Hacker Newsnew | comments | show | ask | jobs | submit | pedanticfreak's comments login

The Chrome Web Store looks like the native iTunes store. That is not a compliment.

Despite that it is still better looking than the Android Market Web Store. The best thing I can say about the Android Market is that it is remarkably fast.

-----


I find it incredible someone with enough expertise to build the project and get it on the Mac Store can be so clueless with regard to licensing.

Not only are they using unlicensed game assets, but it seems they are violating the GPL as well.

I suspect iCoder knew what it was doing all along.

-----


Nevermind the cheap device. The $25 per month service that includes 300 minutes, unlimited text, and unlimited data is the real story here.

http://www.virginmobileusa.com/cell-phone-plans/beyond-talk-...

Of course, you get what you pay for in coverage

http://www.virginmobileusa.com/check-cell-phone-coverage

Meanwhile in Canada you can't even get unlimited data over wired internet.

-----


In Canada I have unlimited data (with fair use policy), unlimited text and unlimited minutes (North America) for $40/month. The existence of such plans is quite new.

Concerning the introduction of "mandatory" metered internet in Canada: it appears the big guys may have been so greedy they over-reached. The consumer backlash is strong and the decision is now under review by government.

-----


Could you explain the "fair use policy"?

-----


Yes - you pay and they decide later what you get.

-----


Max speed to 5GB per month after which they reserve the right to slow down your connection.

-----


I guess that means all our plans here in New Zealand are technically "unlimited"...

You know, the ones that give you X GB of traffic, after which you're throttled back to dial-up speeds.

-----


That sounds like a mobile plan in the €30 per month range, not like an unlimited residential plan.

-----


Can you then explain the use of the term "unlimited"

-----


The carrier has an unlimited license to distort the English language.

-----


If that's on mobilicty - they use AWS so you are bit more limited in your choice of phones, and where they will work.

-----


Yea, the cheap device part is nothing new. Just look on ebay for "unlocked android phone" and you'll find tons of G1's and other low end devices below $100.

-----


I agree, the real deal is the plan. Otherwise you could get an iPhone 3GS for $49 with AT&T and it would be a much better device than that.

-----


No more awkward than Apple using Samsung to fab its chips.

-----


And in both situations, each company is giving its competitor coarse-grained data about its customer base (Netflix in real time, Apple with a few months' lead).

If Netflix hasn't put DRM on their stream, someone monitoring the pipe could easily get the zeitgeist of what movies are being streamed.

-----


"If Netflix hasn't put DRM on their stream..."

Um, ever tried to stream Netflix video from anything that wasn't running the latest Silverlight? Or diverting/capturing the video from the stream, even on an authorized client?

That's why there's still no Netflix client for Android or Linux, and why Netflix probably doesn't have to worry too much about content sniffing.

-----


It's certainly a good point-- It's not like competitors that also work together is a new concept. Except I'd say this is a bit different. We're not talking about Netflix relying on Amazon to produce a hardware component, we're talking about Amazon staffing and being responsible at the lowest level (24/7) for Netflix's service to operate (I'm assuming a bit here... perhaps Netflix can still function through an AWS outage). And I'd question if that's really something you want to put in the hands of a company which wants to steal away your customers.

-----


No worse than me streaming Netflix over my Shaw internet to replace me buying Shaw cable.

In fact Amazon are going to be more careful about dealing honestly with Netflix. If they spy on / interfere with customers on their cloud service because they might be competitors they are going to attract government intervention and lose a lot of customers.

-----


Until the W3C officially adopts a royalty free codec as part of the HTML standard, Google and Mozilla should assume HTML video is dead. They might as well make the <video> tag inoperable by default. Just parse it and ignore it.

Of course, Google owns VP8. So they are pushing it so it might become a defacto standard that later gets officially adopted. Despite meeting the requirements to be part of the HTML spec, without the official backing of the W3C it is no different than any other out of spec extension to HTML.

-----


Maybe this is a dumb question, but what difference does it make what's in the spec? People will pick the browser that plays the videos they want to see over the one that follows the spec every time.

-----


http://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/news/biz/2009/09/123_52401.h...

South Korea built vast infrastructure around IE6 and ActiveX. Just a year ago a full 60% of Korean traffic still came from IE6. Why? Because they relied heavily on features that were not in the spec that Microsoft deprecated and nobody else can or will implement.

An extreme example. But it highlights the importance of sticking to specs that can be freely implemented by anyone. Five years from now when MPEGLA decides to throw down the crap hammer do you want to have to keep around old Safari binaries just for sites that migrated to h264 while the rest of the web moved on?

-----


That sounds like an argument for free and open formats in general more than an argument for strict obedience to the W3C, but I see your point.

At the time those Korean sites were built, I'm guessing there was no spec nor open alternative to do what they were trying to do.

-----


I don't think it is the same thing. Unlike ActiveX, video can be re-encoded (fairly easily I guess if you are going to use 2016 technology).

-----


The W3C (via the WHAT WG) did have a royalty free codec as part of the spec in Ogg Theora. It was removed because it became clear that key players (specifically Nokia and Apple) were refusing to implement it, spec or no. A spec that doesn’t match what people are willing to implement isn’t a very good spec.

-----


Is Mozilla intentionally trying to create market confusion? It isn't obvious from the name, but this is built on XULRunner and has no relation to Google Chrome.

-----


Browser "Chrome" has been a term that's been around for ages. The confusion can be blamed on Google, actually.

-----


Yes, but using "Chromeless" after the fact that Chrome is now considered as a browser name is asking for trouble.

It could have been a nice code name for the project, though :)

-----


If you think that "Chrome" was chosen for any reason other than a direct reference to the widespread usage of the term with regard to Mozilla, you're crazy; i.e., if you have an agenda to name someone to blame for muddying the waters, pointing the finger at the Chrome team would be far more apropos.

-----


Mozilla has been using the term chrome for a while now (http://www-archive.mozilla.org/xpfe/ConfigChromeSpec.html).

"Chrome is the user interface parts of the application window that are outside of a window's content area"

The name Chromeless makes sense.

-----


It's downright ridiculous if section 11.2 is applied universally. So does Apple get a cut of Cisco's WebEx contracts whenever a customer decides to fire up the free iOS app? Does Apple get a cut of OverDrive's contract to deliver eBooks and audio books to local libraries if someone downloads the iOS app? This doesn't even make sense.

Are Netflix and Hulu going to hand over 30% of their subscription fees to Apple if the user wants to fire up the service on an iOS device? Is that even feasible?

Are the Apple tax examiners going to look for login screens and reject apps based solely on that now?

No, probably not. It's probably just a cover for Apple to beat up on its competitors (Amazon, Barnes and Noble) and to let everyone else (Netflix, Hulu) get a free pass. Much like how Apple singled out Adobe yet allowed Appcelerator and UNITY to continue without pause.

-----


If a user uses the IRS's Tax App, should Apple get a 30% cut?

-----


I'm not sure about the IRS, but I know for a fact non-profits have been in a bind with Apple for years for just that reason. Apple wants 30% of the donations. Or rather, Apple will not allow credit card transactions that do not go through in app purchase.

Every charity wants to arm its people with an iPad or send out a free iPhone app to collect donations. Ever notice how there aren't any?

-----


No. I don't have an iPhone. After watching Apple sell a Title I junior high where I was interning a lab full of IIGS machines in 1991, I haven't had much stomach for them.

-----


Why didn't Google's investigation go further? Why didn't they decompile the IE8 toolbar to figure out what it was really doing? Maybe that's against the DMCA and Google can't admit to it?

Having the evidence in code would have made the accusation irrefutable.

-----


Agree. I have to imagine that someone at Google captured the toolbar's HTTP traffic. Maybe they're holding it back, or maybe it's the same for Google results as it is for, say, Lycos.

-----


Nexus S? Nexus One? Nokia N900? OpenMoko FreeRunner? OpenPandora?

There are more than a few more powerful alternatives to an iPhone that are open source and ready to hack. Most of them can even make phone calls.

-----


And yet this 8 bit microcontroller seems to have more fluid, smooth scrolling than all of them...

-----


Let me know when they finally ban the pink plastic shopping bags from Chinatown.

-----


Seriously. Add the Sunset and the Richmond to that, too. Unfortunately the plastic bag ban was only for "large markets" (eg Safeway, Whole Foods).

-----

More

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

Search: