-- they have delegated themselves a right to approve how do you use "their" device and a right to charge you a tithe for everything that comes to you on "their" hardware.
They have worked as hard as possible to create devices that work in ways that they genuinely believe are better than the competition. Is the 'tithe' you refer to the initial product price (entirely competitive), peripherals (comparable), or the ongoing costs of app store purchases? Do you think Apple's product pricing is unfairly high? Should all App Store purchases be gratis?
In effect, you've relinquished ownership, and, unlike some other platforms, you have no legal way out.
In effect, we have gladly relinquished the tyranny of micro-management, and have been rewarded with the time we would spend doing so.
... they cannot achieve it easily, and hence cannot exploit the full potential of the hardware platform to their advantage.
I thought that developers were free to install whatever they want on their iOS devices. It's only when you want to sell your app to the world that you must submit it to the App Store. Correct me if I'm wrong.
For Apple it worked because part of their marketing strategy is to dazzle you with fancy plastic
For Apple it worked because part of their marketing problem was an affiliated retail channel that was actively damaging their brand with poor service and limited supply.
You are absolutely wrong.
One and a half Gamecubes, at most.
Dude, I went to http://www.tempura.org/ and it didn't have anything to do with Microsoft.
"Flaunt"? Will it come with a perspex case, so when you turn it over
I guess if you've got it...
Dude, you sound like you'd love a DS right now.
both seem very plausible given the parties involved.
Am I the only one who read that as "given the panties involved"?
An English bum is an American fanny.
And you don't want to know what an Australian fanny is.
I don't know why people keep bagging Ewoks. When I was a kid, I didn't think the were out of place. Now, my kids love them - I'm pretty sure they view them they same way I did (as 'fact', and not as a merchandising opportunity).
I absolutely love 80s-era Cray-level CGI - TRON, Last Starfighter etc. Like you say, it takes me back.
Perhaps it's because the graphics are nowhere near the uncanny valley? And because of that, they can be viewed as art, instead of ultra-realism?
A man can be killed. But an idea
Machines have less problems. I'd like to be a machine. -- Andy Warhol