But it also illustrates the absurdity of the snooping--the only way to avoid it is to not use the device. It would be easier if companies (and the government) would simply not snoop.
But it also illustrates the absurdity of the snooping--the only way to avoid it is to not use the device. It would be easier if companies (and the government) would simply not snoop.
“For another metric, we measure adoption. If you look at Windows 7, it took them about 20 weeks to reach 10% of their base. It took Lion 2 weeks. - Tim Cook”
Six million copies of Lion downloaded so far — 80 percent more than Snow Leopard - The Next Web (via thenextweb)
Sorry, kids, this was one of the many misrepresentations (lies, even) presented in today’s underwhelming Apple event. Comparing Apple’s success to Microsoft’s is pretty much identical to comparing apples to oranges. Why are the numbers above no significant? Because Apple charged a pitance for their single-versioned OS which was downloadable. If Microsoft had such a system and chose to sell a single OS at $30/per, they’d reach higher saturation, too. Instead, Apple did something entirely different and blamed Microsoft for not doing as well.“Yes, with the new ‘wheel’ from Apple, you can do so much more than you could with that old fashioned plank you drag around. The guys who designed that thing were morons.”
Sure, it’s an improvement, and Apple’s system does move more product, but it’s hardly fair to compare.
But they pulled this crap all over the place. It's like they were trying desperately to cover for the fact that they weren't announcing an iPhone 5. Most of the numbers they presented were just utter bullshit, like those above. At one point, they compared PC market growth to Mac market growth as though that meant something at all. PCs are still everywhere. It makes sense that their market growth is a paltry 4% since they're already owned by everyone. Yes, Mac market share jumped 23% and that's nice, mildly impressive even, but the comparison to the PC market is just not a logical one.
They called the iPod Touch the number one handheld gaming system. But that's a total fallacy. The iPod Touch isn't a gaming system at all. It's a convergence device. It's like the Swiss Army Knife people claiming their knives are comparable to the butter knives in your silverware drawer. And newsflash, I have yet to see Super Mario games show up on iOS. When they do, maybe I'll think about retiring my DSi XL.
Is any of this type of behavior new? No. But this time around it seems worse than usual to me. Basically nothing in today's event made me want anything Apple is offering right now. I couldn't care less about their entire line. Well, I'd like an iPad 2, but only because iPlayer isn't available for Android. But that had nothing to do with today's announcements and I'm not about to drop $400 just so I can use one app.
What really scares me is that there is so little actual innovation going on these days. People will point to "Siri," Apple's new voice-recognition/command system available only on the iPhone 4S, but since when does anyone like to use voice commands? Android has had similar features (not as built-up, obviously) for a while and I've never used it once. Sure, some folks might like literally telling their phone what to do but I like the tactile experience. I don't want to broadcast to everyone around me what I'm doing and I feel like speech requires more thought than just pressing buttons or touching icons. I can be thinking about what I'm going to do while my fingers tap the icons on the screen, rather thing thinking of the right words to say to get the right app or info to pop up.
So, basically, Apple's "innovation" is something I don't think people really want. It may seem like a cool bell/whistle, but really, it's nothing that innovative. It's just another layer of interface. Plus, who wants their requested information on that tiny screen? I don't care how crystal clear the screen is, I still feel like I'm looking through a hole at the words I want to read.
Anyway, it's just more "fun" from the Apple Reality Distortion Field.
I still have three more questions for Apple:
1) Why does the iPhone 4S not support 4G networks?
2) Why no iPhone 5?
3) Why no plans to put out a midsized device, like a 7in tablet? (I already have a 10in netbook and you already sell a 10in Macbook Air, don't you? Won't people who own those not want an iPad?).
Apple continues to make me shake my head.
Messing around with Action Snap for Android. Interesting results!
Link: Wireless carriers openly considering charging per service -- Engadget
Imagine paying extra to visit Facebook. Imagine not being able to check your tweets with your smartphone while on the go. Imagine wireless carriers charging us to do even more stuff that costs them little extra to do (like they already do with texting). This is horrible and they’re thinking about considering it.
I remember back in the AOL days when AOL used to charge X amount of dollars for X amount of hours online. Ridiculous, right? Of course. Well, it seems like wireless carriers may be thinking about going backwards. In fact, in some ways, they already have with their $60/mo-for-1GB-style plans. Now they want to micromanage what they let us do on their connections.
This is ridiculous. Please clock the link above and read more about this nightmarish scenario.
