?
I don't know how long you have been into Smartphones but smartphone marketshare has always been calculated this way, even in the old days of Symbian and Windows Mobile which also ran on non smart phone PDA's.PDA's were excluded from smart phone market share despite running the same OS.
"Smartphone OS" market share has been around before Android and iOS even existed as a platform and isnt some tool to belittle Apple's perceived performance in any way. Its just a metric in a sea of metrics that count things to different cirteria.
Small White Car
May 3, 11:33 PM
1) Is this a permanent move to a Fall Release of the iPhone?
I'm guessing 'yes' simply because I think "Because they want it to be in the fall" is the one reason for moving it that makes the most sense to me. I think that's the whole point.
3) Does this affect the timing of iOS's release, which has traditionally been released with the new iPhone and has been centered around the iPhone's hardware?
I have less reason to believe it, but I sure hope that iOS 5 still comes out in the summer. I'd like to see iOS updates divorced from hardware updates, just like it is with the Mac.
I'm guessing 'yes' simply because I think "Because they want it to be in the fall" is the one reason for moving it that makes the most sense to me. I think that's the whole point.
3) Does this affect the timing of iOS's release, which has traditionally been released with the new iPhone and has been centered around the iPhone's hardware?
I have less reason to believe it, but I sure hope that iOS 5 still comes out in the summer. I'd like to see iOS updates divorced from hardware updates, just like it is with the Mac.
Applepi
Oct 4, 07:53 PM
I had to sell my beloved iPhone and kick AT&T to the curb because I get zero service here in my home just outside of Phoenix. I was so fed up with the dropped calls and AT&T had nothing but excuses for me, they also told me to wait til the next quarter so I could purchase a cell booster for home. What a joke.
southernpaws
Apr 22, 02:58 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_2 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8H7 Safari/6533.18.5)
This will likely offend the diehard apple fanboys and the people who want to steve jobs to have their kid. But it needs to be said because it will add to the discussion. Read on at your on discretion:
Apple inc. Idea of technology is simple if product A is X weight and Y thin. Any upgrade to product A that will and can result in the weight being greater then X then the upgrade is not a worthwhile addition to the phone.
I like apple but they are to damn cautious of a company. Google is know for its innovations, but more ever it does things that most people would not think of many of these Ideas fail others become standard. Apple needs to be more on the front lines and take risk. Nothing wrong with a few bad products.
Is it a bad thing that apple doesn't want to increase the size of the iPhone? There are people who want/accept huge phones but the fact remains that the motorola razr is historically one of the most successful phones and people criticized the iPhone on its realease for it's size.
The majority of the market wants smaller phones. Apple should go after that
Also. Re: innovation. Ever hear of. Um. The iPhone? Or the iPad?
Google isn't known for innovations they're known as a search company that's expanding their reach. Google has never "innovated" with a larger phone. They just make a very good OS...but your comparison is false
This will likely offend the diehard apple fanboys and the people who want to steve jobs to have their kid. But it needs to be said because it will add to the discussion. Read on at your on discretion:
Apple inc. Idea of technology is simple if product A is X weight and Y thin. Any upgrade to product A that will and can result in the weight being greater then X then the upgrade is not a worthwhile addition to the phone.
I like apple but they are to damn cautious of a company. Google is know for its innovations, but more ever it does things that most people would not think of many of these Ideas fail others become standard. Apple needs to be more on the front lines and take risk. Nothing wrong with a few bad products.
Is it a bad thing that apple doesn't want to increase the size of the iPhone? There are people who want/accept huge phones but the fact remains that the motorola razr is historically one of the most successful phones and people criticized the iPhone on its realease for it's size.
The majority of the market wants smaller phones. Apple should go after that
Also. Re: innovation. Ever hear of. Um. The iPhone? Or the iPad?
Google isn't known for innovations they're known as a search company that's expanding their reach. Google has never "innovated" with a larger phone. They just make a very good OS...but your comparison is false
fastdrive
Oct 24, 09:10 AM
So how long do you think before I can pick one of these up in the refurbished store?
twoodcc
Oct 16, 11:44 PM
I'm running it on my air as fast as I can... but I'm stuck on this Astropulse thats taking 200 hours to complete :(
are you really folding on an air?
I will have to try it when I get home tonight.
let us know how it goes
are you really folding on an air?
