I think it is more of a cautious approach to entering the market. Price the OS, so that it will only be included on the high end Tablets (ones with faster processors and more memory) So when these go on the market they run very well and smooth. You don't want bad reviews out of the starting gate because the starting tables are just running of the systems minimum specifications.
Because there is time where Metro-Apps need to be built Microsoft needs to push the Intel Versions of its OS for a while, where people will upgrade their Old OS and slowly become accustom the the new Apps, and with Visual Studios upgrades more Metro-Apps will be made. Then when the App Store has a good number of programs available and good reviews of those existing systems, then Microsoft can lower the price to attract more lower end systems (by that time the lower end systems, will be a few notches higher) .
Most people really start forming rational political preferences out of college. College is such a protected environment, shelter food education gym huge amounts actives going on, all paid for by student loans that you don't need to worry about yet. Any money you make will first go to books and after that it is all recreational spending. This is good for education because you can focus on your studies without the worries of real life problems. However your political opinion at the time isn't complete. After you leave college and money becomes a serious issue in your life you may find the conservative (rugged indivualism) more appealing as those taxes that out of your paycheck are as much as your rent.
Well there are more factors. Blue states tend to have more colleges, because blue states have more/bigger cities. Cities in order to operate work best with liberal principals. Bigger government to offer services because in the city you don't have resources to be fully self reliant. You need city water and sewer because there isn't room for well and septic systems. Too many cars you need a good public transit system to move around faster. When you live in a city the government is the good guy.
Red states are In rural areas you have land and you are more self reliant. Your house your own infrastructure, you will wait public transit just won't work so you need your own car. The government is seen as a force that taxes your income for services you don't use and maker of rules that restrict your freedom. So you are more apt to favor conservatives.
In college the more conservative students are more apt to hit the books and study, while the liberal ones will party more. However the liberal students are less career minded and will more likely go directly into higher education.
So are liberal or conservatives smarter? Probably not much of a difference, in terms of smarts. But more into life choices.
I am wondering how you decide if you are a Troll or not. There have been times I had stated an unpopular opinion, and have been moderated as a Troll, because they just didn't like what I was saying. For most sites they are populated by people who are not really interested in debate but reassurance in their beliefs. So anyone who disrupts that ideas will be considered a Troll.
As an American I get a bit of Schadenfreude, that the Europeans have seem to be less snobbish lately on their superiority, over the Americans. Right before 2008 crash, there was all this stupid talk on how much better they are for all the government provided services... Then the market crashed, America is in a recovery, Europe is still having a tons of major problems. A lot of it is due to the fact that they offered too many services that they could only afford in a strong economy, while the US and other countries who took a more Conservative approach seems to be better off.
Yes, lets argue that a technology distribution method is worse, by explaining the extreme cases.
Not all IT solutions are good for the cloud. Some are. Email for example is good for the cloud. IT staff running an email server is usually a time sap, you have security concerns, if it goes down, it needs to be treated as more of a critical problem then it really is, you need to keep updates to prevent spam. You need to pay for storage... Hosing email in the cloud, can save your organization money, and reduce the stress of your IT staff, allowing them to work on more things. However more advanced systems, that requires a lot of customizations, are not fit for the cloud, if you go with a could solution you have locked yourself out of software really designed for your business.
Ethics of the Tool Maker, vs the Ethics of the Tool user. We make tools. We stream line processes, We automate Mind numbing tasks, We calculate a lot of numbers. Now that we have made our tools, how people decide to use them is their moral decision not ours. Any tool you make can be used for Good or Evil. The better your tool is the more people will use it and there will be more people using it for Evil.
My Job is to create software that aids in medical billing. My Job makes it easier to bill people expensive health care that could make them bankrupt. My Job also makes sure health care systems get funded, thus having money used to save peoples lives. People can use my work, to help maximize revenue by allowing them to Charge the most value for work done, or they can use it to Maximize the savings to the customer. When I write a system that automates a task it means dozens of starting level positions will not be available, because I got the computer to do the for them, the money saved from not hiring these people could be used towards hiring other positions.
We are the tool makers, the ethics of making tools, are not bound by potential misuse but planned use. If you make a Root Kit or a Virus, You can use it for good, but the reason for your tool is to do harm, so you are ethically in the wrong. If you make a security analysis tools (like nmap) it could be used for good, but its intent was to help people make things more secure, so you are ethically Ok.