I posted this over on website666 and thought it would fit here, too.
I noticed this over the past few weeks as I read various coverage of iPhone apps that Apple was and was not letting get through. Check out these headlines:
Radio Station Apps: No Longer Welcome in the App Store
Apple Bans Android Magazine From The App Store
Why Does Apple Make Donation Apps So Hard?
In short, Apple seems to be using it’s position to stop certain information from getting onto it’s devices. Want to listen to your favorite local radio station now that you live in a different city? Sorry, you won’t be able to on your iPhone. That’s a shame since it’s just a little station with a tiny budget and not much ability to reach a national audience. Now, thanks to Apple, a great (and inexpensive) channel for reaching a national audience is gone.
Then, we’ve got Apple deciding whether or not you can read about competitors to Apple on Apple devices. I don’t know about you, but I don’t like Apple telling me what I can and can’t read on my iDevice. Sure, I can always pull up that Android magazine’s website in Safari, but then, what’s the difference between Safari and an app?
Finally, that last article I link to above talks about how Apple has stopped accepting apps that allow in-app donations to charity orgs (or anyone else). Why is this? It sure seems like it’s because it means money passes through Apple’s infrastructure without them getting a cut.
Over all, I feel that it’s this kind of “walled garden” mentality that makes us less free as consumers. When we start accepting limits on what content we are allowed to consume and how we consume that content, I think we become less free as a people, too.
You don’t really appreciate how important Net Neutrality is until you don’t have it anymore.
Link: I TOTALLY want to do this: How to Install Android on an iPhone in Six Easy Steps
And I just might!
Seeing how smoothly it works on an iPhone 2G makes me reeeeally want to see how well it works on a 3G—MY 3G. Especially since I’ve been so SICK of iOS and iTunes giving me endless shit about what I can and can’t do.
What’s really great is that, apparently, you can dual boot—so it leaves your iOS install untouched. Pretty cool.
If I do it, I’ll be sure to take pics and/or video…
ARG! As if technology doesn’t give us enough troubles as it is, here comes a post from Gizmodo called “New Studies, Cellphone Manufacturer Legalese Revive Brain Cancer Debate“ here are a couple cuttings:
The latest troubling study, and companies’ own cellphone instruction manuals, says they might. Again.
Randall Stross, writing for the New York Times reports on the latest “do they or don’t they?” findings:
But the legal departments of cellphone manufacturers slip a warning about holding the phone against your head or body into the fine print of the little slip that you toss aside when unpacking your phone. Apple, for example, doesn’t want iPhones to come closer than 5/8 of an inch; Research In Motion, BlackBerry’s manufacturer, is still more cautious: keep a distance of about an inch.
Continuing on, Stross writes that the manufacturer’s consumer guidelines were brought to his attention by Devra Davis, an epidemiologist and author of “Disconnect,” a book on cellphone radiation. Overall, the average number of brain-related cancer cases has not increased since the introduction of cellphones to society. That said, there’s a caveat: brain cancer in the 20-to-29 age group has actually increased in that period, while dropping in the older population. Confusing!
I’ll say! Then there’s this:
Furthermore, Henry Lai, a researcher with the University of Washington, currently maintains a database of 400 papers related to radiofrequency radiation and damaged brain DNA. What has he found in all that data?
He found that 28% of studies with cellphone industry funding showed some sort of effect, while 67% of studies without such funding did so. “That’s not trivial,” he said.
GAH!!!
Personally, I use my cell phone for surfing, email, GPSing and other functions MUCH more than I use it for actually talking. Does this mean I’ll get hand-cancer?
What’s even more fun is the crazy inconsistency between studies funded by cell phone companies and studies NOT funded by cell phone companies. It’s just a big mess.
At first this iPhone stun gun attachment sounds like a great idea—but it plugs into the dock connector—shock-yourself-much?
iPhoneを9万ボルトの電気ショックを与えるスタンガンにするアクセサリー「Stunfone」 - Touch Lab - タッチ ラボ
iPhoneのドックコネクタに接続し、9万ボルトの電気ショックを与えるアクセサリー『Stunfone』についての情報が公開されています。
スタンガンは、高電圧を発する電極を相手に押し付けることで電気ショックを与える護身用のアイテムで、電流が少なく抑えられているため、殺傷能力はないとされています。
公開されている動画およびWebサイトによると、『Stunfone』は、9万ボルトの電圧で放電
iPhoneの全てのモデルに対応という特徴があるようです。