On Fri, 02 Sep 2011 01:12:29 -0400, Stephen wrote:

> Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
> 
> 
>> There you go again, typical Brit, adding unnecessary letters into
>> words. ;)
>>
>>
> Mock not the afflicted!
> Besides that you lot add an "e" to whisky. And we can afford to put a
> "u" in labour and colour. :-P

Yes, but then you also have words like "thrufffff" (which I realise 
doesn't work so well in writing - if you're familiar with Eddie Izzard's 
work, though, you probably have heard that one - the word he's talking 
about is "Through" (or in the US, "Thru").

But I think the most egregious examples of "unnecessary letters" are the 
place names "Leicester" and "Worchestershire".  But I can understand not 
pronouncing all of those letters, particularly after a few pints. ;)

The only thing missing, though, is the four M's, and the silent Q.

> At work we had a session about the differences between American and
> “real” English. Run of course by an Indian (from India). Who, 
is an
> American citizen (not to mention a great guy).
> Good fun and lots of bonding.

Indeed - I've a friend in Bucks who is a linguistic 'purist' of sorts - 
and who has a terrific sense of humour.  First time we went over, we 
stayed with him and his wife (well, actually, both times we visited we 
did for some period of time) - and he decided to use it as a chance to 
practice his "American" speech, as he was planning a trip over here.

I finally got 'upset' (we both were laughing), and I told him "Shaun, 
damn it, we're in England, and Amy and I are in fact bilingual - you 
don't have to Americanise your speech for us!", and he explained that he 
was coming over here and wanted to make sure people understood him.

To which, of course, the obvious answer was "Shaun, nobody will 
understand you, and it's not because 'you talk funny'." ;)

Jim

Post a reply to this message

On Thu, 01 Sep 2011 22:53:28 -0700, Darren New wrote:

> On 9/1/2011 8:57, Jim Henderson wrote:
>> Apple's attempts to extort *30%* of content sales with apps distributed
>> through the app store
> 
> That's pretty much industry standard for all the app stores, including
> Microsoft and Android.

I don't think so, but my sample size is one at present.  (It's standard 
for the app itself, not the paid content - the paid content is what I'm 
talking about).

"Ghost in the wires" on Android market:  $12.99

"Ghost in the wires" on amazon.com as a Kindle book:  $12.99

What Apple wants to do is take 30% of the revenue from the book, which 
means for Amazon to make the same amount per book, they need to increase 
the price of the book by 30%.  So, through amazon.com or purchased on a 
Kindle, that book would be $12.99, but for Kindle on iPhone, that same 
book would be $16.88 - for the exact same copy you'd get purchasing it 
for $12.99 through the web browser on the phone.

After all, Amazon isn't a charity either - Apple cutting into their 
profits doesn't mean they make less, it means they raise their prices.  
Most likely, rather than charge iPhone users extra, all of us subsidize 
that 30% to Apple, whether we have an Apple device or not.

>> - which has caused several to implement their 'in- app' store
>> interfaces through the web browser instead rather than integrated into
>> the app.
> 
> A big part of that is to prevent piracy from jailbroken iphones/ipads.

I don't think that's what Apple's motivation is.  They want to make money 
not just on the apps, but on the content purchasable in the apps as well.

Unless I'm not understanding what you mean here.

Jim

Post a reply to this message

On Fri, 02 Sep 2011 07:45:52 -0400, Warp wrote:

> Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
>> That's a bit of a straw man argument.  Many app developers for Android
>> devices don't "target" anything other than the Android platform.
> 
>   Most android apps are targeted at cellphones and do not take full
> advantage of the resolution and screen size of a tablet, nor the
> specialized hardware it might have.

The phone is a more ubiquitous device, arguably.

But I'm sure we both could find examples to support our own points of 
view.

Jim

Post a reply to this message

On Fri, 02 Sep 2011 07:54:11 -0400, Warp wrote:

> Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
>> Of course Android has that same problem - Apple tightly controls their
>> platforms.  That can increase the quality of the products offered, but
>> at the same time, their dev agreement allegedly is one of the more
>> draconian agreements out there.
> 
>   There are, roughly speaking, two possible at making hardware that can
>   run
> software: Either make it completely open for anybody to use in any way
> they want, or keep it under tight control.
> 
>   The former method is more liked by developers and many users, but it
> inevitably causes efficiency and compatibility problems when random
> Chinese companies start spewing their cheap low-quality clones and
> flooding the market with them, not to talk about the low quality of the
> software, with little to no quality control, and which may or may not
> work properly with your particular brand of the hardware. While Android
> devices work acceptably well for the most part, they often suffer from
> this problem.
> 
>   The second method, used not only by Apple but also by most game
>   console
> manufacturers (especially the big ones, ie. Nintendo, Microsoft and
> Sony) ensures that the device *will* be "plug-and-play" (or, in this
> case, "install-program-and-play"). There will be no cheap low-quality
> clones, there will be no software with little or no quality control. If
> you buy the program, you will be able to run the program. No messing
> around, no tuning parameters, drivers and whatnot, just
> install-and-play, and it will just work. Most users appreciate this,
> even those who don't realize it themselves.

That's a fair point.

But it boils down to this - do you want an appliance, or do you want a 
general purpose computing device.

If you want an appliance, then Apple's the way to go.

I know plenty of Linux die-hards who have iPhones because they want their 
phone to be an appliance and not something they're likely to tinker with.

But one has to realise that classification and that the two aren't 
necessarily direct competitors to each other, because they fill different 
needs.

Jim

Post a reply to this message

On Thu, 01 Sep 2011 22:54:45 -0700, Darren New wrote:

> On 9/1/2011 10:02, Jim Henderson wrote:
>> Apple's approach to computing is different than everyone else's
> 
> Not really. Apple is a hardware company, not a software company. When
> you realize that it's OK for the app store and itunes and such to break
> even as long as it increases hardware sales, it makes more sense.
> They're not more draconian than the phone companies are.

It's about setting that expectation, though.  Apple tries to compete in 
the "general computing" arena, but they really are an appliance vendor.

Jim

Post a reply to this message

Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
> On Fri, 02 Sep 2011 01:12:29 -0400, Stephen wrote:
>
> > Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:

> But I think the most egregious examples of "unnecessary letters" are the
> place names "Leicester" and "Worchestershire".  But I can understand not
> pronouncing all of those letters, particularly after a few pints. ;)

Wales wins hands down. Consider the town of...

Llanfairpwllgwyngyllgogerychwyrndrobwyll-llantysiliogogogoch

No, I didn't just make that up:

http://www.facstaff.bucknell.edu/rbeard/gales.jpg


Best Reghaurddes,
Mike C.

Post a reply to this message

Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
> But it boils down to this - do you want an appliance, or do you want a 
> general purpose computing device.

  If you want a general-purpose computer, why don't you buy a laptop?
You'll be able to do a lot more with it than with a tablet. Many modern
laptops aren't even significantly heavier or larger either, so it's not
even a question of portability.

  The iPad is not a laptop. It's a portable multimedia device which also
doubles as a pretty decent game console (it is, in fact, surprisingly
powerful at running games, even heavy 3D ones). It also has an incredible
battery life (which most portable devices can only dream of).

  I suppose the Android tablets try to be a bit of both, and in many cases
probably not being very good at either.

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
> What Apple wants to do is take 30% of the revenue from the book

  Do you have an actual reference to this? (I'm not saying you are wrong.
I just have never heard that the 30% share applies to books as well as apps.
It would be nice to know for sure.)

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

On Fri, 02 Sep 2011 12:31:54 -0400, Mike the Elder wrote:

> Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
>> On Fri, 02 Sep 2011 01:12:29 -0400, Stephen wrote:
>>
>> > Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
> 
>> But I think the most egregious examples of "unnecessary letters" are
>> the place names "Leicester" and "Worchestershire".  But I can
>> understand not pronouncing all of those letters, particularly after a
>> few pints. ;)
> 
> Wales wins hands down. Consider the town of...
> 
> Llanfairpwllgwyngyllgogerychwyrndrobwyll-llantysiliogogogoch
> 
> No, I didn't just make that up:
> 
> http://www.facstaff.bucknell.edu/rbeard/gales.jpg

LOL, yeah, Wales would win a competition like that. :)

Jim

Post a reply to this message

On Fri, 02 Sep 2011 12:43:44 -0400, Warp wrote:

> Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
>> But it boils down to this - do you want an appliance, or do you want a
>> general purpose computing device.
> 
>   If you want a general-purpose computer, why don't you buy a laptop?
> You'll be able to do a lot more with it than with a tablet. Many modern
> laptops aren't even significantly heavier or larger either, so it's not
> even a question of portability.

I have a laptop.

But I've also tried to use a laptop in coach class on an airplane.  It's 
not a pretty sight.

>   The iPad is not a laptop. It's a portable multimedia device which also
> doubles as a pretty decent game console (it is, in fact, surprisingly
> powerful at running games, even heavy 3D ones). It also has an
> incredible battery life (which most portable devices can only dream of).

Yes, that's exactly right.  I remember going to a conference where a 
presenter asked if anyone had an iPad, and a guy in the back of the room 
did.  He had it set up on a stand, so it looked like (from the presenter's 
point of view) he was using it to take notes.  The presenter couldn't see 
that the attendee was writing notes on a pad of paper until the attendee 
held up the paper for him to see.

>   I suppose the Android tablets try to be a bit of both, and in many
>   cases
> probably not being very good at either.

No, I think most Android tablets try to be a media consumption device 
(let's face it, text input without a keyboard is painful for most 
people), but the users try to push the limits of what they can do.  
That's not necessarily a bad thing.

Jim

Post a reply to this message