"Android is an orphan; Google doesn't really care about it"
Couldn't agree more.
The documentation is incomplete, support is horrible and there is no way to even view my Android 2.0 app without a DROID.
Apple's Mistake
251–260 of 285 posts
Re: Apple's Mistake
#252Oldtimers have told me that they liked PCs better than Apples in the early 80s because they were more hackable: you could mix and match and tinker and make them do your own thing, while Apple's stuff was closed. Users loved Apple, but hackers didn't like their we-know-best mentality. If that's true, it may not be the first time Apple has made this mistake. Perhaps losing hackers was what caused them to lose to PCs th…
That was why Stephenson described Apples as "hermetically sealed" in "In the Beginning Was the Command Line..."
Re: Apple's Mistake
#253Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't agree. On the desktop there are 'killer apps' like Photoshop, Excel, Quicken, Final Cut, etc. I don't think there are any killer mobile apps yet. Maybe for some it's FourSquare or FB, but I can't think of one app I'd miss that's not built in.
We probably have a different view on what is a killer app. From my perspective: Windows - Outlook Express, IE. OS X - Mail, Safari. I can't recall the last time I fired up "Photoshop, Excel, Quicken, Final Cut" and I bet 90% of randomly selected users couldn't either.
The point I was replying to was that "... third party apps are just as often or more used on iPhone than on, say, Windows and Mac OS X".
I really doubt this is true given the lack of any killer mobile apps. I don't personally consider any of desktop apps in the list I gave 'killer', but fairly sure they've sold lots of computers.
Re: Apple's Mistake
#254Earlier quoted context omitted.
Although I don't think your comment is true, I do have a question for PG: Did you buy the 27" iMac just to use as a monitor, or for the computer part as well?
Not that I care much, but what makes you think my comment is untrue?!
This part: "Laptops displaced desktops?! You are deluded."
I _like_ desktops more than laptops, as I argue here: http://jseliger.com/2008/12/26/computer-post-desktop-or-lapt... , but note the link to the Ars Technica article: global laptop shipments as measured both by number and by dollars have overtaken laptop sales. And that was in Dec. 2008: the trend has only accelerated since. That's about as good a definition for laptop sales having overtaken desktops as I can imagine.
Re: Apple's Mistake
#255Earlier quoted context omitted.
Of course, then Apple couldn't screen for the things that they care about but that users won't report. For example, applications that use Apple/iPhone imagery wouldn't get reported because users don't care about the dilution of Apple's brand. Likewise, applications that encourage the user to do things that might damage the device (swinging, throwing, or dropping) wouldn't be reported because the device is broken -- a…
If I create a website that tells you that you should play the (already existant) Super Monkey Ball app by wildly swinging it around like a monkey, should Apple blacklist my site from all iphone users? (Bonus points: if not, why, and how is it different from your example?)
It's not a question of whether they should reject certain apps, but whether they can. Under the current system, Apple can reject applications that encourage you to throw your iPhone. And the ability to do this is definitely something Apple wants, as they currently use this criteria to reject such apps. This ability would be diminished under dasil003's proposal, so it would be harder to convince Apple that such a system is a net win.
Re: Apple's Mistake
#256Earlier quoted context omitted.
> , hold constant that Microsoft didn't vet DOS/Windows apps and imagine that every DOS/Windows machine had access to a cellular network owned by a some other company. Well most windows machines do have access to a network controlled by someone else. And with the proliferation of cellular usb accessories more and more windows machines do have access to a cellular network owned by some other company.
True, and about ten million of them are estimated to be in the Conficker botnet, another half a million in the Kraken botnet, etc, etc... I'm definitely not saying that Microsoft should have been vetting programs. I'm saying that cellular platforms may not yet be to the point where unfettered access is safe. The software on cell phones tends to favor being small at the expense of all else - probably including safety.
[deleted]
Re: Apple's Mistake
#257The other huge irony about the app store approval process is the massive advantage that it ends up giving Apple's competition. The app store is already far ahead of the competition but it could be factors further ahead with shorter cycle time. Progress is a non linear function of cycle time. Apple are holding themselves back by many factors by artificially extending cycle time and making it far far easier for the oth…
The killer feature isn't that you can run lots of apps on it. The killer feature is that it has a market built into it.
