On October 07 2011 01:13 esperanto wrote: Apple supports open-source. No they don't. Apple has a strict "Iphone Developer Program License Agreement" that every developer must sign before using Apple Sofware. You can read it here to see just how much Apple loves to "support" open-source.
In fact thats one of the reason why there are not so many games for apple computers. Apple decided not to go with directX, which is a non-free licenced code. Instead they went with OpenGL which is free, actually alot faster than directX and anyone can work with it. There are not so many games on Mac because developers wants to makes games for Windows. Windows is still the main computer gaming platform. And Apple chooses OpenGL instead of DirectX because DirectX is developed by Microsoft, their rival.
Comments in bold. No disrespect to the deceased, but Apple products are overpriced and it pains me to see people paying more for less.
This, 9000 times over. You see, the reason for Apple's success is they were able to generate a popularity cult of their products. That is, "If you don't have Apple shit, you're not cool." Seeing as how a lot of teens and young adults just aren't there in the head, it's not terribly difficult to create such a fad. Bingo. You're in business.
Most of the movies you see, the magazines you read and the tv (even NASL) you watch is done on a mac, and not cause macs look cool and "every cool kid wants to have it". All these ppl/companys work with mac for a reason. To be honest, these are also the areas where it doesnt matter if a product is maybe overpriced. The whole creative-scene would look alot diffrent today without Steve Jobs.
If all what you know about mac is the price and the most stupid programm apple has ever done "itunes" and you never really worked on mac for a long time. Please stop complaining about it in this thread. Cause then for sure you wouldnt understand Steve Jobs acomplishments.
On October 07 2011 01:13 esperanto wrote: Apple supports open-source. No they don't. Apple has a strict "Iphone Developer Program License Agreement" that every developer must sign before using Apple Sofware. You can read it here to see just how much Apple loves to "support" open-source.
In fact thats one of the reason why there are not so many games for apple computers. Apple decided not to go with directX, which is a non-free licenced code. Instead they went with OpenGL which is free, actually alot faster than directX and anyone can work with it. There are not so many games on Mac because developers wants to makes games for Windows. Windows is still the main computer gaming platform. And Apple chooses OpenGL instead of DirectX because DirectX is developed by Microsoft, their rival.
Comments in bold. No disrespect to the deceased, but Apple products are overpriced and it pains me to see people paying more for less.
Apple supports open source. There is more than just the iOS developer agreement.
Every single iOS, Android, WebOS, Safari and Chrome web browser out there is based on WebKit, an open source web rendering engine that is led and maintained by Apple. Apple is a big supporter of open web standards, including but not limited to HTML5.
Apple is the main factor why HTML5 video has gained traction. If it wasn't for the iOS devices, there would be no incentive to serve pure h.264 video instead of only Flash.
The core of OSX is based on BSD, an open source project. Apple not only makes enhancements to their core OS, they also return a lot of these enhancements to the community. An example is the technical bits that allowed the development of Time Machine, such as the support of hard links pointing to directories. An other example is the support of anonumous blocls to the GNU C compiler, introduced in Snow Leopard.
There is more than rivalries involved in the case of DirectX. 1. licensing fees. 2. you are always going to play catch up. 3. you are at the mercy of a third party vendor able to determine your own technology stack. Apple very well learned that 2 (Java) and 3 (Internet Explorer, later also shown on Flash) are very dangerous.
The difference is that Apple is pragmatic about open source. They will use ir where they think it can provide a better solution and yes, is convenient, but not just for bragging rights.
See Google. If they are so about open source, why can't you download the source of the latest Android build? Where is the Page Rank source code? Every company protects their most valuable assets.
I have no problem with people hating on Apple and their users. I have a problem when its done based on inaccurate bullshit or double standards. You have no idea how many open source personalities use Apple computers on a daily basis, starting with Linus Torvalds.
On October 07 2011 04:07 JudicatorHammurabi wrote:
On October 07 2011 03:44 Jindo wrote:
On October 07 2011 01:13 esperanto wrote: Apple supports open-source. No they don't. Apple has a strict "Iphone Developer Program License Agreement" that every developer must sign before using Apple Sofware. You can read it here to see just how much Apple loves to "support" open-source.
In fact thats one of the reason why there are not so many games for apple computers. Apple decided not to go with directX, which is a non-free licenced code. Instead they went with OpenGL which is free, actually alot faster than directX and anyone can work with it. There are not so many games on Mac because developers wants to makes games for Windows. Windows is still the main computer gaming platform. And Apple chooses OpenGL instead of DirectX because DirectX is developed by Microsoft, their rival.
Comments in bold. No disrespect to the deceased, but Apple products are overpriced and it pains me to see people paying more for less.