When you work in Defense, you are making tools to help save lives. The more accurate smart bomb, means you can have a bomb that will hit its desired target and with less civilian causalities. Yes you are making a tool to kill people, however you are working on a way to kill less people then the current ways, because people will still going to try to kill other people, but if you do it in a way that less people get killed then you are helping.
In finance besides popular opinion, financial institutions do not want to steal money from the poor, but they want to invest it wisely so they get more money so they will get more money. The mess we are in now is due to poor measurements of risk. If you had more people making better programs for Risk assessment then you could stop the same problem from happening in the future.
My reason is simple. I just don't care anymore. Whatever the Distribution gives me by default, ill go ahead and use. Just as long as I can put an icon for my terminal I am good.
I use to care, but then I spent more time finding the perfect GUI then I did actually doing work. So if it has Unity, Ill deal with it. Is it my favorate... No but it isn't worth it for me to try over and over again.
I am not running KDE because it wasn't my default choice. Why am I sticking to my default choice... Because I really don't care. And whatever distribution I choose I stick with the default choice because all the bits and pieces are working. No broken links, copy and paste works, and if I need help online, I can get the easy answers from the beginner page even though I am not a beginner, but I prefer the beginner pages, because I usually get the straight forward answer to the problem, vs the Advanced Pages, where I need to discuss why am I trying to do something. Vs just getting info on how to do it. Besides I usually just need help with whatever new UI crazyness that comes out that I haven't figured out quickly.
No consumers will not see savings. Trickle down was never about consumer prices. However that money will be reinvested into the company to allow the company to grow, and hire more people.
Trickle Downs failure like a lot of political mumbo jumbo is because it is too simplistic model for an advanced system.
Trickle Down is part of a well balanced economy. Too much of it will just hurt because the company will make too much profit and will have less incentive to grow. Thus pocketing the money. Too Little, then the company is forced to pay taxes for services that they don't need and have the government holding them back, because they need to give the poor there "fare share" even though they are not going out on the line risking their money, and working really hard to get where they were.
Like real life you need balance. The more complicated the system the more factors you need to balance and often it is more then left right you need to balance but up down and forward and backwards too...
Do you earn you money writing free software. Or do you earn your money writing software to support an other business model for your company?
If you company only wrote free software, and didn't offer any other services, you wouldn't make much money.
RMS views on Open Source creates an environment where there are a lot less business models to profit off of software. You can make money off of open source, that part is proven. But what it does is remove business models.
I never connected Code with ethics. Code is just a bunch of instructions that the computer follows, I am a bigger fan of open specifications, where you can write your own compatible code if you need to. Code itself isn't that helpful.
Well the trick to remember is to not get caught up in title.
Here are the titles I have been threw in my career. (some due to promotion and others from change of jobs) Systems Analysis, System Administrator, Sr. System Administrator, Systems Engineer, Consultant, Sr. Consultant, Developer, Software Development Lead, Software Architect, Lead Software Architect, Sr. Systems Analysis Team Lead.
If you are going by titles it would look like in a course of 15 years I have only gone up one promotion from Analysis to Sr. Analysis. However When I was a System Analysis was in High School, it was for a small 3 man development shop, writing Fox Pro apps. Now I am one of the highest ranking people outside of Management in a 10,000 person organization, with an IT team of 500 people, and I am making more now then the Owners of the companies of my first 3 jobs.
Now my current job has the highest technical title available, however there is still ways to get promoted without the title change, you get new responsibilities, and more money. So I can get paid more then the managers or directors do.
The argument is really mixing two different things The stuff in the past 30 years produced by Microsoft and Apple probably would only combine to be a footnote in history probably combining the two companies, as major companies that had helped bring general computing to the masses. But that is really it.
Now Jobs stayed in making technology and Gates left and started his charity work. Normally if you can do big things with your money, that really helps a lot of people you are going to get remembered more. As I have spent my career around computers, I know I will not make it into the history books, even when I make great ground breaking things. Because computer do not help people. They are a tool that people can use to help people better if used properly.