The more I think about it, the more I think a QA review process is necessary to make the market work in the long run, and I think the idea of "rapid iteration" on mobile devices--while nice for the developers--is ultimately wrong for the users.
APIs are notoriously hard to get right without either committing yourself to support a broken implementation forever, or breaking thousands of apps. So access to the API is rolled out slowly and gradually to give engineers time to see what's working and what should be changed.
And the value of "don't have to think twice about buying" for the users is probably worth millions or billions of dollars to a large marketplace. I don't think you can get that with certifications, because it really hasn't been working for SSL certificates and "TRUST-e", etc.
A mobile phone is NOT the center of my world. I already hate the fact that the few apps I have installed on my iPhone keep coming out with updates that I keep having to install. I do _NOT_ want rapid iteration being performed on a phone with 10-20 apps on it. It's a chore to keep installing the new versions. Nor do I think they should auto-update, because that comes with its own can of worms, too.
Apple isn't handing an advantage to its competitors. The review process _is_ the advantage. We've been needing a good review process for the notoriously crap-assed QA problems in commercial software for a long time.
Re: Apple's Mistake
#258Earlier quoted context omitted.
"Do they have a giant disclaimer that they do not support or condone the applications, take no responsibility for any damages, etc?" Read your iTunes agreement. I think you will find that they already have this.
There's a big difference between a legal disclaimer that no one reads and a marketing disclaimer. Apple unofficially accepts responsibility for the AppStore apps. They don't vouch for their quality per se, but they do vouch for the fact that they won't wreck your phone. The same can't be said for apps on an open platform. Hackers love open platforms but users flee them because the experience is painful.
Hackers love open platforms but users flee them because the experience is painful.
Very well said. The developers the app store is designed for are the boring, careful, professional developers who create polished, shiny, dependable apps. And that's what most users want. They want freedom from fear -- freedom to search the App Store and download whatever they find without without worrying about their level of sophistication. They want Disneyland, not a bazaar in Cairo. They want new Times Square, not old Times Square.
As a matter of pride, developers and early adopters refuse to acknowledge this factor. They pride themselves on their savoir faire and their ability to safely navigate an uncontrolled software ecosystem. The image of Apple users is carefree, self-assured, and adventuresome, and consumers can't feel that way in a place that is wild and unpredictable. They need Disneyland.
Re: Apple's Mistake
#259Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not that I care much, but what makes you think my comment is untrue?!
This part: "Laptops displaced desktops?! You are deluded." I _like_ desktops more than laptops, as I argue here: http://jseliger.com/2008/12/26/computer-post-desktop-or-lapt... , but note the link to the Ars Technica article: global laptop shipments as measured both by number and by dollars have overtaken laptop sales. And that was in Dec. 2008: the trend has only accelerated since. That's about as good a definition…
Obviously, I was talking FOR DEVELOPMENT, as was talking pg. Of course that for general consumers latops are more popular, as they should be considering their main use: communication tools.
As I said, we too have laptops we use for browsing from the couch. We just don't write serious code on them
Re: Apple's Mistake
#260Y Combinator RFS 5: Development on Handhelds, mentioned in the submitted article: http://ycombinator.com/rfs5.html
Some Nokia devices have a TV out facility that lets you see the screen output on an attached TV. Coupled with a Bluetooth keyboard you have the beginnings (I know it isn't perfect) of an acceptable input and output arrangement. Then take a text editor and something like Python for Series 60 and voila - a mobile development device. I've already got Putty (SSH) running on my phone, so I can do server side development v…
Yea, my Nokia N95 (built in 2007) has this... it works perfectly for showing videos, etc. Mobile mfgs. are starting to build 720p HD-ready devices (ala Samsung Omnia i8910) but there's still tons of bugs and it's all very beta. Give it 2 years and we'll have phones outputting quality 720p, they're already recording at that resolution. With the latest tech like Qualcomm's Snapdragon (1ghz chip) on phones like the HTC HD2, I wouldn't be surprised if you could get some decent dev-work out of it.