That reminds me how Ogilvy wrote in Confessions of an ad man - how his copywriting style was more successful (sales-wise) than others even though his copy was lengthier and more descriptive than others'.
Generate another password upon request, store both hashes with the user account and make the user account accessible with both passwords. Not that I condone such snooping, but that isn't that hard of a workaround to implement.
Does it really say you cannot at all store hashed passwords, or does it mean just that you have to give the authorities the password for a user account if they ask you to? After all, if they want a password that can access a user's account, they could get that but that doesn't mean that it has to be the exact same password that the user uses, does it?
I doubt you'll have to pay to develop for Mac, the 99$ are for joining the developer program that allows you to get your apps on the App Store (Mac or iOS). Xcode, compilers and the possibility to run and sell your programs via other means will still be free.
They (Apple) were actually working on a phone in 2005 which they announced in September of that year - the first "iPhone" before the iPhone - http://direct.motorola.com/hellomoto/rokr/. Of course, that turned out to be a crapfest noone was happy about and Jobs couldn't help wincing even while presenting it.
The message is still there, it's just that there are much more sales talks because, well, they're doing much better as a company now.
The message has matured now - perhaps it wasn't just enough to be different - now their message is that they aren't being just different, they are better. You can see it in those product videos they do in keynotes, you can see it in Ive, Schiller, Cook, Jobs interviews and they definitely are trying to be better. In their products they don't have much to excel with the common stuff everybody does because it's the same suppliers for everyone - Intel, NVidia, Foxconn, Samsung, etc. but look at where they are trying new approaches everyone else has tried and given up on or haven't tried at all - a touchscreen phone when everyone said touchscreens don't work or a tablet computer when everyone thought that had been tried and failed or just the spectacular attention to detail (ironically, the most similar company in that aspect would be the IBM/Lenovo with the Thinkpads).
Don't get me wrong, Apple isn't infallible, they have failed spectacularly on some fronts and have been unable to compete on others but they seem to be doing just fine as it is.
Don't know and don't care much about it, but it says in the article that sneaking in undisclosed easter eggs is verboten and that is why [this version of] the app was rejected.
> Internet traffic has to prioritized on the backbones and local networks before it gets to the local wireless transmitters therefore it will be available in a prioritized order to local wireline consumers too.
Is this true? Given that this is the main argument of the article, the author could have elaborated a bit and I don't know nearly enough about the inner workings of Internet providers, so is this actually true or just some senseless punditry?
They just cannot please everybody. There was a fuss when they were being arbitrary with their rejections and now there's a fuss when they reject an app for not following the rules.
