Apple iPhone and related items (cont.)

[Crispy]

Not entirely true.

How easy is it to navigate around a non-mobile-optimised website on something like Safari using only one hand?

(The existence of those applications like the one that reads vBulletin boards, that everyone got so excited about recently, demonstrates that using Safari has its limitations)

Easy. double tap to zoom in and out, swipe to scroll

But yes, you're right it's still not optimal. Opera Mini makes forums completely unintelligable, though.

 

[teuchter]

Opera Mini makes forums completely unintelligable, though.

I find it works pretty well if you use the mobile skin on U75.

 

[grit]

How easy is it to navigate around a non-mobile-optimised website on something like Safari using only one hand?

A shit load easier than using Opera

 

[teuchter]

A shit load easier than using Opera

In what way?

 

[Kid_Eternity]

Been using it all day and have decided I don't like it. It's just too choppy and hyper active. Not smooth at all...

 

[Sunray]

How do dynamic sites like gmail.com perform? all that javascript - do the popups pop up? menus etc. all work properly?

One of the limitations is to the Javascript.

Check out the wikipedia entry on how it works.

 

[Sunray]

In what way?

Its very like using a desktop browser. I can post on here without much extra effort than I would using my desktop. The app makes things even easier but its not like Safari was pissing me off. I've forgotten about that app, so i'd gone back to Safari.

 

[teuchter]

Its very like using a desktop browser. I can post on here without much extra effort than I would using my desktop. The app makes things even easier but its not like Safari was pissing me off. I've forgotten about that app, so i'd gone back to Safari.

I've recently moved to a phone with a browser very much like a desktop browser; arguably more so than safari/iphone.

It's great but I still miss Opera Mini in some situations. Normally when I'm on the move and trying to look at something one-handed. Particularly large pages with a lot of images. All the panning around and waiting for stuff to load is a pain if you just want to find stuff out quickly.

 

[Kanda]

I've recently moved to a phone with a browser very much like a desktop browser; arguably more so than safari/iphone.

It's great but I still miss Opera Mini in some situations. Normally when I'm on the move and trying to look at something one-handed. Particularly large pages with a lot of images. All the panning around and waiting for stuff to load is a pain if you just want to find stuff out quickly.

Dunno what phone you have but, no, no experience of that. Things run slow in shit coverage, things run fast in good coverage, bugger all to do with the phone really...

 

[editor]

Bish bosh! Law suit ahoy!

Adobe is allegedly set to sue Apple over changes in its iPhone software development kit, as the row over the lack of Flash support on the iPhone, iPod touch and iPad escalates.

Technology website IT World quotes sources close to Adobe as saying that they will be filing a lawsuit against Apple "within a few weeks". The software company is incensed at recent changes to the iPhone software development kit, which have banned the use of cross-compilers to build applications for the platform.

The Packager for iPhone OS tool was a centrepiece of Adobe's new CS5 suite of products, but has effectively been rendered obsolete by the SDK changes. It is thought that Adobe might sue Apple for "restraint of trade", which is a key tenet of US contract law.

Both Apple and Adobe have refused to comment on the rumours, but there are signs of growing hostility between the two companies. Adobe is concerned that Apple's refusal to support Flash technology on its range of multimedia devices could damage its business, while Apple says it is backing rival standard HTML5 because Flash is "too buggy".

It means that companies will no longer be able to build iPhone and iPad apps on Adobe Air or Microsoft Silverlight, and must instead code in Apple's preferred languages. Experts believe it's one way for Apple to ensure that developers write software first for its highly popular iPhone platform before deciding whether or not to rewrite the code for rival operating systems, such as Google Android.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/apple/7588825/Adobe-to-sue-Apple-over-Flash-row.html

 

[elbows]

Meanwhile I keep hearing that full mobile flash plugins for the likes of WebOS keep getting delayed. Ive been unable to get to the bottom of this matter yet - is there a mobile version of flash for any platform that has the same features as the desktop version and runs at an acceptable speed?

