Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login
Ask HN: iPhone released: discouraged as I am?
44 points by oldgregg on June 10, 2008 | hide | past | web | favorite | 67 comments
My first response: wow, this is an amazing device -- geo-location services are finally here! -- can't wait to pick one up.

But now I'm just depressed.

I'm depressed because people I know who have been working on great products are going to have an impossible time competing with Cupertino - every ajax desktop, data backup/sync, ???.

I'm depressed because apple apparently hates open-anything. Jobs smirks "oh hey we're going to let you push icon updates to the phone" -- WTF? Oh thank you great benevolent one. Then they proudly announce they had approved 4,000 developers. Nevermind the 21,000 we arbitrarily dicked over.

For developers it seems like the only upside is that someone is finally kicking mobile carriers in the teeth -- long since overdue.

In five years will we be missing Microsoft? :-/




"But now I'm just depressed."

Why? Because the landscape has changed?

People affected by this will just have to adapt and find their place in the new landscape. That's all.

The pie is so big there's room for everybody. And if you still don't think so, there are plenty of other pies no one has noticed yet. You just gotta find them.

Nothing to be "depressed" about. Happens all the time.

OTOH, this is an excellent example of the advantages of being small and nimble - you can adapt quickly while the big boys are stuck struggling.


Apple is fascist. The iPhone specifically.

Microsoft in comparison looks like a beautiful tour de force of openness. Free (arguably) open CIL, languages, document format, IDE, documentation. No one DECIDES who can develop on windows mobile. Or for that matter most other SDKs. As for the cost, absolute worst case for an individual - about $1k a year to get an MSDN subscription.

Meanwhile 4000 devs are going to make ALL the applications that the masses could ever want on an iPhone. Why not just open it up for $100/$300? Heck, why isn't it free to push open source projects? Why isn't it free to push to your own iPhone? Why hasn't anyone asked Apple these questions? This is insane. If Microsoft tried something this crazy everyone would be in an uproar. This will give a huge advantage to large or "in the know" tech companies. I don't see the advantage to the consumer. The iPhone SDK is already relatively locked down so I don't want to hear security.

This being said I have an iPhone and Macbook. They are beautiful elegant machines. They work great. The interface is excellent. FreeBSD is $$$$. They've replaced my linux boxes at home. My iPhone completely pwns my old samsung blackjack. I actually use the internet on my iPhone and I enjoy using it.

I am frustrated that I can't push my iPhone apps from my macbook to my actual iPhone. I'm frustrated that I can't get some of my linux apps to work in OS X. It seems like they have it out for open source / small business / hackers. I could jail break my iPhone, but I shouldn't have to. I could install Xen and Linux, but I shouldn't have to. Sadly, I would be happy if Apple gave us the same choices as Microsoft. That should not be too much to ask.

EDITED: Syntax and a sentence or two.


No one DECIDES who can develop on windows mobile.

which might have something to do with why it's an ugly, unpleasant mess.

great technical products are not produced via democracy. they're almost always the vision of just a few people.

Meanwhile 4000 devs are going to make ALL the applications that the masses could ever want on an iPhone.

that's patently absurd. apple randomly picked 4000 iphone devs to let into the beta program. that's all. they will let in more later, once they've gotten feedback from the first crop, and understand better how the process will work.

I'm frustrated that I can't get some of my linux apps to work in OS X.

the linux community is not exactly known for making user-friendly apps. it's only natural that there would be a disconnect between their apps and macosx.

heck, i could spend all day addressing the misconceptions and downright falsehoods in this comment, but it sounds like you've already made up your mind.


great technical products are [...] almost always the vision of just a few people.

Platforms, yes -- consistency goes a long way there, and a few coherent voices can build something where all the pieces work well together.

Applications? 'the talented few' still need access to the platform. The question is, is there a way for a few, talented people to develop and deploy the killer iPhone app?

That's not a rhetorical question -- is there such a route?


i believe that there very much is. the iphone sdk is really, really good. you can get up to speed quickly.

it's a shame that apple is not giving out many of the developer keys yet. but if you're serious about this, that shouldn't be much of an impediment. you can still develop for the iphone simulator. and if you really, really need to see your app on a real iphone, you can jailbreak your phone. it's not what apple wants you to do, of course, but i really doubt they're going to disqualify developers who use that method for testing.


heck, i could spend all day addressing the misconceptions and downright falsehoods in this comment, but it sounds like you've already made up your mind.

