If you think something is spam or offtopic, flag it by going to its page and clicking on the "flag" link. (Not all users will see this; there is a karma threshold.) If you flag something, please don't also comment that you did.
..the guidelines clearly specify flagging is for spam or off-topic posts. i generally define 'abuse' as utilizing a feature for something that its not intended for, such as burying a story one does not agree with.
saying its 'off topic' is total bs. issues involving standards, ip, public access, etc.. (also, involving two of the largest tech companies, the mobile space, a popular web-based product, etc...), seem to be very relevant around here and frequently come-up.
so.. this wasn't spam or off-topic, yet shows heavy flag activity. that indicates abuse to me. would 'misuse' be better? - its petty of you to dismiss my point as being 'dramatic'. i attempted to frame the issue as i saw it, using the evidence i was able to scrape-together, and tried to avoid making generalizations or turning it into a 'hn hates microsoft' or whatever as i'm sure this happens often, but this case highlighted it most clearly, and most recently..
its still odd behaviour.. look at any similar post (in terms of age/activity) and you can clearly see that one stands-out as odd. here's one that looks to follow a more typical progression - http://hnrankings.info/5719667/
also from making it near the top [rank 3 / 22:30-22:45] it rapidly fell close to the bottom of the front page [rank 22 / 23:10].. that's a pretty quick decline.
clearly people flag for different reasons. that just bolsters my point that there should be an examination of flagging behaviour and some clarification around how its meant to be used, if need be, and potentially some adjustments to prevent occurrences such as when "people flag a thread just because it has positive coverage of companyA or negative coverage of companyB"
i don't want to turn this into a battle of fanboys, but i have a hard time believing a post titled "Microsoft to Google: Remove something as it violates something.." would have been so heavily flagged or sparked such negative discussions..
what became apparent to me, from both reading the comments and seeing how the post was handled, was it did collapse into mindless bickering, but mainly because people rushed to 'defend' the company they feel more loyal to..
all i'm saying is flagging shouldn't be used as a weapon in such bickering.
within a minute or two after posting it disappeared off the 'new' page. not sure what would have been the cause but i don't believe flagging would have caused that.
thanks for the actual rankings numbers - that would have saved me some time..
and i agree that thread got pretty unpleasant and i think it highlights another side of the same problem as it shows how people who may not like the particular issue furiously attack those who do (and likewise in reverse).
i really believe if one made-up a similar post and reversed the roles between the two companies the reaction would have been substantially different - both in terms of the thread commentary and flagging. its one thing to disagree with something and argue against it, its another thing to try to burry something which only serves to depress any good exchange of thoughts that came come-out of it.
that may make sense to you, but for the average consumer i doubt they'll differentiate. microsoft has built and will be promoting the windows app store as the place to find and download apps (and on some devices, windows rt tablets, it will be the only place)
ios popularized the app store and their model, which has defined it as a safe reliable place to find apps that won't fuck-up your system, has become the standard (many may suck, but they're generally not harmful). microsoft is doing the same with the windows store and in the case of metro/modern apps, that holds true. but for desktop apps (which many people do, and will still, want) that’s not true. they have deeper-access to the system and are not sandboxed. so it makes sense to try to differentiate malware and crap from valuable desktop-style applications, which is exactly what they’re trying to do..
and microsoft does not charge for these desktop application ‘store listings’, and they are not required. they do however look like a good option for desktop application developers to showcase their offerings within (the increasingly common model of) a managed store, improving discoverability. if they let anyone publish apps without trying hard to verify the identity of the developer and reliability of the application (as they're not 'certifying' these like the metro apps) then it would entirely undermine the whole point of the store..
you can essentially do just that, and the process is exactly the same:
(1) mouse-over to the bottom left of the taskbar (same place as before) and in place of a fixed icon (start ‘orb’) a small image of your start screen will pop-up which you can click to open the start screen
(2) from there just start typing (as before) and it will automatically change the layout showing you results for apps. by default the first app in results is selected so you can just press enter to launch it or navigate to others via keyboard/mouse (same as before). that’s it.
you can, of course, still just hit the windows keyboard button and start typing as well which i find faster. there are also now additional keyboard shortcuts that let you quickly search for specific items (win + q/f/w allow you to narrow search between apps/files/settings respectively)
pro tip: if you right-click in the same space (bottom left of taskbar) a menu comes-up with more power-user specific commands (run, command prompt, admin tools, etc...)
Bing Maps have been rapidly improving over the past year and no one seems to have picked-up on it. via their deal with Nokia, Microsoft is slowly updating the backend data, incorporating Navteq's over 20+ years of mapping tech. its not quite up to parity with Nokia Maps (or Google) internationally yet, but it's come a long way and (i'm guessing) easily beats-out Apple's quickly-built homegrown implementation.
for those who don't know, Nokia owns Navteq (purchased a few years ago) which powers over 85%+ of automotive navigation systems (as well as Garmin, Mapquest, and many other popular mapping services)..
but since we're on it, yes it looks awesome. really looking forward to picking one up. everyone has opinions and preferences but i think it’s hard to argue against the fact that microsoft is showing some real innovation and creativity in development of windows phone, and nokia compliments that exceptionally well with their stellar hardware.
i for one feel that microsoft is completely justified in actually being stricter with these desktop listings in the windows store..
these apps don't go through the same certification processes as do the modern apps that sit alongside them in the store, but they get all the discoverability from being in there.. to a consumer, all apps via an app store are assumed to be stable and safe (even if they link to an external site to complete payment). just the fact that they're listed there in the windows store provides a de-facto stamp of approval that these apps are vetted by microsoft.
if they aren't sufficiently strict and maleware (or process-hogging apps) get through it would undermine both trust in microsoft and in the reliability of the app store which would probably hurt all devs.
re: engadget being suspiciously friendly to Nokia.. i think that if you're willing to actually send a reporter to Espoo, Finland (of all places), Nokia would likely be happy to provide access. especially so, given what now appears to have been a significantly overblown reaction to their introduction of the technology (as the actual usage results appear to validate what was demoed, even if not shot with the Lumia at the time)..
and the Lumia 920 camera apparently has a narrower focal length (which results in a wider field of view), so it can capture more on-screen than than the iPhone; hence it looking particularly 'zoomed-in' when compared side-by-side.
additionally, and i'm not entirely sure about this, but the digital image stabilization software (in contrast to Nokia's actual/mechanical OIS) found on the other phones may have some cropping involved to help smooth-out shaking which would be typically most noticible around the edges..
lol, ouch. i didn't say it was objective (is anything from any blog really?)... and there were plenty of submissions as the event unfolded focusing on every minute iterative change the iPhone 5 brings; this provides another take looking at the specs as a whole and comparing them to other devices.
and it’s a testament to the iPhone that they lead-off in the article how for once a Windows Phone out-spec’s the iPhone; and you have to admit that the new Nokia Lumia 920 does up it in many ways (nfc, wireless charging, better screen, better camera, colour selection/matching accessories, etc...). i’m not saying its better in every way nor does the article imply that.
not trolling here, but people do tend to get caught-up with these events and assume every detail out of every Apple product announcement makes it, by default, the best and most cutting-edge. this article highlights that, for a change, someone else (in this case, Nokia) has actually out-innovated the undisputed leader in the market in some regards..
Yeah, as far as I know, the Windows Phone Store certification policies are pretty lax (not sure if that’s reflected in their official terms or their implementation of them; I’m guessing it’s the latter). The only times I hear of apps being rejected or pulled seem to in cases of trademark infringement; and, even-then, only if the infringed-upon company requests them to do so..
I saw this play-out with Vimeo apps not too long ago. Prior to the company launching their (really nice btw) official app there were a few a third-party clients which used the Vimeo name and logo; since then, they've all rebranded or disappeared (I’m guessing at the request of Vimeo to avoid confusion).
Other than that, pretty much everything else seems to fly (I’m guessing security issues and serious bugs that come-up during review aside). This is all anecdotal (I don’t work at Microsoft or review apps for certification) but I’d be pretty shocked if they blocked an app like this.
Anyways, it looks pretty cool, maybe if iOS certification doesn’t go over the dev can port it to WP. For simpler apps (no offense here) I’ve heard it’s fairly quick work and involves a lot less on the testing/optimizing for 1,000+ device SKUs (Android) front.
If you think something is spam or offtopic, flag it by going to its page and clicking on the "flag" link.