The Perspective of Moral law and Circumcision Essay

The Perspective of Moral law and Circumcision - Essay Example They are ones who do not consider Jesus as God instead believes that a Messiah will be the one to unite everyone towards the kingdom of God. Gentiles on the other hand are those people who are not seen as a descendant of Israel and at the same time people who do not see themselves as one, which often takes their right to worship God. However, they still do worship God based on His teachings told to them through different people chosen by God such as Moses. Now, after clearly setting enough light on what Gentiles and Jews were, it is now easier to know the difference between how each perceived moral law. The latter are those who obeyed the law based on their traditions rather than what God truly meant in His teachings. On the other hand, Gentiles are those who followed Jesus because they put importance in living under no other law but Christ’s (New International Version (NIV Bible) - Version Information - BibleGateway.com. (n.d.)). Thus, when it comes to the topic on circumcision in the olden days, each of them would have different purposes and attitude towards doing so. For the Jews, circumcision, which was one of the clearly stated teachings in the Old Testament was just an act they had to do to be able to avoid persecution from the people. Another reason why they do not really believe in circumcision being a holy and biblical act is because of the fact that even those that are circumcised sin. However, for Gentiles, circumcision is a whole different thing. Even when Gentiles are seen as those who do not have the law and not being the chosen people of God, they do things that are required by the law of God not only obeying by word but at the same time has the law written in their hearts (New International Version (NIV Bible) - Version Information - BibleGateway.com. (n.d.)). Thus, for them, circumcision is an act done to please God by not only getting circumcised but at the same time by observing the other laws and not just pick out the laws that might

Roman Art Essay Example for Free

Roman Art Essay The ancient Greeks and Romans left such artistic treasures in art and architecture that the world is still using them as models. Their sense of style and symmetry was such that everything seemed to fit together perfectly. There was an emphasis on the capture of beauty and perfection so that what is left will always be classic art. The Statue of Meleager and A Grave Marker are perfect examples of how statues from two different empires represent the societies and the artistic periods of their day. Two unknown sculptures produces both The Statue of Meleager and A Grave Marker. Lack of records is a sad fact of much of the artistic works of the ancient periods. Many could not read or write even if they were accomplished artist. The records that were kept have had to constantly battle the test of times. Much of the materials used for writings simply could not stand up to the elements of time. Then of course, many important documents were destroyed each time a different empire would overtake the one before it. So the world is left with incredible pieces of art work yet it will never know whose hands crafted it with such talent. These two statues are no different. It is evident by the craftsmanship that whoever carved them, were not armatures, but talented sculptures. Their works have remained, but the names and lives are lost forever. Since the sculptures’ identities are lost forever, there is no way of knowing who the patrons of these great works of art were. However, there surely would have been a patron of each of the works. The sculpture of a youth from A Grave Marker has been recognized as being from circa three hundred and eighty B. C. Since it is a grave marker, there surely would have been a patron. It would have been commissioned after the death of this young man since the death of one so young would not have been expected. The patron would have been wealthy since many of the graves in ancient Greece were not marked at all. This one proclaims wealth and importance. Even though the Greeks tried hard to not have a social hierarchy, There was a notable social mobility for certain groups, and exception not permitted in ancient Greece. (D’Ambre) The fact that the subject is a youth points toward some kind of family importance because he would not have lived long enough to have established his own life and accomplishments. This grieving patron would have hired the best that Greece offered at the time. The sculpture would have to have known the subject to have created such a life like image. There were no photographs at the time so the work would have had to be done from memory. Therefore the sculpture would have also been in a state of mourning when the work was done. The Stature of Meleager would also most likely been commissioned by a patron. The time and materials that it took to produce a work like this would not have been something that a sculpture would not have had the money to produce. It would have taken a great deal of time to sculpt and the artist would have needed money to live. This could have only been possible if he was paid for his services. This statue was produced during the Hellenistic Period which was a time that Greece was under Roman rule. Since the subject is of a god, there is a possibility that the patron could have even been the government. The subjects and uses of A Grave Marker and the Statue of Meleager were quite different. A Grave Marker had a youth who was robbed of his life while young as the subject. He was obviously a real person, while Meleager was a mythological god. The young man, as stated earlier, would have been from a prominent family and possibly even a family that was involved in a high ranking political official. The purpose of the statue was to mark the grave of this young man. The family would have wanted this statue so that they would not forget him and that family throughout the ages would get to see the magnificence of this young man who died too soon. Not only would family be reminded of him, but the rest of the world as well would know that he existed. It would have also had the purpose to help relieve the grief that this family obviously suffered. There would be an image on which they could focus. This image would have captured this young man when he was at his best and so could the family focus on the best time of the subject’s life. The Statue of Meleager would have had the purpose of illuminating the greatness of the Greek god, son of Althaea and Oeneus. He was married to Cleopatra and produced two children, Parthenopeus and Polydora. However, he was in love with Atalanta, a huntress. It was because of her that he had to kill her two brothers, and this led to his death. The purpose of this statue in society was to keep alive the memory of the gods of Greece. When viewed by a person of that culture, he/she would be reminded of the story of this god. Both statues would have been for public display. A Grave Marker would have been outwardly displayed on the grave and the Statue of Meleager would have been prominently displayed in a public place or the garden or courtyard of a wealthy person to be seen at lavish parties and get togethers. Both statues are made of marble so that they would last for many years. Therefore, they would have been made for display instead of decoration. Most sculptures would have been painted, but the painted exterior of has worn away with time. Romans were nearly exclusive in the mixtures of supplies used both for painting and sculptures because of the cost. A Grave Marker is the oldest of the two sculptures. The sad countenance of the young man whose likeness is portrayed allows the viewer to experience the tragic sadness of a life that has been lost too soon. The lines are delicate and flowing while they create a feel of movement. While the hair seems tight and a little unrealistic, it could symbolize the harsh stiffness that is present in death. The statue only consist of the torso and head of the subject perhaps suggesting that he was cut down in life as he is in the statue. The Statue of Meleager is missing its head. However, the grace that the body can only allow the viewer to imagine the delicacy of what the head would have looked like. Meleager is standing, but instead of seeming harsh and erect, he is leaning slightly onto a stump for support, while a wrap is draped fluidly around his neck and shoulders. There are no harsh lines in this stature, only curves, that while delicate, they do not take away from the masculinity of the subject. Works Cited D’Ambre, Eve. Roman Art. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press 1998. Ramage, Nancy. Ramage, Andrew. Roman Art. New York: 2008.

