Fallout From Apple's Exclusion of Flash-to-iPhone Export Continues

[justinfreid]

Ok

You're (deliberately?) misinterpreting his statement. What he didn't have time for was that "rambling remedial" you requested. Odd how you didn't keep reading, as the rest of that post is one of the best in this thread, topic-wise. [methinks thou wanteth to merely protest.]

By best you mean one that regurgitates content posted to the front page of MacRumors, and then providing facile responses to my questions without addressing what I asked?

We now have Steve Jobs, and some other guy, saying you can't have third party apps use cross-compilers, access APIs Apple itself uses, or run unsigned apps because they're bad for the platform...yet I use apps that fall into some or all of those categories and that only serves to enhance my use of iPhone hardware, and in fact easy jailbreaking is what has kept me using the iPhone.
Knee-jerk responses which couch the type of apps I mentioned as slow or insecure or whatever without acknowledging the benefits they've been providing since before the app store was released are not among the best posts on this forum. Plus, no case has been made for why users can't choose to run unsigned code if they please. I don't know if other posters think jailbreaking itself does represent Apple's nod to those users who want to do that, or if they think it's wholly a bad idea and should be further prevented, or what because what I've gotten instead is a lot of discourteous misdirection.
Further, if this all boils down purely to technical protection of the iPhone OS, please explain how showing nipples in an app might cause a kernel panic.

And, maybe you should read all of the relevant messages leading to my post (including my clearly sarcastic mention of remedial discussion): my standing complaint is that someone chose to refer to his supposed expertise in an area relevant to this thread, on a basically anonymous forum, as a method of mocking a bunch of other people instead of adding anything to the discussion. Yes, doing that I protest. Doing it in a rude way I detest.

 

[dsnort]

"Snip"

Easy does it Tolstoy!

"Snip, Snip, Snip......

You too Dostoyevsky!

 

[MagnusVonMagnum]

"So you think that money is the root of all evil?" "Have you ever asked what is the root of money? Money is a tool of exchange, which can't exist unless there are goods produced and men able to produce them.

Money is not the root of all evil. Ego (i.e. self-centeredness) is the root of all evil. Money is just a by-product of greed, which is a characteristic of the ego. By Gnostic accounts, the only real "devil" is the self. For it is choosing one's own desires and ambitions over the welfare of others that leads to all wars, strife, violent acts like murder, thievery, etc. It is the height of "Me" to all exclusion that is the very root of "evil" for what is evil but the total non-caring about others. If you don't care you don't mind harming others to benefit yourself (whether that be profit or some twisted pleasure motive, it doesn't really matter as the root is the same). Money serves a purpose and people need to earn a living. But "greed" is the problem, not the money itself which is merely a tool of commerce. When companies move jobs overseas to increase profits, they often destroy lives in the process. Corporations primary motivation is profit so thus one could say it is the corporate disinterest in the human factor that drives much of the misery on this planet. By comparison, those who DO care about other people are often generous and have a deep concern about the ethical motivations of their actions and the effects those actions have on other people around them. This is a basic law of the Universe (cause/effect) and the so-called "Golden Rule" (treating others as you would have them treat you) is the only real rule one needs to know in that regard. Your particular religious beliefs are pretty much irrelevant to that regard.

So when I have a problem with corporate greed it is precisely because it is that greed that is the root of much of society's problems and much of my country's problems (i.e the U.S.). No jobs = disaster in the end for this country and we are VERY good at outsourcing this country's livelihood. The rich then get upset that certain government elements want to tax them to death. Why? Because there's not going to be any middle class left to pay the taxes at the rate they're going. What selfish people don't seem to realize is that society means we're all in it together and together we stand and together we fall. Sooner or later the domino effect will cause the country to cave. Money didn't do the rich in France any good when the revolution came.....

 

[Hal Itosis]

By best you mean one that regurgitates content posted to the front page of MacRumors, and then providing facile responses to my questions without addressing what I asked?

