I would rather have the choice to find out myself if an application for my android is crap, rather than letting a company decide for me, and at least I can install apps not available on the app market without having to jailbreak my phone (emulators). To me defending a company restricting what I can run on a device I have paid for is defending the indefensible.
It's about time there was a standard for DRM (although I am against it, if prices was more reasonable piracy would probably be minimal) set by regulatory bodies and not any individual company, much like there is in electronics.
I know they can still read PDF's, I was just saying there has been security flaws before involving PDF files and the iPhone.
And the security flaws are totally unrelated to the choice of eBook format on the iTunes store.
Originally Posted by Rhys D
Apple only have strong control over what apps get passed review because they want a standard of quality on the app store, compared to the Android Marketplace. I'll admit the standards of the apps on the App Store is getting lower as time progresses, but compared to the amount of absolute shite on the Android Marketplace and the fact that anyone can submit without review, it's miles above the rest.
Well, that sounds nice in theory, but in practice there are too many apps released to give each an individual quality evaluation.
Originally Posted by Rhys D
Other devices force the user to use proprietary software as well, look at the Windows phones and ZUNE by Microsoft. It's about resource control. They are more likely to get less technical issues and irate customers bogging down support lines if they are all using the same software.
Notice how it's two industry giants who force the use of proprietary software. If a smaller company such as Sandisk can support a standard MSC or MTP interface without being bogged down by support calls then why can't the industry giants do it?
Originally Posted by Rhys D
The DRM is added to eBooks, movies, apps etc to protect copyright and ensure the creators are getting paid. DRM can be a nuisance, but if you buy a product via a specific medium or for a specific device/software, you can't reasonably accept they would love to see you use it on a competitors device or share it round with your friends.
Now you're putting words in my mouth. I never said they should release eBooks DRM free, what I said was it is stupid that they can't be read in their own software i.e. iTunes.
Edited by Phredreeke
- Ok, you must admit that was the most creative cussing this site have ever seen -
Originally Posted by ..::hagar::.. I would rather have the choice to find out myself if an application for my android is crap, rather than letting a company decide for me, and at least I can install apps not available on the app market without having to jailbreak my phone (emulators). To me defending a company restricting what I can run on a device I have paid for is defending the indefensible.
It's about time there was a standard for DRM (although I am against it, if prices was more reasonable piracy would probably be minimal) set by regulatory bodies and not any individual company, much like there is in electronics.
Gotta disagree with you on this one (the top part). Apple's approval process might have some flaws, but it does help strain out the crap. The success of the app store versus android is proof of that. It is good for developer's and good for customers. The only people it's not good for is people shoveling out garbage. They won't make money with it, they just clog up the system and make it that much harder for the quality products to get noticed. And yes, I know there's a lot of crap even on the app store, but imagine if they got rid of the price of entry and let anyone upload whatever they want whenever they want, in whatever quantity they want.
Originally Posted by ..::hagar::.. I would rather have the choice to find out myself if an application for my android is crap, rather than letting a company decide for me, and at least I can install apps not available on the app market without having to jailbreak my phone (emulators). To me defending a company restricting what I can run on a device I have paid for is defending the indefensible.
It's about time there was a standard for DRM (although I am against it, if prices was more reasonable piracy would probably be minimal) set by regulatory bodies and not any individual company, much like there is in electronics.
Gotta disagree with you on this one (the top part). Apple's approval process might have some flaws, but it does help strain out the crap. The success of the app store versus android is proof of that. It is good for developer's and good for customers. The only people it's not good for is people shoveling out garbage. They won't make money with it, they just clog up the system and make it that much harder for the quality products to get noticed. And yes, I know there's a lot of crap even on the app store, but imagine if they got rid of the price of entry and let anyone upload whatever they want whenever they want, in whatever quantity they want.
Then the applications get flagged, they get reviewed, they get taken down, the developer gets his or her account terminated.
The biggest issue with Android is device fragmentation.
There are too many different OS versions and hardware specs to worry about when developing for them.
A headache I'd rather not deal with, at least with iPhone you can assume that the majority of people have either one of the last two revisions of the phone.
Originally Posted by . : UrbanMonk : . The biggest issue with Android is device fragmentation.
There are too many different OS versions and hardware specs to worry about when developing for them.
A headache I'd rather not deal with, at least with iPhone you can assume that the majority of people have either one of the last two revisions of the phone.
Yeah, Android is more PC-like than iPhone, for better and for worse.
- Ok, you must admit that was the most creative cussing this site have ever seen -
In all seriousness I still do not agree with filtering any form of app store (apart from malicious apps). If an app is crap let the market and the end users decide if it's crap or not. I think it's totally wrong for a company to have such control over a market (like the banned game Phone Story).
I actually agree that the Android Market is not monitored enough. It's not the only source for applications on Android (unlike the App Store on iOS) so I think it wouldn't hurt if Google was a lot more controlling.
Its not that hard to develop for the android regardless of various hardware specs. Develop for a minimum spec or an average spec. Or develop for a specific phone. The marketplace does allow for limiting sales of an application to specific devices and/or service providers.
In all seriousness I still do not agree with filtering any form of app store (apart from malicious apps). If an app is crap let the market and the end users decide if it's crap or not. I think it's totally wrong for a company to have such control over a market (like the banned game Phone Story).
Well I knew someone would bring crappy apps up which is why I said
"And yes, I know there's a lot of crap even on the app store, but imagine if they got rid of the price of entry and let anyone upload whatever they want whenever they want, in whatever quantity they want."
in my original post.
I do not see how apple controlling the content that shows up in their store is any different than nintendo or microsoft controlling the content that is approved for their platforms, be it physical or digital. If you want an open platform, there's android. Nobody is forcing anyone to develop for ios versus android, so for those that want a more controlled platform, they can have it, and for those that don't, they can have that too.
Advertisement
Post Reply
Edited by an Administrator
What good reason does Apple have for that? Security issues perhaps? 