I'll listen if you'd like to continue to comment.

great technical products are not produced via democracy. they're almost always the vision of just a few people.

This clearly puts you in the cathedral category from The Cathedral & the Bazaar (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Cathedral_and_the_Bazaar). I think both approaches have their merits and operating systems should make room for both. Though, there are good arguments for both sides I tend to like enough openness for both approaches to compete.

that's patently absurd. apple randomly picked 4000 iphone devs to let into the beta program. that's all. they will let in more later, once they've gotten feedback from the first crop, and understand better how the process will work.

I could understand this for a few months following the launch of the beta. But at this point open it up, what are they worried about? I'd just like to be able to put my own apps on my own iPhone for starters. I don't see how that will hurt Apple's app store launch. I understand why they are doing it, I just don't agree.

I'm happy Apple is at least based on FreeBSD. If Apple is going to use Unix as a selling point then they open themselves up to some expectations from the Linux / BSD crowd. I've found ways around any problems, new apps, different work processes. But, that doesn't mean I wasn't frustrated.


i agree that it is unfortunate that you can't install your own apps on your own iphone without a key from apple, access to which they are zealously guarding. i'd love to be able to do just that.

my guess is that it's because this is somewhat tricky. the natural state of data is that it's easily copied. apple is creating artificial impediments to that natural state, in order to keep the iphone experience pristine and friendly for non-techy-types. they don't want to release something that's half-baked, then have to take it back. that would get everyone enraged.

also, apple does have an unfortunate tendency towards absolute secrecy. it's better than the endless vaporware announcements that most other companies seem to revel in, but i think they go too far sometimes.

apple's not perfect, but they do a better job than any other tech company i can think of, in my opinion.


"Free (arguably) open CIL, languages, document format, IDE, documentation."

Actually, Visual Studio Express doesn't even include a profiler, IIRC. The profiler is included only in the much more expensive enterprisey Visual Studio team edition (or whatever the hell it's called). All of Apple's developer tools are completely free and come with OS installation DVDs. Apple's compilers are based on gcc, and, per terms of the GPL, Apple's patches are sent back to gcc's maintainers.

"Meanwhile 4000 devs are going to make ALL the applications that the masses could ever want on an iPhone."

Where did you get this idea? 4000 people are in the beta, and there is no reason to believe that Apple won't let absolutely anyone on Earth develop iPhone apps as soon as the SDK reaches its final release.

"Heck, why isn't it free to push open source projects?... It seems like they have it out for open source / small business / hackers."

The iPhone App Store is free of charge to developers who choose to release free software, so I have no idea what you're complaining about. The store also lets independent developers set their own pricing. If you don't like that you can't just zap apps from iPhone to iPhone, (1) that's mainly done for safety reasons, and (2) you actually can, with the ad hoc signing mechanism discussed in WWDC keynote.


Fact check in aisle zero. Microsoft's CLR profiler is freely downloadable, no linkage to IDE versions. Additionally, there are two tiers of VS above Express, Professional and Team Suite (VSTS). VSTS comes in different editions, it's a bit convoluted but mostly irrelevant because most folks doing this for a living have an MSDN subscription (or they should, as it pays for itself pretty quickly just for dev/test licences). Collectively, these tools are frequently used to build mission-critical software for large corporations, which is probably the largest difference between MSFT's developer stack and APPL's.


Yes, They've sold this great idea to the developers. Including me. I'm waiting for Apple to implement. Ideas are one thing, implementations are another. And timing is important. I think it's safe to assume that these 4000 beta testers have an advantage. If you are allowed to release a product exclusively for any amount of time that is an advantage.

The iPhone App Store is free of charge to developers who choose to release free software, so I have no idea what you're complaining about. The store also lets independent developers set their own pricing. If you don't like that you can't just zap apps from iPhone to iPhone, (1) that's mainly done for safety reasons, and (2) you actually can, with the ad hoc signing mechanism discussed in WWDC keynote.

Like I said, I enjoy Apple products. I have a problem with the way they run their business. Just because the iPhone will someday be supportive to open source and sharing doesn't mean that it is now. When they finally do allow new small-time iPhone developers I will be celebrating with everyone else.