Open Source vs Closed Source Systems

Open Source vs Closed Source Systems INTRODUCTION For many years, proprietary software has been the dominating business approach used by the commercial software firms. Industry giants like Microsoft proved this strategy to be successful, building their multibillion dollar empires based on the proprietary software platform. Over the past decade, a new business approach called open source model which involves contributors from around the globe to create, share and distribute software code for free had come into practice (Pal, N Madanmohan, TR., 2002). Although the roots to this practice of sharing code evolved since early 60s, the widespread usage of internet and the technology developments in past two decades opened new opportunities for open source projects (CNET news, 1998). A number of Open Source Software (OSS) products such as Apache web server, BIND and SendMail have dominated their product categories ever since then (Pal, N Madanmohan, TR., 2002). In the past decade, several researchers (Wheeler, DA., 2007; Mockus, et al., 2000) have taken interest in studying how open source can be applied to modern business strategies. However, a concern exists that in this area of study that there is no substantial evidence that the practices followed are effective in the business environment (Bitzer Schrà ¶der, 2004). For economists like Lerner Tirole (2000), the altruism shown by commercial companies and programmers involved in an open source software project is surprising. They stated altruism hasnt played a major role in any other industry than software. Several others like Freeman Rogers (2008) and Goetz (2003) contradict this statement by illustrating altruism exist in any industry provided there is proper exposure of the problem towards the contributing community. But most of the researches surrounding open source model considered software industry as the base for their studies. 1.0 SCOPE OF THE PROJECT 1.1 Objective This project work focuses on the study of the Open Source ecosystem (Android) how it differs from Closed source sustems such as those surrounding the iPhone. This project includes the study of the Android Market, (online mobile application store for Android users) application developers, and which factors developers consider for selecting a platform for application development. To understand business strategy development trends across Android and iPhone platforms, we compared the Android market with the iPhone App Store, the leading application store in current mobile market. Apple launched an online application marketplace called the â€Å"iPhone App Store† before launching iPhone 3G. Currently, this store has more than 195,000 applications. To match or surpass the success of iPhone App Store, Apple rivals such as Google and Blackberry introduced their own application downloading stores called â€Å"Android Market† and â€Å"Blackberry App World† respectively. T he Android Market is similar to the iPhone App Store or to any other application store; it boasts a catalog of applications,  services and tools available for the user to purchase download and use. Today, the Android Market also has around 49,000 applications. Thus, the comparison between iPhone and Android application stores will help explain the new challenges faced by these two application stores, and also the demand for these stores in the near future. This study will help understand why Android choose Open Source System and why Apple doesnt, what determines their success, which large companies are directly involved in developing applications for Android, and which factors they consider for developing an application. 1.2 Experimental Procedures This project is based on a semi-automatically collected application database and   surveys to obtain necessary information for proving the hypothesis. (A) Website Data Firstly, application data were collected semi-automatically from the Android Market and iPhone App Store (iTunes store) and other mobile applications related websites, for e.g., Androlib.com, iPhoneapplicationlist.com. This gathered application database includes a list of the application categories on both platforms, number of applications in each category, and application information for the selected categories. (B) Interview Data Next, we interviewed mobile application developers to understand and know their views about Android/iPhone platforms and the ecosystem. To get in touch with mobile application developers, we attended the mobile conferences where they gather to share their views. (C) Survey Data Lastly, all the relevant facts about application developers from the interview data helped us prepare a survey. This web-based survey was prepared and conducted using Survey Monkey. 1.3 Resources Utilized The main resources used during this project were our industrial advisor, our academic reader, Android and iPhone application database, interviews and surveys from mobile application developers. 2.0 LITERATURE REVIEW 2.1 Introduction of Literature Review In order to achieve success in project implementation, the first step is to research and find information already available. During research, we found many articles related to our topic. This paper is based on the content from these articles. We have divided this section in four main areas: Overview of the Open Source Operating Systems (Android). Overview of the Closed Source Operating Systems (Apple IOS). Fundamentals behind the Open Source Platform. Introduction to the Smartphone. 2.2 Overview of the Open Source Operating Systems (Android). Google has achieved something remarkable with its open-source Android operating system. SinceApples iPhonerevolutionised thesmartphonein June 2007, bringing touchscreens and a beautiful user experience to the masses, its been without a rival. Sure, theres a small legion of BlackBerry fans, and a few Nokia die-hards, but the critical consensus up until about a year ago was that the iPhones achievements were peerless. EnterAndroid. The free, open-source mobile operating system was introduced to consumers with theHTC Dream(also known as theT-Mobile G1) in late 2008, but didnt start gaining steam until the release of theHTC Heroin July 2009. The Hero, armed with a custom user interface called Sense that HTC built in-house, gained rave reviews for its high-end specs and faultless user experience, and appeared on many critics lists of the best gadgets of 2009. The whispers began: Had Google managed to create a platform that genuinely rivalled the iPhone for the best smartphone experience around? This success is starting to show in the numbers. In February 2010, Google announced that more than 60,000 phones with Android on were shipping each day. The Android App Market is also booming, housing more than 30,000 downloadable applications in March 2010, although thats still comparably small when set beside the 185,000 or so Apple has in its App Store. But where once companies had to have an iPhone app, its now understood that they need to offer both an iPhone and an Android variant. Manufacturers havent let the opportunity pass them by, either. At the time of writing, there are around 35 mobile phones, five tablet PCs, three e-book readers and a netbook available that come with Android installed a total of about 43 devices. But thats nothing compared to the amount of gadgets that are purportedly in the works. If you tot up the rumours, statements of intent, leaked documents and roadmapped products from manufacturers, you can add at least another 15 smartphones, 19 tablet PCs, two e-book readers and three more netbooks to the pile. When you combine the totals, you arrive at a figure of at least 82 Android devices either released or in development. The platform has received four major updates since the HTC Dream launched with Android 1.0. Version 1.5 brought camcorder functionality and the ability to use homescreen widgets. Version 1.6 added voice search and a better Android App Market. Then version 2.0 revamped the user interface, added new, larger screen sizes, as well as navigation support in Google Maps. The latest update is version 2.1, which debuted on theNexus One a handset built by HTC but to specifications dictated by Google itself. Android 2.1 brings additional homescreens, animated wallpapers and the ability to use voice recognition to type in all text fields very useful if youre in a situation where you cant use an on-screen keypad, such as when driving. Other devices are starting to appear with version 2.1 as well the Motorola Droid, known as theMilestone in Europe, recently received an update to 2.1, and HTCs forthcoming Legend and Desire handsets come with it installed. Oldhardware=nonewtricks However, the new features available in 2.1 come with increased demand on the relatively weak processors found in most smartphones, particularly in the earlier Android devices. As a result, some handsets cant run later versions of Android at satisfactory speed. Even in those that can, manufacturers have been exceptionally slow at rolling out updates to their device owners, with HTC still not having delivered any update above 1.5 for its Hero at the time of writing. Its difficult to fault Google for wanting to update its core platform as fast as it can. The problem is that its going so fast that manufacturers cant roll out updates to their own software at a speed to match. The upshot for users is that early Android adopters are stuck on two-year contracts looking mournfully at all the fun that new device owners can get, with no knowledge as to whether theyll eventually have access to the new features themselves. This isnt anything new in most cases other manufacturers dont grant older gadget owners access to new features but its tough on Android users in particular because the pace of the updates is so fast. A phone can be out-of-date within months of its release, and in some cases handsets are still arriving with Android version 1.6 installed. App developers suffer, too. Many of Googles home-grown applications Maps, Earth, Goggles and Gesture Search were initially only released for the 2.0 and 2.1 platforms. Some have since gained backwards compatibility to 1.6, but HTC Hero owners, running 1.5, still cant use them. App developers have a tough choice to make: support as wide a range of phones as possible, or offer an app with superior features, but only to those running the latest Android builds. Situationnormal: Allforkedup So what can Google do about the problem? The company is stuck with four slightly different variants of its platform in the wild, and its got a splintered marketplace where one Android user cant necessarily access the same apps that another can, and its confusing and frustrating for end users. The obvious way ahead is to try and force manufacturers to update the software on their devices. Any device running 1.5 should be able to cope with 1.6, and a 2.0 device will manage 2.1. While that still leaves the problem of devices that cant quite cope with the most recent updates, Google should be able to merge its four shards into two