lzw

It totally is. You express anything that goes against the rigid leftist freetard ideology and you get voted down and people start putting words in your mouth, like you just did. (If you read my actual post, I never said you said that.)

Speak the truth on hacker news and get voted down. Here's the truth: Facebook: promised your data was private so you could open up with friends, then made data public by default, allows friends to leak your data. now spreading data all over the web.

Google says "do no evil" yet arbitrarily punishes websites with ranking, cancels people's adwords and adsense accounts, and employes (apparently) zero customer service and has no interest in resolving any issues people might have.

Microsoft- do I really need to go over the history of microsoft's lapses in integrity?

Dell-- was making all of its profit via kickbacks from intel and failed to report it to investors, denying investors an honest accounting of how its business was really cratering.

I could go on....

They are a different class of product. I would not be surprised for apple to allow a parental control to lock a given mac down to just appstore apps. This is a nice feature.

Since steve jobs explicitly said this is not going to be the only way to install software, all this speculation is dishonest.

The funny thing is, he shouldn't have had to say that. You should know apple well enough (Rather than listen to the nonsense from the nondevelopers who are bosting page views by bashing apple) to know that apple would never force people to only buy mac software via the appstore.

You don't get to criticize me about name calling when you did so in the post I was responding to. If you don't want to be called an apple basher, don't say asinine things like "android device with the same specs for half the price."

IT is amazing that I can't go a week without seeing mainstream FUD about how apple is boiling a toad, meanwhile the countries economy is just shy of "roiling" and half the people are shouting "Turn up the heat!"

Too much worry about Apple- which has been treating people well and going above and beyond the call of duty for decades, and no worry about the government which has just blown up the biggest bubble the country has seen and then blamed it on bankers.

The fearful comments are not from Apple developers, but from freetards who have hated apple for the past 20 years and been making the same kinds of comments for that same period.

Meanwhile, those of us who have been developers for apple platforms during that time have never seen apple screw us over and find this kind of fear to be asinine.

It makes for good press to boost your page views, though, and so any burp eminating from cupertino is used to rationalize wild speculation and assertiosn that it is proof that steve jobs is a control freak who wants to run your life.

Apple introduced App signing in Leopard. You've been able to produce signed apps since around that time. That's all the appstore on the mac needs. Apple won't care what toolchain you use...

No, you're just spreading FUD, and it is a dead horse. One thing Apple has over most other businesses is a much higher level of integrity.

I see you're a real one.

Of course there will never be an android device that is equally specced but half the price. This is just the kind of lie that apple bashers have been spreading for decades. Falsely comparing the Air to a netbook running atom processors and claiming that Apple is overpriced. Reality is, for the market segments apple competes in, they generally deliver significantly more value for slightly less price. But getting an honest comparison from apple bashers is pointless-- they don't really care, they just hate apple.

Which is also why it is not a netbook. Apple haters have it both ways- they complain the processor is too slow compared to a macbook pro, and that the price is too high compared to an atom running netbook.

sigh.

Except that it won't suck.

People assume apple wants absolute control. They don't. They want absolutely great user experiences. Personal Computers are a different category from mobile devices. Apple keeps your mobile device safe, but lets you browse any website you want, because the damage is minimal. On your computer, apple lets you do whatever you want.

Apple is growing Mac sales at significantly higher rates than the rest of the PC market. Apple has been competitive with others on prices for about 20 years.

Apple doesn't compete on the low end of the market. The people who think Apple is expensive are the people who compare an ATOM internet pad to a Macbook Pro and think they are both the same value because they are both "laptops".

4GB is $100 more. At some point apple stopped overcharging for RAM. They now charge more than the minimum you can find it for from fly by night places (As they do with everything) But in line with market prices.

720p is a video standard that specifies a resolution of 1280x720 in progressive format (hence the name "720p") Apple, fortunately, seems to be sizing their screens based on HD formats, but giving some extra space for UI chrome.

A very obscure, complicated and short term bill that lets democrat congressmen go back to their districts and run political advertisements that claim they "passed legislation to help america's small businesses", etc.

Minimal effect, and on top of it, it is overwhelmed by bills already signed that do significant damage to the economy. For instance, the bill that massively increases the size of government, putting a permanent burden in taxation or inflation on the economy that Obama claims will "Stimulate" it. Making things more expensive and preventing businesses from expanding is not stimulative. Adding more workers to the government payroll is a drain.