I mostly agree. You're absolutely right about there being tons of other opportunities out there -- my start-up won't be affected at all -- and I have no doubt people like netvibes or dropbox will adapt. Not to mention I work on apple products 12 hours a day so personally I really benefit from their work.

It's more an issue of building closed platforms. Everyone knows they are bad news but it seems like Apple gets a free pass. Adapting is always a good move, but you have to go meta at some point. A rough parallel would be people living in a locked down communist country... sure you adapt, but on some level it's proper to object to any system that long term consolidates power and subjugates minority interests.


Apple and the iPhone are not roughly parallel to "living in a locked down communist country." You pay for the iPhone. You pay for the cell service. You pay for the shiny MacBook. Nobody makes you pay for these things; you don't have to use Apple products or services if you don't want to. In a communist country you will participate or be imprisoned or killed.


That's why I've never understood the Apple-hate. I mean, yes, I understand that it's great to have open things to fiddle with. At the same time, though, open-source applications are almost never the top-notch apps in their field. I think that Firefox, for instance, is dwarfed in terms of features by Opera and in terms of usability by Safari (my personal favorite). It's partly because Firefox is far more loosely-designed than either of the two browsers. Its philosophy is primarily "be open to change," whereas Opera's is "do everything" and Safari's is "stay out of the way."

Apple doesn't lie to developers about their systems. They present a "my way or the highway" offer. And many excellent devs take them up on it, because they think that the OS X is worth the limitations developers face. Some users think that overall, that is a trade-off that is completely worth it. Others absolutely disagree. But Mac users don't hate "freetards" for their choices. The hate tends to be one-way. Ironic, because a lot of the condescension that Mac users get is from people who accuse them of being elitist.

And... that's my one-sided, rambling rant.


I'm of two minds.

On the one hand, the OP reminds me of the people who were complaining about Microsoft killing firewall vendors by including basic security features in the OS -- you should expect to be destroyed if your entire business model is dependent on the elephant sleeping peacefully on one side of the cage.

On the other hand, Apple isn't creating an ecosystem with the iPhone, so much as a different type of cage. If you play by their rules, you're extremely susceptible to being squished when the elephant gets restless.


> a different type of cage.

Exactly. Many people here may be too young to recall the late 80ies, but Apple were the ones who wanted to control the operating system and the hardware, whereas Microsoft settled for "just" the OS and open hardware. Remember the Apple "look and feel" lawsuit?

They make great products, but as a developer, I'm not sure I trust them a whole lot more than Microsoft.


> Remember the Apple "look and feel" lawsuit?

A remnant of that issue may be present on your desktop. I believe this works on Windows XP and it should also work on Windows Vista. Select a window. Press Alt and release. Press Space and release. The menu that is revealed is to sidestep Apple's single click window closing patent which was filed circa 1984.


How dare you accuse me of using a Windows desktop! :-)


I'm not afraid to say that i'm using Windows XP. :-)

But i don't see how this behaviour is related to a single click patent. Btw. it doesn't work with Firefox.


It could have been expensive for Microsoft to license single click window closing on a per copy basis and it could have set an expensive precedent. So, they devised numerous methods of closing a window without infringing on the patent. One method was to open a menu on the top left corner of a window, and with or without a second click, selecting the window close item. Another method selects the same menu item by using keyboard sequences. However, no method allowed you to close a window by using a single mouse click.

After the patent expired, the keyboard sequences were retained for power users who were already familiar with the sequences. However, the prominance of the menu has declined.

> it doesn't work on Firefox

I'm not surprised. Firefox on Windows implements its own menu primitives. Many other applications have different versions of the same libraries statically compiled. Obviously, the Firefox implementation doesn't implement a legacy window.


You are supposed to keep ALT down when you press space.


Actually, you don't need to with MS apps, but doing so allows it to work with FF also.


That's right. I have Alt+Space mapped to Launchy so i didn't test that.


I was talking to a googler the other day who says that Eric Schmidt is fond of saying about these situations, "It's not a zero-sum game."

The original complaint about Apple being anti-open is proof that there's still room for more than Apple.


I want Apple pie.

Nothing to be "depressed" about. Happens all the time.

"Happens all the time" is a reason not to be depressed? I think "landscape changes" take place because someone/some group got tired of being depressed and actively sought some sort of change.

OTOH, this is an excellent example of the advantages of being small and nimble - you can adapt quickly while the big boys are stuck struggling.

