As someone who has dealed with walled gardens of many kinds it is definitely not heaven.If Apple's walled garden is heaven, who cares?
As someone who has dealed with walled gardens of many kinds it is definitely not heaven.If Apple's walled garden is heaven, who cares?
That's one of the reasons Jobs was so successful. You can tell that he spent years thinking about things like digital textbooks before he started thinking about the iPad.
Most of us weren't sure what an iPad was for when we first saw it. But Steve had already been dreaming up answers to that for many, many years.
Ok -- I misunderstood. You can see how, right? His post wasn't very thorough. Like, at all... I'll get to that down below... however... about what he REALLY meant:I could be wrong but I think he means like the App Store on iOS devices. There is an application for the iTunes Store and App Store on iOS devices. He wants to add an iBook Store to those two
students poor backs as well!
He was also sucessful because Everyone THOUGHT they were HIS Ideas! As wie can See above the textbook idea wasn't his. Also the iPod wasn't his. He was apples boss, and therefore he might have been the driving force. But why do people believe he invented all of this? This is only part of a good marketing.
I am sad for all the real inventors, apples engineers who suggested things to jobs and he said 'yes' to them. I guess there are so many people in the background who's ideas are sold as jobs ideas like we can not imagine...
Do you have any evidence for those assertions, because Steve Jobs' name occurs on 100s of patents.
if Apple is seen to be resting on Jobs legacy it could hurt the stock price as the investors might worry about Apple's ability to push forward after Jobs.
You realize one does not have to be involved in order to be labeled as the owner of a patent? Its not exactly uncommon that companies shift 'patent ownership' from an employee onto itself, partially or completely. Its often even part of the employment terms.Do you have any evidence for those assertions, because Steve Jobs' name occurs on 100s of patents.
Microsoft Encarta was a digital multimedia encyclopedia published by Microsoft Corporation from 1993 to 2009. It handled pictures and illustrations, music, videos, searching, interactive content, dictionary, timelines and maps, along with having other academic/study tools (lots of useful templates for Word etc).What is encarta?
Yes. Even more reason to say it was Apple and not Jobs who did this. A lot of the Apple patents could have been Apple's work but in the contract they had to allow Jobs name and not theirs on the patent. Even though Jobs might have done little if any work on the patented idea/product.You realize one does not have to be involved in order to be labeled as the owner of a patent? Its not exactly uncommon that companies shift 'patent ownership' from an employee onto itself, partially or completely. Its often even part of the employment terms.
Given this was Steve's idea and he was heavily involved in the project, I'm surprised he received no mention or credit in the keynote.
I'm sure they are being careful to avoid exploiting Steve's legacy and show that Apple can continue without him, but in this case, I think a quick nod to the creator of this idea would have been classy and surely gone over well with the crowd. Conversely, I felt the lack of any hat tip was a bit callous.
I still think textbooks through iTunes is daft as hell..
What would it take to create a separate app?
That's one of the reasons Jobs was so successful. You can tell that he spent years thinking about things like digital textbooks before he started thinking about the iPad.
Most of us weren't sure what an iPad was for when we first saw it. But Steve had already been dreaming up answers to that for many, many years.
And their iBooks Author software is dead on arrival by definition: Its license locks the authors exclusively into the iBooks store, even if Apple decides to NOT publish the work, the authors will not be allowed to publish it anywhere else. Those terms are completely unacceptable, especially since the iBooks Store is not nearly as attractive as Amazon's Kindle Store and only reaches a fraction of the audience. That software is a desperate and unethical attempt at catching authors that don't read the fine print.
So iBook's proprietary format will fail because everyone who hates proprietary formats will rush on over to use Amazon's proprietary format.
Right. Makes total sense.
The .epub or OEBPS format is an open standard for e-books created by the International Digital Publishing Forum (IDPF).
I get it that you never saw the books in Harry Potter and never saw a Kindle or any other eBook reader before. I'm sure you also never saw one of the language courses that PONS published in the early 2000s (all written in Flash, by the way). You probably also never saw software for clinical trials in action.
Really, there were industries (plural) active in this market long before Apple even began designing the iPad - they only didn't have the right hardware for their software.
The iPad's greatest achievement is its working form factor. And the iPad's greatest disadvantage is its closed proprietary platform. Apple might have shown a way here (certainly not the way), but eventually, cheaper and more open platforms and offerings will dominate that market.
Heck, even the UN have already announced a tablet for less than 100 bucks. Their tablet really will help in the education sector - on a global scale. Apple's platform will just be a niche solution for the wealthy. Just like everything else that Apple sells, to sum it up. The company simply does not care for the majority of people, it only cares for those with thick wallets.
And their iBooks Author software is dead on arrival by definition: Its license locks the authors exclusively into the iBooks store, even if Apple decides to NOT publish the work, the authors will not be allowed to publish it anywhere else. Those terms are completely unacceptable, especially since the iBooks Store is not nearly as attractive as Amazon's Kindle Store and only reaches a fraction of the audience. That software is a desperate and unethical attempt at catching authors that don't read the fine print.
Like the concept but besides lots of immersive media where is the real educational value ? Do these books allow the students the opportunity to demonstrate what they have learnt? A few or a lot of interactive quizzes with output to databases or spreadsheets would be helpful. Does it enable teachers or instructors to monitor progress to identify underachievers or gifted students ? Do they promote team work ?
From an educators point of view, these are great toys, but do they offer real learning and the ability to demonstrate understanding ?
It's a promising start, but once the media snow storm has cleared, will schools be able to afford them with out some form of output to provide clear, hard evidence of increased learning and understanding.
Embedding Khan Academy videos, with supporting text and quizzes, would make an interesting e-textbook.
http://www.khanacademy.org/
And iPads work without energy...?
Oh, happy winners: atomic power plants???
I get it that you never saw the books in Harry Potter and never saw a Kindle or any other eBook reader before. I'm sure you also never saw one of the language courses that PONS published in the early 2000s (all written in Flash, by the way). You probably also never saw software for clinical trials in action.
The iPad's greatest achievement is its working form factor. And the iPad's greatest disadvantage is its closed proprietary platform. Apple might have shown a way here (certainly not the way), but eventually, cheaper and more open platforms and offerings will dominate that market.
Heck, even the UN have already announced a tablet for less than 100 bucks. Their tablet really will help in the education sector - on a global scale. Apple's platform will just be a niche solution for the wealthy. Just like everything else that Apple sells, to sum it up. The company simply does not care for the majority of people, it only cares for those with thick wallets
And their iBooks Author software is dead on arrival by definition: Its license locks the authors exclusively into the iBooks store, even if Apple decides to NOT publish the work, the authors will not be allowed to publish it anywhere else. Those terms are completely unacceptable, especially since the iBooks Store is not nearly as attractive as Amazon's Kindle Store and only reaches a fraction of the audience. That software is a desperate and unethical attempt at catching authors that don't read the fine print.
That software is a desperate and unethical attempt at catching authors that don't read the fine print.
Why? From Apples perspective, add a service to which it already has millions of credit card accounts attached to it.
You realize one does not have to be involved in order to be labeled as the owner of a patent? Its not exactly uncommon that companies shift 'patent ownership' from an employee onto itself, partially or completely. Its often even part of the employment terms.
And their iBooks Author software is dead on arrival by definition: Its license locks the authors exclusively into the iBooks store, even if Apple decides to NOT publish the work, the authors will not be allowed to publish it anywhere else. Those terms are completely unacceptable, especially since the iBooks Store is not nearly as attractive as Amazon's Kindle Store and only reaches a fraction of the audience. That software is a desperate and unethical attempt at catching authors that don't read the fine print.