A free version of Word in exchange for only selling the resulting docs through MS, but the author retains content ownership? Doesn't sound crazy/abhorrent to me.
Are you Steve Ballmer? In that case your statement is perfectly sensible; otherwise, what?
nescientist on
0
Options
syndalisGetting ClassyOn the WallRegistered User, Loves Apple Productsregular
Should game developers be able to use an xbox 360 dev kit to build games for sale on competing platforms?
SW-4158-3990-6116
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
Should game developers be able to use an xbox 360 dev kit to build games for sale on competing platforms?
No, but that's because doing so would be counterproductive, because other platforms are very dissimilar. This argument really isn't the winner you think it is.
Should game developers be able to use an xbox 360 dev kit to build games for sale on competing platforms?
No, but that's because doing so would be counterproductive, because other platforms are very dissimilar. This argument really isn't the winner you think it is.
So the only reason is because it is counterproductive, not because of any legal rights?
And as for dissimilarities, there are enough differences between iBooks2 and ePub3 to say the same thing. The apple-specific features rolled into an ibook file are not present in the standard ePub3, so people would have to write specific apps on other platforms to run things designed for their closed ecosystem.
Kind of like an "emulator" of sorts, since stuff in iBooks2 relies heavily on Apple Core Services.
SW-4158-3990-6116
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
Should game developers be able to use an xbox 360 dev kit to build games for sale on competing platforms?
No, but that's because doing so would be counterproductive, because other platforms are very dissimilar. This argument really isn't the winner you think it is.
So the only reason is because it is counterproductive, not because of any legal rights?
And as for dissimilarities, there are enough differences between iBooks2 and ePub3 to say the same thing. The apple-specific features rolled into an ibook file are not present in the standard ePub3, so people would have to write specific apps on other platforms to run things designed for their closed ecosystem.
Kind of like an "emulator" of sorts, since stuff in iBooks2 relies heavily on Apple Core Services.
Congratulations on missing the point on ePub3. The issue there is that Apple could have easily chosen to support a common standard for modern ebooks. Instead, they chose to create an incompatible proprietary format. Of course, when it's to their benefit, they're more than happy to fly the banner of open standards...
Should game developers be able to use an xbox 360 dev kit to build games for sale on competing platforms?
No, but that's because doing so would be counterproductive, because other platforms are very dissimilar. This argument really isn't the winner you think it is.
So the only reason is because it is counterproductive, not because of any legal rights?
And as for dissimilarities, there are enough differences between iBooks2 and ePub3 to say the same thing. The apple-specific features rolled into an ibook file are not present in the standard ePub3, so people would have to write specific apps on other platforms to run things designed for their closed ecosystem.
Kind of like an "emulator" of sorts, since stuff in iBooks2 relies heavily on Apple Core Services.
Congratulations on missing the point on ePub3. The issue there is that Apple could have easily chosen to support a common standard for modern ebooks. Instead, they chose to create an incompatible proprietary format. Of course, when it's to their benefit, they're more than happy to fly the banner of open standards...
ePub3 does not do what iBooks does. And honestly it could not, because iBooks relies on a bunch of core services baked into their hardware / OS.
Apple is laying no claims whatsoever on any of the content, only the sale rights of the final outputted file (and only one of three means of output that iBook Author allows for).
There is nothing whatsoever stopping the author from copy-pasting their work into an ePub3 editor, making some changes, and selling that (slightly more limited) file through whatever services currently support ePub3 (pretty sure that list does not include any amazon or b&n devices either, with Amazon having ALSO made their own ePub3 alternative)
syndalis on
SW-4158-3990-6116
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
I can see people screaming bloody murder if Microsoft did try that--even if no one actually adopted it because every computerize-office on the face of the Earth already uses Word (and likely the same version they used ten years earlier).
0
Options
VanguardBut now the dream is over. And the insect is awake.Registered User, __BANNED USERSregular
Hackers protesting harsh working conditions at iPhone manufacturer Foxconn dumped what they said were megabytes of private data belonging to the outsourcing giant.