 

[Sunray]

Meanwhile I keep hearing that full mobile flash plugins for the likes of WebOS keep getting delayed. Ive been unable to get to the bottom of this matter yet - is there a mobile version of flash for any platform that has the same features as the desktop version and runs at an acceptable speed?

There was one for a phone out there, I can't remember but its was akin to pouring treacle in use plus it didn't address the touch input issue.

Was it the G1? Not sure.

 

[beesonthewhatnow]

Flash seems to work OK on my HTC Desire, no idea what sort of version/how "complete" it is though.

 

[teuchter]

Meanwhile I keep hearing that full mobile flash plugins for the likes of WebOS keep getting delayed. Ive been unable to get to the bottom of this matter yet - is there a mobile version of flash for any platform that has the same features as the desktop version and runs at an acceptable speed?

Flash 9.4 runs fine on Maemo 5 / Nokia N900 native browser.

 

[Gromit]

The silver vollume knobs thingie has fallen off my phone somewhere.

Gives me an excuse to look at a new phone before the next iPhone comes out. Tired of waiting and the Desire looks tasty.

 

[gabi]

What exactly is the beef between apple and adobe about? I heard it might be as petty as a personal beef between Jobs and his opposite number?

 

[grit]

What exactly is the beef between apple and adobe about? I heard it might be as petty as a personal beef between Jobs and his opposite number?

Thats a hugely complex answer, its essentially two rival, powerful companies that have been competition for over (?) 20 years. There may be slight personal issues, however the whole thing is driven by money.

 

[teuchter]

What exactly is the beef between apple and adobe about? I heard it might be as petty as a personal beef between Jobs and his opposite number?

I think this needs to be discussed in depth. I feel it has not been discussed enough on here yet.

 

[magneze]

Jobs called Flash "butters", it all went down from there.

 

[Kid_Eternity]

I think this needs to be discussed in depth. I feel it has not been discussed enough on here yet.

That's nothing compared to the utter neglect we've shown to scrutinising the app approval process.

 

[editor]

I'm sure most of you will just shrug your shoulders and say "so what?" at the news that Apple have banned a Pulitzer Prize winning cartoonist from the app store for "ridiculing public figures."

Such moves worry me though, so I'm sorry to say I'll keep commenting, whether you like it or not because it's very relevant to the phone in your (and my) hand.

Mark Fiore made a little online history this week by being the first web-only journalist to win a Pulitzer Prize. His editorial cartoons, though, were rejected from the App Store for violating Apple's anti-satire provisions. That's a dangerous precedent.

...Apple's walled garden approach to App Store content means they can exclude pretty much whomever they want. But can and should are obviously entirely different things. And if they're sincere about the iPad being the future of media, they're going to need to accept that satirical—even controversial—voices are an essential part of the information landscape. Otherwise, the future might a pretty bleak place.

http://gizmodo.com/5517890/apple-blocks-pulitzer-prize+winning-cartoonist-from-app-store

 

[Kid_Eternity]

What does it change though? We all know this and yet still own iPhones you included, all you're doing is telling us nothing new. Over and over and over again.

 

[editor]

What does it change though? We all know this and yet still own iPhones you included, all you're doing is telling us nothing new. Over and over and over again.

*shrugs.

It's seen as interesting enough news to be be reported elsewhere. Maybe it might influence some people's future buying decisions too.

 

[g force]

Maybe...Apple's control freakery does make me think i'd move away from the iPhone in a year's time but that is also a decision based on how good the competing handsets are now

 

[editor]

Maybe...Apple's control freakery does make me think i'd move away from the iPhone in a year's time but that is also a decision based on how good the competing handsets are now

I kinda hoped they'd become less restrictive as time wore on but they seem to be continuing in the opposite direction.

Wired has run a big feature on the ban, and raises some interesting points:

Fiore’s rejection may be especially disconcerting to news and media organizations, many of which are betting heavily on iPad apps as a way to get users to pay to read magazines and newspapers, and to get advertisers to pay print-ad prices for online content. (Online ads cost a small percentage of what ads in glossy magazines cost, in no small part because the net has almost infinite advertising space.)