a set of 1.6 devices and a set of 2.1 devices simplifying the situation somewhat. However, that relies on the goodwill and resources of a diverse set of companies, and some of those will only have dipped a toe into the waters of Android, meaning that they might be less keen to start devoting significant staff time to mucking around with operating system updates. So Googles got another trick up its sleeve. Recent rumours suggest that the company, in the upcoming version 2.2 update, is planning to de-couple the various applications that run on the device from the operating system itself. The browser, email apps, contacts, input methods and various other components will be downloadable and, crucially, updatable through the Android market rather than needing to wait for a full OS update to be upgraded. When Google wants to update the Gmail app, it can just push a market update, rather than forcing customers to wait for HTC, Dell, Samsung or other manufacturers to approve it. If Google fails to unify the Android platform, a future looms where Android is stuck in a series of ghettoes, with no guarantee that one Android user will be able to run the same apps as another unless they buy a new device every six months. Thats good news for manufacturers, but very bad news for Google and for consumers. If Google manages the transition successfully however, then a unified (or at least consolidated) platform could be easily updated by both Google and phone-makers, depending on whether the update is a critical security issue or a new feature in an application. Time is pressing. The fate of Android rests on what Google does over the summer of 2010. Will the platform fall by the wayside, or will it instead grow to be the Windows of smartphones, carefully balancing openness to app developers with a superior user experience and mass-market appeal? On past form, it seems foolish to bet against Google. Let us also look at the SORT analysis for android: Being a self declared Google and Android fanboy, Im constantly reading and studying about cloud computing and the mobile marketplace whenever I have the opportunity. Ive even begun the very first steps of beginning to learn programming Java for the Android platform, although this is a ‘free time endeavor which is going to take quite some time for me to get even the basic level of proficiency achieved. 2.2.1 SWOT Analyses for GOOGLE ANDROID But one area where I feel comfortable in discussion and analysis is in the business realm, which is why I decided to do a basic SWOT analysis for Google Android. It is a tool used in strategic planning to evaluateStrengths,Weaknesses,Opportunities, andThreats involved in a project or business. A companys Strengths and Weaknesses are generally internal, while the Opportunities and Threats are external factors. To spare most of the readers of this analysis, this SWOT is going to be a little less in depth than a typical SWOT analysis. However, it will be detailed enough to outline and discuss what I feel are the key items in each area of the analysis. STRENGTHS The Google Brand-Google is one of the most well known and respected technology companies on the planet. The fact that they are behind the Android platform gives it credibility and viability in the eyes of potential partners, vendors, and developers. Device Selection-Unlike the Apple iPhone where you dont have any options of hardware suppliers other than Apple itself, the Android OS is open-source and any hardware manufacturer who chooses to do so can use it on their handset. This gives consumers a great deal of selection from which to choose from while also decreasing the lead time to the use of the latest hardware and technological advances in mobile electronics. Competitive Pricing-The Android OS is very cost effective to develop for since it is open source and the licensing arrangements are very vendor friendly. Thus, handsets utilizing the Android OS tend to be prices very aggressively. Google application and services integration-The fact that the Android platform integrates so many of the Google services and applications into its base only strengthens its core capabilities and usefulness. Google items such as GMAIL, Calendar, Reader, Listen, and of course GPS and Maps to name a few integrate seamlessly with the Android OS and make it very simple for users to synchronize their data across platforms from the desktop to the cloud and mobile platforms. Open Source-The Android OS is built from a Linux base using the JAVA Programming language. You can go directly to the http://source.android.com website and find the information and source code you need to build a compatible device for Android. Additionally, Android is a core part of the OHA (Open Handset Alliance) which is a group of companies working together to develop Android as an open and free mobile platform. Google Assets-The Android team(s) has all the intellectual, economic, and influential resources of Google at its disposal to make it a dominant player in the mobile marketplace. WEAKNESSES Multimedia Support-Unlike the Apple iPhone which has the enormously popular iTunes application and marketplace, Android does not have a central or cohesive source of multimedia material nor a centralized player. Although there have been some improvements in applications on the Android platform in this area, at this time there is no â€Å"the† place to go that comes even slightly close to what Apple can offer on this front. However, there are numerous rumors to what exactly Google has in store for a music service of its own to be released sometime in late 2010. Whatever it is, it needs to be extremely well executed to come close to what iTunes offers Apple iPhone users. The one large asset Google has going for it is YouTube, and their recent announcement ofWebM(VP8) could become a lever for multimedia influence in video delivery for Google and the Android OS. Reliance on hardware makers to upgrade-Apple controls the when and how iPhone users will get not only new hardware, but upgrades to the OS and core functionality. With Android, even when Google releases a new version of its OS, it has to wait for the manufacturers to thoroughly test and modify code to make sure it works properly on their specific hardware configuration. Google is addressing this issue as it has announced that it plans to implement more of the core features of its services into the Android OS itself instead of as applications, and to slow down the upgrade releases as the OS matures in the marketplace. Less Mature-Android is not as mature or as polished as the iPhone at this point. It improves with every release, but it hasnt reached the same level of overall user friendliness in its interface that Apple has achieved. Lack of Enterprise Support-Blackberry and even Microsoft still get most of the support when it comes to Enterprise usage. Although both Apple and Google have made some inroads in this marketplace, Android has a very small market share here. It needs to continue to develop Google Apps and its integration abilities with Microsoft Exchange. OPPORTUNITIES The Android OS has a â€Å"HUGE† opportunity to get into the Tablet and e-book reader platform market right now. It cannot afford to sit back and watch Apple dominate the tablet market and eat up the market share as it had done when it released the iPhone. To date, that is exactly what is happening as no major hardware ‘mover and shaker has released an Android based tablet which is a fantastic opportunity if it is executed properly. I want one NOW! There have been several minor releases of Android tablets over the last few months, but none of them are what I would consider a significant product. Either Google itself or someone such as HP, Dell, ASUS, or ACER need to release a killer Android tablet in order for it to gather any traction. These waters only became murkier when HP acquired PALM. Developing Countries-Google has a huge opportunity to develop inexpensive devices using the Android platform in developing countries. The licensing is extremely developer friendly and the upfront cost investments are significantly less than other platforms. The integration with so many of Googles other free services is a natural fit in this marketplace. Developer Friendly-Unlike the recent activities of Apple which has alienated and ticked off much of the developer community, developing for Android is very open and developer friendly. Google needs to take this opportunity to help developers continue to monetize their efforts through improved advertising revenue models and app sales. Growth of smartphone market-The smartphone market is still very immature and there is still a huge amount of growth to take place over the next several years to decade. Google needs to continue to work hard to position itself with its cloud computing applications and services in support of the Android OS. The marriage of these two areas is key to the maintained growth rate and increased market share potential of the Android platform. Embedded electronic devices-The Android OS has huge potential to be a major player in the embedded electronic market as a dominate embedded operating system. With so many devices becoming embedded with smart technologies and connectivity to the cloud, the Android OS is primed to be a major winner there. THREATS iPhone unleashed-If the iPhone is unleashed from the beaten down ATT network and appears on other networks such as Sprint and in particular, Verizon, it could be a real threat to the sustained rate of future market share growth for the Android OS. A significant amount of potential smartphone customers said they would buy an iPhone if it werent on the ATT network. (I was once in this camp, until I discovered the world of Android.) Apple dominance-Apples market share gives it a great influence over developers and old media companies who are dying for a revenue model that will work for them. The ever growing walled garden that Apple is building is a false panacea that the old media companies are holding onto with both hands-the ability to charge users for access to premium content. Apples recent changes in policy and functional restrictions make it the ideal platform to launch such a strategy and recruit the power brokers from this old model. Additionally, the â€Å"theres an app for that† and Im willing to pay for it behavior of Apple iPhone users is of great appeal to developers who see the dollar signs in this market. (Ive yet to pay for an application on Android) This gives Apple influence over developers and makes their huge market share very difficult to walk away from, even when they adopt very unfriendly developer policies. Increased Competition-Obviously, companies like RIM and Microsoft are going to fight for their share of the market and arent going to just give up. In particular, the Blackberry platform which still has huge support in the enterprise market. Platform Fragmentation-This is a huge threat to the Android platform. Although I listed the numerous devices as a strength above, the risk of fragmentation is a real and significant one. This