"Note: The passwords inside these files could allow individuals to make fraudulent orders under big companies like Microsoft, Apple, IBM, Intel, and Dell," a group calling itself Swagg Security wrote in a message posted to Pastebin. "Be careful." The purported contents were made available in a torrent on The Pirate Bay.
A free version of Word in exchange for only selling the resulting docs through MS, but the author retains content ownership? Doesn't sound crazy/abhorrent to me.
Are you Steve Ballmer? In that case your statement is perfectly sensible; otherwise, what?
That would be a pretty sweet deal for most people. The vast majority of Word users aren't producing documents that are ever going to get sold to anyone. In fact, even people who are using Word to produce documents that are going to earn someone money probably aren't actually selling Word documents, but let's just pretend that they are. Anyone who uses Word for school work, personal use, or purely internal business-related things could then use it for free without having to worry about the whole "selling docs through MS" thing.
But it's not really a parity case with the Apple thing since people use Word for a vast and diverse array of things, the majority of which are probably not for sale. I don't imagine people are going to be making a lot of apple iBooks that they aren't also trying to sell.
See, this is why the rest of the electronic manufacturers worldwide don't claim they're fucking saving the world or advancing human evolution for the better when they put on the third model of their phone in the last three years. They're doing the same goddamn thing, by and large, they're just not acting like idiots. Though it does seem they're not limiting themselves to Apple.
0
Options
VanguardBut now the dream is over. And the insect is awake.Registered User, __BANNED USERSregular
I like Apple product. I don't, for second, believe they are different from any of the other manufacturers.
Direct actions like that hack are good because no one is going to legislate anything that threatens the status quo in this country, nor is China going to cease the human rights abuses and lack of worker protection until a populist movement occurs.
I like Apple product. I don't, for second, believe they are different from any of the other manufacturers.
Direct actions like that hack are good because no one is going to legislate anything that threatens the status quo in this country, nor is China going to cease the human rights abuses and lack of worker protection until a populist movement occurs.
I think pretty much all effective political action is going to have to take into account that the normal political processes are all broken or corrupted. I'd much rather we figure out a cool, nonviolent solution to this, because it will ultimately end in massive violence otherwise.
0
Options
mrt144King of the NumbernamesRegistered Userregular
edited February 2012
Had my first iPhone 4s die today. My user is taking a trip to the Apple store to rectify it. If only I could walk down to my local ATT RMA shop to do this...
Apple has invited the Fair Labor Association to audit Foxconn's factories, to be followed by most of their other suppliers. Thousands of workers to be interviewed. Findings out in March. Link.
Whatever happened with that thing about iOS developers copying everyone's address books without authorization? Like, there aren't any permissions or security blocking it from happening, and is apparently common practice among iOS devs, although not all did/do it obviously. Not your personal information, just everyone in your address book.
Apparently it was mainly with social apps and since the Path fiasco many have changed their practices, but still. I only heard about it on Gizmodo and nowhere else.
Whatever happened with that thing about iOS developers copying everyone's address books without authorization? Like, there aren't any permissions or security blocking it from happening, and is apparently common practice among iOS devs, although not all did/do it obviously. Not your personal information, just everyone in your address book.
Apparently it was mainly with social apps and since the Path fiasco many have changed their practices, but still. I only heard about it on Gizmodo and nowhere else.
[Daring fireball mode]
Don't worry, that's just apple doing what's best for the customer. It's just evil developers being evil. Not Apple's fault they have no security.
Google sharing/not protecting your information is unspeakable hypocritical evil though. Boo, Google.
[/Daring fireball mode]
The more I read about the patent disputes between Apple and Samsung, the more I despise Apple. Samsung owns actual patents on things. Actual technological innovations. That the iPhone relies on in order to function. Apple, on the other hand, has never innovated on anything except form and style. That's all great, and it's made them the richest company in the world. But they've been "patenting" these style elements, dressing them up like they were inventions, and this is expressly NOT what patents are for. They have a patent on "a rectangular phone with equally rounded corners." Again, that is precisely the kind of thing that should never, ever, ever receive a patent. It's a look, not an invention. It is, at best, a trademark. Very different from a patent.
