Posts by Mark .

Re: Pricing

The Galaxy Nexus (and presumably Nexus S) was high cost too - the low cost strategy was only introduced with the Nexus 4.

It's a fair point that although cheaper than say the Note 4, the Nexus 6 is still more than the flagship S5.

It's a shame that Google seem to have abandoned the low cost strategy (though the Nexus 5 isn't being discontinued, unlike annoyingly the excellent Nexus 7), but I can see why they want to put out a high end device - Nexus devices were originally meant to be the showcase for Android, after all, not budget choices. Indeed, part of the fear in the early Android days was manufacturers racing to the bottom, so Google wanted their own premium flagship. I don't mind paying extra if it means that the Nexus finally has a reasonable camera.

Also there are devices from Motorola that are low cost, and come with virtually stock Android and fast updates (Android 5 reportedly rolling out on Motorola before the Nexus!)

I get the impression that Google put out a low cost Nexus 4 to change the way that people bought phones - buying it outright unlocked rather than from the carrier. But whilst the Nexus 4 was far more successful than previous Nexuses, it seems that most people are still buying non-Nexuses on contracts. Sadly marketing, distribution and "ooh it's free if I pay monthly" won out over a great device at a good price that's not advertised or distributed very well.

"Different people have different needs."

Well yes, exactly, that's why a 64GB or more options would be nice. No one's saying they should scrap the smaller options. (Though I'm thankful that at least we get a 64GB Nexus 6 - it now becomes a viable option for my next phone, which I'd like to store my music on.)

I don't what ipad users do, but one of the most obvious uses for a tablet is for playing videos - there's a reason why in the 2000s, tablets were instead often called "media players". At home, I have a 42" media player for watching videos - a tablet's strength is its portability.

Re: Doesn't matter if the features have been available for years...

Ah yes, just like everyone video calls now rather than making normal phone calls. And everyone uses a fingerprint scanner.

If you're going to counter "But Apple do it better", you forgot to include details of how it's better, rather than just assuming it to be so. Otherwise, we can make that argument for anything. Oh, it doesn't matter that Apple were first with multitouch, I'm sure the Android implementation is much better. And oh look, far more people are using Android to iphone, especially compared to 2007 iphone sales, so it must be true! And I'm sure that the next Nexus will have much better NFC than what you assume the iphone 6 has.

True, the fact that Nexus 4 had NFC for years isn't really that important, but you're missing the point - it's Apple who are touting this as some great feature, so it's fair game to point out that this is a standard feature on other platforms.

Re: OS vs apps: Paint

Given the price of iphones, it's odd to claim credit based on it being cheaper...

The original iphone wasn't a smartphone (couldn't do apps) other than the "it's marketed as a smartphone" definition, it did however do Internet access as was standard on all phones by the 2000s. If networks unfairly gave iphone users cheaper data plans, then that's something to criticise.

"hugely successful" - 8 million or so isn't bad for a first release, but it's way down the list on best selling phones. For comparison, the 2009 Nokia 5230, the best selling smartphone of all time, sold 150 million. Also Apple put all their weight behind one phone - companies like Nokia and Samsung vastly outsold them (and still do outsell them, though Samsung overtook Nokia).

GUIs are a matter of preference, I don't find anything "slick" about it - you touch an icon, it does something, nothing new. Multitouch can be useful, but no good for one-handed use (amusingly the standard argument iphone users make against Android - well, until iphone 6 that is). That leaves us with minor stuff like scroll bounceback (which I always found annoying). Handwriting recognition was just one of many things that other people were looking at and supporting, as indeed they still do (Galaxy Note, and Windows devices). Various companies have introduced swipe-based UIs since then, this wasn't all Apple, and I'm not really a fan of those actions anyway.

Of course, I'm sure the Apple fans will pick up all sorts of minor reasons about what was special, because we constantly have to hear about this 7 years later. I'll thank Apple when I hear them thanking the many innovations they take for granted that came first from other companies, both before and after.

Re: How exactly is that wrong?

Oh yes, it's the fault of the networks - I don't think anyone's saying otherwise. I'm not convinced that Apple are behaving any different in terms of negotiation though - the networks didn't stop being rubbish just because Apple came along. The networks do improve, but slowly and with reluctance (e.g., at long last we're starting to see better deals for roaming).

Re: Apple is the reason some stuff happens

Though you compare "Fandroids" to "the Behmoth that is called Apple" - last time I checked, there were companies behind this Android thing and all those phones. OTOH, the networks could say "Efff off you iphone zealots".

How is it wrong?

Because it means the majority of users have to wait years for Apple to implement a feature, before it's supported.

Because it means that 3rd party companies are supporting the minority of iphone users in terms of which features are supported, which both is not useful for most users, and anti-competitive.

Indeed, the fact that everyone gains when a new feature is supported, is all the more reason why 3rd parties should support a new feature _whoever_ introduces it, not just when Apple does.