I didn't mean all of them. I mean for the most part. Also I was talking about developers who are in the early 60's and up. who are close to retirement. We have the opportunity at any point to go and get better educated at any point of our lives. However usually after a particular age most people will tend to stick with what they know. But not all of them, they will chose to further themselves and more power to them.
.NET thrive is because the Visual Studio IDE demands it, unless you are doing C++. The basic rule of thumb, if you are going to be writing programs for windows you use Visual Studio. Now.NET as a language isn't that bad, I actually like it. What I hate is the Virtual Machine nonsense, that only works on Windows Systems, yet it is still virtualized so it runs slow. It combines the worst attributes of the VB6 world and the Java World. If Visual Studio gave people a non.NET option for VB (a VB 7 per say) then I would expect VB 6 dyeing out and.NET wouldn't have caught on. It would have been an other J++
Java success is in the fact you can write code and run it nearly every modern system out there. And you code isn't scripted but in a way that can be closed source (Not all developers want their code Open Source) Also Java has a good set of quality IDEs Netbeans, Eclipse are a few of them, and they are really good at Java Coding.
Why do we want VB6 to die more then the others? 1. It is a platform for unstable applications. VB6 Apps have a tendencies of getting corrupted and random deaths where you need to reinstall them. 2. Visual Studio 6 needs to run on Newer OS's Windows 7 64 bit... Windows 8? 3. You cannot buy the media/licenses directly anymore. If you are going to grow you company you cannot stick on a tool where you cannot get legal licenses as your company grows. 4. Young Whipper Snappers don't want to use it. (We are at a point where we have a lot of software developers retiring) And we need to replace them with younger blood. The problem is the young guys do not want to use it.
If you had VB5 and you got VB6 you could upgrade your app to a vb6 application very quickly and your program looked and worked just like it did before. Upgrading you VB6 app into.NET breaks all but the most basic application, and there is a lot of rework to be done. Often these VB6 apps are not the best design and, and you need to find a.NET compatible version of your third party tools, then they are probably quite different and you need to rework them again.
Next you have the.NET framework. I write a program in visual studios 2010, Now I need to make decisions... Do I compile it for.net 2.0 and not have as many features but know that my system will work on most modern windows systems, or work on 4.5 and require all the users to upgrade their system? Why can't I just compile it into a static.EXE
Finally you have older developers. These guys are not Computer Scientists, They studied other fields and happened to learn computers, and started to program before a lot of the formalization in good form came into place..NET seems unnecessarily restrictive to them. Why do you need to type all this extra crap. I need it to do this, why do I need System.Windows.Forms.PotatoGun.PopSound() instead of PlayPop Often these older developers are just maintaining the existing system that they have coded decades ago. So there is no real push to upgrade and give them a new project just because it needs to support.NET
I guess you don't use terminal type 3270 too often. Control E is often configured to clear your field from the cursor to the end. So your password would be saved as what you typed minus the Ctrl-E... Unless you intentionally go back a few characters and do the ctrl-e last.
Back in the olden days of DOS my password often had Alt-219 atl-176 alt-177 and alt-178
While a first post off topic troll. I will relate it with the topic at hand. The key reason why we don't have high resolution PC displays, is partially because the current Operating Systems, are not configured to use them. Sure they may be able to support the resolution, however your start bar will be very tiny and unreadable, on windows, in Linux Unity will be this very thin little strip with some static in the corner, OS X will have a tiny doc. The apps will be too small to read, especially for older viewers who still keep their 20" screens at 800x600 display.
I have an RDP app for my iPhone, I configured the setting to connect to a windows server at the phone native resolution. The start bar wasn't that much bigger then 1 or 2 pixel high on at 300x200 display, on a 17" monitor.
Now many of the next generation Desktop Operating Systems, are trying to move away from the 72ppi idea, and make their systems more resolution independent. But they are not quite out there yet. Once the OS's start supporting these screens and displaying apps that are viewable, then the hardware makers will put more effort into making systems with such displays.
Well it isn't that vague. We figure out the average on how overweight Obese people are. So lets say on the average Americans are 50 lbs overweight. Next we figure out how much soda these people drink/day/month/year.... Now across these people do people do don't drink soda are their on the average overweight by 25 lbs or are they near the 50 lbs mark like the rest of the population. The Same with people who drink a lot of soda, are they overweight by 75 lbs on the average or are they at the 50 lbs mark too.
So if you find that the Non-Soda Drinkers are 25 lbs under the average, and the heavy drinkers are 25 lbs over the average, then you can expect Moderate Soda drinking accounts for 25 lbs. Then in that case perhaps you should put restrictions on it. Now if the numbers are smaller say 5 lbs, and Obesity average is at 50 lbs. Then the policy to restrict soda isn't that helpful, and there are bigger fish to fry.
The "Feaking Out" is from the traditional PC people. The standard, Desktop CPU, Monitor, Key Board and Mouse. Is going out. So is the normal Clam-shell Laptop.
Performance isn't as big of a deal as it was 10/15 years ago. 1998 There was a huge difference if you had a 486 vs a P2. Or a system with 16 Megs of ram vs 32 megs. Now in 2012 there is less of a difference between a Core 2 Duo and a Sandy Bridge Core i5, a System with 3gigs vs 8gigs. Now it isn't that the new stuff isn't orders of magnitudes faster and better. But the stuff we use computers for doesn't fully utilize the hardware anymore. We are preferring to say with slower computers and get systems that are smaller, longer battery, and overall just more portable. Because our needs for a computer isn't following Moors Law.
Slashdot Mirror
I think it is more of a cautious approach to entering the market.
Price the OS, so that it will only be included on the high end Tablets (ones with faster processors and more memory) So when these go on the market they run very well and smooth. You don't want bad reviews out of the starting gate because the starting tables are just running of the systems minimum specifications.
Because there is time where Metro-Apps need to be built Microsoft needs to push the Intel Versions of its OS for a while, where people will upgrade their Old OS and slowly become accustom the the new Apps, and with Visual Studios upgrades more Metro-Apps will be made. Then when the App Store has a good number of programs available and good reviews of those existing systems, then Microsoft can lower the price to attract more lower end systems (by that time the lower end systems, will be a few notches higher) .
No it will just go to Apple and Android (Some people count Android as Linux, others do not)...
Most people really start forming rational political preferences out of college. College is such a protected environment, shelter food education gym huge amounts actives going on, all paid for by student loans that you don't need to worry about yet. Any money you make will first go to books and after that it is all recreational spending. This is good for education because you can focus on your studies without the worries of real life problems. However your political opinion at the time isn't complete.
After you leave college and money becomes a serious issue in your life you may find the conservative (rugged indivualism) more appealing as those taxes that out of your paycheck are as much as your rent.
Well there are more factors.
Blue states tend to have more colleges, because blue states have more/bigger cities.
Cities in order to operate work best with liberal principals. Bigger government to offer services because in the city you don't have resources to be fully self reliant. You need city water and sewer because there isn't room for well and septic systems. Too many cars you need a good public transit system to move around faster. When you live in a city the government is the good guy.
Red states are In rural areas you have land and you are more self reliant. Your house your own infrastructure, you will wait public transit just won't work so you need your own car. The government is seen as a force that taxes your income for services you don't use and maker of rules that restrict your freedom. So you are more apt to favor conservatives.
In college the more conservative students are more apt to hit the books and study, while the liberal ones will party more. However the liberal students are less career minded and will more likely go directly into higher education.
So are liberal or conservatives smarter? Probably not much of a difference, in terms of smarts. But more into life choices.
I am wondering how you decide if you are a Troll or not. There have been times I had stated an unpopular opinion, and have been moderated as a Troll, because they just didn't like what I was saying.
For most sites they are populated by people who are not really interested in debate but reassurance in their beliefs. So anyone who disrupts that ideas will be considered a Troll.
As an American I get a bit of Schadenfreude, that the Europeans have seem to be less snobbish lately on their superiority, over the Americans. Right before 2008 crash, there was all this stupid talk on how much better they are for all the government provided services... Then the market crashed, America is in a recovery, Europe is still having a tons of major problems. A lot of it is due to the fact that they offered too many services that they could only afford in a strong economy, while the US and other countries who took a more Conservative approach seems to be better off.
For me, McCain, lost his credibility during the primaries, where he had to seem less moderate, then placing on the ticket crazy Palian.
It is too bad, because I liked him before he ran.
Yes, lets argue that a technology distribution method is worse, by explaining the extreme cases.