I realize that the iSheep are annoyed that the Galaxy devices looks so much like iDevices. But that is how it is supposed to work. If Samsung put it in a white box and caled it an "I-Phone," then we'd have a problem. A trademark problem, not a patent problem. But there is a major gulf between imitation in order to trick consumers, and imitation because you're following a style leader. On the other hand, iPhones make use of all sorts of actual patented inventions, like 3G and 802.11, and they aren't legit on many of those. But unlike Apple, many other companies respect the fact that IP law is intended to stop wholesale theft of creative works, not as a means to enforce a stranglehold on the marketplace.
As tributes to the late star continued at the Grammy Awards on Sunday, fans on Twitter noticed a sly price-increase on Whitney Houston albums on iTunes. 'Whitney - The Greatest Hits' is currently sitting at No. 2 on the iTunes US Chart, while 'Whitney Houston - The Ultimate Collection' is No. 2 on the UK iTunes chart. The latter album was initially offered at a price of 4.99, but increased by three-pound to 7.99 once news of her death began circulating. Numerous Twitter users described the price hike has "greedy" and "shameful", while iTunes and Sony Music (Houston's record label) declined to comment on the matter.
They jacked the price up 60% with in hours of her death being made news. Stay classy!
Also everything Yar said. Is there some way Samsung/Motorola(Google) can just pull there patents from apple? Moto especially has so many patents on so much hardware, if you took them away, Apple would have to amend "a rectangular phone with equally rounded corners.", to remove mentioning "phone", since something that can't make or receive calls certainly isn't a phone.
I still don't know if the hate for Foxconn is that justified.
They sound pretty awful if you compare their employee conditions (eight people on bunk beds to a room, suicide rates, wages) to western standards, but as has been pointed out repeatedly in apple threads, the 'epidemic' of suicides at foxconn is far below the national chinese average, and the pay (for China) isn't bad.
I still don't know if the hate for Foxconn is that justified.
They sound pretty awful if you compare their employee conditions (eight people on bunk beds to a room, suicide rates, wages) to western standards, but as has been pointed out repeatedly in apple threads, the 'epidemic' of suicides at foxconn is far below the national chinese average, and the pay (for China) isn't bad.
I don't know, Tim Cook has made a lot of honest, positive changes since he took over the reigns, and I do believe he's sincerely concerned about resolving the questions surrounding working conditions in Apple's supplier's factories.
I still don't know if the hate for Foxconn is that justified.
They sound pretty awful if you compare their employee conditions (eight people on bunk beds to a room, suicide rates, wages) to western standards, but as has been pointed out repeatedly in apple threads, the 'epidemic' of suicides at foxconn is far below the national chinese average, and the pay (for China) isn't bad.
I prefer non-shittiness to be objective, not subjective.
I as well, but I also acknowledge that as long as we're willing to outsource labour to other countries, their labour standards won't be the same as our own. I'm a fan of globalization so I'd prefer all things to be equal in such areas, but I figure that'll take another hundred (or couple hundred) years at best.
I don't know, Tim Cook has made a lot of honest, positive changes since he took over the reigns, and I do believe he's sincerely concerned about resolving the questions surrounding working conditions in Apple's supplier's factories.
I think Cook's probably trying to do what he (reasonably) can. My concern isn't with Cook as much as it is with Foxconn's management.
I don't know, Tim Cook has made a lot of honest, positive changes since he took over the reigns, and I do believe he's sincerely concerned about resolving the questions surrounding working conditions in Apple's supplier's factories.
I think Cook's probably trying to do what he (reasonably) can. My concern isn't with Cook as much as it is with Foxconn's management.