What? The big boys are eating Apple pie because they, I assume, had an easier time getting to the table than the small and nimble.


The only problems I have with the iPhone is that Apple decides what software is available and that makes it extremely difficult to write free software for it. There's _no_ reason in 2008 that people should be excited about (effectively) a computer that is actively free software unfriendly. The iPhone seems defective by design. The thing that makes me sad is that no one -- _particularly_ the people calling themselves hackers -- seems to care...


I would care if the existing software on the iPhone was really lacking. I actually wrote a new firmware for the Archos multimedia jukebox for that reason - the original software absolutely sucked. Archos then actually threatened to sue me etc etc. Good times, good times...

Anyhow. Games consoles are pretty closed, I don't have a problems with the iPhone being closed to be honest. It has a very capabale web browser, which means you can run pretty much anything you like anyway.


Games consoles are pretty closed

Don't remind me :(

That's one of the biggest obstacles to independent innovation in gaming today. The PC is the current bastion of the small developer but PC gaming itself is in decline. We need more open access to the console space.


I think the notification system will work out. Apparently you can use it to play a sound, "badge" an icon, or display a custom message. That sounds limited, but I think it completely encompasses the vocabulary of the user interface. Think of how Apple's programs work, and the only think I think of immediately missing is an action button or two on the "display a custom message", perhaps that will be there, maybe not, I can still attract the user to interact with my program and that makes me happy.

As one of the 21,000 "dicked over" developers, I am still hopeful that they will open the floodgate enough days before July 11th to let me deploy on Day 1 and stake my ground against any potential competitor before they are the incumbent. The nature of my application makes the emulator mostly useless, but I have written a suite of algorithms and when I learn the performance characteristics of the iPhone hardware I will be able to choose and tune rapidly to deliver the best user experience. It has been a lot of extra work that I could better spent if I could have chosen and tuned along the way, but I also understand their desire to limit load from the beta program. I suppose what I would have done differently is make a track for people whose applications need to run natively and made room for them... but that would probably be abused.

I don't see that mobile carriers got kicked in the teeth here. AT&T appears to be loaning you $200 for a stream of 24 monthly $10 payments. That works out to about a 15% return on their money. Then read the articles about AT&T no longer paying a monthly share to Apple and justifying it "because they are using that to subsidize the phones". I call bullshit. The $10/mo more than covers the $200 subsidy.


Why didn't you run the program on a jailbroken iphone? The performance characteristics/quirks/etc would be far more similar to the "official iphone" vs. the simulator


That's a good idea, probably better than the way I have gone. If I personally knew anyone with a jailbroken iPhone and I saw that the process of loading and running was wrinkle free I might do it. I've recently spent far too much time wrestling strange build and run environments to want to get involved in another. At least my work on the algorithm suite has improved my understanding of the problem and possibly my solution. Time spent wrestling with a platform is mostly lost.


the 10 dollars a month covers the difference between 3G and edge.


What makes anyone think 3G costs more to operate than edge? As I understand it 3G is more bandwidth efficient than edge which makes it able to serve more bits and handle more calls with fewer towers. Presumably consumption will rise a bit with faster page loads, but I don't think they'll be installing 50% more towers to justify the 50% price hike on data. Can I leave my iPhone 3G in edge mode (we saw the slider) and not pay the extra $10? I doubt it.

Calling the extra $10 a 3G upgrade is one more bit of mirror in the smoke.


I'm happy to pay $10 more per month to get 3G even without the carrier discount on the hardware, regardless of whether or not it costs the carrier more to provide 3G service. But I can only imagine upgrading their infrastructure to provide 3G took a significant investment and I can't blame the carrier for trying to recover their costs by charging more.


Gotta admit, I was surprised by their new apps. They are absolutely stunning. I heard rumors some time ago that Apple would offload their web apps (.Mac) to Google. Well, these new apps look better (and hopefully work as advertised) than Google's apps. For a company that only dabbles in web development, these new MobileMe apps change all that. They've raised the bar very high indeed.


Having worked on the XBox 360, Sony PS3, Sony PSP this is a HUGE improvement.

The walled garden is not as huge an impediment as you believe it to be. Figure out if it is fiscally prudent for your organization to work on the iPhone platform. If not, move on. There are a ton of ideas that need to be worked on on a wide range of platforms.


You are definitely not alone. I'm pretty worried myself. A phone to realistically compete with the iPhone (especially at its new lower price point) is nowhere in site and the walled garden seems to grow with each Apple announcement.

AppStore could be another Facebook platform situation where Apple kills startups at will simply by releasing their own version of a application. And Apple wont need to push icon updates, their apps can run as background services just fine.

I'd like to be optimistic about other emerging mobile platforms, but everyone else is so dreadfully far behind and thats a bit concerning for a developer.


it's hardly the case that the other 21k developers got "dicked over!" apple decided they were only going to let a few in during the beta period. i bet the situation will be rectified at some point after the app store launches.

the only thing those 4k developers got that the rest of us didn't is a key to install apps onto real iphone hardware. everybody else can still develop for the iphone simulator, which is very good. and if you really really need to see your app on a real iphone, you can go the jailbreak route.


Nokia's S60 is a good alternative. A very mature, yet completely open OS. Touchscreen phones coming, too. It would take years for Apple to catch up with Nokia's attention to detail. Too bad they are practically non-existent in the US...


You could also root for Google Android.


It's hard to "root" for them when there are no phones out that currently run on the platform, and many of the details still seem to be up in the air.

My worry is that Apple will dominate the smartphone market (like the MP3 player market), which will cause everyone else to try and play catch up. It already seems to be happening - other companies seem to be concentrating on touchscreen phones they call "iPhone killers." When was the last time someone made an innovative MP3 player that gained a significant share of the market?


I am comfortable having a company like Apple lead the MP3 and smart phone markets. They are setting a quality standard that balances function and design in ways that other companies can learn from.

I hate to make the obvious comparison but its better then having something like Vista; an OS that dominates the market and the competitors succeeding by trying to be better, by not being like Vista.

Apple deserves the top spot if all the competitors can do is make a touchscreen, instead of improving the UI as a whole and focusing on the user experience.


With the iPhone though we are potentially talking about the platform of the future.

Do you want a single monopoly controlling this? That type of situation has historically been bad for innovation.

As an analogy, how would things be if every internet web app created had to operate at the mercy of another company? Startup A has a great idea and wants to release an innovative new webapp. But they need to pay and have permission to do so, must operate in a tightly defined sandbox, and must share profits that they make. And the webapp could be kicked off the internet at anytime for breaking these rules.

Does that make you comfortable?


Depends if I'm taking the perspective of a start-up founder or a developer.

As a founder I would understand the business strategy taken by Apple who naturally aims to keep a maintainable standard in it's softwares components.

Keeping technical standards is pretty common for any company acting as a platform. In this scenario the end goal seems to be ensuring a level of performance.

A company who decides to create an innovative app should of considered whether or not it can meet those standards. Otherwise their time creating something innovative should of been applied to a better market or when the platform in place can handle the innovation.

By the way, the smart phone market is far from monopolistic so I'm not really worried.


I personally have no problem (okay, some problem) with apple cornering the hardware market for smart phones. My bigger concern is if they corner the software market as well. The software from apple is more suited to the non-technical user (as most of their users are non-technical) and I would like to have my own software on the iPhone. That is why we have competition in the first place. To serve the market in the most efficient way possible. If a single company controlled the entire software space (not just OS), would we have software like emacs which is completely useless for anybody outside a technical field but a godsend to hackers?

Likewise, eventually apple will corner the hardware market in some platform and sell hardware that I do not like at which I will just have a problem with all parts of their products. Better not to let them monopolize the marketplace in the first place.


Is there a release date for android yet?


Now, let's not quibble over minor missing features like "physical existence". Surely they can patch that after the initial release.

Instead, we should think about all the great things we can do with the imaginary Android phones that are available today. My older model is relatively limited, but I'm told that the new Android 3e^i, shipping in July, will cure cancer!


> but I'm told that the new Android 3e^i, shipping in July, will cure cancer!

Take that, iPhone!

http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=213895


Google delayed their handset. No word about other carriers.

Problem is that many carriers are backtracking on their support for Android. Google hoped that the newly opened spectrum would be a fertile ground for Android and now it looks like Verizon will fight Google over that agreement with FCC. It will be a mess in any case.

If I were betting money on mobile market, I'd bet on Apple.


Here's the thing. I think most of us here are rational enough to not degrade into raw fanboy-ism (is that asking too much?). If Apple didn't keep knocking the ball out of the park while simultaneously facing a competition that seems utterly incapable of making an adequate response, we wouldn't be having this conversation. Sometimes I wonder if Apple's real brilliance is in carefully choosing which segments of a market to attack... perhaps they have an incompetence detector?

