What have you got against PDF's being used to exploit iOS4? Would you prefer a TIFF like in 1.1.1? Or BMP because they're infrequent enough to filter on your own end?

Well clearly they are most concerned with the appearance of addressing the problem, not the problem itself. I mean this sounds like it could be defeated with an entry in /etc/hosts, nevermind bothering to crack each app. Android being completely open will have no problem running a local daemon saying yes to everything you throw at it, I'm quite sure. Encryption is scary and sounds too much like DRM for them to utilize in anything visible. (though bootloaders are apparently fair game?)

Either way digital locks, particularly on open platforms are ineffective other than keeping out the casual pirate. At one extreme (Apple) you have signed code running with it's various layers of authentication, sandboxing and encryption everywhere -- trivially circumvented if a jailbreak is available but otherwise cryptographically secure. ...And yet Google's approach seems to be aiming just one notch above asking politely not to steal apps which sounds good at first and seems easy enough...but ultimately developers, and thus everything, will suffer.

Why? It's easy to see how "Allow installation of non-Market applications" will become *the* preferred method of software installation due to it being the only constant among handsets; the Market Place is only on special Google devices and clearly Carriers will foist their own horrible interpretations of what they think an App Store should be, nobody will use them of course. Why bother when you can get the same thing for free, easier and more quickly? This will happen very quickly and when it does the Black Market for cracked apps will not only be "the logical choice"--it will be waiting, well established and more popular than Napster. I don't predict App Stores on Android to be fruitful given this landscape, even before taking into account the stench of fail permeating this Verizon App Store (or T-Mobile's App Café)

Obviously the situation is entirely different over on the iOS side of the pond where they seem to be caught in the most envious loop of increasing apps, eyeballs, and earnings. Ask literally anyone how to install on an iPhone...the only response is "the App Store". This didn't happen by accident.

>Windows 7 crashed yet again, with the only solution being "format and reinstall". Bah, I just did that a month before.

I'm a raging mac zealot and even I can tell you're full of shit.

>I thought that display port was taking over from HDMI? I see many devices not just video cards with display port as an option.

It was, but you know, now we have Light Peak. And that other thing coming after that I saw on here a few days ago.

Why am I not suprised this isn't a black spot for AT&T coverage. I bet they have a transmitter aimed directly at Steve Jobs' head.

Just curious if anyone, anywhere has ever done this? I've never heard of XUL being used (outside of Mozilla) for anything really.

I'd love to describe one.

- No useless dialogs informing you of non events (if I immediately close the dialog with no consequence, it wasn't that important)
- Unambiguously labeled options
- Clear areas of distinction for various functionality
- IF YOU'RE USING ALL CAPS YOU'RE DOING IT WRONG
- No grandiose corporate banners or logos randomly inserted for no reason or mandatory splash screens that are just basically an advertisement wait timer at your own expense
- Tasteful artwork/icons, not something lifted directly from Office 98 clipart
- Use native system frameworks, and most importantly conventions and UI where possible. There's a reason Firefox is lagging behind which is because (suprise!) it uses an intermediate layer.

I could go on if you'd like?

Obviously you've never used a Mac...

Note that fart apps were initially banned until there was a massive outcry (even on this very site as I recall); now they're the perfect example when disparaging the App Store to try and make Android look better. The hypocrisy is staggering.

OK Go's recent video of a Rube Goldberg machine? My Mac can't play it reliably in Flash at 480p without dropping frames when a lot of action is going on.

It's busy simulating the even more complicated Rube Goldberg machine that is Flash Player.

Umm, iPhone flash apps are nothing but a statically linked Flash Player binary blob -- you actually believe Flash CS5 is magically translating everything into Cocoa Touch events and native system calls? LOL. Honestly, just stop repeating this lie. How could anyone could be so brazenly disingenuous? The juxtaposition between an engineering fantasy like this vs. the cold hard reality of their demonstrated coding laziness and utter incompetence makes it completely self evident.

Ironically. Apple did invent the standard notebook computer form factor we all use today in 1990 with the PowerBook 100.

What makes you think the iMacs, specifically? Perhaps you're just so predictably ignorant that 'iMac' is your mental placeholder for any Macintosh.

You have no idea what you're talking about; how embarrassing for you to be so publicly outed like this. Isn't it funny how you could be so myopic that you're criticizing the iPad (essentially) for not being a Windows PC? Going from the rest of your paranoid rambling I'm shocked you're able to use WiFi at all without an incapacitating migraine, much less entertain the idea of putting a base station on your head.

fyi, the iPad has these neat things called Apps. Especially useful for those core OS functions you don't want to route through a web browser such as content delivery and software installation. LOL@false indignation btw *gasp* "You mean I can't download music in the single most complicated way possible? But how will I ever obtain media on an electronic device without using (in order) a web browser, bittorrent client, dearchiving utility and audio app?"

Please stop repeating this lie. Adobe is being disingenuous and intentionally misleading. It doesn't even make sense - the "slow Quicktime libs" you are talking about are in fact hardware accelerated and if Adobe bothered to use them instead of their own ancient Rube Goldberg routines they would have HW acceleration for free. And even if it were true that HW acceleration was completely prohibited somehow, it should not take entire cores of a CPU to repaint a screen region 30 times a second.

Fitts law only applies at screen boundaries - how are any one of the buttons easier to click than another?