Don't know any resources for queer hackers, but both of our founders are queer.

Well, since Jim has taken it upon himself to speak on my behalf ("developers want more options ") allow me to rebut:

No, Jim. Developers do not want more options. Developers want a well engineered, single platform with excellent development tools and support, so that their code can target hundreds of millions of devices without any customization. Specifically, developers do not want more "options", because every "option", which from what I can tell is code for yet-another-me-too-iPhone ripoff with a random screen size and configuration and very limited storage capacity means an order of magnitude more headaches for anyone doing anything more significant than a twitter client (excluding, of course, the really well designed twitter clients who would also have this problem, such as twitteriffic.)

Developers want an appstore with reliable terms. Developers don't want to pay outrageous fees for the "privilege" of selling software on your platform. You may have reformed, by copying apple's better terms, but at least this developer-- who you purport to speak for-- remembers when your terms were disgustingly hostile. Some developers have a memory.

Developers want a store where there are a lot of customers, happy to buy apps, and happy to do business with us. I can't count the number of happy letters I've gotten from satisfied customers. As a developer, I recognize that, while you may copy the appstore, and provide an SDK, you are not providing a developer experience anywhere close to the one Apple provides. Higher quality tools mean higher quality products and more letters from satisfied customers, and lower developer stress. What me-too products don't understand is that Apple products are not popular because they look good (the easiest thing for you to copy) they are popular because they work well. IF you're serious about developers, (and this goes for android as well) you'll start making good developer tools.

I do find it hilarious that people try to bash Apple by talking about how Apple doesn't have flash on their platform. How does? As far as I know adobe still hasn't managed to deliver a version of flash for mobile devices that doesn't suck, and it has been half a year since Steve called them out for it.

As to "customers want to fully access the overwhelming majority of web sites that use Flash", I have flash blocked in my browser, so this consumer doesn't want access to flash.

I must also be navigating the web very carefully since the "overwhelming majority of websites" don't seem to have any flash on them at all!

"We think many customers are getting tired of being told what to think by Apple. "

Apple has never told me what to think. Apple has simply told me what they think. You are now purporting to tell others what I think, without doing the courtesy of contacting me.

"even people inside the distortion field will begin to resent being told half a story."

I've been a fan of Apple since I got an Apple II nearly 30 years ago, and I am pretty sure I first heard the phrase "reality distortion field" sometime in the 1980s. Yet the reality is, I've never heard Apple distort anything. Apple has never promised me a product that didn't live up to the hype. Apple has never blatantly ripped off another companies product and pretended like they were innovating, like you have, RIMM.

But of course, what is so great about the "reality distortion field" phrase is that it is designed to denigrate and marginalize anyone who thinks different. Anyone who appreciates the extra-ordinary, and apparently beyond duplication effort of Apple to deliver a great customer experience is just a cult member incapable of thinking.

So, you'd have us believe that this reality distortion field has caused us to break with the majority, and go seek out a company that your kind has spent decades saying is a failure?

Was I imagining it yesterday when an Apple employee went above and beyond the call of duty to fix an issue for me that he didn't have to? Was it Steve's "reality distortion field" that has left me unhappy and feeling dissatisfied with so many competitor products that were purported, and even pretended to be the same thing? For instance, your poor quoality touch screen devices that you design to look like the iPhone but then cheap out on the hardware and software so it works nothing like the iphone.

Who was it engaging in distortion of reality, again?

One thing I will say about RIMM. You did a fantastic job when you named your company. Perfect name. Don't ever change it.

For the masses, who buy everything thru the appstore, Apple controls the experience.

But this does not make iOS "closed". You can get whatever widgets you want built using web technologies, and they run like apps.

And if you're a developer, you can put whatever programs you want on your device.

Since all the open advocates should be advocating open source as well, why complain about iOS? IF you want to put open source software on your device, you can just compile it. Apple gives you the development tools for free (the core of which is itself open source) and charges $99 for handling the certificates an authentication for apps.

But you can put any app you want on your iPhone if you're a developer.

IF you're a consumer, you're not capable of compiling apps for your android phone either anyway.

(For some values of "developer" here I'm including enthusiasts who may not really be able to program but are find with compiling code.)