We now have Steve Jobs, and some other guy, saying you can't have third party apps use cross-compilers, access APIs Apple itself uses, or run unsigned apps because they're bad for the platform...yet I use apps that fall into some or all of those categories and that only serves to enhance my use of iPhone hardware, and in fact easy jailbreaking is what has kept me using the iPhone.
Knee-jerk responses which couch the type of apps I mentioned as slow or insecure or whatever without acknowledging the benefits they've been providing since before the app store was released are not among the best posts on this forum. Plus, no case has been made for why users can't choose to run unsigned code if they please. I don't know if other posters think jailbreaking itself does represent Apple's nod to those users who want to do that, or if they think it's wholly a bad idea and should be further prevented, or what because what I've gotten instead is a lot of discourteous misdirection.
Further, if this all boils down purely to technical protection of the iPhone OS, please explain how showing nipples in an app might cause a kernel panic.

And, maybe you should read all of the relevant messages leading to my post (including my clearly sarcastic mention of remedial discussion): my standing complaint is that someone chose to refer to his supposed expertise in an area relevant to this thread, on a basically anonymous forum, as a method of mocking a bunch of other people instead of adding anything to the discussion. Yes, doing that I protest. Doing it in a rude way I detest.

Wow, i sense profound frustration... but i can't make heads nor tails what you're on about. If the answers at MacRumors are so disagreeable, then try the forums over at arstechnica.com perhaps. [doesn't sound as though the iPhone is the right platform for you however, so maybe it's time to simply switch brands.]

 

[justinfreid]

OK #2 (final)

Wow, i sense profound frustration... but i can't make heads nor tails what you're on about. If the answers at MacRumors are so disagreeable, then try the forums over at arstechnica.com perhaps. [doesn't sound as though the iPhone is the right platform for you however, so maybe it's time to simply switch brands.]

I am frustrated, but your fairly level-headed response ameliorates it some, thanks. Did you read the entirety of the conversation that led to my attitude? Let me give you some examples from the poster whose response contributed most to it:

• "They aren't refunding your money. So sell it on craigslist and vow to do a better job as a consumer before buying your next product."
• "We better lock you up now."
• "Remind me to never enter into a contract with you."
• "Don't try to change the subject and play games with semantics."
• "It's the kind of intellectual shallowness and laziness that all-too-often passes for debate on the Internet."
• "Don't you dare purposely misrepresent what I wrote like that!"
• "So, in conclusion, **** and quit second guessing the marketing and technical decisions coming out of Apple. You're no more qualified to do that than you are to critique Stephen Hawking's understanding of physics."
• "Now, Mr. High and Mighty, WTF experience are you bringing to the table?"
• "If you honestly don't know why, maybe it's just not the right conversation for you to be in."
• "As you can see, I totally disproved what you said and made your foolishness obvious to everyone here."
• "How f***ing hard would it have been for you to do that? Talk about lazy..."

Is anyone of those quotes taken on its own reason for my frustration? No.
Are all of those even directed at me? No.
Did many others on the forums try to dilute the negative attitude they embody? Yes.
Do I think the attitude they embodies sucks? Absolutely (and I say that full well knowing I've said things that sound similar in the past and might mistakenly say them again in the future).

I'm much less frustrated by Apple than I am by the attitude of some people on these forums. I don't have thin skin, and can take the heat, but I what I really can't take is heavy handed, paternalistic, rhetoric coupled with an entitled, know-it-all attitude which makes reading through any forum less useful and enjoyable. I'd probably even let it slide if there was something informational to take from the posts.
It's really easy to think you're right on internet forums when you gloss over points that you disagree with, but can't explain why.

This'll be the last public post I make on this thread. Anyone who's inclined can send me a private message.

Hey - did you see Opera was approved on the App Store? http://j.mp/9kQ2uX

 

[czachorski]

Is the concept of greed REALLY that hard to understand? You make it sound like a person must choose between having nothing and pushing to make millions. Is life really that black and white to you or are you just purposely trying to be thick in order to justify your own belief in endless greed? Do CEOs really need to make tens of millions of dollars each year while 95% of the rest of the company are barely making above the poverty line (or in the case of some companies, their primary workforce is making slave labor rates in Communist countries while the company pays out millions for celebrity endorsements of their shoes. They do this not because they cannot make a profit paying at least minimum wage in the U.S. to make things like shoes, but because they're so darn greedy that they always want MORE MORE MORE. Like I said, a day of reckoning is coming. History has taught it is INEVITABLE when greed takes focus over ethical and moral concerns.