Apple has built a little slab of Disneyland with its iPad, which is meant to be an experience unsullied by provocative or crude material. It’s beautiful and enticing — the company has already sold more than a half million of them in the first two weeks it’s been available — but it’s not the real world.

Publishers, including such august organizations such as The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal and Wired.com’s parent company Condé Nast, see a solution to their declining dead-tree ad sales in building a pay-to-play attraction in that park. But they need to understand that to do so, they have to play by Mickey Mouse’s rules.

The signs have been there from the start, as Wired.com’s Brian Chen pointed out in February. Apple banned an e-book reading application once because it figured out that iPhone users could use it to read a free version of the Kama Sutra. Then last week, Apple abruptly banned apps developed using programs that translate apps into multiple platforms.

Adding the news of Fiore’s ban to that, the publishing world is now officially on notice that the iPad is Apple’s, and unlike with their print and web editions, they don’t have the final say when it comes to their own content on an Apple device.

http://www.wired.com/epicenter/2010/04/apple-bans-satire/

 

[pboi]

This just in from our news desk.

Today Bill Gates made the unprecedented announcement that Apple’s iTunes is banned from the Windows OS.

Our roving reporter was lucky enough to catch up with Bill and ask him why Microsoft had made this astonishing announcement. Bill had the following to say on this subject…

“In the first place we were happy that they (Apple) deployed iTunes to Windows; we got a lot of new customers just because of that one app, but, then we heard from an inside source that they (Apple) used the EXACT SAME code-base for iTunes Mac as for Windows.

On closer inspection we noticed that iTunes didn’t even use the real windows API! They make their own scroll system and their own chrome COMPLETELY bypassing our fantastic Windows OS. So, we’ve decided enough is enough. We’ll allow iTunes back into Windows when they (Apple) make the following changes.

* Apple MUST write a specialised version of iTunes on Windows and use Windows compilers and Windows languages ONLY
* Apple MUST use native windows controllers such as our in built Windowing system and scroll objects.
* Apple MUST lose this RIDICULOUS attitude of writing code once and deploying to multiple operating systems. Just don’t go there.

If they (Apple) can follow those few simple rules, then we (Microsoft) will be happy to allow them back on Windows.”

Update:
Just to be clear this is a Thought Experiment article parodying the double standards that came from Apple’s 3.3.1 T&C clause. Also, the author (Me) is a huge fan of Apple and ironically purchased a Mac Book Pro the very day this article was written!

Update 2:
You should follow me on Twitter! @justinvincent

 

[Pie 1]

What does it change though? We all know this and yet still own iPhones you included, all you're doing is telling us nothing new. Over and over and over again.

Actually I'm with editor on this particular one - It's bollocks KE - I didn't know that Apple would start effectively censoring editorial content when I bought an iphone & it makes me feel quite uncomfortable tbh.
How would you feel if say the Guardian app was banned because it inculded Steve Bell cartoons?

 

[Kid_Eternity]

Actually I'm with editor on this particular one - It's bollocks KE - I didn't know that Apple would start effectively censoring editorial content when I bought an iphone & it makes me feel quite uncomfortable tbh.
How would you feel if say the Guardian app was banned because it inculded Steve Bell cartoons?

I agree with the Ed for the most part but that wasn't my point. We all know this so repeating the same point over and over again doesn't add anything imv to the thread...

 

[editor]

I agree with the Ed for the most part but that wasn't my point. We all know this so repeating the same point over and over again doesn't add anything imv to the thread...

But I'm not repeating anything. This is the first time a Pulitzer Prize winning satirist has had their work rejected by Apple, and it's a move that sites like Wired clearly think is worth having further discussion on.

 

[grit]

But I'm not repeating anything. This is the first time a Pulitzer Prize winning satirist has had their work rejected by Apple, and it's a move that sites like Wired clearly think is worth having further discussion on.

Oh ffs these are essentially the same articles just featuring a different app.

We know, that you know etc.