I will have to try it when I get home tonight.
let us know how it goes
tomokun
Jul 24, 04:40 PM
I dont think I could ever go to a Mighty mouse, however i always thought that it should have been bluetooth. I have a bluetooth apple mouse (that came with my iMac) and my Logitech MX1000. The logitech is much more comfortable, i cant stand using the small apple mouse for long periods of time.
I could see this as better than mightymouse, however its nothing to make me want to buy one. The logitech is better.
I could see this as better than mightymouse, however its nothing to make me want to buy one. The logitech is better.
MagnusVonMagnum
Nov 20, 10:40 AM
If you don't address those very good reasons, your argument won't be very convincing. We do not want the CPU suck, the identity leaking, the UI inconsistencies, and the very real risk of "zero day" Adobe bugs.
Whom am I trying to convince? Illogical and irrational people who worship Steve Jobs and hate what he hates? Such people will not care or listen to any form of reason. That's why the word fanatic is in fanboy. No, I talk about an option to turn Flash on or off at will and you find it offensive to even offer an option. That is irrational at best.
Everything you fear would be avoided if someone just turned Flash OFF (or it could default to off and have to be turned on). I've said since the first post the word OPTION. You don't seem to comprehend that word or understand why those of us that would want the choice of having Flash are not asking you to give up anything in the process. You could always turn it off if it were present. We cannot turn it on if it's not present.
In other words, you are not competent to carry on a rational discussion. You're just here to vent.
No, I just don't see any point in trying to carry on a logical, rational discussion with someone whose "argument" is based purely on emotion. If it weren't, you wouldn't object to an option for those of us that don't agree with Steve Jobs point of view because an option satisfies all your arguments against having Flash because you can always just leave it OFF. It cannot do harm if it's off no matter how paranoid you may become about having it on your device.
Many millions of people have Flash installed on their Macs (let alone those using Windows and Linux) and they could remove it. They know that if they do, some web sites will cease to function properly and thus they leave it on. The security concerns you mentioned will be addressed as all security bugs are in both OSX and Windows.
Users of those 120M+ devices don't have to hope. They are already free of Flash!
Free of Flash? You say that in a tone that sounds like they're free of slavery or something. No, what they're free of is the ability to access millions of web sites that require Flash to view them or much of their content and I do not see that as a good thing. But my point of view doesn't require you to see it. I said from the first post I wanted an option to use Flash. You could still choose to turn it off if it were there. I cannot turn on what is not present nor should I have to buy some absurd 3rd party converter that requires their web site to be running to use it.
The analogy makes no sense. Nobody is forcing you to use any Apple product.
And so that makes it OK for him to behave as he does? A lot of us like Apple products, but we would like them a lot better if Steve would just stick to making the products unfettered instead of trying to force his opinions and world view on people in the process. He doesn't like Flash so he decides for everyone they should not use Flash. What if Steve decided iOS shall no longer support MP3 files, only AAC? I suppose you would accept that as OK too? Update iOS and your MP3s no longer function. Yes, that would be just wonderful if they did that. After all, AAC is superior to MP3, so why should Apple support a legacy inferior heavily pirated format? By your logic, they should not.
If you really want the "full web experience" of zero-day Adobe bugs, get an Android phone. Note: Android phones were vulnerable to the last zero-day Adobe bug. (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-273.txt)
I don't want a phone period guy. I only want and use an iPod Touch. Is there an Android iPod Touch? Android didn't exist when Apple made the claims of accessing the full Internet either and it doesn't make that any less a lie.
The fact that I can't catch zero-day Adobe attacks on my iPhone is a great reason to praise Apple's decision.
You act as if Apple has no vulnerabilities to attack. That is extremely naive to the point of emotionalism once again. In fact it's just the opposite. Apple's security is rated as bad compared to Windows and only the fact that there are so few Mac users compared to Windows has saved it thus far. As the popularity of iOS devices has exploded, it's inevitable that it will start attracting malware. It's only a matter of time. Will you wish you never bought an iPhone on that day or will you recognize that companies simply have to find and patch vulnerabilities. Apple has patched numerous security flaws in OSX over the years. Should we plug our ears and say there is no such thing?
Do tell: what exact sites are you talking about? What exact legacy flash applications are running on those sites to which you can find no substitute?
