Yup. Their interface doesn't even support the ability to add licenses to an existing certificate since their software update. Thanks but no thanks, I can save my company a bomb by going elsewhere
Some viable arguments lost in a tirade of hysteria. I've never written an app for the iPhone/iPad, so I have no first hand experience with the approval/rejection nonsense. I do however own an iPhone, and I love the fact that I can expect a certain level of quality in the applications I buy. One thing that makes me snicker about the article in question is the purpose of the app. Why the hell would you want to waste an iPad on using it as a picture frame? With Twitter overlays? Anyway, each to their own. My main point is that so long as the people bitching publicly are gibbering loons like the idiot-in-charge at the linked blog, very few folk will pay attention.
Why the hell would you want to waste an iPad on using it as a picture frame?
Why the hell would you want to use an iPhone to make farts? But the app store is full of them.
I, as an iPhone developer (reconsidering the thing every time I read news like this one) don't see all that quality in the app store. Sure, there are a lot of high quality apps, but there is a lot of garbage that just piles up hiding worthy applications.
And the iPad appstore app is hideous for browsing, so you have to wade through all the crappy apps to see anything, and whenever you look at an app, you get put back to the beginning of the category.
Downvoted. This article (and the one from the developer that was posted yesterday) indicate that this isn't about quality. By all accounts it was a well-done app. Rather, the problem was that Apple dislikes its functionality -- but in a way that they refuse to define, so the developer has no way to "fix" it.
> Why the hell would you want to waste an iPad on using it as a picture frame? With Twitter overlays?
When you're at your laptop/desktop computer on your desk. It's handy to have a dedicated display for twitter/other dashboards, if you like keeping up on that stuff while you work.
Diaspora will be a geek resource at best, possibly backed by a nice network in academia. For the vast majority of people who post photos of their weekend (mis)adventures to share with family and friends, it just isn't going to work. No-one in my family in the UK is going to host their own seed. Thus, I will use Facebook, where my non-technical friends and family are. If I want to share ideas with the nerd set, I hammer out a blog post, link in some Gists and have Posterous fire off a notification via Twitter.
The iPhone has been out for years and encompasses a single device from a single manufacturer. Sales to date prove the success. Android is shiny and new, any handset manufacturer can slap it onto their collection of plastic and glass. I'd be more worried if Android as a phone OS wasn't outselling iPhone.
I realise that PHP gets slated as often as not, but considering it's a language I am familiar with, and that time constraints in many instances mean I must simply sit down and code, I find myself dipping into PHP frequently while Python/Ruby projects sit half-baked on the shelf. Has anyone used this? Comments?
This bill strikes me as being a little odd in light of the drive toward the small and agile versus the monolithic and too big to fail. I think this paragraph sums up the potential for disaster:
"Obviously, I’m deeply concerned about Senator Dodd’s proposal to place these restrictions on angel investing. I think angel investing is undeniably one of the largest engines for job creation as well as innovation and competitiveness on the global scale for the United States. There’s no doubt about it that the restrictions that he’s proposing would absolutely chill investing."
Chilling investment is the last thing that bootstrapping start ups need.
Given that the bill enshrines the "too big to fail" concept and those who fit that definition (as the government will define it), perhaps it's not so surprising.
"There’s a report from the early 1950s (in this PDF) of a one-ton spill of the stuff. It burned its way through a foot of concrete floor and chewed up another meter of sand and gravel beneath, completing a day that I'm sure no one involved ever forgot. That process, I should add, would necessarily have been accompanied by copious amounts of horribly toxic and corrosive by-products: it’s bad enough when your reagent ignites wet sand, but the clouds of hot hydrofluoric acid are your special door prize if you’re foolhardy enough to hang around and watch the fireworks."
