Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 50
  1. #16
    Tinman
    Guest

    Re: 4Phun- You missed this "news" item...

    The Bob wrote:
    > "Tinman" <[email protected]> amazed us all with the following in
    >>
    >> Let's just say I love laughing at you fools who hold a grudge over a
    >> device. It would be pathetic if it weren't so damned funny.
    >>
    >>

    >
    > Wow- I love laughing at you fools who have such a blinding passion
    > over a device. It is pathetic and not even damned funny.


    You gotta work on yer on material. It's not very original. Parroting others,
    while flattering in a short bus kinda way, is still kinda lame.



    --
    Mike







    See More: 4Phun- You missed this "news" item...




  2. #17
    The Bob
    Guest

    Re: 4Phun- You missed this "news" item...

    "Tinman" <[email protected]> amazed us all with the following in
    news:[email protected]:

    > The Bob wrote:
    >> "Tinman" <[email protected]> amazed us all with the following in
    >>>
    >>> Let's just say I love laughing at you fools who hold a grudge over a
    >>> device. It would be pathetic if it weren't so damned funny.
    >>>
    >>>

    >>
    >> Wow- I love laughing at you fools who have such a blinding passion
    >> over a device. It is pathetic and not even damned funny.

    >
    > You gotta work on yer on material. It's not very original. Parroting
    > others, while flattering in a short bus kinda way, is still kinda
    > lame.
    >
    >
    >


    And coming from you, an explanation of lame is so appropriate.



  3. #18
    Tinman
    Guest

    Re: 4Phun- You missed this "news" item...

    The Bob wrote:
    > "Tinman" <[email protected]> amazed us all with the following in
    > news:[email protected]:
    >
    >> The Bob wrote:
    >>> "Tinman" <[email protected]> amazed us all with the following in
    >>>>
    >>>> Let's just say I love laughing at you fools who hold a grudge over
    >>>> a device. It would be pathetic if it weren't so damned funny.
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>
    >>> Wow- I love laughing at you fools who have such a blinding passion
    >>> over a device. It is pathetic and not even damned funny.

    >>
    >> You gotta work on yer on material. It's not very original. Parroting
    >> others, while flattering in a short bus kinda way, is still kinda
    >> lame.
    >>
    >>
    >>

    >
    > And coming from you, an explanation of lame is so appropriate.



    Zzzzzzzzzzz.....



    --
    Mike





  4. #19
    The Bob
    Guest

    Re: 4Phun- You missed this "news" item...

    "Tinman" <[email protected]> amazed us all with the following in
    news:[email protected]:

    > The Bob wrote:
    >> "Tinman" <[email protected]> amazed us all with the following in
    >> news:[email protected]:
    >>
    >>> The Bob wrote:
    >>>> "Tinman" <[email protected]> amazed us all with the following in
    >>>> news:[email protected]:
    >>>>
    >>>>> The Bob wrote:
    >>>>>> Apple is showing that the phone
    >>>>>> is designed for idiots.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Only if you bought one.
    >>>>
    >>>> Never happen- I need more than it offers.
    >>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>> I'm guessing you suck at poker too. Transparent.
    >>>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> I'm guessing that you suck at realizing that I have no need to
    >>>> bluff here. I have no need to be anything but transparent here.
    >>>
    >>> <whoosh>
    >>>
    >>> Right over your head. Expected though.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>

    >>
    >> the only <whoosh> here is the sound echoing from between your ears.

    >
    > That's all you've got? I've heard better when I was 12.
    >


    That's far from all I've got. You get the maximum effort from you
    required.

    >
    >>
    >> And for the record- I could probably take your house from you in less
    >> than an hour playing poker, as I don't appear to be the transparent
    >> one in this discussion.

    >
    > While you might think your double-wide counts as a house, the fact is
    > you couldn't even afford to pay the taxes on my vacation home.


    Sorry- that tarpaper shack has no value to me. I'd rather have the
    cabins in Georgetown and Aspen. The wife is particulalrly fond of them.

    >
    > And you still don't get it.


    I'm not trying real hard. You bore me.

    >
    > Now run along and catch this little red ball...


    Sorry- your wife would be much better at playing the game.

    >
    >
    >





  5. #20
    Tinman
    Guest

    Re: 4Phun- You missed this "news" item...

    The Bob wrote:
    >>
    >> Now run along and catch this little red ball...

    >
    > Sorry- your wife would be much better at playing the game.


    Zzzzzzzzzz....



    --
    Mike






  6. #21
    Todd Allcock
    Guest

    Re: 4Phun- You missed this "news" item...

    At 13 Mar 2008 03:18:25 +0000 Larry wrote:
    > > - it's the
    > > allegedly watered-down SDK that prevents developers from writing apps
    > > that can multitask.

    >
    >
    > Which would render it just as useless. Any ideas what his point is
    > hobbling it up like this?


    My guess is that a less-open SDK was released to the "public" and the
    "real" one is in the hands of Apples trusted partners, like Google and the
    major software companies.