A quick search (you do know how to do that don't you?) reveals offhand a few example sites that don't use HTML5 video (which could and may in the future, but that doesn't help someone today):
Gametrailers
GiantBomb
Vimeo
Playstation Blog
Stiq of Joy
Engadget
Try some of these effects on this site this with HTML5:
http://superior-web-solutions.com/
Maybe read this article on Flash. Most HTML5 is just a video player. Flash isn't just a video player and it didn't even start as one.
http://www.andrewgreig.com/2010/06/html5-is-not-a-flash-replacement-and-shouldnt-be-seen-that-way/
Perhaps you want an open standard? So when does Apple stop requiring Quicktime on their web sites? :rolleyes:
Nobody is holding a gun to your head. Nobody is holding you hostage.
If you don't like the choices that Apple made, then ditch your iOS device and get an Android. Simple.
No, they're just boring me to death with emotional arguments why everyone should either worship Steve Jobs or leave the platform and get an Android instead similar to the "love OSX or leave it" arguments the fanboys regularly produce.
This is the first little lie in your rant. The iOS users don't find it inconvenient. If Flash were so damn important to them, they would have bought some device that could run Flash.
The fact that you think my statement is a "lie" based on a subjective opinion tells me you cannot even tell fact from fiction let alone lies from opinions. Trying to see someone else's point of view is completely foreign to you. You view the world through tinted lenses. What you say is akin to if you don't like something about OSX, go buy a Windows machine, as if there aren't any compromises along the way on that platform either (not to mention having to replace possibly thousands and thousands of dollars worth of software for a given platform to do so). Not liking something about a given platform and wanting to change it doesn't mean another platform is more viable in ALL areas or that a person may wish to spend a lot of money to make that change just because of that one issue. Perhaps you'd like to send me a free Android phone to replace my aging 1st Gen iPod Touch that I bought before Android even existed? I'd happily consider such an offer. Of course I'll need replacement apps as well.
The people who bought those 120M+ devices disagree with you.
You seem to forge that I and others that actually want Flash are part of those people dude. Get over yourself. Just because you don't like Flash doesn't mean the rest of us have hatred for it. Some of us simply don't like our iPhones, iPads and iPod Touches crippled for no reason. Besides, how you try to turn my initial argument that I'd prefer to see an option to use Flash for those of us that want it rather than no option into this flipping crusade against all things Apple and Flash alike is beyond me. You are making mountains out of mole hills and lies out of opinions. For what? I can't make you see things the way I see them. I never wanted to try. That's why I said OPTION. But you would deny everyone who wants that option to have it just like Steve Jobs. Steve does it because he's a control freak (he was once ousted from Apple for this very reason). I imagine you do it because you love Apple. Sadly, I actually prefer Steve's reason.
This is the second little lie. Apple did provide a choice: they approved the SkyFire App. They didn't have to do that.
Didn't they? It doesn't violate their rules for an app so how could they not approve it without being outright liars? Oh wait. They have done that before so I can see your point. ;)
Apple has also announced they will approve Flash Apps using Adobe's cross-compiler for iOS. If there actually are crucial Flash apps -- you haven't named a single specific one so far -- the owners of those apps should be able to easily cross-compile their apps for the iOS App Store.
Apple formerly announced they would NOT support it. Why did they change their minds? Could it have something to do with the Justice Department starting an investigation into anti-trust behaviors by Apple policies? Noooo....it couldn't be that. Apple is allowed to single out companies it doesn't like and compete with to just willy-nilly throw specifically into their license agreements.
And that is the third little lie. Flash is a proprietary and legacy platform. It's on the way down now.
I say if you don't have Flash you don't have the full Internet and you call that a "lie" based on the above quote? What freaking UNIVERSE do you live in??????? ROTFLMAO. You cannot tell a statement of fact from an idea in your head that somehow says that the "full internet" doesn't include sites that use "propriety" formats. Come on man. That position not only ignore reality it even invalidiates Apple's own web site as being part of the "full Internet" !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
You need to try harder. Calling someone a liar when they are obviously stating facts and/or opinions just makes you look immature.
because accusing someone of lying when it's obvious
Even Adobe has acknowledged that a Flash-only choice is a bankrupt strategy (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1039999). After websites start offering their content with an open standard, you've gotta ask: what exactly is the value in continuing to prop up Flash?
First of all, you are the one that is calling it a "bankrupt strategy". I see nothing in that thread by Adobe that even addresses the matter. Adobe is simply trying to sell products and if they can easily sell more products to Apple users by providing an easy way to convert their hard work Flash sites into HTML5, they are going to do so and laugh all the way to the bank. That in NO WAY invalidates the fact that there are still plenty of Flash only sites out there and plenty of flash uses (e.g. Flash games) that HTML5 is no simple substitute for regardless. Until the Internet is Flash free, there is going to be a need and a will by people to have the option to view Flash.
