Here's the thing you fail to understand. It's great to be them. They have a phone that they love, and have apps available to them, which they are willing to pay for. For every paid app they download (aside from games, naturally), there's not shortage of free apps that do the same thing.

See, you don't get it. They don't buy things because they have to, they buy them because they want to. There are a lot of great free apps on the App Store as well, and your friends certainly download many of them as well.

So, does that mean "it sucks to be you" then? Of course not! It's great to be you as well. You have a phone that you love, and have apps available to you, for free!

How is either bad, wrong, or sucks? Idiot fanboys (like you, and those that modded you up (and likely, me down)) make the world a poorer place. Why not be happy that people have the choice and freedom to buy what they want, instead of pissing all over them for liking something you don't?

I just don't get it. It's like some of you guys prefer to walk around pissed off all day. And for no good reason! Because somebody else bought an app? Really?

Um, what is this drivel? The 4S isn't "yesterday's customers". Apple sells it today, and will keep selling it tomorrow, and for many tomorrows to come. Nobody's telling you to buy a 5, not even Apple. I have a 4S, and it works better today than it did when I bought it well over a year ago.

You are right about one thing. Apple does drop support when they feel it's worth it. PPC, Classic, 32-bit hardware... But here's the deal with that: 1. the old stuff doesn't magically stop working. 2. by dropping legacy support, the new stuff works much better than it otherwise would.

MS's adherence to legacy has brought about all sorts of annoyances (including security issues) throughout the years. That's one of MS's strengths, though, supporting things for years and years. Apple's quickness to disregard legacy to make things better is one of their strengths. I prefer the latter, because it provides, for me, a much better experience. Perhaps you prefer the former?

You must be new here.

Troll much?

There are hundreds of millions of people without any problems whatsoever, and hundreds, maybe even a few thousand, who are having problems. After all, if what you said were true (and not just the standard Slashdot drivel), you'd see not just a sensational headline and story, but an outcry from the users.

Don't worry yourself about it, though. Trolling Apple here will get you points.

There may be many worthy reasons to move from an iPhone to a Nexus 4, but battery life isn't one of them, and neither is heat.

However, you may be on to something with the SIII. After all, if holding off on upgrades to the newest OS version is something that's important to you, going with a non-Nexus Android device will provide that functionality far beyond expectations. :D

And 10% do, which is a much larger number than even need to compile iOS software. I'm not saying they fully overlap, but this helps put things into perspective.

And, like I said, if that's a problem, then Android is there for them.

And it's a great value. Just quit acting like it's universally appealing (or anything more than a very small niche), and we've got nothing to argue about.

Apple has no intention to do that, and even if they did, it cannot happen. You sound like Chicken Little.

Because they aren't selling (i.e., people don't want them). But you're right, strike "netbook" from my post, nothing important about it changes.

How do you think this conversion is supposed to go?

You: "Please, before buying an iOS device, consider if you will end up needing to buy a Mac and subscribe to Apple's iOS developer program for $99/year in order to keep using it the way you want to!"

Them: "What? Will Angry Birds and email and Safari stop working? Will the phone or SMS break? Instagram? Facebook, Twitter, Pinterest? Maps? (ok, haha)"

And this is the crux of the matter. If you think this is something that people are running into, you'd expect iOS ADC memberships to skyrocket (or new iOS sales to plummet). You correctly point out a Mac is required to develop for iOS. If Macs are out there in the tens of millions, and iOS devices in the hundreds of millions, then clearly most people aren't compiling software for their iOS devices. And that's even assuming the absurd notion that all Mac users are programmers.

Somehow, you claim that iOS users have to buy Macs, yet iOS outnumbers the Mac by a huge amount. How can that make any sense? Is everyone sharing Macs or something?

If what you keep worrying about is true, then why does Apple sell more and more iOS devices over time, not fewer? Where are all the people who bought an iPad or iPhone, found they had to pay Apple $99/year and buy a Mac, and now need to switch over to Android to do what they want? Clearly, if this was an actual widespread problem, you'd not expect iOS usage to keep growing, would you? Doesn't that seem a bit odd?

It does affect some people, and they do exactly what you seem to think is impossible: they buy an Android device. Problem solved!

Then they bought the wrong thing, and will need to spend money to correct that mistake. It happens all the time on all sorts of things, not just iPads. People buy the wrong TV, the wrong car, the wrong house, the wrong pants, the wrong mayonnaise, the wrong wallet, the wrong...

So, the question is, for how many people is iOS the wrong mobile OS? The evidence sure seems to imply it's the right OS for ever more people, not fewer.

Strange, right?

Thank you.

Yes, there are restrictions. The question that matters is, do those restrictions bother enough people to matter? If what you say is true, that people have to pay Apple to use their devices in the ways they want to, then you'd expect most people would become paid developers as a standard course of action. Buy an iPhone, become a $99/year iOS ADC member would be as rote as buy a TV, buy a DVD player (well, as rote as that used to be at least).

But most people never do that. And I don't mean most as in just >50%, I mean most as in >99%. To me, that looks like very strong evidence against the bulk of your iOS-related posts.

And for those few people who do have those needs? What's wrong with paying $99/year? It's not like it's some horrible thing. If they prefer iOS over Android enough to find that worthwhile, what's the harm?

And if not, if they either don't like iOS, or simply don't want to (or can't) pay $99/year (and again, very few people even get to the point where it's something they'll ever, ever need to consider), what's wrong with them buying an Android device (or a PC, or a netbook, or whatever best fits their needs)?

Nothing!

iOS exists. It serves hundreds of millions of people's needs very well. It doesn't suit you. Fair enough. No one is going to tell you you have to want iOS, or that you have to buy iOS. Hate it all you want. Talk online about how you hate it all you want. I just simply ask that you stop pretending like your preferences represent anything other than the most minute fraction of the market.

And for that minute fraction, options exist! From Apple and from outside Apple!! Everyone has options to fit their needs and preferences!!!

How is this bad?

Absolutely, though it's only fair to point out that iPhone outsells Galaxy by a large margin, so that headline wouldn't count if it included Apple's products.

And that's what makes some Android fans so mad, that Apple products are actually popular. That people have the audacity to have different preferences from them!

Overly harsh, but on the mark. I like Android, but the vocal among their fans really look absurd when they talk about Apple. Double-standards abound on Android, apparently. "Fandroids" put Apple "fanboys" to shame in their advanced levels of absurdity.

You could just say, "you're right".

It was his term, I just pointed out it applies to him. I wouldn't normally call people that. But yes, that's self-deluding <pick your animal>shit. Because you don't have to pay Apple an "annual poll tax" (neither literally, nor figuratively) to use iOS devices.

You are so caught up on something that affects <1% of users, there's something wrong with you. I understand that it's something you care about personally, and that's wholly valid. I won't argue with that at all, your preferences and needs are yours to decide. But quit acting like most anyone else actually cares. You are not the center of the Universe.

Also, it would help if you actually called things what they are instead of engaging in hyperbole all the time. Calling the (completely unnecessary for most people) developer subscription a "poll tax" is a sign that calling it what it really is just won't make your point well enough and would only serve to make you look silly.

Linux: the "PC" OS that is rarely actually run on so-called (here on Slashdot at least) "real" PCs!

They need to rename it "the year of Linux on (everything but) the PC". :D

They are all computers. PC's are generally defined by their roles and usage. Gaming consoles only replace a very small subset of PC roles (primarily gaming, and to some extent, streaming media, most anything else (really, just web browsing) is exceedingly sub-par).

While all three are computers, can all three fill the roles of a PC (not workstation, not server, but PC)? Gaming consoles quite simply can't. Some, but not all, not even most. Phones can technically do most anything you'd do on a PC, but only at the high end is it even reasonably capable enough (iPhone, Galaxy, Nexus), and even then, the screen size is too limiting to really replace a PC for extended periods of time.

But tablets can. Not only can they, but they do. For a large number of users, the iPad is becoming more and more their primary PC, with their regular PC augmenting it, and not the other way around. This number will only increase (and if Apple falters with iOS, substitute Nexus for iPad).

Now, as a workstation (what most Slashdotters get hung up on), iPads, Android tablets, none of them are reasonable replacements for all that many roles. But for web browsing, media consumption, email, video chatting, apps and games? iPads can hold their own, and are often more enjoyable to use than than the standard PC.

Whether you want to call an iPad a PC or not, the topic is at least debatable, and far more reasonable than it is for consoles or even phones. I think we're definitely at a point today where it makes sense to, at the very least, consider both markets, the "total PC market with iPad" and "total PC market without iPad" when considering the lay of the land. I'd add the Nexus 10 to the mix, but it has not sold sufficient numbers yet to make a difference. Same goes for Surface. Once (and if) they do, all three deserve to be part of at least some of the analysis.

"Self-serving bullshit" is when you engage in childish, "I'll make up some silly rule and pretend like it's valid, though only because it helps me in some way".

All tablets that I'm aware of have actual keyboards. They are on the screen, and they are, optionally, wired or wireless external keyboards, compatible with full-fledged desktop keyboards. And I'll wager a large number of people reading this (and agreeing with you) have PCs that don't have a keyboard connected to them.

Wait, what was that? Keyboards are optional on PCs as well? But I thought... Didn't you just say... Oh no! How can that be!!!

It can be because all the things people use to preclude the iPad from being a PC are "self-serving bullshit".

It does more, poorly and at great compromise. And it's more portable by being too small and unusable on your lap (ironic, for something you just called a "great laptop"!).

With the Type Cover, it's thicker than my MacBook Pro! How is a 5 hour battery life, heavy, thick, non-LTE optional, horrendously expensive, gimped storage space tablet supposed to be a "great tablet"? Because it runs Windows? MS has been singing that song for over a decade now, and it turns out, no one wants Windows on their tablet!

And there have also been UMPCs, and netbooks, and no one wants those either! This thing doesn't even have an 11" display, and it's somehow a "great laptop"?! Almost any ultrabook is a better laptop (and those aren't generally regarded as "great laptops"), and often cheaper!

Surface Pro is compromised in all the wrong ways in order to make a device that has all the wrong features. It might sound like a good idea, but it's not. It's a dud.

Except the Surface Pro addresses a very narrow market that wants "more tablet than laptop", but not laptop enough for an ultrabook, and not tablet enough for an iPad or even so ring like an ASUS Transformer.

I, like many here, gave the Surface some interest, but realized I'd rather have a good tablet (an iPad, like most here), and not a gimped Windows. So I had hopes for the Surface Pro. But it looks like having a Surface Pro would mean constantly being annoyed that I'm not using an iPad or a proper notebook, depending on the task at hand.

"Worst of both worlds" sums it up perfectly. "No compromises" my ass!

That's not true. Even if you can't run all your existing apps, many developers could, over time, release ARM binaries. I'd expect many of the standard nerd apps would flock to ARM (Firefox, Chrome, Foobar2000, most any actively run open source app, like VLC).

And regardless, it'd be significantly more relevant than not supporting it, right? Like is the case with Windows RT.