Err... that isn't what I'm saying at all.
Your words disagree with you. Perhaps you should chose them with more care.
Just because you haven't heard about them doesn't mean I'm making it all up. Don't take my word for it - have a look on the IT news sites (such as The Register, which is pretty respectable) and find out for yourself.
I read widely and daily across a range of tech sites, of which only a handful (well, only MacRumors, really, and I only hang about the design forum there) could be considered pro-Apple.
As I have said on a similar thread: there is most definitely mileage in discussing whether Jobsian-control-freakery is too high a price for the unified user experience that Apple uses as one of its USPs. Nothing you have posted indicates that
that discussion is one you're interested in having.
Fortunately the days are gone when you can pass an opinion off as fact without it being easily spotted!
What? Like this one:
When I buy a device I want to actually own the thing - All I want is to put any software I see fit on there, and to keep said software for as long as I want to. I don't want my apps removing because some marketing drone at Apple thinks that it has too many widgets, or uses an undocumented section of the API
The implication here is that Apple can "take back" an app, like Amazon can remove content from a Kindle, and this is
simply not true. If you got that from one of your trusted IT sources, then you need to be a lot less credulous in swallowing what you're being peddled. Or did you just make it up and hope no-one would notice?
In fact, at the time of writing, here is the latest mad story on the Apple interpreted code ban which you say I know nothing about and which you appear to deny the existance of...
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/06/11/steve_jobs_lifts_interpreted_code_ban_for_chosen_few/
First time you've brought this up, so I'd like you to provide a quotation from me denying the existence of it, or retract and apologize. Like the Flash thing, there are sound technical and business reasons for restricting the use of compilers for non-native code. There is also an undeniable element of Jobsian-control-freakery -- I'm not at all convinced that this decision was sensibly implemented and suspect that the control-freakery has overridden the more reasonable business case.
I'm sorry that you interpreted my comments as trolling - it wasn't intended.
For the record, a lot of people seem to think when I use the term "trolling" I'm using it to denote general internet dick-waddery. I'm not. I'm using it in the very precise internet sense of someone adopting a position or a view and stating it in a manner designed to prompt a indignant, outraged or irritated response.
But if you can't stand the thought of hearing something you don't agree with then you should either try the ignore button, or mark the threads 'Do not disagree with anything in this thread or else'.
What I can't stand is people trotting out falsehoods, intentionally or through ignorance, as if they were true. They gain credibility through repetition and I see no reason to let them pass.
I'm going to leave this thread alone now
Transl:
La la la! I've had the final word! I can't hear you! La la la!fortunately I have a life and am sick of being bullied by folk who know sod all about IT issues, about a platform I really don't care very much about, by someone who obvioudly has too much time on his hands.
Don't patronize me, mate -- you have no fucking
clue how much I do or don't know about IT issues. And I want you to retract the suggestion that you're being bullied: you've made one statement that was substantially biased (you can't have Flash because Apple don't want you to -- this is true but overlooks the fact that it's also very, very shit on Apple platforms) and one that was demonstrably untrue (Apple can remove apps from your iPad) and I've called you on it.
As I recall saying on a similar note recently: grow a thicker skin or get a better argument.
Thanks for playing.
Jim