The N.Y. Times was a huge black eye for Apple. It hit them in their image with their core audience. People don't want to be ashamed to own Apple products.
Which is a great example of what journalism is supposed to do - highlight problems in a way that influences positive change.
0
Options
KalTorakOne way or another, they all end up inthe Undercity.Registered Userregular
I don't know, Tim Cook has made a lot of honest, positive changes since he took over the reigns, and I do believe he's sincerely concerned about resolving the questions surrounding working conditions in Apple's supplier's factories.
I think Cook's probably trying to do what he (reasonably) can. My concern isn't with Cook as much as it is with Foxconn's management.
The N.Y. Times was a huge black eye for Apple. It hit them in their image with their core audience. People don't want to be ashamed to own Apple products.
Which is a great example of what journalism is supposed to do - highlight problems in a way that influences positive change.
That said, Apple's response is also part of what is supposed to happen in that process.
I don't know, Tim Cook has made a lot of honest, positive changes since he took over the reigns, and I do believe he's sincerely concerned about resolving the questions surrounding working conditions in Apple's supplier's factories.
I think Cook's probably trying to do what he (reasonably) can. My concern isn't with Cook as much as it is with Foxconn's management.
The N.Y. Times was a huge black eye for Apple. It hit them in their image with their core audience. People don't want to be ashamed to own Apple products.
Which is a great example of what journalism is supposed to do - highlight problems in a way that influences positive change.
That said, Apple's response is also part of what is supposed to happen in that process.
I think that's why they chose Apple. It's a brand that would have been damaged by the story, because it relies on individuals who relate to the Apple "image." You wouldn't have the same impact with, say, Dell, because their corporate client base would largely give a shit.
I still don't know if the hate for Foxconn is that justified.
They sound pretty awful if you compare their employee conditions (eight people on bunk beds to a room, suicide rates, wages) to western standards, but as has been pointed out repeatedly in apple threads, the 'epidemic' of suicides at foxconn is far below the national chinese average, and the pay (for China) isn't bad.
I prefer non-shittiness to be objective, not subjective.
I as well, but I also acknowledge that as long as we're willing to outsource labour to other countries, their labour standards won't be the same as our own. I'm a fan of globalization so I'd prefer all things to be equal in such areas, but I figure that'll take another hundred (or couple hundred) years at best.
There's also the annoying little fact that Foxxcon, and other sweat shop industries, have been raising their wages--along with the rest of the bloody country--over the years. So while they're still depressingly low, they're actually advancing faster than the cost of living in China has in the same few decades since the 70s (though that's in large part because the cost of living, as we measure it, isn't rising that fast by comparison, and was low to start with).
The exact same thing happened in Taiwan 3 to 4 decades ago (going into about 20 years ago, when the White Terror finally ended). It's no coincidence that Foxconn is owned by Taiwanese businessmen--they know the writing on the wall, and want to exploit profit margins while they're still there. In a few years, when both Chinese government and these corporations themselves are forced to acknowledge rising wages to the point where they lose competitiveness versus other manufacturing nations, but are still very much underpaid by my metrics, the US will have come to grips with paying two or three times what they have for consumer electronics, and god knows how much for Apple products in particular--in other words, basically what many people outside the United States, particularly in east Asia, already pay for Apple products, which is why they're utterly crushed by their rivals in many fields.
A Chinese firm which claims that it owns the iPad trademark in China is to ask customs officials to block shipments of Apple's iconic device in a move that could potentially disrupt the technology giant's supply chain.
If Shenzhen-based Proview succeeds, it would be a major blow to the Californian company's sales, as all of its worldwide supplies of iPads come from the country. The move could, in theory, lead to serious shortages of iPads around the world.
It would also be a major blow for the company in what is Apple's fastest-growing market. Earlier this week, there were media reports of retailers in some Chinese cities removing iPads from their shelves after local authorities banned their sale.
A Chinese firm which claims that it owns the iPad trademark in China is to ask customs officials to block shipments of Apple's iconic device in a move that could potentially disrupt the technology giant's supply chain.