Re: Don't forget Microsoft

I have the 32GB Transformer Book which has the same "problem" - but given that it (and the Surface RT) is priced at or less than 16GB models of various IOS and Android 10" tablets, it doesn't seem unreasonable. At least they have upped the minimum memory available, and put it out at the base price. And the microSD that adds up to 128GB. The biggest problem with Samsung phones (with the exception of the Note) is that it's often hard to find anything other than the 16GB model available - not sure if that's the fault of Samsung or the carriers.

People can delete the U2 etc music, can't they? If so, it's not an issue of space anyway, though I would consider it commercial spam (if someone wants music free, they can get it the same way everyone else gets it for free...) If they can't delete it, that's just plain ridiculous anyway.

The difference is, we don't have hoards of Google fans trying to claim Chromecast is a new invention, or "popularised" anything, or brought it to the mainstream, or revolutionised anything, yet with Apple fans we have to hear them endlessly claiming this, even when the sales figures don't actually support the statement.

The excitement is that Chromecast is really cheap, I don't see ridiculous claims being made about it (though it would be reasonable to say the hype is a bit unfair, given there are other cheaper alternatives like NowTV).

It's not about specs with Apple, until it is - remember the "PPI" obsession? For user experience, how well does Airplay support playing to my LG TV? My user experience with itunes was terrible, as well as trying to get video on an ipod play through someone else's computer.

"Apple have seldom been the pioneers of new technology, but they have a very successful history of picking up new technology just when they are ready to move with it and making a big success out of it. Both the iPad and the iPhone are examples of this"

Please check Apple's actual sales in 2007-2008, compared to other platforms/companies.

Symbian dominated until 2011, and the huge growth of smartphone sales came almost all from Android.

Just like everyone now talks to their phones and makes video calls all the time thanks to Apple... Of course, it may well be that some places only introduce NFC now that the minority of Apple users can use it - but I'm not sure that's something to be thankful for, on the contrary, we should be asking why they aren't already supporting the majority of Android users, and why we have to wait years if things are only supported when Apple get round to it.

"They don't always invent the steam engines, but they're great at knowing when it's Steam Engine time."

Steam Engine time simply gets defined as whenever Apple do it, whether it's early, late, or sometime in between. It's the bullseye Apple fallacy - draw a ring round whenever Apple released something, and say "Look, that was the defining point!", never mind what actually happened at the time.

"At least I sincerely hope they don't have some trick up their sleeve to close the market!"

I can see it now - "Pay with NFC!" Let me just pay with my iphone - oh wait, I can't, because like the rest of the world I use Android.

Re: I'm not surprised

What "much greater" risks are there for someone using it to transfer money, e.g., between countries, or in countries where banks don't offer easy transfer like in the UK? (The US's idea of 21st century banking is that you can use your phone to scan a cheque...)

Essentially this is where Paypal got popular - the extra risk of an unregulated company was evidently outweighed by the reduced transfer fees or hassle. It's not clear to me why say a company that uses Bitpay to receive payments is a much greater risk?

Maybe the European Banking Authority should warn people off Paypal...

"It's a bubble speculation which has proved of some ongoing value to some cyber-criminals, drug dealers, botnet operators and digital blackmailers."

We've been hearing "it's a bubble" since the value was $10 - still waiting for the crash. Any form of money has black market uses.

Re: This is not a validation of Microsoft's Metro strategy

"(a proper Start menu is finally coming back in the next update, I hear)"

That's great for people who prefer the Windows 7 start menu (not "proper" - people just have different preferences, and options are nice). But what does that have to do with touch? I can click icons with a mouse, or use with touch. MS changed the start menu significantly, but it's a myth that it's forcing people to use touch (otherwise how would people click the icons on the OS X dock without a touchscreen).

Re: For all the metro haters

The start menu is significantly different, and plenty of people prefer the old one to the new version. But although a side-benefit was them making a consistent interface, imo it still works as a UI in its own right. I like the new Windows start menu ("screen") on a non-touch laptop - now I have the fullscreen being made use of, rather than a postage stamp sized window in the corner. Remember, way back in Windows 95, the point of the start menu was to cascade, so that submenus opened, and took up the full screen. Without XP or Vista (I forget which), they made it remain small, stuck in the corner, with the submenus opening in the same space.

In fact, I'd probably like this less on a Windows Phone, because you don't have the screen size to make use of it, so can only fit a few tiles. There it's better to have something that allows hierarchical menus, like you can with the Android homescreen (well, one level of hierarchy anyway) (and was the case with Symbian and feature phones years before that). But then again, I haven't tried it, and it's probably what I'm used to :)

"It also might seriously piss off long term Android users who, if they wanted WinPho would have bought WinPho."

Indeed, I think this is the key - people get annoyed with change. If Windows 8 had thrust the OS X UI onto people, it wouldn't be (as much as many journalists seem to think) "Oh yes, this is much better", but even more of an uproar - either because they don't like change, or if they wanted OS X they would have bought it. Indeed OS X launches things by clicking on icons, that doesn't mean it was made for touchscreens, but would still annoy those who wondered where their start menu had gone.