Apple has in fact created entire industries. Apple created the modern smartphone. Previous to the iPhone, all phones were feature phones, though of course many were advertised as "smartphones" because they had simple PDA functionality. The android phone was a copy of the RIMM phone with the keyboard which was much like a treo. Now they are all making touch screen phones with appstores, and aping all of the other features of this product. Sure, things with CPUs in them have existed long before the digital phone and before the laptop, etc. But the iPhone did create a new industry-- the touch based phone.

The iPad also created the tablet industry. Sure, people had tried tablets before, even Apple did with the actually quite successful newton (though this was stylus based like the palm pilot, and other copies.) But the computer tablet industry that is taking share away from laptops didn't exist before this year.

Apple created two industries. I'm a fan of apple because they are always innovative, always honest, and they always try to ship quality products. They're about the only company I can say that about.

I don't know why people should diminish that. This is a gold standard we should all attempt to emulate (And I don't mean by copying their products, but by copying their methods and standards.)

This is almost literally attempting to predict when a soap bubble is going to pop by examining the patterns in the rainbow effects that appear on its side as it expands.

The real answer is very simple: Can't know when it will pop, but if you keep expanding, it is guaranteed that it will.

But then, this article was published by Roosevelts.

I've heard multiple reports that Hong Kong is a good choice- quick to start businesses, moderate or low taxes and a good culture for business... though others have complained that the successful businesses are snooty there, so if yours requires getting meetings with larger business execs might not be the best place. But a consumer internet startup, it sounds good.

Also, hear good things about singapore, though it is a bit less freewheeling.

All of this is just what I've heard attempting to research the same question, don't have direct experience.

You should be able to evaluate someone's ability to program without ever asking them to write any code, or without them ever having even heard of the language you're going to have them programming in.

I've never met a programming language that I couldn't learn and be competent at in about a week. Everything about programming has nothing to do with particular languages.

The "you need 5 years of java experience" is the kind of requirement that HR robots and hiring managers who aren't programmers look for. They look for someone having already done the job as proof that they can do the job. Yet, someone with 5 years java experience is going to be as good of a C# programmer as they were a Java programmer, even if they've never heard of the language before being hired.

PS- Please don't take this personally, I'm assuming your an engineer, but if you're a designer or marketing guy and are not sure how to hire a programmer, don't take this as derogatory at all. Programming is like driving a car. It is an ability, that is improved with learned skills, but it is not specific to the particular language. IT is like thinking a woman who owns a volkswagon bug can't drive a fiesta because she's got 5 years of "bug experience"

The irony is, of course, that this article is trolling. I got so far as where they pretended that the 13" macbook doesn't exist and gave up. Of course, there's no way anyone would ever use an iPad for the same purposes that people bought 12" laptops in the past.

I continue to take the position that ars technica is an Apple bashing site pretending to not be.

I do not support wikipedia because you cannot correct errors and misinformation on that site. Editors who have apparently been around for a long time and got a lot of power by editing a lot of pages on wikipedia, will reverse edits that disagree with their preconceived notions.

This was the situation on a page where I participated directly in the events in question, was a first hand witness, am a domain expert, and was simply stating facts.

Reality disagreed with the editors ideology, and therefore, I was unable to correct the propaganda (which is what deliberate misinformation is.)

While I will refer to wikipedia on occasion, I will not trust it for anything that could have a political bias (which includes the entirety of economics and finance) and will not give them any money. Nor will I attempt to edit to correct errors. Now I just laugh at them.

I really think they should buy ARM. People say there would be a conflict, but ARM licenses architecture and designs, rather than selling chips, and the existing licensees would surely continue, and there's nothing stopping apple from selling new licenses. But having the ARM design team available to task for custom designs for apple (to be licensed as well to others, or not) would be worth about $8B, in my opinion. (given the size of the iOS market already.)

The rest of those are bad choices for Apple. Apple is what it is because it focuses. I think none of those companies are in Apple's focus.

However, Apple could buy Clearwire- Clearwire has very valuable spectrum licenses in the USA. This might be justified, but since Apple is a global business, it isn't a slam dunk, as whoever controls WiMax spectrum internationally would need to be contended with. On the third hand, they could use that spectrum to create their own LTE network in the USA, and still have enough spectrum on the side to create a parallel high bandwidth data-only network.

Hmmm.... Clearwire's market cap is $1.6B. They might need to buy sprint too (and then spin out the telecom business) to get full rights to the clearwire spectrum. (not sure about what the agreement is.)

Netflix is a great company with great management. But the streaming rights won't transfer thru an acquisition, I'm pretty sure. However, giving netflix a spot in the iTunes ecosystem seems like a good deal, maybe take an equity stake in the process, sure.

EA- no need to buy them, balloons headcount, very different business. EA will either put out the apps for Apple's devices, or other companies will beat them to it. Apple's in a strong position.

I'm not sure about Cablevision.

I think Apple should buy Adobe, though. I'm sure they still have some talent left, and owning what's left of the desktop software market would be good for Apple.... but that is a "mac primacy" play, and I think Steve and the rest of Apple is focused on iOS exclusively, so I'm sure they won't buy Adobe.

PS-- I realize your point was that they have the capital to buy all those companies if they wanted to, but I'm looking at it as a shopping list.

I'm pretty certain Apple has plans for the $51B. They could spend some of it buying back their stock, or as a dividend, but both of those are non-growth company strategies, essentially giving the money to investors and saying they can't manage it well.

I think Apple has its eye on some very big opportunities.

I think one of those opportunities is putting $10B-$20B into a vertically integrated automated manufacturing facility.

They cannot continue to scale their business on the backs of foxconn. At some point, this is becomes the biggest inefficiency, even though Chinese labor is inexpensive, it won't always be, and when it becomes as expensive as korea or singapore or even japan, where will foxconn move?

I think pure automation is the solution. Foxconn needs to be able to build anything, Apple just needs to build the products it desgins. There is a position to squeeze a lot of cost out.

And the other argument? Apple did it before. The Macintosh factory was a wonder of its age, and extremely automated. IT was designed along with the macintosh.

I think Apple is learning from foxconn, but eventually will need to build their own manufacturing base. Simply because you cannot keep doubling your device numbers forever.... foxconn will still build a lot of stuff for apple, but I'm waiting for Apple to take over a chunk of it.

I've seen no evidence or reason to believe that those who care about their kids will not value education for them. And I have seen evidence that uneducated people do value education. My presumption would be that they value it more.

On the other hand, I find that very few people are willign to create jobs for themselves. Most people are workers. Most people are mainstream and conventional thinkers. I have a sample group of people in the %98 of intelligence and education in the country, and still more than %99 of them are uninterested in striking out on their own... they don't have any desire to be entrepreneurial. Of course, they did go thru the US educational system which pretty much is all about conformism and groupthink, in my opinion.

Give parents the financial resources, via a job, and they will get their kids education.

But how many liberal arts majors do you know? Or other people who went to college, and can't get a job using their degree?

This is not a definition, this is an expression of the leftist ideological position. I have seen many situations on Wikipedia where factually correct edits are reversed because they disagree with the ideology of the wikipedia editors who have stature.

It is kinda like hacker news where a useful comment like mine is voted down to zero, while someone calling me names and repeating ignorant comments that are consistent with the groupthink of the left, get modded up.

It is not that their name calling and ideological regurgitation are superior to my argument... it is that people vote based on ideology, often when they are profoundly ignorant of the reality.

I suggest that you not use Wikipedia as a source for definitions, as that one is particularly heinous. In common usage one could use the term "monopoly" to describe entities with strong pricing power, but common usage is not usage in economics, yet the wikipedia definition starts "in economics".

Any "Economist" who defines a monopoly as a company that does not have ownership of the entire market, is an ideologue pretending to be an economist.

In economics, they use this term correctly.

The only way a cartel can work is via government enforcement. Cartels can try to fix prices, but as soon as they do, if the price is above the free-market price, members of the cartel will try to gain marketshare by selling under the table at a lower price. Cartels are not sustainable in a free market for this reason.

I can't comment on DeBeers because I do not know enough of the history of the situation. I will say, though, that diamonds are essentially worthless, and it is primarily by brilliant propaganda / advertising that people continue to buy them.

I love how ideological nonsense that bears no releationship to historical facts is considered "facts" and by not goose stepping along with your fascist ideology you feel justified in calling me ignorant. When its painfully obvious that all you are able to contribute to the conversation is a poor repetition of your vague memories of the propaganda you were told about the situation, when in reality, vertical integration, including the purchasing of transportation systems gave standard oil a competitive advantage. This is known as competition, and is not "anti-competitive". In fact, if you use the phrase "anti-competitive" seriously, you should lose the right to post on this website because you reveal yourself to be an unthinking socialist, and if you ever managed to start a company, you would surely fuck it up by following your ideology over reality.