SJ and Ryan Tate go at it via email at 2AM!

[iLunar]

THe application store is supposed to allow independent developers sell their programs to peoples personal phones. So people can use their own phone, which they have payed for, for what use they want. Apple shouldnt have a say in all.

Why shouldn't Apple have a say? Isn't the App store hosted on Apple's servers? Isn't the only way to access the App store through Apple's iTunes software or website?

And you can use your phone for whatever you like. Set the camera to on, stick it up your bum, and take a picture and email it to sjobs@apple.com. They won't care, they won't send the cops after you, and they won't respond. It doesn't matter to them what you do with your phone.

 

[PJT]

"IF you dont like it, buy something else" is a term used to completely fool people in an old capitalistic country where the consumers are naive enough to think that the choice is theirs, and anyone has the chance to offer them a different product.

Its kill or be killed. Thats the whole weakness of capitalism in america, so easy to monopolize. Which is exactly what Apple has done. And theres nobody at this point that efficiently can compete and offer the consumer a better product.

The last time I checked, Windows had a 90%+ market share. The majority of phones were not iPhones, and there were way more netbooks than iPads. With your argument, Apple would not exist. But Apple has done exactly what you said can't be done, in my opinion. They are competing and offer the consumer a better product.

Also, I don't live in America. Please point out some some good non-American examples of capitalism to help make your point. They exist. There is no reason to bash countries on the forum.

 

[LagunaSol]

Unsurprising. It's owned by a borderline sociopath.

Not for long.

 

[notabadname]

Remember that with great power, comes great responsibility. .

Great, he's seen Spiderman.

 

[NSMonkey]

No, it's not like asking for propellers on your car. It's more like Steve Jobs telling you your car cannot make left turns, because he thinks the lefties support pornography.

So, in this analogy, is Steve Jobs actually driving the car? Because, in that case, I might be fine with the "no left turn" policy. I could just relax in the back seat while Steve takes a ridiculously long time to get me anywhere. But the cool part would be, when I finally arrive, I would be like "Dude, check out my driver. It's Steve freakin' Jobs!" How awesome would that be?

Now you weren't specific as to whether or not I would have to pay Steve to drive the car. Because then it would just be a scam where Steve is trying to make a few extra bucks in his spare time, like a dishonest taxi driver. Or was your point that turning right is evil and since Jobs only turns right, he's obviously composed of pure evil?

Damn, I never can follow these deep, thought-provoking analogies.

 

[H. Flower]

When millions of people around the world uses Apples computerproducts, Apple has the responsibility of allowing them view the internet, which is a public resource of information, and to follow the law of freedom and justice.

Apple is not restricting your right to view pornography. They are simply choosing not to SELL it to you.

Theres a fundamental difference between the two, and your failure to grasp this means you lose the argument.

 

[JayMysterio]

Microsoft has payed huge fines for abusing their monopoly of the computer marked in Europe. So will Apple, if they continue like this.

Remember that with great power, comes great responsibility. When millions of people around the world uses Apples computerproducts, Apple has the responsibility of allowing them view the internet, which is a public resource of information, and to follow the law of freedom and justice.

M$ paid fines for tying their browser and their browser alone in their operating system ( Ironically enough, not allowing Safari which you were bitching about earlier ), thus monopolizing how one saw the internet. That is not the issue!

You've strayed so far in desperation to make a point, you don't know where you're going anymore. This isn't about viewing the internet, it's about whether or not a company has the right to control what is sold on their product. But to make a vague digression to your pointless point, ironic that you can get other browsing apps such as Opera now, and Atomic web off the app store eh?

You keep throwing out concepts about freedom & justice, all the while wanting to curtail anyone else's.

 

[macbookpro13]

"IF you dont like it, buy something else" is a term used to completely fool people in an old capitalistic country where the consumers are naive enough to think that the choice is theirs, and anyone has the chance to offer them a different product.

Its kill or be killed. Thats the whole weakness of capitalism in america, so easy to monopolize. Which is exactly what Apple has done. And theres nobody at this point that efficiently can compete and offer the consumer a better product.

So when Jobs says this, he is sitting with a grin on his face, rubbing his hands together. Because in reality, its a joke.

The reality is that Apples products is increasingly becoming a dominant force in the computer marked. With their stationary, and portable computers, phones, tablets etc. With that much power, they can no longer do what they want, they must serve the peoples RIGHTS, not their own wallets.

Yes. Now why is that, despite how "locked down" their products allegedly are? Try to think for a moment.

And yes, for the umpteenth time, you have a choice. Everyone who has ever bought iThing had a choice. Arguing against this is idiotic.

 

[NSMonkey]

THe application store is supposed to allow independent developers sell their programs to peoples personal phones. So people can use their own phone, which they have payed for, for what use they want. Apple shouldnt have a say in all.

Apple shouldn't have a say in their own products? That's rich.

 

[doctor-don]

"IF you dont like it, buy something else" is a term used to completely fool people in an old capitalistic country where the consumers are naive enough to think that the choice is theirs, and anyone has the chance to offer them a different product.

Its kill or be killed. Thats the whole weakness of capitalism in america, so easy to monopolize. Which is exactly what Apple has done. And theres nobody at this point that efficiently can compete and offer the consumer a better product.

So when Jobs says this, he is sitting with a grin on his face, rubbing his hands together. Because in reality, its a joke.

The reality is that Apples products is increasingly becoming a dominant force in the computer marked. With their stationary, and portable computers, phones, tablets etc. With that much power, they can no longer do what they want, they must serve the peoples RIGHTS, not their own wallets.

First, don't post without proofing; and if you did, then get educated so your post is not disjointed.

