.... or maybe it's a fact.

tell me one thing i've said that isn't 100% factual. bravo on taking a stance like an adult and not using childish prepositions... perhaps your mother was a whore and you are a whore's baby perhaps maybe perhaps. adults don't talk about how to have discussions, they just have them. if you can't handle that, maybe you should stop growing AND living.

you are NOTHING

what knowledge is there to have? are you denying that flash consumes more resources to run (CPU/battery) and has higher latency and response time than a natively coded app?

that is the only thing i'm commenting on, and my knowledge is complete, and obviously so.

apple respects their customers more than to offer them a watered down experience in the same way high end audio equipment manufactures would not sell a product with a gimmicky feature that added noise to the signal. flash is for lazy developers. i am a user.

too scared to not post anonymously... pathetic.

YOU'RE NOT EVEN HERE.

you are NOTHING.

go fuck yourself.

the entire point is that the user experience for an application on a battery powered device is better without flash.... or do you think less responsive, more latency, lower battery life are desirable qualities?

it's relevant because if flash isn't NECESSARY, then it's just as ill equipped to do a job optimally as you are.

are you serious? how do you think the old dynamically linked libraries are updated to run on a vastly different modern multiuser operating system?

even briefs isn't about interpreted code... i never said the issue was with interpreted code. apple never said anything... let alone this being about interpreted code.... the REAL question is why are YOU talking about interpreted code? the problems apple is taking a stand against stem from unnecessary emulation and virtualization layers that degrade latency and mask application thread information from the operating system, that could be used to optimize the user experience.

so it's illegal for chilean ISP's to not replace perfectly functional routers and switches with exorbitantly over-priced newer models with lower latency? i doubt it... so it's already arbitrary which locations and which packets will end up going through which routers. so suddenly the routes to some specific server include 10 hops on naturally high latency routers. what are you going to argue? de facto delay?

you "should be" bitter beacuse you're an idiot.

slashdot user: "I fail to understand."
slashdot mod: "Insightful."

*sigh*

i find it telling that the stated purpose of the company behind the briefs product is: "to give [our] users the best experience possible."

the thing is, the "user" to briefs is someone with an application idea drawn on napkins who wants to release a prototype application "without expensive development". to apple the user is the REAL user... the user of the application created by the user of briefs prototyping tool, and to apple, that user is not getting the best experience possible... they are getting a translation.

imagine you are a company that could benefit by making a high profile apple product look slow and buggy and prone to crashing... you release an innocent enough looking "prototyping" tool... it doesn't make applications as optimized as one's with "expensive development", or using the free native development environment, but it's dumbed down and simpler, and hey, it's just a prototype and it works... the translation isn't optimized at all, but all the buttons will do what you tell them to do... now these prototypes are going to be seen by people and the hardware will be judged by the responsiveness of the software.

apple has taken a firm and understandable stance: THIS IS HOW YOU MAKE SOFTWARE FOR THIS DEVICE. NO EXCEPTIONS. *cough* except javascript.

interpreting code is the beginning of another platform layer. look at windows... the root cause of most problems is the requirement to keep legacy software supported... even if the software relies on old system buggish quirks that become protected "features". the card game you bought on cd for windows 95 will probably still work on windows 7. that is perfectly fine, but causes exponential bloat over time that wreaks havoc on latency... when your product is intended for multimedia conversation, protecting latency is important. taking a preemptive stand to protect the user experience is something apple believes is noble... because you're questioning the motivation behind such actions, i'm assuming you're the type that would also be complaining if that old card game didn't still work...

emulation and virtualization platform layers are NEVER the optimal platform for a single system application relative to latency.

you're an idiot.

claiming that adding "on the internet" or "in a web browser" is not innovation does not make it law.

delaying a packet in a queue is not blocking the packet... so the law is pointless. deciding now much delay is effectively a block would itself be arbitrary. packet prioritization with some level of latency is still inevitable.

stop using the phrase "network neutrality"... it no longer means anything.

your inability to understand what the words you string together imply is a disgrace to intelligent life.

you are NOTHING.

yes, the age requirements on political decision making positions, such as the ones described in the story, were put there by individuals who just don't understand how things SHOULD work.

you and your children are idiots.

so you believe i've already achieved everything you find is necessary for those you speak for, while you remain unable to provide it to them.

you've admittedly failed. smile all you want, it won't change anything. you'll never change anything. you just want to convince people of ANYTHING, while you remain NOTHING.