If Shenzhen-based Proview succeeds, it would be a major blow to the Californian company's sales, as all of its worldwide supplies of iPads come from the country. The move could, in theory, lead to serious shortages of iPads around the world.
It would also be a major blow for the company in what is Apple's fastest-growing market. Earlier this week, there were media reports of retailers in some Chinese cities removing iPads from their shelves after local authorities banned their sale.
This is probably a somewhat orchestrated response to Obama's threats to crack down on Chinese IP violations. Kind of a "do you really want to play this game with us?" type-thing.
I don't think it damages the apple image. Strict control over everything, stock prices uber alles, image over everything. It's what I expect from them.
Posts
Are you Steve Ballmer? In that case your statement is perfectly sensible; otherwise, what?
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
No, but that's because doing so would be counterproductive, because other platforms are very dissimilar. This argument really isn't the winner you think it is.
And as for dissimilarities, there are enough differences between iBooks2 and ePub3 to say the same thing. The apple-specific features rolled into an ibook file are not present in the standard ePub3, so people would have to write specific apps on other platforms to run things designed for their closed ecosystem.
Kind of like an "emulator" of sorts, since stuff in iBooks2 relies heavily on Apple Core Services.
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
Congratulations on missing the point on ePub3. The issue there is that Apple could have easily chosen to support a common standard for modern ebooks. Instead, they chose to create an incompatible proprietary format. Of course, when it's to their benefit, they're more than happy to fly the banner of open standards...
It shouldn't stop someone from making a devkit that let's you do that, though.
Apple is laying no claims whatsoever on any of the content, only the sale rights of the final outputted file (and only one of three means of output that iBook Author allows for).
There is nothing whatsoever stopping the author from copy-pasting their work into an ePub3 editor, making some changes, and selling that (slightly more limited) file through whatever services currently support ePub3 (pretty sure that list does not include any amazon or b&n devices either, with Amazon having ALSO made their own ePub3 alternative)
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
http://arstechnica.com/business/news/2012/02/hackers-target-iphone-manufacturer-to-protest-harsh-working-conditions.ars
That would be a pretty sweet deal for most people. The vast majority of Word users aren't producing documents that are ever going to get sold to anyone. In fact, even people who are using Word to produce documents that are going to earn someone money probably aren't actually selling Word documents, but let's just pretend that they are. Anyone who uses Word for school work, personal use, or purely internal business-related things could then use it for free without having to worry about the whole "selling docs through MS" thing.
But it's not really a parity case with the Apple thing since people use Word for a vast and diverse array of things, the majority of which are probably not for sale. I don't imagine people are going to be making a lot of apple iBooks that they aren't also trying to sell.
Direct action across international borders.
We are officially living in the future.
*sigh*
See, this is why the rest of the electronic manufacturers worldwide don't claim they're fucking saving the world or advancing human evolution for the better when they put on the third model of their phone in the last three years. They're doing the same goddamn thing, by and large, they're just not acting like idiots. Though it does seem they're not limiting themselves to Apple.
Direct actions like that hack are good because no one is going to legislate anything that threatens the status quo in this country, nor is China going to cease the human rights abuses and lack of worker protection until a populist movement occurs.
I think pretty much all effective political action is going to have to take into account that the normal political processes are all broken or corrupted. I'd much rather we figure out a cool, nonviolent solution to this, because it will ultimately end in massive violence otherwise.
Apparently it was mainly with social apps and since the Path fiasco many have changed their practices, but still. I only heard about it on Gizmodo and nowhere else.
[Daring fireball mode]
Don't worry, that's just apple doing what's best for the customer. It's just evil developers being evil. Not Apple's fault they have no security.
Google sharing/not protecting your information is unspeakable hypocritical evil though. Boo, Google.
[/Daring fireball mode]
I made a game, it has penguins in it. It's pay what you like on Gumroad.
Currently Ebaying Nothing at all but I might do in the future.
I realize that the iSheep are annoyed that the Galaxy devices looks so much like iDevices. But that is how it is supposed to work. If Samsung put it in a white box and caled it an "I-Phone," then we'd have a problem. A trademark problem, not a patent problem. But there is a major gulf between imitation in order to trick consumers, and imitation because you're following a style leader. On the other hand, iPhones make use of all sorts of actual patented inventions, like 3G and 802.11, and they aren't legit on many of those. But unlike Apple, many other companies respect the fact that IP law is intended to stop wholesale theft of creative works, not as a means to enforce a stranglehold on the marketplace.
They jacked the price up 60% with in hours of her death being made news. Stay classy!
Also everything Yar said. Is there some way Samsung/Motorola(Google) can just pull there patents from apple? Moto especially has so many patents on so much hardware, if you took them away, Apple would have to amend "a rectangular phone with equally rounded corners.", to remove mentioning "phone", since something that can't make or receive calls certainly isn't a phone.
Uh, right, but it's not Apple, it's Sony.
http://technolog.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/02/13/10394035-sony-hikes-whitney-houston-album-prices-online?chromedomain=digitallife
The price went up on Amazon's store too. Go-go Gadget Applehate all you want though.
You're right, it was classless of Apple, who doesn't have control of individual album pricing changes on iTunes! Grab the pitchforks!
This is how I imagine the interviews going as well.
They sound pretty awful if you compare their employee conditions (eight people on bunk beds to a room, suicide rates, wages) to western standards, but as has been pointed out repeatedly in apple threads, the 'epidemic' of suicides at foxconn is far below the national chinese average, and the pay (for China) isn't bad.
I'm sure we've all seen this:
I prefer non-shittiness to be objective, not subjective.
Same. Lest they get beat or don't get their food allowance this week.
I as well, but I also acknowledge that as long as we're willing to outsource labour to other countries, their labour standards won't be the same as our own. I'm a fan of globalization so I'd prefer all things to be equal in such areas, but I figure that'll take another hundred (or couple hundred) years at best.
I think Cook's probably trying to do what he (reasonably) can. My concern isn't with Cook as much as it is with Foxconn's management.
The N.Y. Times was a huge black eye for Apple. It hit them in their image with their core audience. People don't want to be ashamed to own Apple products.
Which is a great example of what journalism is supposed to do - highlight problems in a way that influences positive change.
That said, Apple's response is also part of what is supposed to happen in that process.
I think that's why they chose Apple. It's a brand that would have been damaged by the story, because it relies on individuals who relate to the Apple "image." You wouldn't have the same impact with, say, Dell, because their corporate client base would largely give a shit.
There's also the annoying little fact that Foxxcon, and other sweat shop industries, have been raising their wages--along with the rest of the bloody country--over the years. So while they're still depressingly low, they're actually advancing faster than the cost of living in China has in the same few decades since the 70s (though that's in large part because the cost of living, as we measure it, isn't rising that fast by comparison, and was low to start with).
The exact same thing happened in Taiwan 3 to 4 decades ago (going into about 20 years ago, when the White Terror finally ended). It's no coincidence that Foxconn is owned by Taiwanese businessmen--they know the writing on the wall, and want to exploit profit margins while they're still there. In a few years, when both Chinese government and these corporations themselves are forced to acknowledge rising wages to the point where they lose competitiveness versus other manufacturing nations, but are still very much underpaid by my metrics, the US will have come to grips with paying two or three times what they have for consumer electronics, and god knows how much for Apple products in particular--in other words, basically what many people outside the United States, particularly in east Asia, already pay for Apple products, which is why they're utterly crushed by their rivals in many fields.
Not going to be a easy transition, I expect.
[/theory]
http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/gadgets-and-tech/news/trademark-row-could-lead-to-ipad-shortages-6917477.html
This is probably a somewhat orchestrated response to Obama's threats to crack down on Chinese IP violations. Kind of a "do you really want to play this game with us?" type-thing.