I think MS should have done more to keep in options to keep things somewhat the way they were (similar to how XP could switch back to 2000s menu), but whether a particular UI is good or bad, or works better on a phone or laptop or not, comes down to preference. Anyhow, any half-decent OS lets you change things, and it's a 5 minute job to put the start menu back anyway for those who prefer.

Re: Next step?

Or, you could just stop installing rubbish - never had any trouble with the free MS Security Essentials, or Windows Defender which is now installed as standard.

Re: Yawn

With 90+% market share, it's the same thing.

I don't see people mention specifically Windows when they release other kinds of software - it's just "PC"; same with mobile software, should they list the operating systems if it turns out they don't support Windows Phone?

But no, don't let that stop with your tin-foil-hat conspiracy theory.

Re: Clicking links ...

I can see a QR code before I use it. I don't see how reading the phone number in digits rather than seeing it as an image has anything to do with whether it will blow up my phone.

Re: Please continue truecrypt

Interesting article at http://www.forbes.com/sites/jameslyne/2014/05/29/open-source-crypto-truecrypt-disappears-with-suspicious-cloud-of-mystery/ argues some advantages of it being part of the OS: "I worked close to the development team that maintained their pre-boot environment, shims and other mechanisms for hooking in to the OS. I can say first hand that this is an expensive, difficult and cumbersome thing to do whereas for Microsoft which owns the OS and the relationship it is a much easier task. Trying to “out Microsoft Microsoft” at hardware support, performance and compatibility is a tough gig and there are a wealth of new features in modern hardware and software that offer major trust enhancements that just ‘work’ with Bitlocker (TPM, UEFI, SecureBoot, Windows 8.1 etc). This is precisely why Sophos made the move to start managing BitLocker and other inbuilt encryption technologies like FileVault on Mac OS X rather than focusing on maintaining our own environment."

I agree there are advantages to having encryption be cross-platform, but thought that was interesting nonetheless. Also for the people claiming backdoors in bitlocker, I hope they're running Linux with Open Source drivers on an openly-designed CPU and hardware, to go along with their tin foil hats.

Re: Feminists: they are idiots and to blame!

"and saying that the females generally have a different *average* psychological disposition."

But can you show that a different average psychological disposition explains away the 80% male domination in an IT company, without relying on social differences?

Of course there are trivially biological differences, but it doesn't follow that any difference must be due to biological differences. Different species doesn't even make scientific sense.

And why do the comments focus on the issue of gender? Are you going to say that there are biological differences to races too?

That's a straw man - no one's saying that every company must have exactly equal proportions.

There is surely a medium between "every computer company being dominated by men" and "every computer company must have exactly 50%".

Not that I necessarily blame companies, I suspect a lot of the problems start early, just look at any toy shop and see what boys are encouraged to play with versus girls - but it is still good to keep track of these statistics.

And whilst there are biological differences, I don't think there's evidence to say that men are more biological predisposed to computer jobs, certainly not to the extent to explain the differences you see. It's hard to see what the evolutionary reason for this would be, also consider how many early programmers were women. I hope you have references for this "simple psychological fact"?

"When 50% of people choosing and completing IT courses at universities are female (without imposing artificial gender quotas and turning men away simply because they are men), only then do you have the right to whine if the employment figures don't match the graduation rates."

You're accusing people of being politically correct, but _you're_ the one saying people don't even have a right to "whine"?

I think all this says is that it's not the fault of the companies - but it's still reasonable to then ask why we then have the inbalance in education.

"Your comment reminds me of one of those meme images I saw recently, which had a picture of a stereotypically feminist-looking woman and was captioned something like this:"

Your comment reminds me of a straw man argument that's completely irrelevant to the topic. Did the OP major in gender studies? If you're suggesting that most men in IT like it being male dominated - well, I don't know if it's true, but I hope not. I'd rather it not be one of those sad male-only morris dancing clubs.

"by making an ISO image of the disk"

...which at the time would still have been piracy.

Re: re "unless you can find a better use for them"

Yes whining on the Internet is such a better use of electricity.

This is no better than the people who think you save the planet by switching off the lights for an hour. Yes, the Bitcoin network has a cost, but unless you can show this is significantly worse than a equivalent method (banks, Paypal etc), this is not a fair argument, and falls under "I don't like this, therefore no one else should".

I'd have more respect if you were a green person criticising all kinds of energy use, but you're not - you're someone who thinks that as long as you turn off the lights for an hour, or criticise the use of things that you're not interested in, that makes you green even though you happily use energy-guzzling computers the rest of the time.

Re: Bitcoin is strongly deflationary

Well, that's an argument against using Bitcoin as one's national currency.

But usages such as Internet and international transactions still remain. Currently Paypal is largely used for this, but I don't see people criticising Paypal by considering what the economy would look like if everything (wages, taxes, etc) was done using and controlled by Paypal.