f



App Store = 1/2 Million Apps

Estimates peg App Store at 500,000 apps

<http://news.cnet.com/8301-27076_3-20065720-248.html>
0
Fred
5/24/2011 6:34:34 PM
comp.mobile.ipad 2567 articles. 0 followers. Post Follow

25 Replies
978 Views

Similar Articles

[PageSpeed] 23

On 5/24/2011 2:34 PM, Fred Moore wrote:
> Estimates peg App Store at 500,000 apps
>
> <http://news.cnet.com/8301-27076_3-20065720-248.html>

Mostly fart apps...

-- 
MFB

0
Flint
5/25/2011 11:19:38 PM
In article <irk2qg$lh0$1@dont-email.me>, Flint <agent1@section31.org>
wrote:

> > Estimates peg App Store at 500,000 apps
> >
> > <http://news.cnet.com/8301-27076_3-20065720-248.html>
> 
> Mostly fart apps...

nope. fart apps are well under 1% of the total. try again.
0
nospam
5/25/2011 11:30:44 PM
On 5/25/2011 7:30 PM, nospam wrote:
> In article<irk2qg$lh0$1@dont-email.me>, Flint<agent1@section31.org>
> wrote:
>
>>> Estimates peg App Store at 500,000 apps
>>>
>>> <http://news.cnet.com/8301-27076_3-20065720-248.html>
>>
>> Mostly fart apps...
>
> nope. fart apps are well under 1% of the total. try again.

Your 1% figure is purely a subjective determination.  End users 
determine what fart apps are - not some pseudo marketing claim.

-- 
MFB

0
Flint
5/30/2011 1:02:14 PM
In article <is04h1$4c5$1@dont-email.me>, Flint <agent1@section31.org>
wrote:

> >>> Estimates peg App Store at 500,000 apps
> >>>
> >>> <http://news.cnet.com/8301-27076_3-20065720-248.html>
> >>
> >> Mostly fart apps...
> >
> > nope. fart apps are well under 1% of the total. try again.
> 
> Your 1% figure is purely a subjective determination. 

nonsense. there's nothing subjective about it. i did a search for the
word fart and got 751 results, out of ~500,000 total apps.

751/500000 = 0.15 %

> End users 
> determine what fart apps are - not some pseudo marketing claim.

actually, it's the developer who determines it, by writing the fart app
and putting the word fart in either the title or the description (or
both), so that it will show up in a search. otherwise, how will anyone
find it?
0
nospam
5/30/2011 5:17:24 PM
On 5/30/2011 1:17 PM, nospam wrote:
> In article<is04h1$4c5$1@dont-email.me>, Flint<agent1@section31.org>
> wrote:
>
>>>>> Estimates peg App Store at 500,000 apps
>>>>>
>>>>> <http://news.cnet.com/8301-27076_3-20065720-248.html>
>>>>
>>>> Mostly fart apps...
>>>
>>> nope. fart apps are well under 1% of the total. try again.
>>
>> Your 1% figure is purely a subjective determination.
>
> nonsense. there's nothing subjective about it. i did a search for the
> word fart and got 751 results, out of ~500,000 total apps.
>
> 751/500000 = 0.15 %
>
>> End users
>> determine what fart apps are - not some pseudo marketing claim.
>
> actually, it's the developer who determines it, by writing the fart app
> and putting the word fart in either the title or the description (or
> both), so that it will show up in a search. otherwise, how will anyone
> find it?

Obviously, we have two very different definitions of fart apps...

-- 
MFB

0
Flint
5/31/2011 2:17:53 AM
In article <is1j4h$e3a$1@dont-email.me>, Flint <agent1@section31.org>
wrote:

> Obviously, we have two very different definitions of fart apps...

what's your definition?
0
nospam
5/31/2011 3:52:42 AM
In article <300520112052423254%nospam@nospam.invalid>,
 nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:

> In article <is1j4h$e3a$1@dont-email.me>, Flint <agent1@section31.org>
> wrote:
> 
> > Obviously, we have two very different definitions of fart apps...
> 
> what's your definition?

Anything he doesn't like, generally.
0
Steve
5/31/2011 5:05:36 AM
On 5/30/2011 11:52 PM, nospam wrote:
> In article<is1j4h$e3a$1@dont-email.me>, Flint<agent1@section31.org>
> wrote:
>
>> Obviously, we have two very different definitions of fart apps...
>
> what's your definition?

The extreme antithetical opposite of bloatware that emphasizes form 
over function with dumbed down, over simplified, too cumbersome to 
configure/use interfaces because of the TouchUI 'training wheels'.

And for the record, all lightweight OS'es have this fundamental 
problem, including Android, BBTOS, and probably WebOS as well when it 
first rolls out.

For me it's not just an Apple thing...

-- 
MFB

0
Flint
5/31/2011 10:20:59 PM
In article <is3pkd$qkk$1@dont-email.me>, Flint <agent1@section31.org>
wrote:

> >> Obviously, we have two very different definitions of fart apps...
> >
> > what's your definition?
> 
> The extreme antithetical opposite of bloatware that emphasizes form 
> over function with dumbed down, over simplified, too cumbersome to 
> configure/use interfaces because of the TouchUI 'training wheels'.

so with your definition, a fart app doesn't actually fart, it's any app
you happen to not like, even if other people think the app is useful.
got it.

given that definition, pretty much every app is a fart app.

> And for the record, all lightweight OS'es have this fundamental 
> problem, including Android, BBTOS, and probably WebOS as well when it 
> first rolls out.

any os has its share of 'dumbed down, over simplified' apps. sometimes
that's good. 

> For me it's not just an Apple thing...

no, it's everything and not just computers either. some cameras are
very simple and others are very complex.  i suppose that makes a point
and shoot camera the equivalent of a fart app.
0
nospam
5/31/2011 11:17:16 PM
On 5/31/2011 7:17 PM, nospam wrote:
> In article<is3pkd$qkk$1@dont-email.me>, Flint<agent1@section31.org>
> wrote:
>
>>>> Obviously, we have two very different definitions of fart apps...
>>>
>>> what's your definition?
>>
>> The extreme antithetical opposite of bloatware that emphasizes form
>> over function with dumbed down, over simplified, too cumbersome to
>> configure/use interfaces because of the TouchUI 'training wheels'.
>
> so with your definition, a fart app doesn't actually fart, it's any app
> you happen to not like, even if other people think the app is useful.
> got it.

1> 'Form >following< function' is not my 'definition'.

2> My likes/dislikes have nothing to do with an app's usefulness in 
general - only their usefulness/appeal >to me<.

3> You're reading comprehension clearly illustrates you _haven't_ 'got 
it'.



> given that definition, pretty much every app is a fart app.

If you prefer broad, vague, nebulous generalizations, I suppose.  But 
then I didn't say "every" app is a fart app, only "most" of them are.


>> And for the record, all lightweight OS'es have this fundamental
>> problem, including Android, BBTOS, and probably WebOS as well when it
>> first rolls out.
>
> any os has its share of 'dumbed down, over simplified' apps. sometimes
> that's good.

'Over'-anything is rarely a 'good' thing, much less an ideal one...



>> For me it's not just an Apple thing...
>
> no, it's everything and not just computers either. some cameras are
> very simple and others are very complex.  i suppose that makes a point
> and shoot camera the equivalent of a fart app.

I quite agree.  Dumbing down any technology is possible and quite 
common these days.  In some applications, doing so makes sense. In 
others however, it diminishes/cheapens the value of those who've 
worked to become qualified in the judicious/proper use of a particular 
technology, or are better equipped/trained to do so, just so 
narcissistic CEOs, their boards, and shareholders can suck up all the 
atmosphere and opportunity from the truly innovative and talented. 
Instead, now massholes have shiny toy playthings as status symbols, or 
any no-talent teenage poptart who can't carry a tune in a *bucket* 
(hence, has no business doing so) is able to become a teen popstar 
these days through dumbed down pitch-transposition algorithms labeled 
'AutoTune'...


-- 
MFB

0
Flint
6/1/2011 12:11:32 PM
In article <is5a9n$lvp$1@dont-email.me>, Flint <agent1@section31.org>
wrote:

> >>>> Obviously, we have two very different definitions of fart apps...
> >>>
> >>> what's your definition?
> >>
> >> The extreme antithetical opposite of bloatware that emphasizes form
> >> over function with dumbed down, over simplified, too cumbersome to
> >> configure/use interfaces because of the TouchUI 'training wheels'.
> >
> > so with your definition, a fart app doesn't actually fart, it's any app
> > you happen to not like, even if other people think the app is useful.
> > got it.
> 
> 1> 'Form >following< function' is not my 'definition'.

except that the definition in question is fart app.

> 2> My likes/dislikes have nothing to do with an app's usefulness in 
> general - only their usefulness/appeal >to me<.

again, the question is what qualifies as a fart app, not about your
likes or dislikes.

> 3> You're reading comprehension clearly illustrates you _haven't_ 'got 
> it'.

wrong.

> > given that definition, pretty much every app is a fart app.
> 
> If you prefer broad, vague, nebulous generalizations, I suppose. 

i'm using your definition.

> But then I didn't say "every" app is a fart app, only "most" of them are.

i didn't say 'every' app, i said pretty much every app. now what were
you saying about reading comprehension?

> >> And for the record, all lightweight OS'es have this fundamental
> >> problem, including Android, BBTOS, and probably WebOS as well when it
> >> first rolls out.
> >
> > any os has its share of 'dumbed down, over simplified' apps. sometimes
> > that's good.
> 
> 'Over'-anything is rarely a 'good' thing, much less an ideal one...

that depends on a lot of things.

> >> For me it's not just an Apple thing...
> >
> > no, it's everything and not just computers either. some cameras are
> > very simple and others are very complex.  i suppose that makes a point
> > and shoot camera the equivalent of a fart app.
> 
> I quite agree. Dumbing down any technology is possible and quite 
> common these days.  In some applications, doing so makes sense. In 
> others however, it diminishes/cheapens the value of those who've 
> worked to become qualified in the judicious/proper use of a particular 
> technology, or are better equipped/trained to do so, just so 
> narcissistic CEOs, their boards, and shareholders can suck up all the 
> atmosphere and opportunity from the truly innovative and talented. 
> Instead, now massholes have shiny toy playthings as status symbols, or 
> any no-talent teenage poptart who can't carry a tune in a *bucket* 
> (hence, has no business doing so) is able to become a teen popstar 
> these days through dumbed down pitch-transposition algorithms labeled 
> 'AutoTune'...

what a load of shit.

making something easy to use empowers those who would otherwise not be
able to do something.
0
nospam
6/1/2011 3:46:01 PM
On 6/1/2011 11:46 AM, nospam wrote:
> In article<is5a9n$lvp$1@dont-email.me>, Flint<agent1@section31.org>
> wrote:
>
>>>>>> Obviously, we have two very different definitions of fart apps...
>>>>>
>>>>> what's your definition?
>>>>
>>>> The extreme antithetical opposite of bloatware that emphasizes form
>>>> over function with dumbed down, over simplified, too cumbersome to
>>>> configure/use interfaces because of the TouchUI 'training wheels'.
>>>
>>> so with your definition, a fart app doesn't actually fart, it's any app
>>> you happen to not like, even if other people think the app is useful.
>>> got it.
>>
>> 1>  'Form>following<  function' is not my 'definition'.
>
> except that the definition in question is fart app.

And apparently you fail to grasp the idea that dumbed down app UI's 
are _less_ empowering, not _more_ empowering when they leave out, or 
omit certain functionality access, configuration, user modification, 
(what have you) that one has become dependent on or otherwise requires.

>> 2>  My likes/dislikes have nothing to do with an app's usefulness in
>> general - only their usefulness/appeal>to me<.
>
> again, the question is what qualifies as a fart app, not about your
> likes or dislikes.

See comment above.



>> 3>  You're reading comprehension clearly illustrates you _haven't_ 'got
>> it'.
>
> wrong.

Then why don't you understand I simply feel most apps are fart apps no 
matter how I state it?


>>> given that definition, pretty much every app is a fart app.
>>
>> If you prefer broad, vague, nebulous generalizations, I suppose.
>
> i'm using your definition.

No your not. There is a difference between "pretty much every" and 
"most apps".  I realize the difference may seem subtle (and hence lost 
on you), but words do have meanings.


>> But then I didn't say "every" app is a fart app, only "most" of them are.
>
> i didn't say 'every' app, i said pretty much every app. now what were
> you saying about reading comprehension?

See above comment.


>>>> And for the record, all lightweight OS'es have this fundamental
>>>> problem, including Android, BBTOS, and probably WebOS as well when it
>>>> first rolls out.
>>>
>>> any os has its share of 'dumbed down, over simplified' apps. sometimes
>>> that's good.
>>
>> 'Over'-anything is rarely a 'good' thing, much less an ideal one...
>
> that depends on a lot of things.

Gee, can you be *more* vague?


>>>> For me it's not just an Apple thing...
>>>
>>> no, it's everything and not just computers either. some cameras are
>>> very simple and others are very complex.  i suppose that makes a point
>>> and shoot camera the equivalent of a fart app.
>>
>> I quite agree. Dumbing down any technology is possible and quite
>> common these days.  In some applications, doing so makes sense. In
>> others however, it diminishes/cheapens the value of those who've
>> worked to become qualified in the judicious/proper use of a particular
>> technology, or are better equipped/trained to do so, just so
>> narcissistic CEOs, their boards, and shareholders can suck up all the
>> atmosphere and opportunity from the truly innovative and talented.
>> Instead, now massholes have shiny toy playthings as status symbols, or
>> any no-talent teenage poptart who can't carry a tune in a *bucket*
>> (hence, has no business doing so) is able to become a teen popstar
>> these days through dumbed down pitch-transposition algorithms labeled
>> 'AutoTune'...
>
> what a load of shit.
>
> making something easy to use empowers those who would otherwise not be
> able to do something.