is why Google has recently put a lot of effort into developing ways to minimize this problem. Google does not want numerous custom version of Android to emerge or fork off from their core platform, which is something you see in the Linux distribution network. Google is developing a set of baseline standards for compatibility for its platform. Since Google controls the Android Market, it can maintain significant influence over device vendors to meet the compatibility requirements. If you do a little research on this topic, you will see that Googles standards are fairly rigid, maybe more so than one would expect. Google also plans to adopt aonce-per-yearrelease schedule as well. None the less, managing this risk is a major and real threat to the Android platform. So there you have it, my basic SWOT analysis for Google Android. One underlying issue I feel is worth noting is that Google does not have to dominate, and as much as so many of us would love to see it, it does not have to â€Å"beat† Apple in market share or any other core metric. The only thing Google needs to do is to make sure there is an open platform large enough in the mobile market for its advertising business. Lets face it; Google is not about selling Android devices. Google is about search and advertising, and Apples closed system was a threat to that model which has become even more self-evident over the last six to nine months of Apple policies and maneuverings. Apple recently announced their own Ad network for the iPhone and iPad which could be viewed as a shot across the bow of Google which puts even more necessity on the Android platforms success. The clear advantage that Google has going for itself right now is that Apple (Steve Jobs) is either being indignant o ver what cloud computing actually does and means, or he truly doesnt understand or hasnt figured out how its suppose to work. Considering how intelligent Steve Jobs is, I find it highly unlikely that the second option is the reason, and that his stubbornness and willingness to maintain personal grudges as the likely culprit. 2.3 Overview of the Closed Source Operating Systems (Apple IOS). If theres one company that is the envy of the high-tech community these days, its Apple. Steve Jobs is hailed as a genius CEO and lauded for a string of hit products. Apples market capitalization is over $200 BILLION dollars currently, easily ranking it in the top 10 companies in the world by market cap, and just shy of Microsoft for biggest technology company. Everyone wants to understand the secrets of Apples success and hopefully emulate them. The reasons given by people for Apples success are many. The following are a few of the arguments made: Vertical integration- Apple owns most of, if not the entire, technology stack for its key products, and thus gives it advantages over other less vertically integrated products. NOTE: â€Å"Vertical integration† used to be called â€Å"being proprietary† and was given as the reason for Apples relative lack of success against Microsoft in the OS/PC battles of the 80s and 9os. But phenomenal success has a way of changing peoples minds. Making markets vs. addressing markets- Some claim that Apple doesnt ask people what they need but gives them products they decide theywant. Does anyone NEED an iPhone or iPad? Not really, but a lot of people seem to want them. The Cool Factor- Lets face it, Apple does make â€Å"cool† products. Attention to design and detail-fit and finish as they say-really distinguishes Apples products from competitors. Entering markets after theyve developed— Contrary to #2 above, some people claim that Apple doesnt make markets but enters existing markets once theyre growing and takes advantage of latent demand. The iPod was not the first digital music player and the iPhone was not the first smart phone, and the iPad is not the first portable computing device. In the case of the iPad, products like the Kindle and Netbooks actually paved the way for the market to accept small computing devices, and Apples iPad is riding that wave. Differentiated business models- whether it was iPod+iTunes or the iPhone+App Store, Apple innovates not just on technology, but on the business model. This makes it difficult for competitors to play catch up, let alone overtake Apple once it establishes itself in a dominant position. People care about the experience not technology— Apple has always been about the user experience, but for a long time, the majority of the market didnt care about that. The majority of desktop computer users cared about â€Å"techs and specs†. Now the tables have turned, and the majority dont care about the specs, they care about the experience. The iPod, with its â€Å"1000 songs in your pocket† motto and iTunes which radically simplified purchasing music latched onto the experience wave, and Apple has been riding it ever since. Simple product offerings- Apple has a very clear and simple set of products. Its easy to understand the differences between their products, product families and the various configurations. This makes it easy to buy an Apple product if you want to. A lot of companies complicate things unnecessarily. How many iPhone models are there? How many Blackberry models are there? How many Nokia smart phone models are there? See the difference between Apple, RIM and Nokia? The same is true for the iMAc, the iPod and the iPad. Granted, there are actually a number of iPod models (Nano, Shuffle, Touch etc.) but they are very distinct amongst themselves. This cant be said for digital music players from other companies. 2.3.1 Apple Competitive Analysis: Future Goals Apple has been and continues to focus on what its competitors are doing in order to keep a competitive strategy. Steve Jobs wanted to create a brand loyal name and to also produce a personalized computer with many features that would allow your life to be easier. Apple needed to keep up with rapid price cuts of its competitors personalized computers that were based on other operating systems. They wanted to focus on the rapid technological advances in both hardware and software that would boost their computers performance and provide its own operating systems. By doing so, the iMac-personalized computer was introduced in 1997 and they were able to create the brand loyalty they were looking for. They want to continue to build the brand loyal name and keep giving the consumer what they want to make their lives easier. Current Strategy Steve Jobs has recognized that many of its competitors have been providing computers that rely heavily on other operating systems to run their computers. For example, Dell computers rely on windows XP, and many of their software products rely on other partys. What Steve Jobs has managed to do is to incorporate its own operating systems, hardware, and software programs for its entire product line. The software that they have created would allow the user to edit videos, download and play music, edit pictures, etc. with all of their own products and applications. While other competition relied on outside companies introducing their own digital and distribution music product services, subscription services, and free peer-to-peer music services; Apple has created a way to counter the constant changing competitive market. They have done so by effectively integrating all three services that its competitors have to choose from by creating the iPod for hardware, iTunes for software, and iTune s Music Store for the third party distribution services. Apple has been able to eliminate its reliance on outside companies and to keep on creating specialized programs for consumers. Another factor that has helped keep Apples future thriving is by introducing the Apple Store. Customers are now able to take their products into the store and have an apple specialist examine/work on the products that they are heavily invested in. Most competitors would have the consumer take computer/product to a tech department of a store or would have to send to a third party. Assumptions and Capabilities Apple has done a tremendous job of knowing and anticipating what his competitors are doing. Apple was able to develop its iPhone and music player technology into a mobile phone. The Rokr was the mobile phone device that was developed by Motorola. The device contained quality sound and included an advanced camera system. A version of Apples iTunes music store has been developed for the iPhone so users can manage music and can download other applications that Apple has to offer. An Apple consumer can browse the web faster than its competitors. These capabilities make the iPhone ideal for both business and travel. By knowing the competitors moves and capabilities Apple was able to perfect a phone that could offer more programs and applications than any other phone. The company was then able to then focus on the strengths and weakness of its competition and compare it to the products they provide. The company believes in the highest quality of products. Thes e products will continue to provide what every customer wants and needs, a computer company that continuously makes life easi Open Source vs Closed Source Systems Open Source vs Closed Source Systems INTRODUCTION For many years, proprietary software has been the dominating business approach used by the commercial software firms. Industry giants like Microsoft proved this strategy to be successful, building their multibillion dollar empires based on the proprietary software platform. Over the past decade, a new business approach called open source model which involves contributors from around the globe to create, share and distribute software code for free had come into practice (Pal, N Madanmohan, TR., 2002). Although the roots to this practice of sharing code evolved since early 60s, the widespread usage of internet and the technology developments in past two decades opened new opportunities for open source projects (CNET news, 1998). A number of Open Source Software (OSS) products such as Apache web server, BIND and SendMail have dominated their product categories ever since then (Pal, N Madanmohan, TR., 2002). In the past decade, several researchers (Wheeler, DA., 2007; Mockus, et al., 2000) have taken interest in studying how open source can be applied to modern business strategies. However, a concern exists that in this area of study that there is no substantial evidence that the practices followed are effective in the business environment (Bitzer Schrà ¶der, 2004). For economists like Lerner Tirole (2000), the altruism shown by commercial companies and programmers involved in an open source software project is surprising. They stated altruism hasnt played a major role in any other industry than software. Several others like Freeman Rogers (2008) and Goetz (2003) contradict this statement by illustrating altruism exist in any industry provided there is proper exposure of the problem towards the contributing community. But most of the researches surrounding open source model considered software industry as the base for their studies. 