So do you work for free or for the bare minimum of your own sustenance, or don't you?

 

[jimmyjoemccrow]

"So you think that money is the root of all evil?" "Have you ever asked what is the root of money? .... Blood, whips and guns--or dollars. Take your choice--there is no other--and your time is running out."

Francisco d'Anconia


Greed is good.

Ironworker808

You have really misunderstood the passage you quoted if you think it can be summed up by your quote from Wall Street. In any case your quote is from a movie which condemns greed, it sets out to ridicule Gordon Gecko and people like him. When he uses that line it is showing his character in a negative light, and all the people who are listening to his speech.

 

[PeterQVenkman]

The developers of Unity have a meeting lined up with Apple. The basically say "hold on, we don't think things are too bad, but if they are, we are planning for every contingency. Please wait for the official word before flaming each other and working yourselves into a rage."

I think we'll know more about allowed game engines in general after that meeting.

 

[fmaxwell]

For a guy that keeps claiming lack of time as a reason for not adding constructively to the conversation, you seem to have an awful lot of time...

My additions to this conversation have been tremendously valuable. People have praised what I've written in posts that appear here.

I'm not going to spend tens of hours writing the equivalent of a programming fundamentals course on here, trying to distill down 30+ years of experience in order to educate people arguing about something they don't understand.

 

[fmaxwell]

I am frustrated, but your fairly level-headed response ameliorates it some, thanks. Did you read the entirety of the conversation that led to my attitude? Let me give you some examples from the poster whose response contributed most to it:

• "They aren't refunding your money. So sell it on craigslist and vow to do a better job as a consumer before buying your next product."
• "We better lock you up now."
• "Remind me to never enter into a contract with you."
• "Don't try to change the subject and play games with semantics."
• "It's the kind of intellectual shallowness and laziness that all-too-often passes for debate on the Internet."
• "Don't you dare purposely misrepresent what I wrote like that!"
• "So, in conclusion, **** and quit second guessing the marketing and technical decisions coming out of Apple. You're no more qualified to do that than you are to critique Stephen Hawking's understanding of physics."
• "Now, Mr. High and Mighty, WTF experience are you bringing to the table?"
• "If you honestly don't know why, maybe it's just not the right conversation for you to be in."
• "As you can see, I totally disproved what you said and made your foolishness obvious to everyone here."
• "How f***ing hard would it have been for you to do that? Talk about lazy..."

I wrote all of those and I'm glad that I did. I'm frustrated at arguing you when you won't debate in an intellectually honest manner. Your out-of-context quotes above, including one where I was giving examples of fallacious reasoning (the slippery slope fallacy that you argued), trying to make it sound like I was actually suggesting that you should be locked up. You shouldn't be. But you should be ashamed for that.

Your "contributions" to this have largely consisted of a unsubstantiated claims and temper tantrums. If you think that Jobs is wrong about cross-compilers producing bad code, then prove it. I gave one hell of a good rebuttal to you (see below) and you weren't up to the task of debating the points, so you, instead, you pulled a bunch of out-of-context quotes from me and then whined about them to some third party.

How about answering some of these points:

Does that sound like the beginning to a fruitful discussion as I wanted? Maybe a rambling remedial something or other would be better.

Better for you, maybe, but I don't have the time for it.

...but people defending Apple's draconian step to now limit cross-compiling worries me especially with only nebulous claims about speed and stability to back them up.

Steve Jobs has now said "We've been there before, and intermediate layers between the platform and the developer ultimately produces sub-standard apps and hinders the progress of the platform." That's not "nebulous." It's a specific claim based on years of observation.