    Like it or not, if true, this makes a lot of sense. Unfettered access to
    the device's guts makes it too easy to render the device unstable, and the
    iPhone is all about "User Experience" above all else. You and I might like
    (or at least not mind) hacking and tweaking our devices, but the iPhone is
    aimed at a different market.

    Now, of course, it wouldn't be Apple's fault if 3rd-party apps crashed the
    unit, but that would be the perception, and we know how well that
    perception works for WinMo. As easy as it is to pick on WinMo's instability,

    I stand by my belief that the vast majority of it's problems are the direct
    result of 3rd-party apps. The "out of box" product is very stable.

    Something had bothered me (from a business perspective) about the whole "it
    all comes from iTunes" distribution model: the certification process. How
    was Apple going to be able to insure every freeware "guitar" app
    downloadable via iTunes wouldn't crash the device due to some deeply hidden
    bug that didn't surface unless you played Donovan's "Sunshine Superman"
    backwards? The $99 fee wasn't going to begin to cover the cost
    of certifying thousands of cheesy little apps.

    Now it makes more sense- the SDK itself insulates the device from "harm" by
    locking out access to the phone's guts except via pre-approved calls much
    like a Java VM protects a dumbphone OS.


    > I think they're doing a LOT to hobble the use of BANDWIDTH, especially
    > ATT bandwidth. If it cannot play streams while it's navigating...that

    saves
    > bandwidth. See my point?


    Yes, but again, "real" Apple or 'Apple partner' apps won't have those
    limitations. Just the small-fry/amateur stuff.


    Again, my post wasn't suposed o be an indictment of the iPhone- I was just
    slapping 4phun and his idiotic dozen-a-day iPhone "news" posts around,
    wondering aloud why an alleged shortcoming of the SDK didn't qualify as
    "iPhone news" but a port of Ms. Pac Man that used the accelerometor to move
    would be.




  7. #22
    Larry
    Guest

    Re: 4Phun- You missed this "news" item...

    Todd Allcock <[email protected]> wrote in
    news:[email protected]:

    > wondering aloud why an alleged shortcoming of the SDK didn't qualify
    > as "iPhone news" but a port of Ms. Pac Man that used the accelerometor
    > to move would be.
    >
    >


    The seat warmers would never point out a shortcoming. Vic is the head seat
    warmer...(c;

    I've stolen this phrase from the Comcast internet group where Comcast was
    caught loading up the public forum the FCC was holding about its violation
    of the open internet rules by throttling and forbidding access to bit
    torrent. There's pictures of the Comcast seat warmers sleeping during the
    hearing. They kept out hundreds of public members to testify against them.
    The seat warmers weren't interested, just paid to occupy the seat.

    The Comcrap newsgroup has a substantial group of seat warmers, like our
    buddy, here....(c;




  8. #23
    Tinman
    Guest

    Re: 4Phun- You missed this "news" item...

    Elmo P. Shagnasty wrote:
    > In article <[email protected]>, "Tinman" <[email protected]>
    > wrote:
    >
    >>>>> 'Only one iPhone application can run at a time,
    >>>>
    >>>> False, as it is written.
    >>>
    >>> So let's write it correctly:
    >>>
    >>> only one third party iPhone application can run at a time.
    >>>
    >>> Serious deficiency. Your pathetic attempts at excusing Apple on
    >>> this one are beneath you.

    >>
    >> Yer a complete idiot if that's what you got out of it.

    >
    > Are you saying that it's not true that only one third party iPhone
    > application can run at a time?


    I can run as many apps as I like, at the same time. As I write this I have
    three SSH sessions open into my iPhone, and it's also running an FTP server,
    as well as Apache. It's running several other server-side processes but I
    doubt anyone here would understand what they are, let alone do. Meanwhile
    the iPhone itself is downloading and installing, via Installer, updates to 5
    other apps. All at the same time.

    This is not "amazing" or unbelievable. It's a BSD-based 'nix OS that is
    married to hardware that can do the job. Nothing special.

    And for the record I have the SDK, as well as the non-SDK toolchains.
    Despite the idiots here who cry "fanboi" at the drop of a hat, I don't own a
    Mac yet (I've read the SDK docs, and framework docs, extensively). But since
    I'm about to replace a laptop I'm going to replace it with a Macbook or
    Macbook pro. While this will primarily run Windows, I intend to get up to
    speed on iPhone development ASAP, hence the Mac.

    So the naive comments in this thread are indeed laughable, mainly because
    nearly everyone but me is posting bull**** they know nothing about. I guess
    that is the state of Usenet nowadays.



    --
    Mike





  9. #24
    Tinman
    Guest

    Re: 4Phun- You missed this "news" item...

    Elmo P. Shagnasty wrote:
    > In article <[email protected]>, "Tinman" <[email protected]>
    > wrote:
    >
    >>> Are you saying that it's not true that only one third party iPhone
    >>> application can run at a time?

    >>
    >> I can run as many apps as I like, at the same time.

    >
    > Are you saying that Apple is wrong when Apple says that only one third
    > party application can run at a time?


    Are you saying you have no knowledge of the subject, other than what you
    read on Usenet?



