Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 19th Oct 2010 21:42 UTC
Talk, Rumors, X Versus Y Steve Jobs' rant against Android, RIM, and 7" tablets couldn't go by unnoticed, of course. We already had the rather dry response from Google's Andy Rubin, but Mountain View isn't the only one who responded. TweetDeck's CEO wasn't particularly pleased by Jobs distorting TweetDeck's story on developing for Android, and now we have RIM's co-CEO Jim Balsillie who slammed Cupertino pretty hard.
E-mail Print r 6   · Read More · 46 Comment(s)
Thread beginning with comment 445946
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[4]: Flash
by WorknMan on Wed 20th Oct 2010 12:02 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Flash"
WorknMan
Member since:
2005-11-13

If that's unimportant to you, then you're probably one of those who think it's just great to have your old documents stuck in a format you have to pay money to read. You're giving your content away to the patent holders.


Well, it's like this... I graduated from high school about 15 years ago. Thus, I didn't come from the Entitlement Generation who expects everything to be handed to them for free. So no, I don't mind paying a little something for the apps I use.

In regards to accessing the content, if you're going to use a proprietary format for that, just make sure you're using something that can export to other formats if needed. Later on down the road, you can always use an emulator if you absolutely need to get at the app you used to create it.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[5]: Flash
by organgtool on Wed 20th Oct 2010 13:49 in reply to "RE[4]: Flash"
organgtool Member since:
2010-02-25

Thus, I didn't come from the Entitlement Generation who expects everything to be handed to them for free.

Slightly offtopic, but the Entitlement Generation is always one generation after your generation.

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[6]: Flash
by phoenix on Wed 20th Oct 2010 18:52 in reply to "RE[5]: Flash"
phoenix Member since:
2005-07-11

Hah ha ha!! So true. It's never our generation's fault, it's always the one before us, or the one after us. ;)

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[5]: Flash
by No it isnt on Wed 20th Oct 2010 14:11 in reply to "RE[4]: Flash"
No it isnt Member since:
2005-11-14

Hm, you seriously don't get it at all, and your sleazy double ad hominem is entirely unimpressive. What you just said is that you're younger and less educated than me.

There's more to a free web than in "free to consume". When using non-free codecs, there is an extra cost of producing content as well, a part-transfer of ownership to the patent holders. Should every video on the web be entagled in MPEG-LA's patents? Apple thinks so: it makes all internet video their own property, to some rather small degree. You think you're willing to pay for that because your not part of the "Entitlement Generation". In reality, you think it's worth paying for because you're fucking crazy.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[6]: Flash
by WorknMan on Wed 20th Oct 2010 22:02 in reply to "RE[5]: Flash"
WorknMan Member since:
2005-11-13

There's more to a free web than in "free to consume". When using non-free codecs, there is an extra cost of producing content as well, a part-transfer of ownership to the patent holders. Should every video on the web be entagled in MPEG-LA's patents? Apple thinks so: it makes all internet video their own property, to some rather small degree.


I don't know much about video, but I assume it works like audio in that you record in a raw format (such as a .wav file) and then compress it when you're done for mass consumption. As long as you have the original (uncompressed) content, the owner of the compression algorithm doesn't 'own' a thing. But, if you record in a proprietary format and have no way to convert it to something else, then... well, you're a moron.

Anyway, if you're going to use a compression algorithm that somebody else owns and wants money for it, then yeah... you're probably going to have to pay for it. Why shouldn't you? Just because somebody's labor comes in the form of 1's and 0's doesn't automatically entitle you to have access to it for $0. And in this case, unless the owner is selling t-shirts or coffee mugs, there's no way he can give away the source and/or offer it up royalty free and still profit from it (AFAIK).

Edited 2010-10-20 22:04 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2