I regularly use apps developed with tools outside the SDK and that call APIs Apple would never let a third party developer have access to

What happens when Apple releases a new version of the OS that changes the undocumented, private, internal APIs, and the applications break? Apple gets phone calls, bad press, and unhappy users who don't have a clue about what APIs are, how the apps are developed, and why Apple isn't to blame for their apps breaking.

Why should the App Store be the ONLY acceptable method for installing software?

Because some person with an iPhone doesn't want to discover that the new battery meter app they installed is logging their keystrokes and sending them to some kid in Uzbekistan. They don't want to find out that the nifty business card app was actually a trojan horse that is staying 3G-connected 24/7 while sending out spam. They don't want to have to reset their phone to factory defaults because the poorly written app they installed walked all over configuration files. And finally, because it's Apple's product and Apple's business model.

Was it fair for Apple to prevent third party developers like Google from using APIs that were merely undocumented...

Are you serious? Google entered into a legal agreement in order to use the SDK, violated the terms of that agreement for financial gain, and now you are accusing Apple of behaving unfairly? Google agreed to the following in order to use the SDK:

3.2 Use of the SDK
As a condition to using the SDK, You agree that:
...
(c) Your Application will be developed in compliance with the Documentation and the Program Requirements, the current set of which is set forth in Section 3.3 below;
...
3.3 Program Requirements for Applications
Any Application developed using this SDK must comply with these criteria and requirements, as they may be modified by Apple from time to time:
APIs and Functionality:
3.3.1 Applications may only use Documented APIs in the manner prescribed by Apple and must not use or call any private APIs.​

Remind me to never enter into a contract with you.

Even if these did seriously upend the embedded system, can't those who want to "live on the edge" with their hardware be allowed to make their own choice in the matter?

Apple could allow them to, but chose not to. And Apple could, at the same time, allowed complete neophytes to download apps -- ones that accessed private APIs -- from random web sites, completely oblivious to the fact that they were 'living on the edge.' And then Apple support and the iPhone carrier could have fielded the tech support calls from angry, confused users when things broke.

Next you can explain how cross-compiling hinders the end user, especially with plenty of cross-compiled apps already successfully being used

By providing that user with substandard applications that underperform and that interfere with multitasking due to their inefficient use of RAM and CPU cycles.

What I'm getting at is this seems like the beginning of a slippery slope

First you complain about Apple's policy on cross-compilers. You get angry about it. This seems like the beginning of a slippery slope that will just end with you going on a shooting spree in an Apple store. We better lock you up now.

That's why "slippery slope" is a recognized logical fallacy.

I went through there and answered you point-by-point an you have the nerve to accuse me of glossing points over!

 

[czachorski]

You have really misunderstood the passage you quoted if you think it can be summed up by your quote from Wall Street. In any case your quote is from a movie which condemns greed, it sets out to ridicule Gordon Gecko and people like him. When he uses that line it is showing his character in a negative light, and all the people who are listening to his speech.

Which does nothing more than prove that the folks who made the movie didn't understand the passage either.

 

[fmaxwell]

You're (deliberately?) misinterpreting his statement. What he didn't have time for was that "rambling remedial" you requested. Odd how you didn't keep reading, as the rest of that post is one of the best in this thread, topic-wise. [methinks thou wanteth to merely protest.]

Thanks. He apparently 'took his ball and went home' after that post. I thought that I did a reasonable job of answering his points, but instead of responding to me, he quoted me out of context in a response to someone else and then tried to make me out to be the one being unreasonable. I don't think he just wanted to protest -- I think that he wanted an excuse to leave without finishing a debate that he was losing.

 

[MagnusVonMagnum]

So do you work for free or for the bare minimum of your own sustenance, or don't you?