Not all IT solutions are good for the cloud. Some are. Email for example is good for the cloud. IT staff running an email server is usually a time sap, you have security concerns, if it goes down, it needs to be treated as more of a critical problem then it really is, you need to keep updates to prevent spam. You need to pay for storage... Hosing email in the cloud, can save your organization money, and reduce the stress of your IT staff, allowing them to work on more things.
However more advanced systems, that requires a lot of customizations, are not fit for the cloud, if you go with a could solution you have locked yourself out of software really designed for your business.
Ethics of the Tool Maker, vs the Ethics of the Tool user.
We make tools. We stream line processes, We automate Mind numbing tasks, We calculate a lot of numbers.
Now that we have made our tools, how people decide to use them is their moral decision not ours.
Any tool you make can be used for Good or Evil. The better your tool is the more people will use it and there will be more people using it for Evil.
My Job is to create software that aids in medical billing. My Job makes it easier to bill people expensive health care that could make them bankrupt. My Job also makes sure health care systems get funded, thus having money used to save peoples lives. People can use my work, to help maximize revenue by allowing them to Charge the most value for work done, or they can use it to Maximize the savings to the customer. When I write a system that automates a task it means dozens of starting level positions will not be available, because I got the computer to do the for them, the money saved from not hiring these people could be used towards hiring other positions.
We are the tool makers, the ethics of making tools, are not bound by potential misuse but planned use. If you make a Root Kit or a Virus, You can use it for good, but the reason for your tool is to do harm, so you are ethically in the wrong. If you make a security analysis tools (like nmap) it could be used for good, but its intent was to help people make things more secure, so you are ethically Ok.
When you work in Defense, you are making tools to help save lives. The more accurate smart bomb, means you can have a bomb that will hit its desired target and with less civilian causalities. Yes you are making a tool to kill people, however you are working on a way to kill less people then the current ways, because people will still going to try to kill other people, but if you do it in a way that less people get killed then you are helping.
In finance besides popular opinion, financial institutions do not want to steal money from the poor, but they want to invest it wisely so they get more money so they will get more money. The mess we are in now is due to poor measurements of risk. If you had more people making better programs for Risk assessment then you could stop the same problem from happening in the future.
My reason is simple. I just don't care anymore. Whatever the Distribution gives me by default, ill go ahead and use. Just as long as I can put an icon for my terminal I am good.
I use to care, but then I spent more time finding the perfect GUI then I did actually doing work. So if it has Unity, Ill deal with it. Is it my favorate... No but it isn't worth it for me to try over and over again.
I am not running KDE because it wasn't my default choice. Why am I sticking to my default choice... Because I really don't care. And whatever distribution I choose I stick with the default choice because all the bits and pieces are working. No broken links, copy and paste works, and if I need help online, I can get the easy answers from the beginner page even though I am not a beginner, but I prefer the beginner pages, because I usually get the straight forward answer to the problem, vs the Advanced Pages, where I need to discuss why am I trying to do something. Vs just getting info on how to do it. Besides I usually just need help with whatever new UI crazyness that comes out that I haven't figured out quickly.
No consumers will not see savings. Trickle down was never about consumer prices. However that money will be reinvested into the company to allow the company to grow, and hire more people.
Trickle Downs failure like a lot of political mumbo jumbo is because it is too simplistic model for an advanced system.
Trickle Down is part of a well balanced economy. Too much of it will just hurt because the company will make too much profit and will have less incentive to grow. Thus pocketing the money.
Too Little, then the company is forced to pay taxes for services that they don't need and have the government holding them back, because they need to give the poor there "fare share" even though they are not going out on the line risking their money, and working really hard to get where they were.
Like real life you need balance. The more complicated the system the more factors you need to balance and often it is more then left right you need to balance but up down and forward and backwards too...
Do you earn you money writing free software. Or do you earn your money writing software to support an other business model for your company?
If you company only wrote free software, and didn't offer any other services, you wouldn't make much money.
RMS views on Open Source creates an environment where there are a lot less business models to profit off of software.
You can make money off of open source, that part is proven. But what it does is remove business models.
I never connected Code with ethics. Code is just a bunch of instructions that the computer follows, I am a bigger fan of open specifications, where you can write your own compatible code if you need to. Code itself isn't that helpful.