The mere fact that this Skyfire app has raked in over $1 MILLION in sales already shows just how big that will is. Yet you reject the desire to be able to use Flash web sites as meaningless and unnecessary while the thread title alone proves you wrong.
Whom am I trying to convince? Illogical and irrational people who worship Steve Jobs and hate what he hates? Such people will not care or listen to any form of reason. That's why the word fanatic is in fanboy. No, I talk about an option to turn Flash on or off at will and you find it offensive to even offer an option. That is irrational at best.
Everything you fear would be avoided if someone just turned Flash OFF (or it could default to off and have to be turned on). I've said since the first post the word OPTION. You don't seem to comprehend that word or understand why those of us that would want the choice of having Flash are not asking you to give up anything in the process. You could always turn it off if it were present. We cannot turn it on if it's not present.
In other words, you are not competent to carry on a rational discussion. You're just here to vent.
No, I just don't see any point in trying to carry on a logical, rational discussion with someone whose "argument" is based purely on emotion. If it weren't, you wouldn't object to an option for those of us that don't agree with Steve Jobs point of view because an option satisfies all your arguments against having Flash because you can always just leave it OFF. It cannot do harm if it's off no matter how paranoid you may become about having it on your device.
Many millions of people have Flash installed on their Macs (let alone those using Windows and Linux) and they could remove it. They know that if they do, some web sites will cease to function properly and thus they leave it on. The security concerns you mentioned will be addressed as all security bugs are in both OSX and Windows.
Users of those 120M+ devices don't have to hope. They are already free of Flash!
Free of Flash? You say that in a tone that sounds like they're free of slavery or something. No, what they're free of is the ability to access millions of web sites that require Flash to view them or much of their content and I do not see that as a good thing. But my point of view doesn't require you to see it. I said from the first post I wanted an option to use Flash. You could still choose to turn it off if it were there. I cannot turn on what is not present nor should I have to buy some absurd 3rd party converter that requires their web site to be running to use it.
The analogy makes no sense. Nobody is forcing you to use any Apple product.
And so that makes it OK for him to behave as he does? A lot of us like Apple products, but we would like them a lot better if Steve would just stick to making the products unfettered instead of trying to force his opinions and world view on people in the process. He doesn't like Flash so he decides for everyone they should not use Flash. What if Steve decided iOS shall no longer support MP3 files, only AAC? I suppose you would accept that as OK too? Update iOS and your MP3s no longer function. Yes, that would be just wonderful if they did that. After all, AAC is superior to MP3, so why should Apple support a legacy inferior heavily pirated format? By your logic, they should not.
If you really want the "full web experience" of zero-day Adobe bugs, get an Android phone. Note: Android phones were vulnerable to the last zero-day Adobe bug. (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-273.txt)
I don't want a phone period guy. I only want and use an iPod Touch. Is there an Android iPod Touch? Android didn't exist when Apple made the claims of accessing the full Internet either and it doesn't make that any less a lie.
The fact that I can't catch zero-day Adobe attacks on my iPhone is a great reason to praise Apple's decision.
You act as if Apple has no vulnerabilities to attack. That is extremely naive to the point of emotionalism once again. In fact it's just the opposite. Apple's security is rated as bad compared to Windows and only the fact that there are so few Mac users compared to Windows has saved it thus far. As the popularity of iOS devices has exploded, it's inevitable that it will start attracting malware. It's only a matter of time. Will you wish you never bought an iPhone on that day or will you recognize that companies simply have to find and patch vulnerabilities. Apple has patched numerous security flaws in OSX over the years. Should we plug our ears and say there is no such thing?
Do tell: what exact sites are you talking about? What exact legacy flash applications are running on those sites to which you can find no substitute?
A quick search (you do know how to do that don't you?) reveals offhand a few example sites that don't use HTML5 video (which could and may in the future, but that doesn't help someone today):
Gametrailers
GiantBomb
Vimeo
Playstation Blog
Stiq of Joy
Engadget
Try some of these effects on this site this with HTML5:
http://superior-web-solutions.com/
Maybe read this article on Flash. Most HTML5 is just a video player. Flash isn't just a video player and it didn't even start as one.
http://www.andrewgreig.com/2010/06/html5-is-not-a-flash-replacement-and-shouldnt-be-seen-that-way/
Perhaps you want an open standard? So when does Apple stop requiring Quicktime on their web sites? :rolleyes:
Nobody is holding a gun to your head. Nobody is holding you hostage.
If you don't like the choices that Apple made, then ditch your iOS device and get an Android. Simple.
No, they're just boring me to death with emotional arguments why everyone should either worship Steve Jobs or leave the platform and get an Android instead similar to the "love OSX or leave it" arguments the fanboys regularly produce.
This is the first little lie in your rant. The iOS users don't find it inconvenient. If Flash were so damn important to them, they would have bought some device that could run Flash.
The fact that you think my statement is a "lie" based on a subjective opinion tells me you cannot even tell fact from fiction let alone lies from opinions. Trying to see someone else's point of view is completely foreign to you. You view the world through tinted lenses. What you say is akin to if you don't like something about OSX, go buy a Windows machine, as if there aren't any compromises along the way on that platform either (not to mention having to replace possibly thousands and thousands of dollars worth of software for a given platform to do so). Not liking something about a given platform and wanting to change it doesn't mean another platform is more viable in ALL areas or that a person may wish to spend a lot of money to make that change just because of that one issue. Perhaps you'd like to send me a free Android phone to replace my aging 1st Gen iPod Touch that I bought before Android even existed? I'd happily consider such an offer. Of course I'll need replacement apps as well.
The people who bought those 120M+ devices disagree with you.
You seem to forge that I and others that actually want Flash are part of those people dude. Get over yourself. Just because you don't like Flash doesn't mean the rest of us have hatred for it. Some of us simply don't like our iPhones, iPads and iPod Touches crippled for no reason. Besides, how you try to turn my initial argument that I'd prefer to see an option to use Flash for those of us that want it rather than no option into this flipping crusade against all things Apple and Flash alike is beyond me. You are making mountains out of mole hills and lies out of opinions. For what? I can't make you see things the way I see them. I never wanted to try. That's why I said OPTION. But you would deny everyone who wants that option to have it just like Steve Jobs. Steve does it because he's a control freak (he was once ousted from Apple for this very reason). I imagine you do it because you love Apple. Sadly, I actually prefer Steve's reason.
This is the second little lie. Apple did provide a choice: they approved the SkyFire App. They didn't have to do that.
Didn't they? It doesn't violate their rules for an app so how could they not approve it without being outright liars? Oh wait. They have done that before so I can see your point. ;)
Apple has also announced they will approve Flash Apps using Adobe's cross-compiler for iOS. If there actually are crucial Flash apps -- you haven't named a single specific one so far -- the owners of those apps should be able to easily cross-compile their apps for the iOS App Store.
Apple formerly announced they would NOT support it. Why did they change their minds? Could it have something to do with the Justice Department starting an investigation into anti-trust behaviors by Apple policies? Noooo....it couldn't be that. Apple is allowed to single out companies it doesn't like and compete with to just willy-nilly throw specifically into their license agreements.
And that is the third little lie. Flash is a proprietary and legacy platform. It's on the way down now.
I say if you don't have Flash you don't have the full Internet and you call that a "lie" based on the above quote? What freaking UNIVERSE do you live in??????? ROTFLMAO. You cannot tell a statement of fact from an idea in your head that somehow says that the "full internet" doesn't include sites that use "propriety" formats. Come on man. That position not only ignore reality it even invalidiates Apple's own web site as being part of the "full Internet" !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
You need to try harder. Calling someone a liar when they are obviously stating facts and/or opinions just makes you look immature.
because accusing someone of lying when it's obvious
Even Adobe has acknowledged that a Flash-only choice is a bankrupt strategy (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1039999). After websites start offering their content with an open standard, you've gotta ask: what exactly is the value in continuing to prop up Flash?
First of all, you are the one that is calling it a "bankrupt strategy". I see nothing in that thread by Adobe that even addresses the matter. Adobe is simply trying to sell products and if they can easily sell more products to Apple users by providing an easy way to convert their hard work Flash sites into HTML5, they are going to do so and laugh all the way to the bank. That in NO WAY invalidates the fact that there are still plenty of Flash only sites out there and plenty of flash uses (e.g. Flash games) that HTML5 is no simple substitute for regardless. Until the Internet is Flash free, there is going to be a need and a will by people to have the option to view Flash.
The mere fact that this Skyfire app has raked in over $1 MILLION in sales already shows just how big that will is. Yet you reject the desire to be able to use Flash web sites as meaningless and unnecessary while the thread title alone proves you wrong.
Комментариев нет:
Отправить комментарий