I mean it’s not as if Android’s marketed as being open, and that very open-ness was a reason for the FCC to state that the wireless spectrum didn’t need no stinkin’ net neutrality or anything.
Nothing says ‘Open’ like ‘We’re not gonna share this with you yet’.
Nice comparison of the Xoom, iPad 2, Playbook and TouchPad - though, half of the devices have yet to ship, and the iPad 2 proves the magic’s only half in the device itself. It’s the software experience that sets the bar so high with the Apple tablet.
Lots of smart observations and examples from iOS, Android and webOS.
Great piece, reprinted by the Guardian, about the uphill battle that WebM/VP8 faces.
It’s probably no surprise that Steph and I have already got Google Apps set up for our wedding next summer - however Google’s put together a site detailing not only how you can use Google Apps to plan a wedding but also the templates available in Google Docs.
Remember how not so long ago Google played the “holier than thou” card with Microsoft by offering Chrome Frame - proclaiming it to be a securer, free-er, open-er and all-round better way to browse?
Today Microsoft’s retort came in two parts: one, a 3,000 word piece from the guy leading IE’s development - talking about H.264, the other in the form of a Chrome extension. To re-enable the native playback of H.264 video in Chrome that Google dropped in another of its “We’re a big company doing big company things, but we’ll say we’re doing it for the open-ness” fits.
Video publishers need the VIDEO tag for one purpose only: to support Apple’s non-standard HTML browser.
Google seems to use “open” like a Smurf uses “smurf”: to mean whatever suits them best while they’re forming a sentence.
Did Google decide to make Chrome the browser for neckbeards, or are they coming to the conclusion that it already is?
© Nik Fletcher 2007-2011 ~ Contact