I work for middle class wages and I've devoted many years after my regular job to doing work for free for the benefit of others, if you must know. I also give to charity. Not every business moves their work overseas. Some still believe in "Made In the USA" and proud of it, not "Made in Communist China so Steve can pay himself more millions". Apple used to make computers over here, once upon a time. I used to buy New Balance shoes when they were Made In the USA *because* they were made over here. They were still priced lower than big name Commie shoes like Nike, even though they were paying at least minimum wages in the factories over here. Now they're made over there too. Where are the laws to punish U.S. companies for moving our jobs overseas (and thus screwing our economy over in the long term) and then shipping them back here? I'm still waiting to see Obama keep that promise. I doubt he will. Almost everyone in politics is corrupt and would rather pad their campaign if not their pocketbooks than actually represent the interests of the American people (not just the 5% Ultra-Rich of the American people).

 

[cmaier]

we are all better off when low-skilled jobs are done by those willing to do it for the least money. it lowers prices and increases the buying power of those willing and able to do high-skilled jobs. Apple wouldn't be doing anyone any favors in the long term by moving its manufacturing back to the United States. People in the U.S. are not willing or able to work for low enough wages to enable Apple to be competitive. Meanwhile, Apple having shipped its low skill jobs abroad, has been hiring a ton of high-skill workers. When AMD started hiring folks for an Indian design center, paying them 1/5 my salary, I didn't whine. I just made sure I was at least as productive as 5 Indians - those who weren't lost their jobs, but they deserved to do so because they weren't generating as much value per dollar cost as their competition.

You complain about communists, but you are the one opposed to the free market and the elimination of economic barriers.

I work for middle class wages and I've devoted many years after my regular job to doing work for free for the benefit of others, if you must know. I also give to charity. Not every business moves their work overseas. Some still believe in "Made In the USA" and proud of it, not "Made in Communist China so Steve can pay himself more millions". Apple used to make computers over here, once upon a time. I used to buy New Balance shoes when they were Made In the USA *because* they were made over here. They were still priced lower than big name Commie shoes like Nike, even though they were paying at least minimum wages in the factories over here. Now they're made over there too. Where are the laws to punish U.S. companies for moving our jobs overseas (and thus screwing our economy over in the long term) and then shipping them back here? I'm still waiting to see Obama keep that promise. I doubt he will. Almost everyone in politics is corrupt and would rather pad their campaign if not their pocketbooks than actually represent the interests of the American people (not just the 5% Ultra-Rich of the American people).

 

[czachorski]

I work for middle class wages and I've devoted many years after my regular job to doing work for free for the benefit of others, if you must know. I also give to charity. Not every business moves their work overseas. Some still believe in "Made In the USA" and proud of it, not "Made in Communist China so Steve can pay himself more millions". Apple used to make computers over here, once upon a time. I used to buy New Balance shoes when they were Made In the USA *because* they were made over here. They were still priced lower than big name Commie shoes like Nike, even though they were paying at least minimum wages in the factories over here. Now they're made over there too. Where are the laws to punish U.S. companies for moving our jobs overseas (and thus screwing our economy over in the long term) and then shipping them back here? I'm still waiting to see Obama keep that promise. I doubt he will. Almost everyone in politics is corrupt and would rather pad their campaign if not their pocketbooks than actually represent the interests of the American people (not just the 5% Ultra-Rich of the American people).

That was a nice response and gives me a better perspective of where you are coming from.

 

[Ironworker808]

You have really misunderstood the passage you quoted if you think it can be summed up by your quote from Wall Street. In any case your quote is from a movie which condemns greed, it sets out to ridicule Gordon Gecko and people like him. When he uses that line it is showing his character in a negative light, and all the people who are listening to his speech.

If I was 'quoting' Gordon Gecko, I would have put his name under the quote.

The term 'Wooosh' applies aptly here.

 

[MagnusVonMagnum]

we are all better off when low-skilled jobs are done by those willing to do it for the least money. it lowers prices and increases the buying power of those willing and able to do high-skilled jobs. Apple wouldn't be doing anyone any favors in the long term by moving its manufacturing back to the United States. People in the U.S. are not willing or able to work for low enough wages to enable Apple to be competitive.

I'm sorry, but this is load of horse manure. Have you seen Apple's profit margins on their hardware??? It's 200% on the iPad, as just one example. And you expect me to believe that they could not make those in the USA and keep that price with a slightly lower profit margin. I have to pull the BS card here. Like I said, this is about GREED, not what they COULD do. New Balance was doing just fine when they made their shoes in the USA. As I said, they were still cheaper than shoes from Nike, etc. It is GREED that causes companies to move jobs from the U.S., not NEED.

You complain about communists, but you are the one opposed to the free market and the elimination of economic barriers.

Apparently you don't know the difference between a "FREE" market and a "FAIR" market. Using 3rd world countries and 3rd world labor that is not economically on par with the USA and then having "free" trade only benefits two groups. One is the poor country who gets our jobs, but not at fair rates (and thus it actually props up sweat factory rates, but is still probably an improvement over "no" job) and the other is the company that gets cheap labor rates, probably has little to no incentive to provide safe working conditions, etc. in those countries. U.S. consumers get cheaper goods in outlets like Wal-Mart, but because all the good-paying middle-class jobs are slowly being outsourced to countries like India and China, those people can probably no longer AFFORD to buy their goods in higher quality stores and thus NEED to buy Chinese goods from Wal-Mart because they had to take a $15,000 pay cut after General Electric outsourced their computer science job to India at 1/5 the cost. THAT IS REALITY. Or do you seriously believe that only fruit-picking and shoe-making jobs have been outsourced out of this country??? You are living in a freaking DREAM world, my man. You can take your "free" trade and shove it. Spare me the Communist Sympathizer talk too. You have no patriotism in you.

 

[PeterQVenkman]

"Made in Communist China so Steve can pay himself more millions".

While I believe Steve is an egomaniac, sometimes visionary, sometimes idiotic, and definitely a sociopath, his salary in 2009 was $1. His motivation is something other than money.

 

[qtx43]

I'm sorry, but this is load of horse manure. Have you seen Apple's profit margins on their hardware??? It's 200% on the iPad, as just one example. ...

I have to wonder whether you actually believe what you're saying. Nowhere have I seen anybody estimate the cost for Apple to make the iPad at $167, as you allege. The list of parts is estimated to add up to about $260, add to that paying people's wages, paying for a factory and electricity to assemble it, paying for engineers to design it, paying for shipping to stores, paying for marketers and sales clerks and rent on stores to sell it, paying for television commercials and whatnot, most people estimate the profit margin around 30%, if that. I think, probably, you really don't know how the world works, and are railing against some idealized and imagined evil.

 

[Journojulz]

His motivation is something other than money.

Its ego. Now, obviously, steering a profitable company is part of that ego, but i think if he had the choice he would choose to be Steve Jobs and not Bill Gates.

And as for profit margins - buy stock if you care that much.

What i care about is paying people to care about making a better future - and that costs.

If the iPhone was served to me in a restaurant - i would leave a heck of a tip.

Its all about, respect and gratitude

 

[Internaut]

Hmmmm...... Regardless of Apple's motives, this will doubtless have the feint whiff of anti competitive to. Whatever, it will be interesting to watch this decided over in a court of law (which it inevitably will given Adobe's SEC filings).

Let the fun begin!

 

[MagnusVonMagnum]

While I believe Steve is an egomaniac, sometimes visionary, sometimes idiotic, and definitely a sociopath, his salary in 2009 was $1. His motivation is something other than money.

Since when does salary have anything to do with getting paid in the Corporate world of tax cheats? The $1 trick is pretty standard. Bill Gates used the same trick. The man is not poor. Look at the stock options for goodness sake.

I have to wonder whether you actually believe what you're saying. Nowhere have I seen anybody estimate the cost for Apple to make the iPad at $167, as you allege. The list of parts is estimated to add up to about $260, add to that paying people's wages, paying for a factory and electricity to assemble it, paying for engineers to design it, paying for shipping to stores, paying for marketers and sales clerks and rent on stores to sell it, paying for television commercials and whatnot, most people estimate the profit margin around 30%, if that. I think, probably, you really don't know how the world works, and are railing against some idealized and imagined evil.