    --
    Mike





  10. #25
    Tinman
    Guest

    Re: 4Phun- You missed this "news" item...

    Elmo P. Shagnasty wrote:
    > In article <[email protected]>, "Tinman" <[email protected]>
    > wrote:
    >
    >>>> I can run as many apps as I like, at the same time.
    >>>
    >>> Are you saying that Apple is wrong when Apple says that only one
    >>> third party application can run at a time?

    >>
    >> Are you saying you have no knowledge of the subject, other than what
    >> you read on Usenet?

    >
    > I'm asking you a specific question.
    >
    > I've noticed that you are doing everything you can to avoid it.


    The comment I responded to in this thread was this:
    "'Only one iPhone application can run at a time,"

    For the reading impaired I'll state it again: false, as written.

    As for what will happen in 3 months, I'll let you do the speculating.
    Personally, I don't think that will be the case, if an app has a legitimate
    reason to run in the background. For sure even the limited frameworks
    available via the SDK support background operation. Either way I know I
    won't be restricted to running one app at a time. Not that I think it will
    be a negative to most users anyway--just the opposite. They innocents only
    have Web apps now, so they have zero third-party apps available to them.




    --
    Mike





  11. #26
    Todd Allcock
    Guest

    Re: 4Phun- You missed this "news" item...

    At 13 Mar 2008 10:35:15 -0400 Elmo P. Shagnasty wrote:

    > Are you saying that Apple is wrong when Apple says that only one third
    > party application can run at a time?


    Boy, am I ever sorry I started this thread!

    If you re-read my original post, the (very small) part in single quotes
    from the "Human Interface Guidelines" is the portion the blog quoted (in
    the double quotes) took offense at.

    I'm not a developer, therefore I haven't downloaded the SDK, or read the
    docs, so I can't even tell you if the guidelines are simply instructions
    for making an "approved" app, or are forced upon the developer by the
    programming environment.

    (For example, in the WinMo world I'm more familiar with, Microsoft lists a
    bunch of guidelines that apps SHOULD adhere to to be proper WinMo apps.
    Until fairly recently, one of the stupider ones (and widely ignored by
    developers) was that apps should NOT have an "exit" command. (WinMo's
    clumsy attempt at memory management was discussed earier in the thread!)

    Nothing in the WinMo SDK _prevents_ a developer from adding an exit
    function-
    it was just a guideline. This "no background running" "rule" of Apple's
    might be just that- a "guideline" or even some sort of requirement for
    getting your app listed on iTunes, butit might not be a limitation of the
    programmer's tools.

    Again, sorry- I just latched onto the first mildly negative iPhone "news"
    item I Googled to give a little poke at 4phun's "streaming iPhone news
    service" he continually inundates this NG with.

    Lighten up, kids!





  12. #27
    Tinman
    Guest

    Re: 4Phun- You missed this "news" item...

    Elmo P. Shagnasty wrote:
    >
    > You are such a fanboi loser.


    Predictable.

    What are you going to fixate on when the iPhone isn't hot anymore? Must suck
    to be you.



    --
    Mike






  13. #28
    Tinman
    Guest

    Re: 4Phun- You missed this "news" item...

    Todd Allcock wrote:
    > At 13 Mar 2008 10:35:15 -0400 Elmo P. Shagnasty wrote:
    >
    >> Are you saying that Apple is wrong when Apple says that only one
    >> third party application can run at a time?

    >
    > Boy, am I ever sorry I started this thread!
    >
    > If you re-read my original post, the (very small) part in single
    > quotes from the "Human Interface Guidelines" is the portion the blog
    > quoted (in the double quotes) took offense at.
    >
    > I'm not a developer, therefore I haven't downloaded the SDK, or read
    > the docs, so I can't even tell you if the guidelines are simply
    > instructions for making an "approved" app, or are forced upon the
    > developer by the programming environment.
    >


    Everything I've read shows it to be a guideline. Meanwhile right in the same
    SDK are tools to do just that.

    Not that it will matter to the nutcases posting here--and I don't mean you,
    Todd. They are entertaining though... fanboi, lol.


    --
    Mike





  14. #29
    Tinman
    Guest

    Re: 4Phun- You missed this "news" item...

    Elmo P. Shagnasty wrote:
    > In article <[email protected]>, "Tinman" <[email protected]>
    > wrote:
    >
    >>> You are such a fanboi loser.

    >>
    >> Predictable.

    >
    > Yes, you are absolutely a predictable fanboi.


    Zzzzzzzz....



    --
    Mike





  15. #30
    anon
    Guest

    Re: 4Phun- You missed this "news" item...

    "Tinman" <[email protected]> wrote:

    > The comment I responded to in this thread was this:
    > "'Only one iPhone application can run at a time,"
    >
    > For the reading impaired I'll state it again: false, as written.
    >
    > As for what will happen in 3 months, I'll let you do the speculating.


    Mike, there is no need to try and a"debate" these two idiots. They are
    notorious iPhone haters and usually, as in this case, dead wrong. Your
    points have been taken and they both now look foolish. Let's all update
    our killfiles and carry on



  • Similar Threads




  • Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast