what is this article about? It is totally random, not edited. It clearly lacks lack of thought.
Google doesn't get 'social', but Apple doesn't understand the Internet
71–80 of 92 posts
Re: Google doesn't get 'social', but Apple doesn't understand the Internet
#72Exhibit A: iTunes (the service) is essentially blocked off from being accessed by people who don't have iTunes (the program) installed. This becomes VERY obvious if you run Linux. The App Store and the iTune music library are not easily searchable or browseable from your Linux PC. 3rd party websites that do this instead aren't really the point, either.
I don't think that makes a very compelling exhibit, given that "the internet" is not "all things you can get to via a web browser". The internet, rather, is IP, TCP, UDP, etc...and every protocol built on top of it. This includes HTTP & HTML (which iTunes leverages heavily) but also a many other things that are not browser-oriented. Regardless, I think your exhibit is more easily explained by Apple understanding exac…
Really? I'm a linux user, but I bought an OpenMoko phone despite knowing it's pretty much going to be a paperweight. I bought an ugly keychain from RMS when he was in KL. I own a couple of Android phones. I could have saved some money on my Milestone if I'd gotten an iPhone on the cheap from my carrier and then sold it to offset my Milestone purchase, but I opted not to put more money in the Apple coffers (it was right after that fiasco about them dictating what languages you could use to develop for their app store and I was pissed). I am not tight-fisted, but I am pretty idealistic about who I am supporting with my purchases. I have two close friends who use primarily linux and they're both pretty generous. Both of them also own iPhones, incidentally. My anecdotal evidence against yours.
Re: Google doesn't get 'social', but Apple doesn't understand the Internet
#73Google has failed multiple times at launching social apps. Is there an equivalent series of Apple failures from being too controlling? If not, what makes this a blindspot?
iTools, .Mac and MobileMe. Also, Ping.
The first 3 are the same thing and aren't even social apps.
But, iTools was great when it was around. Way ahead of its time and free! When they went to subscription model I think most early adopters had a hard time justifying the price when you could get hotmail for nothing.
Re: Google doesn't get 'social', but Apple doesn't understand the Internet
#74Earlier quoted context omitted.
They're barely even superior to what's possible with HTML now. If this were really the case — not just in a spec-sheet way but in a user experience way — why are all these companies making apps?
Because customers can buy apps in one click, so they do. If webapps had the same payment/installation procedure, they'd take off like a rocket too. (Given HTML5's local caching and the like.)
If people are using apps because they make more money with them, then what is your basis for claiming web apps are superior?
Re: Google doesn't get 'social', but Apple doesn't understand the Internet
#75Apps are a return to the walled garden -- the anti-Internet, if you will.
Couldn't disagree more. The "all apps should be web apps" movement is just an attempt to return to dumb terminals. Now the pendulum is swinging the other way again, but this time "fat client" apps can just be nicer front ends to web services.
Personally, my strategy is to create my product as a REST web service and provide some kind of default web interface, but let native clients use the REST interface to provide a nicer experience where applicable. I.e. the HTML interface is just one possible "view" to the service.
Why does my native app have to be the completely generic web browser native app when it could be a specific "web browser" custom tailored for my specific service?
Re: Google doesn't get 'social', but Apple doesn't understand the Internet
#76Apple understands the internet, it just doesn't like what it sees. There's a lot of smut, hate speech, pirated content, and malware out there. Just as Google has tried to do with its search engine, Apple is building a system that makes it easy to find quality content. Content that is legal, age rated and doesn't harm your devices. A lot of families value those qualities over 'absolute freedom'.
I really hope it's other trolls modding up these pro-censorship posts.
Just because someone has an opinion different from yours doesn't make them a troll. You calling someone a troll because you don't agree with someone's opinion does.
Re: Google doesn't get 'social', but Apple doesn't understand the Internet
#77Exhibit A: iTunes (the service) is essentially blocked off from being accessed by people who don't have iTunes (the program) installed. This becomes VERY obvious if you run Linux. The App Store and the iTune music library are not easily searchable or browseable from your Linux PC. 3rd party websites that do this instead aren't really the point, either.
I don't think that makes a very compelling exhibit, given that "the internet" is not "all things you can get to via a web browser". The internet, rather, is IP, TCP, UDP, etc...and every protocol built on top of it. This includes HTTP & HTML (which iTunes leverages heavily) but also a many other things that are not browser-oriented. Regardless, I think your exhibit is more easily explained by Apple understanding exac…
1) I don't know about Mac, but most windows users I know pirated a lot of their software. Isn't that just as tight-fisted?
2) There is not much commercial software for sale for Linux at all, so I guess there is a chicken and egg problem.
3) Of course you will sell less Linux copies of a piece of software. There are less Linux users.
But to say Linux users are comparatively tight-fisted compared to users of other OSes, I'm not sure how you come up with that, Personnally, I'd buy a lot more games if they simply worked in Ubuntu... And if iTunes worked on Linux I'd buy more music there.
Re: Google doesn't get 'social', but Apple doesn't understand the Internet
#78Internet != Web
Re: Google doesn't get 'social', but Apple doesn't understand the Internet
#79Apple understands the internet, it just doesn't like what it sees. There's a lot of smut, hate speech, pirated content, and malware out there. Just as Google has tried to do with its search engine, Apple is building a system that makes it easy to find quality content. Content that is legal, age rated and doesn't harm your devices. A lot of families value those qualities over 'absolute freedom'.
I would disagree. Apple fundamentally doesn't understand the Internet. MobileMe/.Mac has been a decent disaster for a long time, not even able to meet the quality levels of services that Google gives away for free. That's not because Apple chooses to not like bits about the net, that's because Apple doesn't seem to have any idea what its doing in that space. I'd say that Apple doesn't just not understand the Internet…
While I don't disagree with you, I wonder how much of this is a function of Apple not being able to figure out how to monetize the Internet to the profit percentages they want and/or use the Internet to constrain people to the Apple ecosystem (which I suppose it just another path to monetization).
Re: Google doesn't get 'social', but Apple doesn't understand the Internet
#80I'd venture to say the internet doesn't get Apple. Many geeks are just anti anything Apple, and have an irrational hatred for them. Apple have made huge contributions to the internet, such as Webkit, promoting web standards, the iPhone and yes, even the iTunes store - still the biggest internet-based media distribution channel.
Nearly every geek I know has a MBP, and every startup I've worked at uses the same.
The two aren't as mutually exclusive as one might think. I'm anti-Apple when it comes to their walled garden media strategy, their iOS App store approach and most things connected those. I am however very pro nice, solid, laptops with a unix based OS that just works out of the box, and that basically means buying Apple.