Their cost is $259 to MAKE the device (that includes all your imaginary extra costs that you want to somehow paint as "extra" like factory assembly costs (read the new article; it's parts AND assembly). I won't include design costs because you'll never figure them out and they are so diminished by the time they sell a few million devices to be negligible (the OS already existed, the technology already existed and it's just a big iPod Touch). Their price is $499 minimum. Their profit is ~200%, perhaps more on the higher-end models given the way Apple gouges for things like hard drives and ram expansions. Advertising might cut into that a bit, but advertising is more about increasing sales and thus essentially pays for itself if successful.

Like I said, it does no good to argue facts with fanboys. They will support Steve's Greed no matter what. They will support moving business to Communist countries that more or less despise our country and would destroy it some day if they could without hurting themselves. NOTHING is too extreme in the name of their god Steve and his two gods money and power. Let's get Steve to run for President. Maybe he can outsource defense to Communist China while he's at it. Then China can nuke us with our own nukes some day.

At least Dell still assembles their desktop computers in the USA. My PowerMac was built in the USA. My MBP proudly declares "Made in Communist China". And despite slave labor costs, Apple apparently cannot offer anything to compete with a $1200 Dell desktop PC in terms of sheer power. It's safe to say I can build a Hackintosh that has 90% of the power of the 4-core Mac Pro at nearly 1/3 the cost and it COULD have a GPU that's far better than it as well except then the OSX drivers wouldn't support it. And yet Dell still makes a profit on that desktop and it's still Made In the USA. Amazing how some of you keep telling me that Apple "MUST" do what they do because they're a corporation and they MUST get the maximum possible profits even if it means supporting Communists, using slave labor and giving the middle finger to the country that makes their corporation POSSIBLE in the first place. True, most PC makers are no different and I despise Bill Gates almost as much as Steve Jobs (well at least Steve is making an effort to help poor people after he screwed other (namely business) people over all those years in Microsoft with his Gates Foundation). Bill was also never the control freak that Steve is. Windows sucks on many levels, but at least the hardware developers have a lot of API support from Windows in the form of DirectX and Direct3D. Apple's use of outdated OpenGL with no real efforts to make it compete or even to keep their video drivers up to part with the ones from Nvidia and ATI or to keep their GPU hardware even remotely current or to support things like SLI in the OS...well what can I say? Don't expect to game much on your Mac or offload things like movies to hardware or Flash for that matter. Steve doesn't care. He's too busy trying to push his own propriety (and not open) standards over the years (e.g. Apple Lossless, Fairplay, Quicktime, etc.)

 

[czachorski]

Their cost is $259 to MAKE the device.....Their price is $499 minimum. Their profit is ~200%

Like I said, it does no good to argue facts with fanboys.

I think the comment of you appearing to react to some imaginary evil was a good one, and you might consider backing it off a notch or two. The information quoted is a good example:

It's a fact that there are more costs than parts and assembly. It's also a fact that even if those costs were $0, $259 cost and $241 profit on a $500 device is 48% profit margin, not 200%. And you are the one saying there is no point arguing facts with fanboys? Step back and take a good look in the mirror.

 

[dpierre]

This thread is now a shed...'cuz it's full of tools.

 

[Eddyisgreat]

I work for middle class wages and I've devoted many years after my regular job to doing work for free for the benefit of others, if you must know. I also give to charity. Not every business moves their work overseas. Some still believe in "Made In the USA" and proud of it, not "Made in Communist China so Steve can pay himself more millions". Apple used to make computers over here, once upon a time. I used to buy New Balance shoes when they were Made In the USA *because* they were made over here. They were still priced lower than big name Commie shoes like Nike, even though they were paying at least minimum wages in the factories over here. Now they're made over there too. Where are the laws to punish U.S. companies for moving our jobs overseas (and thus screwing our economy over in the long term) and then shipping them back here? I'm still waiting to see Obama keep that promise. I doubt he will. Almost everyone in politics is corrupt and would rather pad their campaign if not their pocketbooks than actually represent the interests of the American people (not just the 5% Ultra-Rich of the American people).

I know one countries actions affects the entire world, but they can keep that nonsense over there and just gimme the end product.