Second, how do people's rights have ANYTHING to do with buying a computer? Apple can create whatever they want, and you can buy it – or not. They don't have to DO anything ... unless you have bought an Apple product and require warranty assistance.

 

[Kahnyl]

Apple are only dominant within the bubble of delusion that some people here reside in.

 

[notabadname]

Apple are only dominent within the bubble of delusion that some people here reside in.

Me thinks you are in the bubble . . . .

 

[Berio]

No, it's not like asking for propellers on your car. It's more like Steve Jobs telling you your car cannot make left turns, because he thinks the lefties support pornography.

if you buy a car that does not make left turns - for whatever reasons - you're an idiot. decide which car you need, then choose a car that matches your needs and ignore the "car that only makes right turns".

 

[Kahnyl]

Some people here profess to like the cars that only allow right turns. It simplifies things.

Me thinks you are in the bubble . . . .

Damn, you quoted me while the typo was still there. Now everyone knows I can't spell.

Also, no.

 

[Macmoney]

No major American company solicits porn. Thats including Apple, Borders, Yahoo, Walmart, McDonalds, Blockbuster, Comcast, etc etc

Why? Because its BAD FOR BUSINESS. Why should Apple be held to a different standard?

Is it different in Europe or something? Do all of your multimedia companies solicit pornography?

the medium(the internet)apple wished to engage users in
has a overwhelming query of "porn searchers and watchers"
rather prudes wanna admit that or not.

so there ya go...and four finger up swipe hides my porn well already
when someone interrupts un expectantly

 

[reifer]

Who cares about a porn app?

I don't get all the outrage about a porn free app store
Doesn't Apple have a right to decide what they sell?
No one who wants porn on their Apple device should have any trouble getting it. The web is full of it, or so I'm told. Apple is not keeping you from going to the web site. And if you want an app, save it to your home screen--instant app.
If apple allowed porn apps the store would be overrun with them.
And you have to admit that allowing them on the Apple app store would be viewed by many as some kind of endorsement.
Who would want the looney tunes from the radical religious right raising hell with you? Having the pro Porno (looney tunes) crowd criticizing you would be much easier to take.

 

[H. Flower]

the medium(the internet)apple wished to engage users in
has a overwhelming query of "porn searchers and watchers"
rather prudes wanna admit that or not.

so there ya go...and four finger up swipe hides my porn well already
when someone interrupts un expectantly

ok, so lots of people look at porn on the internet.

How does it follow then that Apple should be required to sell it to you?

 

[bluvision]

if you buy a car that does not make left turns - for whatever reasons - you're an idiot. decide which car you need, then choose a car that matches your needs and ignore the "car that only makes right turns".

As a fun side note, I've read that UPS has configured their driving routes to use right turns more than left because it is more fuel efficient. I don't have the source, but I thought it would be a funny side note.

 

[Berio]

Remember that with great power, comes great responsibility. When millions of people around the world uses Apples computerproducts, Apple has the responsibility of allowing them view the internet, which is a public resource of information, and to follow the law of freedom and justice.

"the law of freedom and justice" - you're funny. even in europe we do not have a law that says that a luxury product like the iphone - for that is what it is - must display flash.
if apple banned wikipedia or a similar resource of information i might have more sympathy for your point. but flash...? porn apps in the app store? don't be silly, Ramius.

 

[Kahnyl]

If apple allowed porn apps the store would be overrun with them.

How's that an indictment? "It'd be popular" isn't the best argument I've ever heard against something.

 

[NSMonkey]

Apple has no right to controll the entire computer marked, just because its being viewed on their iPad.

Who thinks it is okay for a private corporation to controll what we can consume and not consume.

When reading these forums, its like everyone has forgotten about what freedom is. Its being in China in the 50s.

You're so far off base it's scary. I can't even make a joke about it (well, I could make a joke about your inability to spell, but that wouldn't be very original). I'll just say, wake me up when Apple stops supporting open web standards and starts pushing closed, proprietary formats like Flash, Silverlight or ActiveX in their place.

 

[macUser2007]

M$ paid fines for tying their browser and their browser alone in their operating system ( Ironically enough, not allowing Safari which you were bitching about earlier ), thus monopolizing how one saw the internet. That is not the issue!

... This isn't about viewing the internet, it's about whether or not a company has the right to control what is sold on their product....

How exactly is it different from allowing MS to control what is integrated into their product?

In fact Apple is much, much more restrictive with their iPlatform than MS ever was.

Can you imagine if MS had demanded that it approves every application, before it was allowed to be sold for Wndows?

Or, if MS simply banned some applications, such as browsers, because they provided a duplicate functions?

As much as the religious here don't like it, what's good for the goose, is good for the gander.

 

[CFreymarc]

wow, this Ryan Tate must be a real idiot..

IMO, this interview made his career with a few and ended his career with many.

 

[CFreymarc]

You're so far off base it's scary. I can't even make a joke about it (well, I could make a joke about your inability to spell, but that wouldn't be very original). I'll just say, wake me up when Apple stops supporting open web standards and starts pushing closed, proprietary formats like Flash, Silverlight or ActiveX in their place.

Here, here! If you don't like the iPhone, don't buy one. There are plenty of alternatives in the marketplace and there is no monopoly.

IMO, this "we must be allowed to do anything with the iPhone" crowd is just trying to screw up a successful platform by acting like an over vocal minority to cater to the vices of a small part of the population. Odds are they run a jail-broken iPhone already so meh!

 

[Black Macbook]

IMO, this interview made his career with a few and ended his career with many.

If you mean that he has a bright future in writing juvenile, ignorant emails to CEO's while being intoxicated and generally acting like a third rate asshat, then I fully agree!