1.0 SCOPE OF THE PROJECT 1.1 Objective This project work focuses on the study of the Open Source ecosystem (Android) how it differs from Closed source sustems such as those surrounding the iPhone. This project includes the study of the Android Market, (online mobile application store for Android users) application developers, and which factors developers consider for selecting a platform for application development. To understand business strategy development trends across Android and iPhone platforms, we compared the Android market with the iPhone App Store, the leading application store in current mobile market. Apple launched an online application marketplace called the â€Å"iPhone App Store† before launching iPhone 3G. Currently, this store has more than 195,000 applications. To match or surpass the success of iPhone App Store, Apple rivals such as Google and Blackberry introduced their own application downloading stores called â€Å"Android Market† and â€Å"Blackberry App World† respectively. T he Android Market is similar to the iPhone App Store or to any other application store; it boasts a catalog of applications,  services and tools available for the user to purchase download and use. Today, the Android Market also has around 49,000 applications. Thus, the comparison between iPhone and Android application stores will help explain the new challenges faced by these two application stores, and also the demand for these stores in the near future. This study will help understand why Android choose Open Source System and why Apple doesnt, what determines their success, which large companies are directly involved in developing applications for Android, and which factors they consider for developing an application. 1.2 Experimental Procedures This project is based on a semi-automatically collected application database and   surveys to obtain necessary information for proving the hypothesis. (A) Website Data Firstly, application data were collected semi-automatically from the Android Market and iPhone App Store (iTunes store) and other mobile applications related websites, for e.g., Androlib.com, iPhoneapplicationlist.com. This gathered application database includes a list of the application categories on both platforms, number of applications in each category, and application information for the selected categories. (B) Interview Data Next, we interviewed mobile application developers to understand and know their views about Android/iPhone platforms and the ecosystem. To get in touch with mobile application developers, we attended the mobile conferences where they gather to share their views. (C) Survey Data Lastly, all the relevant facts about application developers from the interview data helped us prepare a survey. This web-based survey was prepared and conducted using Survey Monkey. 1.3 Resources Utilized The main resources used during this project were our industrial advisor, our academic reader, Android and iPhone application database, interviews and surveys from mobile application developers. 2.0 LITERATURE REVIEW 2.1 Introduction of Literature Review In order to achieve success in project implementation, the first step is to research and find information already available. During research, we found many articles related to our topic. This paper is based on the content from these articles. We have divided this section in four main areas: Overview of the Open Source Operating Systems (Android). Overview of the Closed Source Operating Systems (Apple IOS). Fundamentals behind the Open Source Platform. Introduction to the Smartphone. 2.2 Overview of the Open Source Operating Systems (Android). Google has achieved something remarkable with its open-source Android operating system. SinceApples iPhonerevolutionised thesmartphonein June 2007, bringing touchscreens and a beautiful user experience to the masses, its been without a rival. Sure, theres a small legion of BlackBerry fans, and a few Nokia die-hards, but the critical consensus up until about a year ago was that the iPhones achievements were peerless. EnterAndroid. The free, open-source mobile operating system was introduced to consumers with theHTC Dream(also known as theT-Mobile G1) in late 2008, but didnt start gaining steam until the release of theHTC Heroin July 2009. The Hero, armed with a custom user interface called Sense that HTC built in-house, gained rave reviews for its high-end specs and faultless user experience, and appeared on many critics lists of the best gadgets of 2009. The whispers began: Had Google managed to create a platform that genuinely rivalled the iPhone for the best smartphone experience around? This success is starting to show in the numbers. In February 2010, Google announced that more than 60,000 phones with Android on were shipping each day. The Android App Market is also booming, housing more than 30,000 downloadable applications in March 2010, although thats still comparably small when set beside the 185,000 or so Apple has in its App Store. But where once companies had to have an iPhone app, its now understood that they need to offer both an iPhone and an Android variant. Manufacturers havent let the opportunity pass them by, either. At the time of writing, there are around 35 mobile phones, five tablet PCs, three e-book readers and a netbook available that come with Android installed a total of about 43 devices. But thats nothing compared to the amount of gadgets that are purportedly in the works. If you tot up the rumours, statements of intent, leaked documents and roadmapped products from manufacturers, you can add at least another 15 smartphones, 19 tablet PCs, two e-book readers and three more netbooks to the pile. When you combine the totals, you arrive at a figure of at least 82 Android devices either released or in development. The platform has received four major updates since the HTC Dream launched with Android 1.0. Version 1.5 brought camcorder functionality and the ability to use homescreen widgets. Version 1.6 added voice search and a better Android App Market. Then version 2.0 revamped the user interface, added new, larger screen sizes, as well as navigation support in Google Maps. The latest update is version 2.1, which debuted on theNexus One a handset built by HTC but to specifications dictated by Google itself. Android 2.1 brings additional homescreens, animated wallpapers and the ability to use voice recognition to type in all text fields very useful if youre in a situation where you cant use an on-screen keypad, such as when driving. Other devices are starting to appear with version 2.1 as well the Motorola Droid, known as theMilestone in Europe, recently received an update to 2.1, and HTCs forthcoming Legend and Desire handsets come with it installed. Oldhardware=nonewtricks However, the new features available in 2.1 come with increased demand on the relatively weak processors found in most smartphones, particularly in the earlier Android devices. As a result, some handsets cant run later versions of Android at satisfactory speed. Even in those that can, manufacturers have been exceptionally slow at rolling out updates to their device owners, with HTC still not having delivered any update above 1.5 for its Hero at the time of writing. Its difficult to fault Google for wanting to update its core platform as fast as it can. The problem is that its going so fast that manufacturers cant roll out updates to their own software at a speed to match. The upshot for users is that early Android adopters are stuck on two-year contracts looking mournfully at all the fun that new device owners can get, with no knowledge as to whether theyll eventually have access to the new features themselves. This isnt anything new in most cases other manufacturers dont grant older gadget owners access to new features but its tough on Android users in particular because the pace of the updates is so fast. A phone can be out-of-date within months of its release, and in some cases handsets are still arriving with Android version 1.6 installed. App developers suffer, too. Many of Googles home-grown applications Maps, Earth, Goggles and Gesture Search were initially only released for the 2.0 and 2.1 platforms. Some have since gained backwards compatibility to 1.6, but HTC Hero owners, running 1.5, still cant use them. App developers have a tough choice to make: support as wide a range of phones as possible, or offer an app with superior features, but only to those running the latest Android builds. Situationnormal: Allforkedup So what can Google do about the problem? The company is stuck with four slightly different variants of its platform in the wild, and its got a splintered marketplace where one Android user cant necessarily access the same apps that another can, and its confusing and frustrating for end users. The obvious way ahead is to try and force manufacturers to update the software on their devices. Any device running 1.5 should be able to cope with 1.6, and a 2.0 device will manage 2.1. While that still leaves the problem of devices that cant quite cope with the most recent updates, Google should be able to merge its four shards into two a set of 1.6 devices and a set of 2.1 devices simplifying the situation somewhat. However, that relies on the goodwill and resources of a diverse set of companies, and some of those will only have dipped a toe into the waters of Android, meaning that they might be less keen to start devoting significant staff time to mucking around with operating system updates. So Googles got another trick up its sleeve. Recent rumours suggest that the company, in the upcoming version 2.2 update, is planning to de-couple the various applications that run on the device from the operating system itself. The browser, email apps, contacts, input methods and various other components will be downloadable and, crucially, updatable through the Android market rather than needing to wait for a full OS update to be upgraded. When Google wants to update the Gmail app, it can just push a market update, rather than forcing customers to wait for HTC, Dell, Samsung or other manufacturers to approve it. If Google fails to unify the Android platform, a future looms where Android is stuck in a series of ghettoes, with no guarantee that one Android user will be able to run the same apps as another unless they buy a new device every six months. Thats good news for manufacturers, but very bad news for Google and for consumers. If Google manages the transition successfully however, then a unified (or at least consolidated) platform could be easily updated by both Google and phone-makers, depending on whether the update is a critical security issue or a new feature in an application. Time is pressing. The fate of Android rests on what Google does over the summer of 2010. Will the platform fall by the wayside, or will it instead grow to be the Windows of smartphones, carefully balancing openness to app developers with a superior user experience and mass-market appeal? On past form, it seems foolish to bet against Google. Let us also look at the SORT analysis for android: Being a self declared Google and Android fanboy, Im constantly reading and studying about cloud computing and the mobile marketplace whenever I have the opportunity. Ive even begun the very first steps of beginning to learn programming Java for the Android platform, although this is a ‘free time endeavor which is going to take quite some time for me to get even the basic level of proficiency achieved. 