Empowers? *Perhaps* But I'm so sick of this worn out 'nobility' 
marketing ploy that doesn't do a blessed thing to *educate* one in use 
of, or understanding just what is they're they're empowered to do.

In short, it's hyped Arthur Clarke flavored 'magic' for "useful 
idiots", which does more enriching those hawking dumb-ware than 
empowering users of it.  It also encourages/fosters intellectual 
laziness, hence a continued >dependence< on the TechnoClergy rather 
truly empowering folks to do/think for themselves.  It fosters a 
technology for technology's sake tail-dog wagging mentality.


-- 
MFB

0
Flint
6/1/2011 7:46:52 PM
In article <is64vf$h5u$1@dont-email.me>, Flint <agent1@section31.org>
wrote:

> >>> so with your definition, a fart app doesn't actually fart, it's any app
> >>> you happen to not like, even if other people think the app is useful.
> >>> got it.
> >>
> >> 1>  'Form>following<  function' is not my 'definition'.
> >
> > except that the definition in question is fart app.
> 
> And apparently you fail to grasp the idea that dumbed down app UI's 
> are _less_ empowering, not _more_ empowering when they leave out, or 
> omit certain functionality access, configuration, user modification, 
> (what have you) that one has become dependent on or otherwise requires.

not when it makes it easier for more people do actually do something
with it.

> >> 3>  You're reading comprehension clearly illustrates you _haven't_ 'got
> >> it'.
> >
> > wrong.
> 
> Then why don't you understand I simply feel most apps are fart apps no 
> matter how I state it?

you're welcome to define it any way you want, but when you use a
definition that runs contrary to what everyone else uses, you run into
problems. that's why we have words with specific meanings.

> >>> given that definition, pretty much every app is a fart app.
> >>
> >> If you prefer broad, vague, nebulous generalizations, I suppose.
> >
> > i'm using your definition.
> 
> No your not. There is a difference between "pretty much every" and 
> "most apps". 

how much of a difference? specific numbers please. 

> I realize the difference may seem subtle (and hence lost 
> on you), but words do have meanings.

ironic, since you just admitted to making up your own meanings as you
go along.
0
nospam
6/1/2011 10:57:56 PM
In article <010620111557562705%nospam@nospam.invalid>,
 nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:

> > Then why don't you understand I simply feel most apps are fart apps no 
> > matter how I state it?
> 
> you're welcome to define it any way you want, but when you use a 
> definition that runs contrary to what everyone else uses, you run into 
> problems. that's why we have words with specific meanings.

Before Flint came along, the only person to complain about fart apps here 
was Larry.  Could it be that...?

-- 
Tea Party Patriots is to Patriotism as 
People's Democratic Republic is to Democracy.
0
Michelle
6/2/2011 12:30:23 AM
On 6/1/2011 8:30 PM, Michelle Steiner wrote:
> In article<010620111557562705%nospam@nospam.invalid>,
>   nospam<nospam@nospam.invalid>  wrote:
>
>>> Then why don't you understand I simply feel most apps are fart apps no
>>> matter how I state it?
>>
>> you're welcome to define it any way you want, but when you use a
>> definition that runs contrary to what everyone else uses, you run into
>> problems. that's why we have words with specific meanings.
>
> Before Flint came along, the only person to complain about fart apps here
> was Larry.  Could it be that...?

I'm not complaining about fart apps.  I'm simply calling them what 
they are.  People cam piss their money away on them for all I care.  I 
simply don't care to.  My preference is as valid as anyone else's.

I simply don't buy that "1/2 million apps" mean they're all useful, or 
even the majority of them are.  In fact, I have never found any 
mainstream platform in the past 25-30 years that didn't have a slew of 
fart apps or applications.  Crapware is nothing unique to any one 
platform. But nor do I buy the notion that iOS devices are the be all, 
end all of mobile platforms.

If people can't understand that, then they simply reaffirm the 
critics' notions about Appple fanboism.


-- 
MFB

0
Flint
6/2/2011 12:41:19 AM
In article <is6m7i$sj0$1@dont-email.me>, Flint <agent1@section31.org>
wrote:

> >>> Then why don't you understand I simply feel most apps are fart apps no
> >>> matter how I state it?
> >>
> >> you're welcome to define it any way you want, but when you use a
> >> definition that runs contrary to what everyone else uses, you run into
> >> problems. that's why we have words with specific meanings.
> >
> > Before Flint came along, the only person to complain about fart apps here
> > was Larry.  Could it be that...?
> 
> I'm not complaining about fart apps.  I'm simply calling them what 
> they are.

no, you're calling anything you deem useless to be a fart app, even if
it does not fart.

> People cam piss their money away on them for all I care.  I 
> simply don't care to.  My preference is as valid as anyone else's.

that was never in question.

