101–110 of 121 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Opera Mini is a great app for reading news and such, but as your main browser? It doesn't execute 99% of JavaScript. You can't load any smartphone targeted websites with your smartphone. Not very smart.
@endtime wrote Opera Mobile, not Opera Mini; they're different products.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
But the N1 isn't even a very good substitute. Although people who buy iTouches love all the apps and the ability to browse the web whenever they have WiFi, in the end, they're buying an mp3 player. They're buying it so that they can listen to music. Not only is the N1 much more expensive, but it also has a much worse music-playing interface. Until someone fixes the Android music player or writes their own (luckily, a…
Although people who buy iTouches love all the apps and the ability to browse the web whenever they have WiFi, in the end, they're buying an mp3 player. They're buying it so that they can listen to music. I don't think you are right. The touch music player interface is good, but not as good as my old 40GB iPod Video. Man, it has been almost two years now and I still miss the clickwheel. I got my iPod touch because of…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Agreed, I can't think of any good reason not to allow sync over wifi (or over 3g for that matter, if I'm on a flatrate plan).
Because the 3G infrastructure is overloaded as it is without multi-gig downloads?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I remember the early 2000s. I devoutly hoped that Linux would get widely used in some way, even if it never really took off on the desktop. I wanted open source to be fairly common and well-accepted, and not just something that weird people wrote and talked about on Slashdot. And hacker-friendly open-source Linux-based smartphones would be great, but that was just too implausibly awesome to even hope for. I wanted pl…
What is really funny is that we never really hit the year of Linux on the desktop. I mean, this has been speculation for years... Will this be the year that Linux really starts to make in roads in the Desktop market? For the most part, the answer has always been no. Redhat and Novell/Suse have all but left the desktop (commercially, not counting Fedora). Ubuntu has all but taken over the desktop Linux market. Overall…
Linux came a little bit too late to make inroads on the desktop vs. the incumbent DOS/Windows platform of the early 90's - if it, and the GNU tools, had reached the 1991 level of development in the mid-80s when the PC clones first took hold, that story might have been a different one - but in the real world, it still devastated the competition on servers when the Web started its massive post-1994 growth.
Now we're hitting the juncture where, again, a new platform category is poised for growth; recall how netbooks started as Linux boxes, and only ended up running Windows after a combination of effort(Win7), strongarming(subsidies and licensing agreements), and initial advantages(the desktop ecosystem, which is largely netbook-compatible) from Microsoft. This time around, those tactics can't work.
It might actually work out that the desktop still shifts towards Linux in the end; the "bottom-up" nature of progress in tech means that people are going to want a desktop that does everything their mobile environment does (plus desktop things). Hence, desktops will start running Android or a compatible variant...which would naturally work out to mean you'd be running Linux, even if it isn't today's Linux environments.
Gruber's thoughts can be summed up as: Google vs Apple, bring it on, but where's Microsoft? While he isn't wrong, it's not exactly much more than some common sense. I also think he _seriously_ underestimates Microsoft.
Microsoft will be 3.5 years late to the smartphone party when windows phone 7 series will eventually be released. People would have already made their choice between iPhone and Android.
Ballmer was not wrong about the iPhone. He said they would get 2-3% of the total phone market , not the smartphone market. He even makes that clear in the part that Gruber quoted: "... 1.3 billion phones ...". That's phones, not smartphones. According to http://www.zdnet.com/blog/btl/apple-iphone-smartphone-market... in the first quarter of 2010 Apple had 16.1% of smartphones and smartphones were 18.8% of mobile phon…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Apple TV is a good point...Don't know why all other Apple devices don't follow the same process.
I suspect it comes back to Job's strategy for the Mac back in 2001 (I think it was 2001, not sure). He talked about how computers had gone through several generations, and that we were moving into an era where the PC/Mac was the "digital hub" that kept all your devices in sync and playing nicely with each other. Google would probably argue that that's the responsibility of their servers. With the iPhone and iPad doin…
Apple are building a new data centre which apparently will be built for the cloud, my guess it's going to be the backbone of iTunes.com and their other online services. http://www.wired.com/gadgetlab/2009/08/apple-cloud/
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Agreed, I can't think of any good reason not to allow sync over wifi (or over 3g for that matter, if I'm on a flatrate plan).
Because the 3G infrastructure is overloaded as it is without multi-gig downloads?
I had some thoughts on it recently: http://www.reynoldsftw.com/2010/04/imagine-a-wireless-sync-w...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because the 3G infrastructure is overloaded as it is without multi-gig downloads?
Downloading the initial sync over 3g isn't something I'd do if I could avoid it, but incremental syncs would be just fine. Even adding an album or two wouldn't take -that- long, and if the network can't handle a few downloads now and then it's just plain broken. Besides, everyone over here in Sweden is selling mobile broadband like there's no tomorrow, so their networks should be up to it.
Carriers here like to complain that people are downloading too much rather than just upgrading the infrastructure to deal with it. I shudder to think what would happen if people started downloading over the air on a serious scale, it's already pretty bad with normal web surfing.