This, 9000 times over. You see, the reason for Apple's success is they were able to generate a popularity cult of their products. That is, "If you don't have Apple shit, you're not cool." Seeing as how a lot of teens and young adults just aren't there in the head, it's not terribly difficult to create such a fad. Bingo. You're in business.
pretty much all of Apple's rivals follow apple's fads too, you know, not just teens. Every time Jobs and Apple released a new device, he would change the technology market, companies would change their business plans, create rival products, and are the people running these massive corporations also "not right in the head"?
Uhh I would say they are fine. Not sure why you would think they are not. I'm just pointing out that it's far more often that Apple sells a consumer product because of the popularity cult they've established, rather than their stuff actually being good (especially for cost), adding on to what the original person I replied to said. I find it a bit hard to believe that 50+ year-old nerds (these rivals of Apple) who actually understand what they're buying and things about consumer electronics just buy things because it's "cool", and not because it's something 10x better for its cost (which Apple products are not). The few that actually do so, some do out of preference, some do because they've been using Apple products for decades, but how many will you find that will honestly tell you "I got this because it's the cool thing" ? A negligible number, at best. It's because they actually understand what they are buying, and are at least a bit more mature than the "oh em gee I want this because all the other kids have it and I want to be cool like them". I will say though that the iPod is a decent product, but most other things like their personal computers are just bad, and terribly overpriced. In fact, the only old Mac computer and Mac OS users I've known are from the "old guard" so to speak, whose first computers were the first apple computers.
you missed the reason of why people in this thread are calling Jobs a genius, and why apple is so successful. They aren't saying that because Jobs found a way to make money off the masses.
Jobs innovated. When I said apple's rivals, i meant the companies as a whole, all these touch-screen smart phones that are the norm today, those sprung from the iPhone. All the other tablets on the market, they are able to survive because the Ipad was released and the tablet market exploded.
It's not about whether apple products are more expensive than their counterparts. These counterparts would've never existed had it not been for apple.
How is a link that show a list of open sourced software Apple used to built its Mac OS X supposed to support your assumption that Apple is pro open source? Are you aware that the OS X was built using the BSD version of Unix, an open sourced OS?
These software are open sourced because that's what they are, not because Apple wants them to be.
Why are people polluting this thread with "Apple sucks and is overpriced" discussion. That may be so and I also hold that opinion, but are you really that much of a blind hater to try to discredit Jobs' accomplishments in his industry? It is pathetic.
Did Steve Jobs & Apple do things that moved the computing industry forward? Yes, especially in the field of consumer computing. For that he should get some respect. What you personally think of their current product line is irrelevant.
RIP Steve Jobs. Steve has pretty much made business what it is. He had the brain power to shape civilization into what it is today. If his cancer was cured he could've continued and eventually we would see the world go from Star Trek to Meet The Robinson's in technology.
its sad to hear that he died, being an inspirational man to so many people. but the company he built up is a slap in the face for anyone that can see the deception it uses to sell its products to consumers who can't tell the difference between quality and crap.
On October 07 2011 07:05 onewingedmoogle wrote: its sad to hear that he died, being an inspirational man to so many people. but the company he built up is a slap in the face for anyone that can see the deception it uses to sell its products to consumers who can't tell the difference between quality and crap.
Someone else said something similar. I commented on that:
I was sadder about Steve Jobs's death than I've ever been about a stranger's, because I've loved Apple products for years and following the company is a longtime hobby. I'm worried that the tech world won't move as fast or create products I enjoy without Mr. Jobs's involvement (think of all of the milestones in consumer electronics Jobs was behind: the first modern personal computer, the first popular MP3 player, the first successful touchscreen handheld, the first mass market tablet). The guy shared (and shaped) my design aesthetic and my concept of the purpose and nature of technology (simplify; do fewer things better).
Watching Mr. Jobs's keynotes over the years, I became really enamored with his "straight man" presentation and his obvious excitement over and pride in his products. Mr. Jobs had this infectious wide-eyed tech-nerdiness; he was a billionaire CEO but he was also any guy whose face lights up when he figures out a new gadget. Steve Jobs stood for everything good about 21st-century consumer technology.
Here's a video that had me feeling a bit teary-eyed this morning.
Listen and watch the crowd!
ps. lol @ everyone in this thread taking Jobs's death as an opportunity to take up their problems with his company. Show some class?
I've always found it a bit strange how reluctant people are to stop working. It's eerily similar to Jack Layton; he gets unprecedented results for his party in the last election, and then he dies.
I guess when you have that much momentum you just don't want to get off. That, and cancer is a bitch.
EPT![[image loading]](http://24.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lqhr46trpa1qz9917o1_500.png)