2.2.1 SWOT Analyses for GOOGLE ANDROID But one area where I feel comfortable in discussion and analysis is in the business realm, which is why I decided to do a basic SWOT analysis for Google Android. It is a tool used in strategic planning to evaluateStrengths,Weaknesses,Opportunities, andThreats involved in a project or business. A companys Strengths and Weaknesses are generally internal, while the Opportunities and Threats are external factors. To spare most of the readers of this analysis, this SWOT is going to be a little less in depth than a typical SWOT analysis. However, it will be detailed enough to outline and discuss what I feel are the key items in each area of the analysis. STRENGTHS The Google Brand-Google is one of the most well known and respected technology companies on the planet. The fact that they are behind the Android platform gives it credibility and viability in the eyes of potential partners, vendors, and developers. Device Selection-Unlike the Apple iPhone where you dont have any options of hardware suppliers other than Apple itself, the Android OS is open-source and any hardware manufacturer who chooses to do so can use it on their handset. This gives consumers a great deal of selection from which to choose from while also decreasing the lead time to the use of the latest hardware and technological advances in mobile electronics. Competitive Pricing-The Android OS is very cost effective to develop for since it is open source and the licensing arrangements are very vendor friendly. Thus, handsets utilizing the Android OS tend to be prices very aggressively. Google application and services integration-The fact that the Android platform integrates so many of the Google services and applications into its base only strengthens its core capabilities and usefulness. Google items such as GMAIL, Calendar, Reader, Listen, and of course GPS and Maps to name a few integrate seamlessly with the Android OS and make it very simple for users to synchronize their data across platforms from the desktop to the cloud and mobile platforms. Open Source-The Android OS is built from a Linux base using the JAVA Programming language. You can go directly to the http://source.android.com website and find the information and source code you need to build a compatible device for Android. Additionally, Android is a core part of the OHA (Open Handset Alliance) which is a group of companies working together to develop Android as an open and free mobile platform. Google Assets-The Android team(s) has all the intellectual, economic, and influential resources of Google at its disposal to make it a dominant player in the mobile marketplace. WEAKNESSES Multimedia Support-Unlike the Apple iPhone which has the enormously popular iTunes application and marketplace, Android does not have a central or cohesive source of multimedia material nor a centralized player. Although there have been some improvements in applications on the Android platform in this area, at this time there is no â€Å"the† place to go that comes even slightly close to what Apple can offer on this front. However, there are numerous rumors to what exactly Google has in store for a music service of its own to be released sometime in late 2010. Whatever it is, it needs to be extremely well executed to come close to what iTunes offers Apple iPhone users. The one large asset Google has going for it is YouTube, and their recent announcement ofWebM(VP8) could become a lever for multimedia influence in video delivery for Google and the Android OS. Reliance on hardware makers to upgrade-Apple controls the when and how iPhone users will get not only new hardware, but upgrades to the OS and core functionality. With Android, even when Google releases a new version of its OS, it has to wait for the manufacturers to thoroughly test and modify code to make sure it works properly on their specific hardware configuration. Google is addressing this issue as it has announced that it plans to implement more of the core features of its services into the Android OS itself instead of as applications, and to slow down the upgrade releases as the OS matures in the marketplace. Less Mature-Android is not as mature or as polished as the iPhone at this point. It improves with every release, but it hasnt reached the same level of overall user friendliness in its interface that Apple has achieved. Lack of Enterprise Support-Blackberry and even Microsoft still get most of the support when it comes to Enterprise usage. Although both Apple and Google have made some inroads in this marketplace, Android has a very small market share here. It needs to continue to develop Google Apps and its integration abilities with Microsoft Exchange. OPPORTUNITIES The Android OS has a â€Å"HUGE† opportunity to get into the Tablet and e-book reader platform market right now. It cannot afford to sit back and watch Apple dominate the tablet market and eat up the market share as it had done when it released the iPhone. To date, that is exactly what is happening as no major hardware ‘mover and shaker has released an Android based tablet which is a fantastic opportunity if it is executed properly. I want one NOW! There have been several minor releases of Android tablets over the last few months, but none of them are what I would consider a significant product. Either Google itself or someone such as HP, Dell, ASUS, or ACER need to release a killer Android tablet in order for it to gather any traction. These waters only became murkier when HP acquired PALM. Developing Countries-Google has a huge opportunity to develop inexpensive devices using the Android platform in developing countries. The licensing is extremely developer friendly and the upfront cost investments are significantly less than other platforms. The integration with so many of Googles other free services is a natural fit in this marketplace. Developer Friendly-Unlike the recent activities of Apple which has alienated and ticked off much of the developer community, developing for Android is very open and developer friendly. Google needs to take this opportunity to help developers continue to monetize their efforts through improved advertising revenue models and app sales. Growth of smartphone market-The smartphone market is still very immature and there is still a huge amount of growth to take place over the next several years to decade. Google needs to continue to work hard to position itself with its cloud computing applications and services in support of the Android OS. The marriage of these two areas is key to the maintained growth rate and increased market share potential of the Android platform. Embedded electronic devices-The Android OS has huge potential to be a major player in the embedded electronic market as a dominate embedded operating system. With so many devices becoming embedded with smart technologies and connectivity to the cloud, the Android OS is primed to be a major winner there. THREATS iPhone unleashed-If the iPhone is unleashed from the beaten down ATT network and appears on other networks such as Sprint and in particular, Verizon, it could be a real threat to the sustained rate of future market share growth for the Android OS. A significant amount of potential smartphone customers said they would buy an iPhone if it werent on the ATT network. (I was once in this camp, until I discovered the world of Android.) Apple dominance-Apples market share gives it a great influence over developers and old media companies who are dying for a revenue model that will work for them. The ever growing walled garden that Apple is building is a false panacea that the old media companies are holding onto with both hands-the ability to charge users for access to premium content. Apples recent changes in policy and functional restrictions make it the ideal platform to launch such a strategy and recruit the power brokers from this old model. Additionally, the â€Å"theres an app for that† and Im willing to pay for it behavior of Apple iPhone users is of great appeal to developers who see the dollar signs in this market. (Ive yet to pay for an application on Android) This gives Apple influence over developers and makes their huge market share very difficult to walk away from, even when they adopt very unfriendly developer policies. Increased Competition-Obviously, companies like RIM and Microsoft are going to fight for their share of the market and arent going to just give up. In particular, the Blackberry platform which still has huge support in the enterprise market. Platform Fragmentation-This is a huge threat to the Android platform. Although I listed the numerous devices as a strength above, the risk of fragmentation is a real and significant one. This is why Google has recently put a lot of effort into developing ways to minimize this problem. Google does not want numerous custom version of Android to emerge or fork off from their core platform, which is something you see in the Linux distribution network. Google is developing a set of baseline standards for compatibility for its platform. Since Google controls the Android Market, it can maintain significant influence over device vendors to meet the compatibility requirements. If you do a little research on this topic, you will see that Googles standards are fairly rigid, maybe more so than one would expect. Google also plans to adopt aonce-per-yearrelease schedule as well. None the less, managing this risk is a major and real threat to the Android platform. So there you have it, my basic SWOT analysis for Google Android. One underlying issue I feel is worth noting is that Google does not have to dominate, and as much as so many of us would love to see it, it does not have to â€Å"beat† Apple in market share or any other core metric. The only thing Google needs to do is to make sure there is an open platform large enough in the mobile market for its advertising business. Lets face it; Google is not about selling Android devices. Google is about search and advertising, and Apples closed system was a threat to that model which has become even more self-evident over the last six to nine months of Apple policies and maneuverings. Apple recently announced their own Ad network for the iPhone and iPad which could be viewed as a shot across the bow of Google which puts even more necessity on the Android platforms success. The clear advantage that Google has going for itself right now is that Apple (Steve Jobs) is either being indignant o ver what cloud computing actually does and means, or he truly doesnt understand or hasnt figured out how its suppose to work. Considering how intelligent Steve Jobs is, I find it highly unlikely that the second option is the reason, and that his stubbornness and willingness to maintain personal grudges as the likely culprit. 2.3 Overview of the Closed Source Operating Systems (Apple IOS). If theres one company that is the envy of the high-tech community these days, its Apple. Steve Jobs is hailed as a genius CEO and lauded for a string of hit products. Apples market capitalization is over $200 BILLION dollars currently, easily ranking it in the top 10 companies in the world by market cap, and just shy of Microsoft for biggest technology company. Everyone wants to understand the secrets of Apples success and hopefully emulate them. The reasons given by people for Apples success are many. The following are a few of the arguments made: Vertical integration- Apple owns most of, if not the entire, technology stack for its key products, and thus gives it advantages over other less vertically integrated products. NOTE: â€Å"Vertical integration† used to be called â€Å"being proprietary† and was given as the reason for Apples relative lack of success against Microsoft in the OS/PC battles of the 80s and 9os. But phenomenal success has a way of changing peoples minds. Making markets vs. addressing markets- Some claim that Apple doesnt ask people what they need but gives them products they decide theywant. Does anyone NEED an iPhone or iPad? Not really, but a lot of people seem to want them. The Cool Factor- Lets face it, Apple does make â€Å"cool† products. Attention to design and detail-fit and finish as they say-really distinguishes Apples products from competitors. Entering markets after theyve developed— Contrary to #2 above, some people claim that Apple doesnt make markets but enters existing markets once theyre growing and takes advantage of latent demand. The iPod was not the first digital music player and the iPhone was not the first smart phone, and the iPad is not the first portable computing device. In the case of the iPad, products like the Kindle and Netbooks actually paved the way for the market to accept small computing devices, and Apples iPad is riding that wave. Differentiated business models- whether it was iPod+iTunes or the iPhone+App Store, Apple innovates not just on technology, but on the business model. This makes it difficult for competitors to play catch up, let alone overtake Apple once it establishes itself in a dominant position. People care about the experience not technology— Apple has always been about the user experience, but for a long time, the majority of the market didnt care about that. The majority of desktop computer users cared about â€Å"techs and specs†. Now the tables have turned, and the majority dont care about the specs, they care about the experience. The iPod, with its â€Å"1000 songs in your pocket† motto and iTunes which radically simplified purchasing music latched onto the experience wave, and Apple has been riding it ever since. Simple product offerings- Apple has a very clear and simple set of products. Its easy to understand the differences between their products, product families and the various configurations. This makes it easy to buy an Apple product if you want to. A lot of companies complicate things unnecessarily. How many iPhone models are there? How many Blackberry models are there? How many Nokia smart phone models are there? See the difference between Apple, RIM and Nokia? The same is true for the iMAc, the iPod and the iPad. Granted, there are actually a number of iPod models (Nano, Shuffle, Touch etc.) but they are very distinct amongst themselves. This cant be said for digital music players from other companies. 2.3.1 Apple Competitive Analysis: Future Goals Apple has been and continues to focus on what its competitors are doing in order to keep a competitive strategy. Steve Jobs wanted to create a brand loyal name and to also produce a personalized computer with many features that would allow your life to be easier. Apple needed to keep up with rapid price cuts of its competitors personalized computers that were based on other operating systems. They wanted to focus on the rapid technological advances in both hardware and software that would boost their computers performance and provide its own operating systems. By doing so, the iMac-personalized computer was introduced in 1997 and they were able to create the brand loyalty they were looking for. They want to continue to build the brand loyal name and keep giving the consumer what they want to make their lives easier. Current Strategy Steve Jobs has recognized that many of its competitors have been providing computers that rely heavily on other operating systems to run their computers. For example, Dell computers rely on windows XP, and many of their software products rely on other partys. What Steve Jobs has managed to do is to incorporate its own operating systems, hardware, and software programs for its entire product line. The software that they have created would allow the user to edit videos, download and play music, edit pictures, etc. with all of their own products and applications. While other competition relied on outside companies introducing their own digital and distribution music product services, subscription services, and free peer-to-peer music services; Apple has created a way to counter the constant changing competitive market. They have done so by effectively integrating all three services that its competitors have to choose from by creating the iPod for hardware, iTunes for software, and iTune s Music Store for the third party distribution services. Apple has been able to eliminate its reliance on outside companies and to keep on creating specialized programs for consumers. Another factor that has helped keep Apples future thriving is by introducing the Apple Store. Customers are now able to take their products into the store and have an apple specialist examine/work on the products that they are heavily invested in. Most competitors would have the consumer take computer/product to a tech department of a store or would have to send to a third party. Assumptions and Capabilities Apple has done a tremendous job of knowing and anticipating what his competitors are doing. Apple was able to develop its iPhone and music player technology into a mobile phone. The Rokr was the mobile phone device that was developed by Motorola. The device contained quality sound and included an advanced camera system. A version of Apples iTunes music store has been developed for the iPhone so users can manage music and can download other applications that Apple has to offer. An Apple consumer can browse the web faster than its competitors. These capabilities make the iPhone ideal for both business and travel. By knowing the competitors moves and capabilities Apple was able to perfect a phone that could offer more programs and applications than any other phone. The company was then able to then focus on the strengths and weakness of its competition and compare it to the products they provide. The company believes in the highest quality of products. Thes e products will continue to provide what every customer wants and needs, a computer company that continuously makes life easi

Apollonius Of Perga :: essays research papers fc

Apollonius of Perga Apollonius was a great mathematician, known by his contempories as " The Great Geometer, " whose treatise Conics is one of the greatest scientific works from the ancient world. Most of his other treatise were lost, although their titles and a general indication of their contents were passed on by later writers, especially Pappus of Alexandria. As a youth Apollonius studied in Alexandria ( under the pupils of Euclid, according to Pappus ) and subsequently taught at the university there. He visited Pergamum, capital of a Hellenistic kingdom in western Anatolia, where a university and library similar to those in Alexandria had recently been built. While at Pergamum he met Eudemus and Attaluus, and he wrote the first edition of Conics. He addressed the prefaces of the first three books of the final edition to Eudemus and the remaining volumes to Attalus, whom some scholars identify as King Attalus I of Pergamum. It is clear from Apollonius' allusion to Euclid, Conon of Samos, and Nicoteles of Cyrene that he made the fullest use of his predecessors' works. Book 1-4 contain a systematic account of the essential principles of conics, which for the most part had been previously set forth by Euclid, Aristaeus and Menaechmus. A number of theorems in Book 3 and the greater part of Book 4 are new, however, and he introduced the terms parabola, eelipse, and hyperbola. Books 5-7 are clearly original. His genius takes its highest flight in Book 5, in which he considers normals as minimum and maximum straight lines drawn from given points to the curve ( independently of tangent properties ), discusses how many normals can be drawn from particular points, finds their feet by construction, and gives propositions determining the center of curvature at any points and leading at once to the Cartesian equation of the evolute of any conic. The first four books of the Conics survive in the original Grrek and the next three in Arabic translation. Book 8 is lost. The only other extant work of Apollonius is Cutting Off of a Ratio ( or On Proportional Section ), in an Arabic translation. Pappus mentions five additional works, Cutting off an Area ( or On Spatial Section ) , On Determinate Section, Tangencies, and Plane Loci. Tangencies embraced the following general problem : given three things, each of which may be a point, straight line, or circle, construct a circle tangent to the three. Sometimes known as the problem of Apollonius, the most difficult case arises when the three given things are circles. Of the other works of Apollonius referred to by ancient writers, one, On

Individual Analysis of Working in a Group Situation

In this paper I will describe and analyze my experience working in a group situation, writing a paper on the movie 12 Angry Men. I will address therapeutic communication techniques used in our group situation. I will address any conflicts that arose in our group. Utilizing Tuckman’s group process theory, I will also address the effectiveness of our group process. Individual Analysis of Working in a Group Situation Learning how to work effectively in a group situation is key to success in many professions as well as in social situations. Groups vary from each other based on the individuals that make up each group, all of us belong to various groups at one time or another. The roles that we fulfill vary from group to group, and may even vary within the same group over time. The purpose of this paper is to analyze the communication process and the interaction of my group during the completion of an assignment. The group consisted of four members. Our task was to prepare an analysis paper on the movie 12 Angry Men. Because this was only a four-member group focused on a single specific task, there was a high level of cohesiveness and no conflict. Our group would be considered a secondary group because the relationship was impersonal and goal-oriented (Arnold & Boggs, 2011). Every member of a group plays a certain functional role within the group. Some functional roles relate to the task aspect of the group, while others promote social interaction. These functions are manifested in the behaviors of individual members and affect group dynamics. Task functions include such behaviors as; identifying tasks, coordinating, clarifying and summarizing. Maintenance functions include such behaviors as harmonizing, gatekeeping, encouraging and compromising. All of the members of our group were task specialists (Arnold & Boggs, 2011). According to Arnold and Boggs (2011), when task specialists dominate a group, members become dissatisfied and collaboration is diminished. However, this was not the case with our group. Due to the fact that our group was very task oriented and we collaborated well with each other everyone was satisfied with the experience. Our group was able to effectively function without a designated leader. As a group, we had many strengths. I believe one of our biggest strengths was our effective communication. When we met in person all the members of our group used therapeutic communication such as active listening, paraphrasing, and summarizing. We were all very respectful of each other and maintained eye contact and receptive nonverbal communication. There were several times during the movie that we paused the movie to discuss the jurors’ ages, professions, or the dynamics between the different jurors. Normally it wouldn’t be acceptable to repeatedly pause a movie for discussion, but it was widely accepted among our group and did not cause any conflicts. Another form of communication that our group used was the internet. It enabled us to receive papers via email attachment, and then download, print, edit, and return the changes at our own leisure. The only drawback with using the internet for communication is the lack of acknowledgement. In the future I will make sure that I ask the recipient to acknowledge that they have received my communication. Groups do not always start off fully-formed and functioning. Bruce Tuckman's model of the developmental sequence in small groups suggests that groups grow through clearly defined stages, from their creation as groups of individuals, to cohesive, task-focused teams. There are five stages of Tuckman’s theory, forming, storming, norming, performing, and adjourning. During the forming stage of Tuckman's theory, group members meeting each other for the first time are primarily concerned with overcoming their discomfort with one another. In this phase, the group members are engaged in establishing boundaries and group norms for communication (Arnold & Boggs, 2011). In contrast to Tuckman’s description, our group did not introduce themselves or share their backgrounds or reasons for coming to the croup, since we have been together in class for a few weeks and had already been acquainted. Our group did not pass through all of Tuckman’s stages of group development. Specifically, we omitted the storming stage and passed from forming to norming. Tuckman's storming phase focuses on the interpersonal conflicts that erupt among the members as they compete with one another for leadership roles. According to Tuckman, the interpersonal conflicts that typically include personal criticisms undermine the group's ability to accomplish the task (Arnold & Boggs, 2011). There was no real conflict in our group, since there was no clear leader in our group and all of the members were very task oriented. According to Tuckman, during the norming phase the group has one goal and all group members take responsibility and work toward the success of the group's goals (Arnold & Boggs, 2011). Our group was able to arrive at this level of cohesiveness at the beginning of the first meeting. Our group agreed to watch the movie once by ourselves and then meet and watch the movie together, and once we had view the film we would decide as a group which questions to assign to each of the members. Tuckman’s preforming phase happened on our second meeting, when our group watched the movie. After viewing the movie we discussed each question and collaboratively decided who would be most knowledgeable about each of the different areas. After dividing up the different areas of the paper we decided on a date that we would email our individual sections to Katie. The final phase of Tuckman’s theory is the adjourning phase. Our group reached this phase after we completed our final paper with the satisfaction of all of the group members. I left the group with a real feeling of satisfaction at having achieved what I set out to do. Throughout this group process has been helpful in a number of ways. I have learned how to communicate more effectively and I have also learned to step outside of my comfort zone. I have also leaned to be more conscious of my body language, because it is more effective than what you say. This group project has helped me learn how to convey my thoughts, feelings, opinions and ideas to my group in an effective manner. . I will be able to apply what I have learned to my work and also to future group projects at school. Groups are a fundamental structure for accomplishing a wide variety of tasks. An effective group has many traits or characteristics that combine to ensure that it is able to reach its goals and objectives in a manner that is conducive to a high level of performance. Most groups go through five separate stages before achieving effective collaboration. Bruce Tuckman described these stages as forming, storming, norming, performing, and adjourning. Several factors affect group performance: composition, size, norms, and cohesiveness. In working with groups it is important to be aware of the many factors that affect group performance and understand the individual as well as the group issues.

The Legacy of the Qin Dynasty

The Legacy of the Qin Dynasty The Qin Dynasty, pronounced like chin, emerged in 221 BCE. Qin Shihuang, the king of the Qin state at the time, conquered the many feudal territories vying for influence during the bloody Warring States period. He then united them all under one rule, thus putting an end to the notoriously violent chapter in Chinese history that lasted for 200 years. Qin Shihuang was only 38 years old when he came into power. He created the title Emperor (  Ã§Å¡â€¡Ã¥ ¸ ,  Ã‚  hungdà ¬) for himself, and thus is known as  the first emperor of China. While his dynasty only lasted 15 years, the shortest dynastic rule in Chinese history, the impact of the Qin Emperor on China cannot be understated. Although highly controversial, Qin Dynasty policies were very influential in uniting China and maintaining power. The Qin Emperor was famously obsessed with immortality and even spent years trying to find an elixir to eternal life. Though he ultimately died, it would seem that Qin’s quest to live forever was ultimately granted – his practices and policies were carried into the subsequent Han Dynasty and continue to flourish in present-day China.   Here are just a few remnants of Qin’s legacy.   Central Rule The dynasty adhered to Legalist principles, which is a Chinese philosophy that followed strict compliance with  the rule of law. This belief allowed Qin to rule the population from a centralized power structure and proved to be a very effective way to govern. Such a policy, however, did not allow for dissent. Anyone who protested Qins power was quickly and brutally silenced or killed off.   Written Script   Qin instituted a uniform written language. Before then, different regions in China had different languages, dialects, and writing systems. Imposing a universal written language allowed for better communication and implementation of policies. For example, a singular script allowed scholars to share information with a greater number of people. It also led to the sharing of culture that was previously only experienced by a few. Additionally, a single language allowed later dynasties to communicate with nomadic tribes and pass along information on how to negotiate or fight with them. Roads The construction of roads allowed for greater connections between provinces and major cities. The dynasty also standardized the length of axles in carts so that they could all ride on the newly-built roads. Weights and Measures The dynasty standardized all weights and measures, which led to more efficient commerce. This conversion also allowed subsequent dynasties to develop a taxation system. Coinage In another effort to unify the empire, the Qin Dynasty standardized the Chinese currency. Doing so led to greater commerce across more regions.   The Great Wall The Qin Dynasty was responsible for the construction of the Great Wall of China. The Great Wall marked national boundaries and acted as a defensive infrastructure to protect against invading nomadic tribes from the north. However, later dynasties were more expansionist and built beyond Qin’s original wall. Today, the Great Wall of China is easily one of Chinas most iconic pieces of architecture. Terracotta Warriors   Another architectural feat that draws tourists to China is the enormous tomb in present-day Xian filled with terracotta warriors. This is also a part of Qin Shihuangs legacy. When Qin Shihuang died, he was buried in a tomb accompanied by an army of hundreds of thousands of terracotta soldiers that were supposed to protect him in his afterlife. The tomb was uncovered by farmers  digging for a well in 1974.   Strong Personality One other lasting impact of the Qin Dynasty is the influence of a leader’s personality in China. Qin Shihuang’s relied on his top-down method of ruling, and, on the whole, people conformed to his rule because of the power of his personality. Many subjects followed Qin because he showed them something larger than their local kingdomsa visionary idea of a cohesive nation-state. While this is a very effective way to rule, once the leader dies, so can his dynasty. After Qin Shihuang’s death in 210 BCE, his son, and later his grandson, took power, but both were short-lived. The Qin Dynasty came to a close in 206 BCE, just four years after Qin Shihuang’s death. Almost immediately following his death, the same warring states that he unified sprang up again and China was again under numerous leaders until it was unified under the  Han Dynasty. The Han would last over 400 years, but much of its practices were started in the Qin Dynasty. Similarities in charismatic cult personalities can be seen in subsequent leaders in Chinese history, such as Chairman Mao Zedong. In fact, Mao actually likened himself to Emperor Qin.   Representation in Pop Culture Qin was  popularized in Eastern and Western media in Chinese Director Zhang Yimou’s 2002 film Hero. While some criticized the movie for advocating totalitarianism, movie-goers went to see it in droves. A hit in China and Hong Kong, when it opened to North American audiences in 2004, it was the number one movie and grossed $18 million in its opening weekend – a rarity for a foreign film.