Yankee Stadium Bans the iPad
- Thread starter Andy Chalk
- Start date
Why does choosing between Microsoft and Apple feel like choosing between Hitler and Stalin?TheFacelessOne said:Only 'caus it's true.Sneaklemming said:
Go m$!
"What about Linux?"
Oh give me a break, that's the Mussolini option. We should distrust and fear all organisations especially when they try to seize control from the user and start acting anti-competitive.
I like windows operating system, at least there Microsoft knows to keep their hands off and are fairly open, I can install the OS on any system I want, with any hardware I want. The OS will even recognise blu-ray drives, a format made by their mortal enemy in the console market - Sony. Sure, Windows 7 doesn't have native Blu-ray PLAYBACK but Win-XP didn't have native DVD playback either.
I'd rather use third party playback software anyway. The job of the OS is to interface between the PROGRAMS and the HARDWARE, it's when it tries to do more than that such as the programs/applications part, that's when things get painful.
You have to find something to do during the 5 minutes between each pitch. Seriously, baseball is boring as hell. I have no idea why people pay money to go in the first place. Add a pitch timer similar to basketball's shot clock and you might have a game that's more exciting than watching the grass on the baseball field grow.Andy Chalk said:
GrinningManiac said:
Actually, I think that falls under the "assumption of risk" loophole. It's why people in the stands who get hit by stray balls don't sue. I'm guessing that the same concept would apply if someone gets their Ipad broken. (And who would bring an Iphone to a baseball game? It's like bringing sand to the beach!)
At the risk of this devolving into a Linux-versus-everyone-else rant:
As for the "Windows works on everything" argument, Linux developers and users have been hammering on hardware vendors for years to release documentation on their hardware, and they continue to refuse -- irrationally -- to do so. So, without available docs, the responsibility for Linux support falls solely to the hardware vendors, but they refuse to do that, either. So if you have a gadget that Linux doesn't work on, it's because the hardware vendors have failed to do their duty -- twice.
If you'd said "Stalin" then you would have at least played in to the "Communism" meme that Micros~1 and others have been flinging at Linux trying unsuccessfully to get it to stick. As it is, Mussolini was a fascist. Different kettle of fish altogether.Treblaine said:
As for the "Windows works on everything" argument, Linux developers and users have been hammering on hardware vendors for years to release documentation on their hardware, and they continue to refuse -- irrationally -- to do so. So, without available docs, the responsibility for Linux support falls solely to the hardware vendors, but they refuse to do that, either. So if you have a gadget that Linux doesn't work on, it's because the hardware vendors have failed to do their duty -- twice.
Well I would never describe Linux as Stalinist, Stalin was brutal as he was willing to kill thousands (if not millions) to MAKE communism work. Linux is an ineffectual anarchist or Trotskyist movement if anything.ewhac said:
Whatever Mussolini was, he was a joke. He may have been a fascist but his incompetence and incredibly weak grip on power was thankfully very weak. But I don't want this to become a history or political-philosophy debate, it was just an analogy. (maybe it's too late now)
OK, I admit, it was a tortured an inappropriate analogy, maybe I didn't make my point clear, that organisations = totalitarian regimes = bad for the little guys
ignore the rightist-vs-leftist analogies, I am saying when if comes to tech corporations, treat them all as the enemy and only look out for one person; you, yourself, numero-uno. You want the system that will give you the most freedom, to run whatever applications and programs you want.
I HAET what Microsoft is doing with XBox and XB Live and all that walled-garden fail, their operating system(s) refuses to adequately adapt to competition and has a de-facto monopoly.
I HAET what Apple is doing with iPhone, iPod and the App-store (another anti-competitive, consumer-sodomising walled garden). Also their refusal to directly compete with Microsoft by selling OEM version of Mac OS X, why the FUCK tie it down to their locked up hardware?!?
Thing is, I still see Windows as the best option for the consumer since it has the widest hardware and software support, but that is just a by-product of it having a virtual monopoly.
The problem is ALL operating systems are stagnating, as there is no direct competition, prices are also no where near as competitive nor flexible. The improvements between XP and win-7 are virtually insignificant compared to from a similar time period when Apple was competitive.
Linux could solve that if they were just more enterprising. I know they can't charge for the OS itself, it has to remain open and user-modifiable, but the Linux Organisation still has to figure out how to make money as they NEED to be aggressive in getting their OS on computers and badgering Hardware companies for the documentation when they need it. That takes money, it takes investment, it takes financial commitment.
And this is why Linux has been running on my laptops ever since I had a Nec Versa M/100 (100 MHz 486).Treblaine said:
Well, now that they finally got Vista Service Pack 3 out (a/k/a Windows 7), maybe they can get their act together a bit.
Though I have a 360 in the house, I'm not a big fan of Xbox Marketplace. I've "purchased" a handful of games through it, but that's all.
The iTunes requirement is pretty much what's keeping me from buying an iPod Touch. Though you can download apps with the built-in interface, getting music in and out of the thing pretty much requires iTunes, despite valiant efforts by Open Source advocates to create workalikes. Palm was briefly engaged in a pitched battle to get a fully functional, supported interface to iTunes, but Apple kept changing the interface and throwing them out. "Oh, excuse us, Apple, for wanting to bring new customers with money in their hand to your storefront. Silly us, what could we have been thinking...?"
As for Mac OS X on non-Apple hardware, check out the discussion fora on Insanely Mac [http://www.insanelymac.com/] some time. You would think that a CPU is a CPU is a CPU, or that a Northbridge is a Northbridge is a Northbridge... Apparently not. The gymnastics some of these people go through to get it barely working is amazing. Now, consider the amount of work Apple would have to do to support the same variety of hardware, and you begin to see why it might not interest them, particularly when, if they encounter a stupid hardware bug, they can go over and thump the responsible hardware guy on the head and make them do it right.
Strong though that position is, there is simply no way I'm going to set up my 80-year-old mom with Windows. I would much prefer she had a Linux system that did exactly what she told it and nothing more, rather than a system that did a ton of sh*t behind her back, "as a user convenience." She's an ideal target for a Mac system, but the expense is a barrier.
Google has done yeoman's work in the portable/handheld arena. And it's interesting to note that virtually nobody is looking to make a handheld using Windows Mobile/WinCE. Everyone's looking at Android or bare Linux.
As for "can't charge for the OS," actually, you can. You simply have to make the source code available as well. But in my experience, most people are happy with the binary, and will pay a modest sum to obtain it from a reputable source. I'm still running 2.6.30, even though 2.6.32 came out weeks ago which (allegedly) supports my web cam. But I haven't bothered because verifying the kernel .config and compiling it is an enormous pain.
Anyhoo, this is already seriously off-topic...
I think it's hilariously ironic that people in this thread who hate apple for "taking away choice" want to ban something or punish someone for making a choice different than theirs.
Besides, all this hate about walled gardens? It's not like they force you into it.
It's actually pretty comfy in here. It's electronics, not some kind of human rights issue.
Besides, all this hate about walled gardens? It's not like they force you into it.
It's actually pretty comfy in here. It's electronics, not some kind of human rights issue.