This is a discussion on Android within the iPad General Discussions forums, part of the Apple iPad Discussions category; iTunes is a huge memory hog and runs slow on just about any system (well, not sure about Macs, I don't have one).
Does that ...
iTunes is a huge memory hog and runs slow on just about any system (well, not sure about Macs, I don't have one).
Does that sound familiar to the argument Steve Jobs was making against Flash? LOL, maybe there is some Flash content built into iTunes and that's why it takes a virtual supercomputer to run it well.
Yes I'm exaggerating, LOL. But the point still stands, if Jobs wants to ***** about software not running fast enough, he needs to fix iTunes first. Pot....kettle....black....
11-15-2010 10:01 PM
So you are arguing that since Wal-Mart has adapted, Apple will too.
Originally Posted by Seadog
Perhaps you don't fully understand what a spurious argument is...
In either event it doesn't negate the fact that many people dislike iTunes. Arguing that the iTunes Music Store is the most popular and that proves that the iTunes software is therefore "good" equals more spurious reasoning.
All of which leaves me wondering what any of your arguments have to do with Android unless you just like providing spurious examples.
Posted from my iPad WiFi 64GB
Guys I ask that you settle down ok As a long time user of iTunes and talking to other users ie that use the windows versions in can understand the issues that you have all we ask is we bring the discussions back on track as the last thing we want is close this thread down.
Thank you in advance for you understanding
I have to question the assertion that Apple doesn't compete with Microsoft and Walmart doesn't compete with Target, Best Buy and Sears. If you are selling products to the same sector of people and those products have overlap then your are competing. Apple would like you to buy a system that runs OSX rather than Windows. Apple makes advertisements trying to convince you that their OS is better than what MS offers. If that is not direct competition I don't know what it is. Apple and MS both offer media stores selling many of the exact same products. MS would like you to believe their delivery system is better, likewise Apple would like to convince you their way is better. That is competition. I could go on ... both sell portable media players, direct competition. Each company wants to grow their customer base by taking from the other. This notion that each is happy with their core customer base just doesn't make sense.
Walmart and Target are direct competitors. Both sell many of the same products and each would like you to buy from one rather than the other. I guarantee that each would love to take a large chunk of the other's customers away. Each company spends a ton on advertisement trying to make that happen. Neither is happy selling to their core customer base only, growth is what drives the stock prices and ultimate success of the company.
The issue is that Apple and Wal-Mart achieved leadership by not going against the others by emulating them. They took the game to a new level. They chose a path which appealed to the public more. They ignored what the others were doing and found a new path to success. Apple did it by appealing to those who wanted higher quality and were willing to pay for it. In the 90s, without Jobs, Apple almost disappeared by trying to put the Apple OS out to other manufacturers like Microsoft. Wal-Mart took the path of reaching out to the average small community. In both cases, they led the way to a new era in their field, they did not just compete.
I have every confidence that Apple is trying to develop a new format for iTunes for the simple reason that they pay attention. In its current form, iTunes does not meet the criteria that has been the earmark of Jobs; simple elegence. It is already in the works for a AppleTV iTunes section. The problem is that in every category, there can be hundreds of thousands selections. How do you make that manageable? Traditionally, a tree or spoke system would be used, but that is essentially what is being used now. It is a good system when you do not have too many folders, but when you get into hundreds or more, it does not work. I would love to see the solution to the issue, but unless it is the big news today, who knows when it gets resolved. And I do not see any of the competitors with a better method.
As for the issue of syncing, since the iPad is not a standalone computer, it has to have a means to download. It uses the same means as used for the iPods and iPhones.
Back to the original subject, the point is that there will not be a Android OS designed for use on tablets until next summer. If you purchase a device in the next few months, you may take a risk that they will not offer the OS as an upgrade for older tablets. A big gripe about the iPad is capabilities not offered until iOS 4.2. While it was a long wait, it was at least a known fact, and that it would be a free upgrade for all iPads. As I remember, there was a big stink when people found they could not upgrade to Froyo 2.2. And remember the griping about how using iPhone apps on 2X was considered poor quality graphics? My point is that those who are anti-Apple and are dying to go to Android, should be aware that they may risk their money if they leap too quickly. Apple cannot be all things to everyone. I do not have the time to research every app, nor do I want to look in a dozen places for apps. If I find an app that looks interesting, I can go the app store, look at the reviews, and make a decision. There are those who love jailbreaking devices, and there are those who love to hack. Most of us are not like that.
Last edited by Seadog; 11-16-2010 at 09:55 AM.
By vb7ue in forum iPad Hacking
Last Post: 01-31-2014, 09:35 AM
By hoing in forum iPad Hacking
Last Post: 08-07-2010, 06:11 PM
By Seadog in forum iPad General Discussions
Last Post: 07-07-2010, 06:01 PM