HN user
The screen size looks wrong because the app is running in pillar box mode — it's only been compiled to run for 640x960 screens (i.e. iPhone 4S and older).
The keyboard is iOS 6 styled because the app hasn't been compiled for iOS 7.
Nothing out of the ordinary here.
Alleged Sheep Marketplace theft and scam?
http://www.techienews.co.uk/973470/silk-road-like-sheep-mark...
>IMHO, feed reading should be integrated into the browser as a tab, not in the hands of commercial interests.
This is a really interesting idea. Has there been any talk in Chrome development about building a browser-side RSS reader? Google would still get all the information they get from Reader now but they'd be making the 'feature' exclusive to their browser. This coming not long after Apple removed their feed managing ability in the web browser, meaning they could get a load of Chrome converts on OS X just from that.
It'd be really interesting to see what happened if browser-side RSS became "the thing" again. Although, as julien pointed out, doing it browser-side doesn't necessarily mean your RSS isn't in the hands of a commercial interest.
Complete with the security of '96: http://www.dolekemp96.org/divider.gi [Intentionally broken link]
There is none — the title is misleading linkbait. The article only mentions Apple twice, and even then it doesn't explain what "Apple's poisonous touch" has to do with GNOME 3 being almost universally disliked — or as the title puts it, "killed" (which is also completely untrue).
Minecraft isn't as popular as it is because it's the result of brilliantly-written Java; it sells so well because it's a brilliant concept.
Or, if on iOS 5, just go into Settings > About and change it in there.
The only technical limitation I can think of is the one which exists server-side. Siri has been having troubles from time-to-time with just iPhone 4S owners polling it. Imagine if all iPhone 4 (and even 3GS) owners were trying to use it too.
For some reason I didn't even consider that you could control it via normal text input, but you're obviously right as that's what Siri will eventually use after the voice-recognition software is used. This totally widens the possible market then, you're right.
I think the main bottleneck at the moment though (and why Siri was limited to the iPhone 4S even though the 4 and 3GS run it perfectly) is due to server load. They simply don't have the infrastructure to handle all the requests.
It wouldn't be competing directly with Google though, would it? Siri offers a limited range of functions (currently, though this will inevitably widen as Apple makes more modules (and possibly opens it up to third parties)) whereas Google indexes (almost) everything on the web and searches by text.
I agree though: due to its nature of remotely processing input, Siri could become a search engine accessed via a web browser assuming the computer has a mic (which most current Macs — especially the biggest-sellers, MacBooks — do). It would become a single interface for accessing dozens of services — like Wolfram Alpha and Yelp — and tapping petabytes of information.
As much as I love what you said, I hate to break it to you that t_hero.png is actually named due to the fact it's the "Hero" graphic. This just refers to the fact that it's the main splash image of the page.[1]
You can see the hero image which was in use before the announcement of Steve's passing here[2] — look at the filename.
[1] http://www.med.unc.edu/webguide/policies/hero-graphics
[2] https://www.apple.com/uk/iphone/home/images/animation/fallba...
>It would seem a full 50% of gruber's readers replaced their ipad's with the ipad 2.
What does Gruber have to do with this? Do you mean Marco?
>I hope that iOS 5's OTA updates we could get to the point where iOS versions older than a few months are considered obsolete.
While a very nice idea, I'm not convinced it much will change due to old hardware being incompatible with new versions of iOS. It's rarely the x.y versions which are the barriers to progress, but the x.0 versions.
As a designer (and soon-to-be programmer) I totally agree that iteration is key. Iteration is so important to producing a polished product with the best possible aesthetics and experience.
However, I really do not agree that the right approach is to not think about the best possible design beforehand. Ramming your fingers in there and fumbling around blindly is a terrible idea. Think beforehand about the best possible solution and then repair and iterate on that.
I'd hazard a guess at saying this was a 20% project and the individual is the engineer who led (or was sole member of) the project.
It's for people who want to lend their Mac to a friend, but don't want them having access to all their already-signed in accounts, to applications like Mail, and all your files. I suppose places with public-usage Macs could also use this to keep clientele restricted to just using the web.
Also, seeing as this boots from the Recovery partition, it means that, should your Lion install go belly-up, you've still got internet access, which I think is brilliant.
That certainly does change the angle of my story — have you got a source for that?
I dunno, I think they're more inspired by this: http://d.pr/dQPu
I think it's far more likely it was rejected because it uses private APIs and takes lower-level access than App Store guidelines allow.
I dunno, the headline is "Apple copies rejected app" not "Apple copies rejected app icon". Seems to me that people either don't know how the App Store and its requirements work, or they're just want to be outraged at Apple. Edit: It seems to me that even people commenting here in HN don't realise that the App Store guidelines don't allow for an app to take this kind of access.
The icons are similar (despite how shitty an icon it is), but it won't actually be used anywhere other than apple.com/iOS5 as far as I know; for example it's not even in the Settings app on iOS 5. Plus people are forgetting that this icon is just what Apple have used for years as their WiFi/AirPort. If anything, the developer copied — or at the very least, took a lot of inspiration from — Apple's icons for his app's icon.
Mhm, so I don't understand why he expected anything different or why people are so outraged it was rejected — that's one of the major benefits of the App Store: sandboxing and access restrictions of apps.
Yeah, as far as I know it was the first publicly-released wireless syncing software designed to let you sync iTunes and iOS.
Mhm. And the fact that he produced the first public implementation of this means that Apple isn't allowed to implement their own version — never mind the fact that such a feature requires lower level control than the App Store guidelines allows for its apps (meaning it's exactly the kind of feature that Apple should be implementing themselves, not App Store developers).
box-shadow is CSS3, not HTML. HTML is markup for text, CSS is formatting that text.
It's not about making it only work in one browser — it's that currently these effects collectively (as Arnorhs points out, this isn't just box-shadow) are only rendered properly by that one browser (actually it's the rendering engine which is most important here — WebKit — which means I can view them fine in Safari 5.1).
Shame to see you're being poopoo'd — there are clearly huge similarities with the upcoming OS X Lion — although, to be fair to your detractors, you did pick the worst example.
The new Application Launcher looks exactly like Launchpad. Darken the wallpaper, display installed applications as icons with the names below them, just as in Springboard.app.
The window selector looks exactly like Exposé — not even a new feature of OS X. Darken wallpaper, windows appear in a miniaturised form of themselves to give you an overview of all open windows.
The workspace manager looks just like Mission Control's space selector. In Lion the spaces are shown horizontally at the top of the screen, but both Gnome and Lion show the spaces on the opposite side of the screen to the default dock position. I have to say, the space is used more effectively in Gnome by stacking them vertically.
The switches (instead of checkboxes) as visible in the YouTube video embedded (0:04) are clearly inspired by iOS' ON|OFF switches. As are the sliders (visible at 0:05).
(Tenuous one, but the Close buttons used in the Exposé view are very similar to the "Remove Widget" buttons used in Dashboard when holding Alt.)
(I don't know what the old System Preferences window of Gnome looked like, but it does look awfully similar to OS X's.)
Now, admittedly, there are of course differences (such as being able to close windows from Gnome 3's exposé view) and I don't expect everyone to invent an entirely new UI — I acknowledge that the use of a windowed environment isn't Apple's invention. But I do refute the idea that this UI hasn't taken inspiration from Lion and I refute the idea that it simply doesn't matter.
Works nice and smooth on iPhone 4 until you zoom in — the further you zoom in, the more jumpy it becomes.
I see your point, but — as already more eloquently explained by ecuzzillo and monastic — dormancy does eventually lead to worthlessness.
Already people are experiencing issues with features not working properly [1], and relatively simple (but non-vital) updates to add to functionality are not being made [2].
[1] I don't get RSS updates reliably any more, essentially making the app worthless to me, considering that was the main reason I bought it.
[2] E.g. the Twitter button opens m.twitter.com, not the official Twitter app. Same goes for Google Reader.
I bought this a while ago (a year?) and, although it's a great application, the developer seemingly abandoned it not long after.
MBA Late 2010 (i.e. SSD only) and I have TRIM support listed in Sys Profiler.
"Chrome is only eating away from IE's market share" Really? I'd love to see some sources on that, because I know of dozens of people who've switched from Firefox to Chrome.
Obviously I wasn't suggesting you weren't watching Chrome at all, but it's good to hear you're making the right decisions in competing with Chrome (primarily the reduction of Firefox's inherent clunkiness and slowness).
True, but it's not the contender they should be focusing on.
It's like Apple comparing iOS to Symbian and lauding how great iOS is, when really they should be watching Android.