> I simply don't buy that "1/2 million apps" mean they're all useful, or 
> even the majority of them are.  In fact, I have never found any 
> mainstream platform in the past 25-30 years that didn't have a slew of 
> fart apps or applications.  Crapware is nothing unique to any one 
> platform. But nor do I buy the notion that iOS devices are the be all, 
> end all of mobile platforms.

nobody said all 500,000 apps were useful or that ios devices were the
be all end all. 

> If people can't understand that, then they simply reaffirm the 
> critics' notions about Appple fanboism.

more accurately, it reaffirms how bashers make up stuff solely to bash.
0
nospam
6/2/2011 1:18:24 AM
Flint <agent1@section31.org> wrote:
..
> 
> Then why don't you understand I simply feel most apps are fart apps no
> matter how I state it?

I prefer the term "Flint apps"...

Less ambiguous.

And then there's "Flint posts"...
0
Jim
6/2/2011 1:56:52 AM
In article 
<183872430328672405.781876jim_glidewell-yahoo.com@news.eternal-september.or
 g>,
 Jim Glidewell <jim_glidewell@yahoo.com> wrote:

> > Then why don't you understand I simply feel most apps are fart apps no 
> > matter how I state it?
> 
> I prefer the term "Flint apps"...
> 
> Less ambiguous.
> 
> And then there's "Flint posts"...

Humpty Dumpty apps because words mean exactly what he wants them to mean; 
it's a matter of who is the master: him or the words.

-- 
Tea Party Patriots is to Patriotism as 
People's Democratic Republic is to Democracy.
0
Michelle
6/2/2011 2:07:46 AM
nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote in news:010620111818248354%
nospam@nospam.invalid:

> no, you're calling anything you deem useless to be a fart app, even if
> it does not fart.

How many flashlight apps does it take to get to 2 million??

How stupid.....
0
Larry
6/2/2011 3:07:17 AM
In article <Xns9EF7EB4DEDEE1noonehomecom@74.209.131.13>, Larry Mobile
<noone@home.com> wrote:

> How stupid.....

like every one of your posts.
0
nospam
6/2/2011 3:12:09 AM
In article <michelle-AC52FB.17302301062011@news.eternal-september.org>,
 Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> wrote:

> In article <010620111557562705%nospam@nospam.invalid>,
>  nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:
> 
> > > Then why don't you understand I simply feel most apps are fart apps no 
> > > matter how I state it?
> > 
> > you're welcome to define it any way you want, but when you use a 
> > definition that runs contrary to what everyone else uses, you run into 
> > problems. that's why we have words with specific meanings.
> 
> Before Flint came along, the only person to complain about fart apps here 
> was Larry.  Could it be that...?

Larry?

Flint?

Larry Flint!

Michelle, I think you've nailed him! He's cranky because he still gets a 
nosebleed up in his Penthouse.
0
Fred
6/2/2011 6:07:23 PM
In article <is6m7i$sj0$1@dont-email.me>, Flint <agent1@section31.org> 
wrote:

> I simply don't buy that "1/2 million apps" mean they're all useful, or 
> even the majority of them are.  In fact, I have never found any 
> mainstream platform in the past 25-30 years that didn't have a slew of 
> fart apps or applications.  Crapware is nothing unique to any one 
> platform.

Well, let's make the assumption that only 1 in 10 apps is really good 
(far too restrictive, but for argument's sake). That means there are  
FIFTY THOUSAND, i.e. 50,000, very worthwhile, useable apps. That's an 
amazingly beneficial resource, and it's no wonder a resource like that 
helps sell iPads.
0
Fred
6/2/2011 6:15:08 PM
On 6/2/2011 2:15 PM, Fred Moore wrote:
> In article<is6m7i$sj0$1@dont-email.me>, Flint<agent1@section31.org>
> wrote:
>
>> I simply don't buy that "1/2 million apps" mean they're all useful, or
>> even the majority of them are.  In fact, I have never found any
>> mainstream platform in the past 25-30 years that didn't have a slew of
>> fart apps or applications.  Crapware is nothing unique to any one
>> platform.
>
> Well, let's make the assumption that only 1 in 10 apps is really good
> (far too restrictive, but for argument's sake). That means there are
> FIFTY THOUSAND, i.e. 50,000, very worthwhile, useable apps. That's an
> amazingly beneficial resource, and it's no wonder a resource like that
> helps sell iPads.

I quite agree.  Even at that useful/fart app ratio, the iPad still 
have a load of useful apps to make iPads useful devices.  I've never 
argued the iPad itself as a useful device.  My initial response in 
this thread was more about the true significance of 500K apps total 
usability to most >users< of it as opposed to most 'shiny toy status 
symbol' >owners< of it.

Between this ng and CSMA, I'm not certain if I ever actually made it 
clear here or not (as I have over in CSMA), I rather like the iPad and 
am still considering it, and a couple of other tablets as well.]

I just refuse to be hyped by fanbois on totally meaningless (to me) 
metrics such as the total number of apps. I've rarely criticized 
Apple's iPad aside from what I perceive as a couple of shortcomings, 
but they are shortcomings I could live/deal with in a total absence of 
any meaningful competitor.  I'm simply holding off a bit longer to see 
what tablet options are available as this (still) nascent market 
matures a bit more hardware-wise.  Tegra 3 tablets vs. iPad vs. AMD's 
next gen x86 SoC tablet are all still in contention AFAIC.

Some Apple fanbois (and their Lilith-lovin counterparts can't seem to 
accept that and shut the fuck up, or jump in mid thread with their 
snide personal attacks, and hence get labeled *cunts* by me).


-- 
MFB

0
Flint
6/2/2011 10:51:30 PM
On Thu, 02 Jun 2011 18:51:30 -0400, Flint <agent1@section31.org>
wrote:

>> Well, let's make the assumption that only 1 in 10 apps is really good
>> (far too restrictive, but for argument's sake). That means there are
>> FIFTY THOUSAND, i.e. 50,000, very worthwhile, useable apps. That's an
>> amazingly beneficial resource, and it's no wonder a resource like that
>> helps sell iPads.
>
>I quite agree.  Even at that useful/fart app ratio, the iPad still 
>have a load of useful apps to make iPads useful devices.  I've never 
>argued the iPad itself as a useful device.  My initial response in 
>this thread was more about the true significance of 500K apps total 
>usability to most >users< of it as opposed to most 'shiny toy status 
>symbol' >owners< of it.

I like Sturgeon's Law - but when you have a very large number of
choices, that 10% of non-crud gets to be large indeed.

-- 
"In no part of the constitution is more wisdom to be found,
than in the clause which confides the question of war or peace 
to the legislature, and not to the executive department." 

- James Madison
0
Howard
6/2/2011 11:12:06 PM
On 6/2/2011 7:12 PM, Howard Brazee wrote:
> On Thu, 02 Jun 2011 18:51:30 -0400, Flint<agent1@section31.org>
> wrote:
>
>>> Well, let's make the assumption that only 1 in 10 apps is really good
>>> (far too restrictive, but for argument's sake). That means there are
>>> FIFTY THOUSAND, i.e. 50,000, very worthwhile, useable apps. That's an
>>> amazingly beneficial resource, and it's no wonder a resource like that
>>> helps sell iPads.
>>
>> I quite agree.  Even at that useful/fart app ratio, the iPad still
>> have a load of useful apps to make iPads useful devices.  I've never
>> argued the iPad itself as a useful device.  My initial response in
>> this thread was more about the true significance of 500K apps total
>> usability to most>users<  of it as opposed to most 'shiny toy status
>> symbol'>owners<  of it.
>
> I like Sturgeon's Law - but when you have a very large number of
> choices, that 10% of non-crud gets to be large indeed.
>

Good point.  It's difficult/time consuming enough to wade through 
determining *useful* apps alone, much less having to do so with 
useless fart apps.  Some folks actually prefer to actually >do< things 
with apps rather than wasting inordinate amounts of time just 
 >getting< to/evaluating them.  At 10% of 500K, even that is 
\cumbersome to deal with. To my way of thinking, a larger number of 
apps overall makes this more difficult, and at some point almost 
becomes a negative selling point. To my way of thinking, a larger 
number of apps overall makes this more difficult, and at some point 
almost becomes a negative selling point.  Perhaps I missed something, 
and someone could explain just how Apple makes this any easier?

Perhaps I'm painting with a bit of a broad brush a bit by throwing the 
term 'fart app' around the way I do, but I tend to include a lot of 
mostly/purely 'amusement' apps into this category as well, but then 
that's just my preference, as I'm more interested in tablets from a 
purely functional perspective, and very 'niche'.  In this regard, I 
really have only a few app 'needs' (less than 10, I would say).  One 
of them which tend to keep the iPad in contention for me is word of an 
app developer I know of who is working on an app to interface an iPad 
to a Soundcraft Si & Vi series digital live audio consoles (useful for 
freeing up front-of-house or monitor engineers to go mobile and have 
complete parameter control while roaming a venue or perfermance stage 
tweaking the system or monitors.




-- 
MFB

0
Flint
6/2/2011 11:54:30 PM
Reply:

Similar Artilces:

Crypto-Apps: Ciphers App-1 and App-2.
These ciphers are available now for free downloading from, http://www.adacryptpages.com (navigate to the bottom title boxes). Crypto-App Ciphers - Apps_1 & 2. - Personalised Cryptography for Tablets, L= aptops, Desktop, Main Frame Computers in Windows XP, Vista, 7, 8. Download App_1=20 Download App_2=20 No need to study the cryptography, the mathematics, the programming, the co= mputer science (unless you really want to and then you just peruse the othe= r title boxes on the same site) - instead, just teach yourself to run these= 'apps' as you would any other app...

App Store is not a store for apps
"Hi, I've got an iPhone and I would like to buy an app for it." "What's the problem?" "Well, at what store do I buy the app?" "At the App Store." "Huh?" "You buy an app for your iPhone at the App Store." "No, Apple says an app store is not a store for apps, so where do I buy my app?" "At the App Store." Okay... I'm talking, but you're not listening. Apple says that the App Store is *not* a store for apps, so *where* do *I* *buy* an app for my iPhone? "At the App Store." &quo...

Apple App Store lost nearly 1/3 of app market share in 2 years
<http://www.research2guidance.com/apple%E2%80%99s-app-store-market-share-dropped-to-59-at-the-end-of-q1-2011/> In article <j33tkd$6o4$1@dont-email.me>, Mark Spencer 256 <notme@notme.notme.com> wrote: Pyram has nymshifted again. *Plonk* -- DeeDee, don't press that button! DeeDee! NO! Dee... [I filter all Goggle Groups posts, so any reply may be automatically ignored] On 2011-08-24 18:23 , Mark Spencer 256 wrote: > <http://www.research2guidance.com/apple%E2%80%99s-app-store-market-share-dropped-to-59-at-the-end-of-q1-2011/> 1. You have no idea why head...

App Store.app
I just updated to 10.6.6, and was playing with the App Store.app. I wanted to DL a couple of the free apps, but discovered that to DL _anything_, you need to register a credit card. Since I dislike leaving any credit card info in any vendor's database, I'm wondering if there's a way to avoid this part of the registration process, entering your credit card info ONLY when needed to make a specific purchase. -- iMac (27", 3.2 GHz Intel Core i3, 4 GB RAM, 1 TB HDD) � OS X (10.6.6) On 28/01/11 17:29, Nick Naym wrote: > I just updated to 10.6.6, and was playing with ...

iPad-Apps up 185% at app store after Jan. unveiling.
http://brainstormtech.blogs.fortune.cnn.com/2010/03/15/flurry-new-apps-up -185-post-ipad/ The app store will drive the iPad. C'mon wintwinkies, have at it...and bring out all the alternatives and how much better they are... In article <mike-13B28C.00595116032010@news.newsguy.com>, Mike <mike@nonnfaba.invalid> wrote: > http://brainstormtech.blogs.fortune.cnn.com/2010/03/15/flurry-new-apps-up > -185-post-ipad/ > > The app store will drive the iPad. > > Come on, Wintwinkies, have at it, and bring out all the alternatives and > how much...

Spicy Schematics and Simulation for iPad, version 2.2 now available on app store
We are very happy about Spicy Schematics v2.2.0, .. all major bugs zapped, and tons of new features added .. check it out! http://ischematics.com ...

Hovsepian: Apps! Apps! Apps!
Novell CEO: Apps Are Job No. 1 for Linux http://www.cio-today.com/story.xhtml?story_id=021001VE8HV3 <<< In order for Linux to grow into the computing mainstream, the open- source OS needs more applications and a standardized approach to software certification, Novell CEO Ron Hovsepian said in his keynote Wednesday at the LinuxWorld conference and trade show in San Francisco. "The No. 1 thing that we need on Linux is applications," he said. "Whether we like it or not, the application is what drives the final customer decision," he added. >>> John Bail...

Mobile apps and privacy in about 400,000 apps on Google Play Store.
Interesting to know how a lot of mobile apps in the Google Play Store are in the hands of criminals: 18-11-2013 http://translate.google.com/translate?sl=nl&tl=en&js=n&prev=_t&hl=nl&ie=UTF-8&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.trosradar.nl%2Fuitzending%2Farchief%2Fdetail%2Faflevering%2F18-11-2013%2Fmobiele-apps-en-privacy%2F%3Fp%3D1&act=url Facebook, Angry Birds, Super Bright Led Flashlight are examples of popular apps on your phone. But what apps actually do with your personal data on your phone? Privacy watchdog Bits of Freedom takes for Radar seven apps under sc...

My app work with HP34401A fw 1-1-1, but with 10-5-2,11-5-2 dosn't work. Why?
I write applicotion,which communicate with HP34401A over GPIB,but customer has HP34401A with later firmware version and application dost work. hi does your customer use the same GPIB - addr. ?? or did he change to serial ?? regards Werner hi, of course, customer use GPIB, and right address. I think,that some problem is in initialization module for HP34401A included in Labview 5.1. regards Tomas ...

Apple: an 'App Store' Is Not a Store For Apps
<http://apple.slashdot.org/story/11/05/20/1947231/Apple-an-App-Store-Is-Not-a-Store-For-Apps> <quote> "What would be your first guess about what an app store sells? Don't be fooled, Apple warns, the phrase 'app store' is not generic and can only be used to describe Cupertino's... um, app store? 'Apple denies that, based on their common meaning, the words "app store" together denote a store for apps,' Apple said in a Thursday filing with a California district court. All this notwithstanding that Jobs himself used the phrase generically while r...

Reviewing Apps at the App Store
I do not own an iOS device, so I'm talking about the Mac App Store here. However iOS users may have similar experiences so read on. One week ago I downloaded the free miDVD app from the Mac App Store. It's a very, very bare-bones DVD creator, and I was pretty sure of its limitations from the get-go. After a couple of days I wrote a short lukewarm review of the app and posted it to the App Store. I compared it with similar free and payware products including iDVD, mentioning the fact the iLife '09 is still available at that "jungle-themed" online retailer...

Pixelmator grosses 1 million on Mac App Store
"I am ecstatic to announce that Pixelmator grossed a gigantic $1 million on the Mac App Store. And that happened in only 20 short days." Amazing http://www.pixelmator.com/weblog/2011/01/25/pixelmator-grosses-1-million-on-the-mac-app-store/ -- Sandman[.net] http://mac.sandman.net In article <mr-6e38fd1a75212230c776e83c6e1f5b36@individual.net>, Sandman <mr@sandman.net> wrote: > "I am ecstatic to announce that Pixelmator grossed a gigantic > $1 million on the Mac App Store. And that happened in only > 20 short da...

How to set iPad "App Store" to only search FREE apps & in more than one category?
I only install free applications that "do something" useful. That is, I never install "entertainment" apps, nor "games", nor "kid stuff" nor anything in the "newstand" category. So, all I want to do is set the "App Store" to search only for free apps in the five useful categories: 1. Business 2. Navigation 3. Photo & Video 4. Productivity 5. Utilities My problem is that I can't seem to manually select more than a single category, and, every time I limit the search to "free" apps only, the next tim...

TS6060: Urgent Need for Mobile App Developer (IPad) #2
TS6060: Urgent Need for Mobile App Developer (IPad) Please contact lina@tansoncorp.com for more info. Job Title: Mobile App Developer (IPad) Location: Eagan, MN Duration: 6 months+ Pay Range: Open Note:Client need to travel to Japan multiple times. ERP and SAP When not in Japan they would work in St. Paul MN Job Description: Our Client wants to create Executive dashboard capability on iPad/ mobile devices. Looking to build a POC solution for rollout by September. For example, their CEO is often asking for data such as State of TX premiums paid for the past 5 years and they want him and oth...

Web resources about - App Store = 1/2 Million Apps - comp.mobile.ipad

Million - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
One million (1,000,000) or one thousand thousand is the natural number following 999,999 and preceding 1,000,001 . The word is derived from the ...

No. 1 Facebook App Socialcam Sold For $60 Million
... , Socialcam, has been sold — but no, this isn’t another Mark Zuckerberg purchase . The video sharing app has been acquired for $60 million to ...

This is what a $13 million model train set looks like
... sections are connected by eight miles of track, and it features over 4,000 buildings and 215,000 figurines. So far it has cost over $13 million ...

These preventable conditions kill millions of children
A short list of illnesses cause the majority of childhood deaths worldwide

Maharashtra Announces $400 Million Off-grid Solar Power Programme
... the next five years. The state government of Maharashtra recently announced that it finalised a policy to spend Rs 2,682 crore (US$400 million) ...

Oprah made $2.4 million per lost pound
Based on an analysis of SEC filings and her own announcements, Oprah Winfrey has made $2.4 million per lost pound.

Gun Control Fanboy George Soros Has Invested Millions In The Firearms Industry
Gun Control Fanboy George Soros Has Invested Millions In The Firearms Industry

Indiana's bet on the 'license to discriminate' law cost the state as much as $60 million
Congrats, Gov. Mike Pence & Co.! Indiana may have lost as much as $60 million in hotel profits, tax revenue and other economic benefits when ...

Fox Searchlight Near Sundance Record $17.5 Million Deal For ‘The Birth Of A Nation’
EXCLUSIVE : In a record-breaking deal for the Sundance Film Festival , Fox Searchlight is wrapping up a deal to pay around $17.5 million to acquire ...

BuzzFeed Served With $11 Million Defamation Lawsuit
... in bizarre, sensational stories with viral potential has sued BuzzFeed for defamation , according to the Hollywood Reporter . The $11 million ...

Resources last updated: 1/27/2016 4:28:36 AM