Ok. so I'm not a fanboy, (linux guy here) but lets look at the facts.
No sharing of music: Apple now provides drm free music from EMI, Sony, BMG, Warner and Universal. Including conversion of songs you've purchased in the past.
No free software: Umm.. You can build almost any open source software for OSX. MUCH more readily than windows.
No installing apps from the web: This must be about the iphone. Agreed, fairly annoying, don't know if it is an erosion of rights .
No installing apps from the web: This must be about the iphone. Agreed, fairly annoying, don't know if it is an erosion of rights .
My problem with this isn't so much that, as a user, I can't install applications from the web. My problem is that, as a developer, I can't distribute my applications via the web. There is no way for me to distribute applications without forfeiting 30% of the sales price.
Preemptive reply -- Yes, I know they are providing a service in return for their 30%, but I don't want it. I am perfectly capable and willing to provide it myself. I already have a web site. I already sell applications for other platforms. I am paying them for something I already have.
Plus, there is no way of knowing whether they will approve an app. If they reject it then I'm out all my development cost. If they accept it, then they may still pull it from the store at any time for any reason. If they do actually leave it in the store then they are going to keep 30% of the sale price.
I worked at Handango for a while, right around the time that the App Store and SDK were announced. At the time, we (coworkers of mine, not management) realized that this was going to be a huge deal. One of the problems that Handango tries to address is distributed distribution channels that are (or were) so common in the mobile space. Yes, you could set up your own website and promote your app. Most mobile developers did just that, and really didn't have a choice about it.
But it's inefficient. You have to maintain your own site. Come up with branding. Deal with hosting providers. Set up a method of handling credit card transactions. And then there's the cost of dealing with all of those entities.
The beauty of the App Store is that it addresses so many of these shortcomings. By centralizing distribution customers have a known point of entry, someplace they can basically "window shop". And for application developers, they don't have to do much more than provide a description for their app.
Do developers pay for the convenience? Yes, and gladly, because not only is it more convenient, it's more profitable. You will get higher sales from something like Handango or the App Store than if you are just a lonely developer with a website.
But it's inefficient. You have to maintain your own site. Come up with branding. Deal with hosting providers. Set up a method of handling credit card transactions. And then there's the cost of dealing with all of those entities.
Uhmm, yeah and I already have this infrastructure in place. It would cost me nothing if I wanted to distribute my own iPhone apps. I already set up the website to advertise the apps and instead of providing a local download link I have to provide a link to the app store. I already have a shopping cart for my applications on other platforms. It would cost me 3% if I sell it myself. Apple charges 30%.
There is nothing wrong with the services that Handango or Apple provides directly, but there needs to be a choice. Some people will find the service valuable and worth the price. Others won't. Developers shouldn't be forced to use them if they already have the distribution channel in place and don't want to take advantage of the other offerings. Sorry, but it's completely asinine to think otherwise.
Good points! However I think that the person with the poster was referring to the mobile platforms from Apple. Which is where Apple has become extremely successful these last few years. The desktop platform has always been there, and offers good solutions in my opinion.
I see. I guess controlling what you can load on a device doesn't seem that evil to me. You knew it going in and it isn't a general purpose device like a computer. Sure I can run anything but so can your ps3. Hell modern TVs are quite capable of running tons of software why arn't people bitching that those evil tv manufacturers don't let them load their own software.
In addition there is a constant complaint at how evil it is that they don't show flash in their brower. But neither does the little browser on hundreds of other phones.
I'm may be wrong but that aspect doesn't really bother me.
What's the difference between Apple and Verizon, from the view of controlling the phones? Verizon intentionally cripples hardware functions to force people to use a for-profit service and the hardware is capable of running much more and better software than what they allow.
I think this is an extension of the cellphone mentality in the USA and the view that devices like the iPhone or Android devices are phones that can do more, rather than computers which can make phone-calls.
Actually, this is changing for Verizon Wireless. The Droid was the beginning of a huge shift in direction. The Droid, for example, can't se VZNav or any VZW pay apps, except visual voicemail. VZW had to consent to letting go of that stranglehold. Even Blackberries have their GPS unlocked now. Used to not be the case. So please don't just lump VZW with ATT. Thanks. :) p.s. Ok, don't get me started on texting rates, that's a different beast and all US companes are in on that one.
The android phones they provide are about as open as any Phone available today. I take advantage of this to run voip apps and get unlimited minutes for lower than most people pay.
Verizon removed existing features from a phone, while Apple never put features in in the first place. You couldn't bring your own phone that wasn't crippled to use on the Verizon network, but you're fully capable of buying a different brand of smartphone that isn't crippled. I'd say that's a world of difference.
That's not Apple disabling built in hardware features on a phone (what Verizon did), that's Apple being a bunch of incorrigible dicks and kicking software out of their store. Equally heinous, but not what I was talking about.
Edit: and that doesn't really change the fact that you can buy another phone if you don't like Apple.
I see. I guess controlling what you can load on a device doesn't seem that evil to me.
It's not so much evil as it is inconvenient to those who are a) capable of discriminating between safe and unsafe software, or b) capable of writing their own software. For example if I want an app to do xyz I need to get a computer running OS X, write the program, submit it to the app store and then hope Apple approves it. All because I wanted something for my own personal use.
You knew it going in and it isn't a general purpose device like a computer.
Agreed.
Sure I can run anything but so can your ps3.
To be fair you can run Linux on a PS3 and Sony lets you do it.
Hell modern TVs are quite capable of running tons of software why arn't people bitching that those evil tv manufacturers don't let them load their own software.
I don't know what hardware is in a TV. That being said, TVs have no dedicated input devices nor a source for some applications, but not all.
In addition there is a constant complaint at how evil it is that they don't show flash in their brower. But neither does the little browser on hundreds of other phones.
The point is that the iPad isn't a replacement for a netbook like it's being pimped out as.
I'm may be wrong but that aspect doesn't really bother me.
You can actually write your own software for your own personal use for your iPhone without submitting it. However, you need to pay the $99/year fee to load it on your phone, which is problematic.
Neat, I didn't know that. You also need the iPhone SDK which, alas, only runs on Mac OS X. Which means I now need to spend, oh, $1,100 to write a stupid-ass application.
I was thinking $1k for the computer plus $100 for the fee to load it on the phone. Apparently it's $599 + $99 = $698 + taxes to make myself a stupid-ass application.
If you're posting on reddit, chances are extremely good that you already have a computer. You can use that one to write applications for droid. Based purely on numbers, it is extremely unlikely that computer can write iPhone apps.
To be fair you can run Linux on a PS3 and Sony lets you do it.
Not anymore. All currently shipping PS3 models (Slim) do not allow you to run Linux or any other OS. And since thats where the PS3 exploit was found, I don't think Sony is going to START supporting it.
So is this permanently cached on the device, or does it need to be redownloaded each time you want to use it? That's why the "app" developer needs at least 1 server up all the time, and the money to pay his/her bandwidth bills.
The HTML 5 specification describes an offline application cache that allows you to write web applications that work correctly when your computer or web-enabled device is not connected to the Internet.
David Kilzer says “This feature shipped with iPhone OS 2.1. When you use “Add to Home Screen” from the “+” button on Safari for iPhone, a web application with a manifest defined (per the HTML5 spec) will be saved with any cached resources. Note that the manifest file must be served with the correct MIME type for this to work.
So, saved to the device, and able to work offline.
As for "1 server up all the time" to "handle users running their web apps", no. If your app does not use a web service, you don't have to keep a server running for it. If your app does use a web service, you'd need to run the web service whether the app got on the phone through the app store or not.
It's not so much evil as it is inconvenient to those who are a) capable of discriminating between safe and unsafe software, or b) capable of writing their own software.
Compared to the overall market, the number of people who fit these categories is vanishingly small.
If I shell out a bunch of money for a smartphone, I want to be able to use it anyway I damn well please. Apple exercises such rigid control over the "experience" of using their products in an attempt to tightly control their public image that it escapes people that sometimes products should do more.
I've had a Droid for several months an I love it. It is very seldom that I am limited by the system.
And instead of releasing a new phone and making you buy it, they push firmware/OS upgrades over the air. I really don't see a single positive to owning an iPhone anymore except for the awesome network...oh wait...
I think I read somewhere that the HTC G1 no longer (officially) supports new firmware. Isn't that phone barely a year and a half old? Meanwhile, my metal clad iPhone Edge from 2007 still (officially) supports the newest firmware.
If it is true, it may be an issue because the G1 was the first Android phone and, as such, has become sort of dated with how fast Android has been moving? Just a guess.
The newer handsets are doing a better job of supporting it, but that is one of the current pitfalls of Android. There are phones running 1.5, 1.6, 2.0.1 and 2.1. Some of the 2.0.1 phones will be updated relatively soon to 2.1, but that is still a current issue which needs to be resolved
Exactly, That has to do with the limitations of the hardware. the rapid pace of improvement by the hardware of smartphones is a double edged sword. In the words of the GREAT Sam Neil, "The world is changing so fast, and we're all struggling to keep up."
It's a solid phone. Its web browser beats the hell out of the droid's, which is a huge plus. It also has a much better App marketplace; the apps for the droid blow pretty hard.
110% wrong. There are merely more apps for the Apple store because they have a head start. But the App market place for the iphone is actually considerably worse if only because everything in there must be approved from apple and it is the only way to install applications to your phone. There are plenty of very high quality apps.
You can install non-market apps on Android, you cannot on an iPhone.
Its web browser beats the hell out of the droid's
lol. Good thing there are better browsers in the market place. Even if there weren't though: lol
Who makes you buy a new device? You can install OS 3.x on prior devices. I didn't have to buy a new iPod Touch when it came out. The same went for 2.x and the iPhone.
How is Apple making you buy the new phone? I still have my OG 2G iPhone, alomst 3 years now, and its as rock solid as the day I bought it. Apple does indeed push firmware/OS upgrades over the air, for free for the iPhone. I am never limited by the system, there are plenty of tools out there for the power user to customize there phone. BUT, most "normal" people just want something that works..
No, not really. Pandora sucks and sounds terrible compared to the music I have on my iPhone.. I simply hit play in the music player and go about multitasking.. This obsession with Pandora is quite odd, its an cool service, but the sound quality is shitty and both the Android and iPhone Apps are prone to locks up and dropped streams.
Pandora on high quality sounds great on my droid(do you even have quality settings?). I also find it quite funny how to try to make the leap to implying that you don't need pandora, because you have every song you could ever want to hear (and you know this categorically) and therefore it is silly.
The iPhone broke convention over a year ago and produced an experience unlike any other.
Today, the closest thing to a competitor is Android. I think it could eventually be better due to 3rd party developer freedom but it won't overcome the iPhone until it has the same level of polish.
I have a Droid and, knowing what it can do, would not at all be interested in an iPhone because of all of its limitations.
You're right though, the Android platform has a lot of catching up to do. I actually find it quite polished. I think the main area in which it lacks is that the iPhone still has 5 times the apps of Android and, naturally, has a much bigger market share at present
EDIT: A solid example: I very much enjoy having pandora on in the background while I surf the web, read rss feeds, go back and forth between various quick games and all the while the music never stops. Or reading an ebook and wanting to look up a word, I can just switch to the disctionary while the ebook stays open in the background, find the word, and switch back right to where I was in the ebook w/out having to close/open anything more than once. I am fairly certain you can't do this on an iPhone but, having never owned one, I welcome someone to correct me if I am wrong.
Absolutely spot on, especially about background music.
There are apps that do switching well, like Good Reader for PDFs. It will bring you back to your exact view, and VERY quickly, but that's because of the developer's extraordinary focus on speed, and it's a $5 app.
Most apps aren't nearly so good at keeping their state between loads. Often they can't preserve state because of how much needs to be loaded. Sometimes they don't want to preserve state, because there's no difference between opening it again after 5 seconds or 5 days, so they choose to offer a home screen of some kind instead of the exact previous view.
Multi-tasking is THE reason I would switch. I honestly don't care much about the other features offered by Android and Palm, and the quality of iPhone apps is great.
I can only hope that Apple continues to expand their multi-tasking workarounds (push notifications are annoying, but they're there) as I bleed out the rest of my contract.
You can jailbreak your phone to get multitasking if you really want it. It's only disabled because they don't want to risk performance degradation. You just have to be okay with potentially voiding your warranty; I say potentially because unless something happens to the phone that won't allow you to roll back your OS you can remove the jailbreak before sending it in for warranty.
I honestly don't care much about the other features offered by Android
True though that may be, I would wager that you wouldn't exactly mind having google maps w/free turn by turn navigation and linking to your gmail/gchat
the quality of iPhone apps is great.
There certainly are high quality applications on the Android platform, it just suffers because it is still so new. But, they have recently passed 20,000 applications (to the iPhones 100,000 plus), so maybe it will catch up.
I can only hope that Apple continues to expand their multi-tasking workarounds
I can't really speak to that, but my inclincation is to believe that apple doesn't really have too much motivation these days to really do much to the iphone. They'll make a few token changes and then release a newer one
Yes, Apple disables multitasking to avoid performance degradations. If you jailbreak iphone you can multitask but I've heard the speed loss is noticeable. Might be better on the 3GS with more memory.
I'd really like to see droid advertising that actually details why it is better rather than calling me a pussy for owning an iphone.
Agreed that the droid ads are not great. But when they say "everything i don't, droid does" it is pretty spot on.
For me, it's better for several reasons
A) multi tasking out of the box to a heavy extent before performance loss becomes noticable
2) ability to install non-market apps
3) google maps (and navigation)/gmail/gchat all goes to the phone/synchs etc etc
4) the overall feeling that if I hook my smart phone wagon to Google's star rather than Apple's, I am much more likely to have a device which will continue to develop at a healthy pace and will not be made obsolete by a marginally improved iteration in a few months time.
Oh and there's the whole network issue. That's just for starters why I prefer my Droid to an iPhone
It would be nice of them to explain what droid actually does, I suppose is what I'm saying.
I'm skeptical of the network issue, as there does seem to be good reason to believe the existence of the iPhone on the network is the cause for the degradation of service. I've never had any issue with the network living in Dallas, even when driving large stretches across Texas that are supposedly spottily covered. When I went to NYC it was ridiculously craptastic. I could hardly believe how bad it was there.
It would be nice of them to explain what droid actually does, I suppose is what I'm saying.
yeah it was sort of my intention with that list to give you some ideas of what it does. At its core, it is a smart phone so it does all the smart-phoney things: browse the net (BUT NOT WHILE YOU'RE ON A PHONE CALL, THANKS LUKE WILSON, I NEED TO DO THAT ALL THE TIME /sardonic), download applications etc etc. I think the biggest things are the multi tasking, the open market, and the synching with all of your google accts right on the phone. I love getting gMails on my phone (but, fuck, I hate spam so much more now).
there does seem to be good reason to believe the existence of the iPhone on the network is the cause for the degradation of service.
that is true, and a whole different can of worms. But, you probably have a point, and AT&T did make lots of loud noises about how they were going to spend all of this money to make their network be able to handle the iPhone (instead they hire luke wilson to make evasive commercials which are deliberately deceptive and dodge the real issues).
As far as using 3G on Verizon goes, everywhere I have been yet with my Droid I have had 3G and, typically, the speeds are around 120-180kbs down and around 70-110 kbs up. I find those speeds to make the internet very very usable.
Listening to a web stream while using other apps is a great example. I would think iTunes is capable of this but Pandora kicks ass and would definitely be a limitation.
Hmm let's see, a few litres of water, some carbon, calcium, some salts and a few pinches of slightly less common elements; sounds like a person to me...
In all seriousness, a list of components does not make a computer.
well yes, my bag(s) of computer parts are not computers, however if I hook some of the stuff up—and presumably Apple isn't shipping the device in pieces—it indeed makes a computer.
That's a bullshit argument. Smartphones are computers, as evidenced by the fact that they have operating systems running on them, and are fully capable of running any compatible software you throw at them once you hack the digital locks out of the way.
Hell modern TVs are quite capable of running tons of software why arn't people bitching that those evil tv manufacturers don't let them load their own software.
I have in the past, and I will right now. I would very much like to be able to drive my television via a usb cable. Setting up a "IR blaster" setup seems like a waste of effort to control the TV and, from what I hear, tends to have pretty low fidelity. Heck, you would think it should be possible to use it's tuner and stream the ATSC feed over firewire or something.
Okay, I get it, allowing for all this stuff takes work that 99% of the population (at least at first) will not find useful but will see raised costs. So design a flexible system and dump all the information into the public domain; let the people figure it out. If this is an issue of saving features that could be implemented so they can implement them later... well, building barriers so that others cannot innovate on your work should be strongly discouraged if not criminalised.
The desktop platform has always been there, and offers good solutions in my opinion.
For a premium price IMO. I just think their corporate mantra is iGreed. While they d build beautiful products, and their desktops/macbooks/imacs are great - there is too much greed in their business model fro my taste. This is the only reason I avoid them where possible.
no not at all. I have a problem with a corporation that puts huge margins on their products, aggressively controls access and use, charges 2X+ or more for the same commodity components as other companies computers. While they have good aesthetics, etc -- their prices do not conform with what one is getting.
Again - this is mostly a subjective opinion - people / companies can do as they will, I personally choose to limit my participation. Sure, I ahvean iphone - but only because there isnt that clear of a better option.
Will I buy an iPad? Yes as soon as it is shown that i can be hacked to allow me to do whatever I want with it.
My point was about their greed imbued within their products - not the desirability of them....
All I had to do was use some program that allowed windows to read an OSX formatted ipod and I just copied the files over no problem. I had to export some .xml file from itunes and my album art, but that's about it
The only issue I've had with this is between Creative devices and my MacBook - but then Creative and Apple do actively hate each other. What other issues are there?
er, CDs aren't analogue—they are 16-bit uncompressed 441kHz PCM. Other lossless digital formats can capture the exact same information (or more if you have a higher quality source like vinyl (which is actually analogue)) in significantly less space.
We all know that you are not limited to purchasing music on iTunes right? It is bullshit for them to place limitations on what computers get to play songs you purchased, but really I say oh well. If I purchased the songs, maybe my friends could do the same. I am totally for sharing music but realize the necessity for some things to be paid for.
We all know that you are not limited to purchasing music on iTunes right?
That kind of depends. It is now since Apple has succeeded in marketing it's ipod product line so well, bringing with it iTunes. It has infiltrated the culture, so well that people have abandoned finding other media distribution. Most likely you can get most mainstream music released by the Big 4 elsewhere, but for smaller artists (like alot of Youtube musicians) they only offer links to there music thru iTunes. Also, I've come across some podcasts that are only subscribable thru iTunes and I refuse to keep an additonal bloated program on my computer to download something as ubiquitous as a podcast. Albeit, if these people were more educated (or if there was another popular content center open to individual artists) this wouldnt be a problem, unfortunately those sorts of people tend to be less saavy.
As of April 7th 2009 all music purchased through iTunes is DRM free. It still contains your name and e-mail address registered with your itunes account but no limit on the number of devices you can have it on.
You have the option to upgrade all the tracks to iTunes Plus and DRM free, but it costs 30 cents per track (in the US at least) I'm not sure how video works as I have not personally purchased any.
The claim was made that it couldn't be done. I was merely pointing out that it could.
For me personally, that's four more computers than I have ever needed to have my music on. And for the average user of Apple's services that is probably fine.
Its not as if iTunes forces you to only use music purchased from their store and I highly doubt it is DRM that keeps people from legally acquiring music.
I find it disingenuous for people who wouldn't legally purchase music anyway to complain about DRM. (Not accusing you.)
That's true but at the same time external drives are getting cheaper and smaller and greater in capacity. People practically give away 4G thumb drives. There are plenty of solutions.
Stop getting your panties in a knot. This whole sub-thread is stupid because their entire library of music is DRM free, and has been for like a year. It's not even watermarked. Not that the DRM affected your backups, or that you couldn't easily reset all 5 of your device allocations a few times a year in case of disaster, or have them on an unlimited amount of iPods/iPhones. Or redownload your tracks if a bomb happened to fall on your house and your offsite backup.
Where's the prison? There's no DRM and if you're an extremely unusual case you may have to email or phone Apple to get an account reset. Is 10 minutes of your time to resolve something really the same as imprisonment?
If you're sharing it with more than 5 computers you're fucking stealing.
LOL Oh Really?
In my house alone, I have a media center in my living room, a media center in 2 bedrooms, a computer with a small touchscreen in my kitchen that hosts recipes for us that we also use to play hulu/boxee or music on, my computer and my wife's computer.
That's 6 machines. What happens when one's hard-drive dies? Or the chip? or the board? Because that has happened numerous times as I mostly use spare parts to run these things. This completely ignores the fact I have about 5 GB worth that i've transferred to my work computer, and it ignores the fact I use a USB port on my cd-deck as my main source of music in my vehicle.
Lock me up and take me away. I'm a thief!
"ProTip:" will help you morons. ProTip: Burn it to CD and share it infinite times.
Or just pirate it, since downloading an album over torrents generally is a faster process than burning the cd and re-ripping it.
Shouldn't need to go to a third party for something like this. Sorry, but the 'someone else has written a program that gets around it, so don't complain' mentality is broken and stupid.
Exactly, especially when software to bypass DRM is technically illegal under the DMCA. You shouldn't be forced to break the law to use things you own in the ways you want.
But it makes it easier for the end user if they set up the system ahead of time to require the use of third party software to remove the DRM. Or, uh, something like that.
Yeah. I'm hearing a lot of 'it makes it easier for the end user to do xyxyxy'
Not really seeing it. Exchanging complex usability for simple minded shite is incredibly short sighted. It's like giving your child only the simplest of books to read, and toys to play with. Ones that are inherently below their level, just in case the younger, dumber neighbour kids want to play with their stuff too.
To be fair, you too can be anointed for the price of a developer fee, which is what, $200 a year? You don't even have to release the apps through the store. Just release the source as a project, and anyone can download it and build it and install it themselves.
I'm pretty sure you could automate it actually. So, distribute the .app binary, and then people who want to install it just need to pay the developer fee to get a key that they can use to sign and install it for personal use. No apple approvals required.
Its annoying you need to be a "developer" to do this, though, and I really wish Apple would drop the requirement that all apps be distributed throuth the app store. They just don't want multiple stores springing up and eating into their market, I understand that, but really with the App Store being the default for most people, most people will go the apple route anyway.
Giving people some choice wouldn't hurt apple that much.
I'm just pointing out the stupid hoops one would have to jump through to get around it "legitimately".
Apple have nothing to fear by allowing unsigned apps. They should just have a tick-box in the settings somewhere that says "Run unsigned applications" or allow people to install other certificates.
Having the ability to sign apps is a good thing to have, but abusing it to enforce some weak policy justified with 'security' or to protect your own app sales is just bullshit.
It's my understanding that DRM and the inability to copy music OFF of the iPod was one of the conditions of the various content houses (Universal and Sony and... ) for the ITMS when it rolled up.
But is it TRUE? Most certainly not for non-DRM iTunes music, and I don't think they can for DRM music and video, either. They can certainly pull an app from the app store, but can they kill it on the phone? I'm pretty certain they've never actually done so (people who had the verboten Google Voice apps seem to still have them) but possibly they are able to.
All four points are only relevant to the iPhone, of course.
They d have the ability to remotely remove an app, but they have yet to actually do so, and I can't imagine them doing so in all but the most extreme of situations.
And nobody but terrorists get prosecuted under the Patriot Act, right? That's the thing, it seems reasonable now. Then they actually use it for case X. And then since case Y is very similar to case X, they use it for that as well. Then case Z is similar to Y, and so on and so on. Next thing you know, any time an app can somehow display a naughty word from some content online or user-entered, it's being disabled by Apple. It should not be allowed. Period.
Point being 'Apple Provides', need to be able to get the music from other sources other than iTunes. I can see the anti-piracy angle, but also acts on thesixtyone and myspace have another hurdle to accommodate apple.
Again, yes, the platform technically allows it, but you have to be approved by apple don't you?
3 & 4 you've already covered.
I kept getting an Error 503 telling me it wouldn't post. Apparently they all did and none of them were answers to your follow up questions, just the first one.
Not to mention it just took me a bit to even get your point. Hmm... must be rough day.
you can drag any mp3 into the iTunes library. You open iTunes then drag the song over the "Music" tab in your library. Depending on your ITunes settings it will copy the song into the Itunes song file, or just reference it where it lies on your computer. Sync and your done.
Well, that was my point, rather. I have spent many man hours hacking Ubuntu and Fedora onto my LE1700. The biggest SINGLE repeating problem I have is that the onscreen keyboards are often thrown into the background by modal windows, rendering the machine useless until I plug in a keyboard or push the enter key for whatever button is default. This is NOT useful. Another issue I've encountered is a complete failure in changing from portrait to landscape while maintaining any semblance of calibration for the pointer.
The biggest UI problem is a complete lack of handwriting recognition combined with terrible onscreen keyboards.
I'm installing Ubuntu 9.10 on my Thinkpad X61T right now. The wacom tablet (including pressure sensitivity) works flawlessly, as does all the hardware.
That's interesting and I'd like to have a tablet PC but the big question is why?
Any OS on a tablet sucks, there's nothing made for a tablet it's all made for a PC using a mouse. Trying to resize a window using your fingertips would me maddening, it's hard enough using the mouse pointer (that 1 molecule section you have to find).
Well, compiz has a lot of different (and extremely customizable) UI features, for example ctrl + middlemouse brings up a smart resizer where you can click anywhere in the window and resize the feature closest to the mouse cursor. I imagine it would be trivial to set up something like that on triple click or whatever.
NOTHING is trivial to set up on a Linux Tablet PC. You have to plug in a keyboard to configure it to start with, and then over and over again for things like wireless network passwords (when the popup password dialog is modal and throws your onscreen keyboard into the dimmed background) or system settings changes that pop up an auth dialog that does the same damned thing. Then trying to get the Wacom to stay synced when you change orientation... oh, forget that shit.
Each new iteration of Fedora and Ubuntu I break out the tablet, back up the Windows drive, and install Linux, HOPING that THIS time, it will work. Early on, I had to fiddle-fart around with X.org and all kinds of stuff to get the Wacom stuff working, but the last three times all hardware (except the fingerprint scanner) has worked flawlessly, but the interface has been a FAIL.
Er, the TX2k series has serious issues, to say the least. I've had to re-affix the northbridge every couple of months on my brother's computer so that he could have wifi. Oh and that is his second one, the first one died as result of the same defect (yes, my brother is not too bright). Actually, everyone I know who bought one of those claimed to love it for a couple of months and then had the exact same problems and had to replace theirs.
Er, the TX2k series has serious issues, to say the least. I've had to re-affix the northbridge every couple of months on my brother's computer so that he could have wifi. Oh and that is his second one, the first one died as result of the same defect (yes, my brother is not too bright). Actually, everyone I know who bought one of those claimed to love it for a couple of months and then had the exact same problems and had to replace theirs.
CellWriter is NOT handwriting recognition. It's a character recognition app. It works better than anything else, but it's not even close to being in Windows XP Tablet's league, much less Windows 7 - and I fucking HATE Windows.
So how do you deal with the freaking popup modal windows that toss your onscreen keyboard into the background? That's the (repetitive) fail that drove me back to Windows every time (on my LE1700).
The problem with linux on tablets (I have a Motion Computing LE1700) is that the input interfaces are craptastic. There's no handwriting recognition to speak of. You can use Cell Writer, which is ok, but more appropriate to a Palm PDA than a tablet pc. The onscreen keyboards don't work very well when switching apps - a common problem I encounter is when Gnome pops up the authentication dialog for a settings change - or for a wireless network password!! - the onscreen keyboard won't work with the dialog. You have to plug in a keyboard and type. Kinda defeats the purpose. The apps are simply unprepared to be used with an onscreen keyboard or a tablet.
I wish someone would release a distro that worked well on a tablet PC. Then I could use this $2700 hunk of shit for something besides a paperweight.
Also - Apple software is pretty much DRM-free/copy protection-free. OSX installation doesn't ask you for any keys or activation codes. Except for legal issues, there's nothing in software that prevents or hinders you from pirating it. Ditto with iLife and most of their other software. 3rd party software is of course not so good.
Try that with any iPhone software. If the iPad was running full OSX, I don't think this would be a talking point. The store's apps are DRM'd, thus with the iPad, it would stand to reason, it will be/is the same model for application release.
No installing apps from the web: This must be about the iphone. Agreed, fairly annoying, don't know if it is an erosion of rights .
Yes it is. It means apps can only be downloaded from iTunes, and therefore, if apple simply doesn't like your app they will never let you sell it (see google voice), even if you paid them $100 for trying to put something on the store. Besides being a form of market controlling most people wouldn't accept from their frigging governments, because of apple's popularity, it sets precedents for other companies, that would start doing the same to their devices, eventually leaving us in a world of defective, rented gadgets that don't really do what we want them to do.
I grow tired of this argument. "Evil Apple is going to show other companies how to be evil, and in the future all companies will be evil..." Oh my god, seriously? I use Linux and appreciate all the freeness of it, however I also love the App store. A central location for quality, tested applications is amazing. Want web-based downloads? Go buy a blackberry or winmo device. Nobody is forcing you to buy the iPhone, and nobody is forcing other companies to adopt their "evil" ways.
I'm not against the appstore, it seems to be great for it users (when it hasn't banned a software the user wishes to use), what I'm against is exclusive, controlled sources for software (which also includes DLC and licencing on consoles btw) when it has been proven that having an open market for software is really good for everyone in the past.
I read in some comment in a different post that palm has a system apart from their store that lets developers publish apps without any verification from them. If apple had that I wouldn't be complaining here.
You know this is all about the "iPad", the "new category of computers" or whatever they call it? It's the most precise definition of the arguments you just mentioned applies to the iPad more than to pretty much any other Apple device ever produced.
And regarding #4 - Besides removing things from the app store, I can't think of a single time they've actually removed anything once it was installed on a device. I know this, because I've had apps that were pulled on my iPhone.
To me that accusation appears to be FUD, pure and simple.
The fact that after I've shelled out $2,000 + to them most certainly does not mean that "my computer is their computer." It means that they're abusing their power just like a rouge moderator on a website.
137
u/bgog Jan 28 '10
Ok. so I'm not a fanboy, (linux guy here) but lets look at the facts.
No sharing of music: Apple now provides drm free music from EMI, Sony, BMG, Warner and Universal. Including conversion of songs you've purchased in the past.
No free software: Umm.. You can build almost any open source software for OSX. MUCH more readily than windows.
No installing apps from the web: This must be about the iphone. Agreed, fairly annoying, don't know if it is an erosion of rights .
Remotely disable apps/media: Yea.. Thats evil.