Slashdot Mirror

I think what is implied is that in an average area, there are more likely 2 out of 3 people who have 'some' experience in using if not supporting Windows. If you look at the numbers, In 2009, 80 % of the homes in the US have a Computer. where looking at OS distribution, Approx 80% of Users are running some form of Windows.

Our company has specialized equipment and as a Systems Admin I work with alot of different *NIX versions. From AIX to Solaris to Ubuntu. And I am the ONLY person in our 9 man IT department who can handle *NIX. Even the operators and users of the machines and terminals dont know anything about *NIX and they use these OS's everyday. So I believe that he wasnt trying to

make it sound like Windows just magically works.

He was just emphasizing the spread of common place OS users and and software compatibility, yes he was correct,

There isn't a right way to do this, depends on the situation. So decide if you are willing to support it (or if they have a support guy that handles Linux, which is unlikely),

If not Windows is the best way to go.

If you're going to take nothing more than the fact that I use a particular communication tool as a reason to write me off as irresponsible, I feel fully justified in declaring you as a pompous, superior, neo-luddite based on nothing more than that single Slashdot post.

The difference between you and the OP is that the OP has good reason to worry. FB users post things to FB they shouldn't. I know several people who have been burned by things they posted on social media sites. My estimation of anyone who uses them is automatically adjusted lower, just like anyone who uses texting abbreviations in professional communications. It shows a level of ignorance of proper etiquette and social consequences. Does it mean that everyone who uses FB is stupid? No, but it does make for an easy metric to weed out people who are less likely to make good decisions about confidentiality when they have a personal stake in the results. How are they going to behave when it is some strangers privacy they are destroying? I should also point out that in all of the cases of people I know being burned by social media posts, not one of them learned their lessons, and they all continue posting things that can and probably will be used against them in the future. Social Media is akin to any other addiction, and I don't trust the addicts for the obvious reasons.

-=Geoskd

There is a T-Mobile version according to the FCC filing.

http://www.gadgetell.com/tech/comment/5-inch-dell-streak-to-hit-t-mobile/

Except you do, in certain circumstances. Usually involving child pornography laws in some fashion. And possibly other cases involving bizarre twisted applications of anti-terror laws.

For example refer to this.

I've thought of that, but it's a lot more complicated. To make that work you'd have to have some sort of huge database of what things (for a fairly nebulous definition of "things") are, and hardware and software to interface between the glasses and the database.

It depends more on what your goal is at any given moment. Have you used Google Earth? Tick enough boxes and the map becomes unwatchable, or worse, completely obscured by the olverlayed info. I constantly find my self selecting/unselecting options depending on what I want, i.e. see people's photos of the place with Panoramio, find a business, just see the street lables, watch the 3D models, etc..

Never mind the fancy HUDs, I sooo want this thing, too bad there is no version for WMV yet ='(

Besides, people are already used to seeing somebody waving their mobile left right and centre whereas me gesturing frantically at something only I can see (and worse, wearing some odd gizmo in the face)... Just think of the dirty looks that some people give to those that yapp away on their bluetooth borgphones

According to news, 150 000 would be more correct number.

But nice try buddy to paint everyone who wants to solve world problems without involving big fat corporations a Socialist. As Linus said, that if Socialist means to do good things to people, then yeah, we are Socialists.

That precedent has been set.

Now Windows will have 200 distributions with subtle changes between them.

That's why Ford slapped the "Cobra" name on the recent Mustang--if they didn't the trademark could conceivably be used by another car builder with impunity.

Sort of how Cisco slapped the "iPhone" name onto their, well, iPhone about a month ago. No doubt it was to increase pressure and get more money from Apple, but I think they're legally in the clear in terms of having an enforcible trademark.

Cisco can hardly argue damages; they have no "iPhone" product from which Apple is causing confusion.

Besides this you mean. (Which, granted, may have been created with the intent of trying to squeeze some money out of Apple as it's a very recent product.)

What?? Where the hell did you get that from?

One place I heard it is here. I've read a number of posts on slashdot that have said Windows APIs might be in Leopard, er I thought I did but I just searched and didn't get any results. So I googled and found some info:

1. Leopard To Run Windows Apps Via API Just Like OS/2 Did
2. 9 Mac OS X Leopard rumors
3. Apple implementing Windows API directly in Mac OS X Leopard? (Windows apps on Mac without Windows)

I found others along the same lines: OS X leopard windows api. As for how factual they all are I don't know but I'm really hoping to see it come true, I'm using an HP PC typing this but within a couple of weeks I plan on getting a MacBook Pro and I want to be able to run at least one Windows app on it without using either bootcamp or a vm to run Windows. I'll probably get CrossOver Mac but I'd prefer Windows APIs in Leopard.