It's not like open source projects like OpenMoko haven't had a chance to make an amazing phone. Indeed, I'm frustrated because before the iPhone announcement, the OpenMoko looked like a top-of-the-line sort of gadget, and then Apple leapfrogs all their efforts on the first try. But I want a great phone, so now I'm stuck with AT&T and buying an iPhone.

If these independent "great products" want to compete, perhaps they need to start forming explicit alliances with other service providers to form an integrated solution that people want. It's very clear that at least the Apple-buying public wants that kind of integration.


I actually think this is going to be a fantastic opportunity for startups.. even though Apple has built some pretty high walls for developers

I'm from Australia and mobile internet is currently just way too expensive and so nobody uses it. If the iPhone (and competitors) can drive demand and push prices down, it could really open up some opportunities for developers working on applications for mobiles.


You could always go with Nokia's S60 devices. I've been extremely happy with my N82 so far, and there's also the N95 or the E90. Seriously, give them a look. You can install whatever you want without ridiculous workarounds, and they are all more capable devices than the iPhone.


I agree that technically there are some good devices out there-- but in 18 months when Apple has the market completely wrapped up what's the point?


Last time I checked Nokia N95's were outselling the iPhone considerably, even as there is hardly any advertising in the US (1), none of the carriers sell it and the price is significantly higher. And that's just one model.

(*) A non-geek friend told me she thought Nokia was bankrupt, because she hadn't heard anything about them for a while.


Honestly? What echo chamber do you live in? I don't know anyone who owns or is even considering buying an iPhone.


I only know one person who owns a Nokia smartphone (and at least eight who have iPhones). He bought it last summer (when the cheapest iPhone was $499) for $200.

Since he wanted cheap email on the go, the iPhone was too expensive for him. I have read a lot of articles about the fact that the iPhone now includes GPS is a game-changer, but I think that the price cut to $199 is more important.


Maybe we should wait to hear whether they remaining devs will be approved at a later date. I've seen people approved with absolutely no track record whatsoever, so the requirements can't be too stringent.


We needed a leader in cell phones. Until now, it was such a completely disjointed landscape that developing an app for phones was a walk in a field of mines. Companies were busy grabbing for land, but weren't working hard to create a great device. Maybe this is that start of focusing how to create awesome mobile applications for the masses.

I think we are witnessing a pivotable moment in history.


Mobile web is the next big thing!!!! WAP!


I hope you are being sarcastic.


Erm yes ;)


Buy Apple stock :)


I will prefer open source phones to the iPhone, of that I am sure. Except I don't like Android much (from a developer's point of view), and Linux on the phone seems to be still far away. For the time being it's like whatever, ALL phones suck, the iPhone just sucks a little less (hopefully).


No my friend you have it all wrong. The badge updates are a fine solution for now. Everything is fine, my friend.

I'm a bit concerned with your tone. It's almost as if you don't have faith that the Steve will do what is right. Has he not given us the iPhone, freed us from shitty cell phones, and gifted us, from some unknowable realm only he walks in, this beautiful 15 in. macbook pro I am typing on. After all the Steve did, you still want to leave the cult? In spite of everything, you just have to see the spear marks and stick your finger in. In your dark night, you even compare our savior (Steve) to microsoft. Luckily for you, the Steve's ability to make totally awesome gizmo's with a touch of LSD in each one is only parrelleled by his limitless compassion, and he is willing to forgive you, if only you would open your heart up to his forgiveness.

Why don't you sit down and talk for a bit, doubting thomas? You are free to leave, just sit down and talk for a minute first, my friend. We're not going to stop you from leaving. Just sit down and chat first.


Wow, I hope that last paragraph is some level of sarcasm that is beyond me or an extract from something, because it sounds ridiculous.


It was an extract from the south park where stan, kyle, and cartman join the david blaine cult and kyle wants to leave, and the shaved head cult people say something almost exactly like that.


Ah good! my faith is restored. Good quote :)


maybe if you stopped wishing people would be "kicked in the teeth" you'd be a happier person. what you need is a better attitude. as you say, apple made something amazing. we should all rejoice.




Guidelines | FAQ | Support | API | Security | Lists | Bookmarklet | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: