Golly-gee-willakers, who’da thunk it. A douchebag with no hardware development or product management skills couldn’t make his mythical iTablet killer appear out of unicorn farts. I’m shedding a tiny little tear.
|
||||
 I’m on vacation from the office this week, so without the constant boredom updates may be a bit more sparse than usual. Deal with it. No sooner do I comment on the overly credulous commentary being offered up by the techno-sphere regarding the ChromeOS announcement than I notice this wretchedly mis-titled article over at TechCrunch: “Google Is Keeping Chrome OS Simple. Maybe Too Simple.” Now, to be fair, this is Erick Schonfeld, and his deep abiding love of the Google-cock is well documented, so I shouldn’t be surprised. But quotes like this really take things to a new level:
Seriously, Chrome web apps are now going to eradicate standalone Android or iPhone apps? The same web apps that Steve Jobs proposed two years ago and was widely, and rightly derided over? Web apps certainly have their place, but to even suggest that a phone running Yesterday Google unveiled their browser-as-operating-system concept, ChromeOS, in greater detail. I’m still processing the information and I may, or may not, write up my thoughts on the announcements later. For the moment though I’m finding myself, as is often the case, more interested in the reaction of the greater techno-sphere to the announcement. I’m somewhat bemused, although I really shouldn’t be, at the credulity of some of my fellow travelers. I don’t doubt that Google is capable of marketing ChromeOS. Google certainly has the money on hand to force themselves into whatever market they so choose, and the adoption of Android shows that they certainly have the capability to produce a serviceable operating system (even if it does largely leverage Linux). I also don’t hold with the segment that dismisses ChromeOS solely on grounds that it only runs web applications. I personally think that, at the moment, web apps are inherently inferior to a well-built desktop application, and I don’t see that situation changing in the near future. But if decades of Windows dominance has shown, your average consumer is perfectly willing to use an inferior product as long as it is cheap and convenient enough. What I do What’s the real threat to marriage in Texas? The State Constitution. Stupid rubes. Brilliant idea from John Gruber. PC World doubles down on the stupid. Fuck you Ian Paul you cheap twat. So, the dip-shits at Psystar had their day in court, and the court punched them square in the junk. You can read all about the legal decision at Groklaw. But I don’t want to write about the decision itself. Suffice it to say that I agree with the Groklaw analysis. No, I want to comment on the absolutely execrable commentary on the decision from the retards at PC World. As always with this sort of puke, the stupid starts right away with the headline:
Really, a “hollow victory?” I rather imagine that Apple doesn’t see the absolute destruction of Psystar as a “hollow victory.” Nor do I imagine that they’re anything but orgasmic to have a court uphold their arguments regarding the enforceability of the OS X End User License Agreement (EULA) as it pertains to third-party resellers. So, overall not so “hollow” after all. But the stupid don’t stop there. The first paragraph re-introduces us to an old friend:
Jason Snell at Macworld opines on the possibility of Apple selling reading content on the mythical forthcoming Apple tablet. Overall, I pretty much agree Jason’s assessment, but the whole discussion raises another question in my mind. I’m perplexed by the fact that the bulk of the tech media seems to have latched onto the idea that this mythical Apple tablet is going to be about e-reading in general, or that it will be targeted specifically to compete with the Amazon Kindle and Barnes and Noble Nook. The Kindle and Nook, and the other minor players in the e-reader space run for around two to three hundred dollars per unit, or approximately the cost of an iPhone or iPod Touch. Does anyone really see Apple releasing a new, larger, e-reading focused device at that price point? I sure as hell don’t. Additionally, as Jason points out, there are already several very well done e-reading solutions for the Mac OS (desktop and Touch versions) that have access to a wealth of content, including the full libraries accessible to the Kindle and Nook. My wild-ass suspicion is that, assuming the Apple tablet is actually real, e-reading will be a small component For all I bag on TechCrunch for their rampant douchebaggery, I have to nut up and give some praise to this piece by Paul Carr exposing “citizen journalism” for the self-indulgent mirror-gazing that it really is. Good on ya’ Paul. Of course, the comments are the worst dreck that humanity has to offer, which sort of proves the point. |
 
 
 |
|||
|
Copyright © 2007 - 2010 The Angry Drunk
Powered by WordPress & the Atahualpa Theme by BytesForAll. Discuss on our WP Forum The Angry Drunk is Digg proof thanks to caching by WP Super Cache |
||||