Well the trick to remember is to not get caught up in title.
Here are the titles I have been threw in my career. (some due to promotion and others from change of jobs)
Systems Analysis,
System Administrator,
Sr. System Administrator,
Systems Engineer,
Consultant,
Sr. Consultant,
Developer,
Software Development Lead,
Software Architect,
Lead Software Architect,
Sr. Systems Analysis Team Lead.
If you are going by titles it would look like in a course of 15 years I have only gone up one promotion from Analysis to Sr. Analysis.
However When I was a System Analysis was in High School, it was for a small 3 man development shop, writing Fox Pro apps. Now I am one of the highest ranking people outside of Management in a 10,000 person organization, with an IT team of 500 people, and I am making more now then the Owners of the companies of my first 3 jobs.
Now my current job has the highest technical title available, however there is still ways to get promoted without the title change, you get new responsibilities, and more money. So I can get paid more then the managers or directors do.
The argument is really mixing two different things
The stuff in the past 30 years produced by Microsoft and Apple probably would only combine to be a footnote in history probably combining the two companies, as major companies that had helped bring general computing to the masses. But that is really it.
Now Jobs stayed in making technology and Gates left and started his charity work. Normally if you can do big things with your money, that really helps a lot of people you are going to get remembered more.
As I have spent my career around computers, I know I will not make it into the history books, even when I make great ground breaking things. Because computer do not help people. They are a tool that people can use to help people better if used properly.
I didn't mean all of them. I mean for the most part. Also I was talking about developers who are in the early 60's and up. who are close to retirement. We have the opportunity at any point to go and get better educated at any point of our lives. However usually after a particular age most people will tend to stick with what they know. But not all of them, they will chose to further themselves and more power to them.
Perhaps he would had been better off if he made a living producing software and selling it.
I wonder if someone took he speeches, did his speech, and collected the pay for that speech, he would be fine with that.
.NET thrive is because the Visual Studio IDE demands it, unless you are doing C++. The basic rule of thumb, if you are going to be writing programs for windows you use Visual Studio. Now .NET as a language isn't that bad, I actually like it. What I hate is the Virtual Machine nonsense, that only works on Windows Systems, yet it is still virtualized so it runs slow. It combines the worst attributes of the VB6 world and the Java World. If Visual Studio gave people a non .NET option for VB (a VB 7 per say) then I would expect VB 6 dyeing out and .NET wouldn't have caught on. It would have been an other J++
Java success is in the fact you can write code and run it nearly every modern system out there. And you code isn't scripted but in a way that can be closed source (Not all developers want their code Open Source) Also Java has a good set of quality IDEs Netbeans, Eclipse are a few of them, and they are really good at Java Coding.
Why do we want VB6 to die more then the others?
1. It is a platform for unstable applications. VB6 Apps have a tendencies of getting corrupted and random deaths where you need to reinstall them.
2. Visual Studio 6 needs to run on Newer OS's Windows 7 64 bit... Windows 8?
3. You cannot buy the media/licenses directly anymore. If you are going to grow you company you cannot stick on a tool where you cannot get legal licenses as your company grows.
4. Young Whipper Snappers don't want to use it. (We are at a point where we have a lot of software developers retiring) And we need to replace them with younger blood. The problem is the young guys do not want to use it.
If you had VB5 and you got VB6 you could upgrade your app to a vb6 application very quickly and your program looked and worked just like it did before. .NET breaks all but the most basic application, and there is a lot of rework to be done. Often these VB6 apps are not the best design and, and you need to find a .NET compatible version of your third party tools, then they are probably quite different and you need to rework them again.
Upgrading you VB6 app into
Next you have the .NET framework. I write a program in visual studios 2010, Now I need to make decisions... Do I compile it for .net 2.0 and not have as many features but know that my system will work on most modern windows systems, or work on 4.5 and require all the users to upgrade their system? Why can't I just compile it into a static .EXE
Finally you have older developers. These guys are not Computer Scientists, They studied other fields and happened to learn computers, and started to program before a lot of the formalization in good form came into place. .NET seems unnecessarily restrictive to them. Why do you need to type all this extra crap. I need it to do this, why do I need System.Windows.Forms.PotatoGun.PopSound() instead of PlayPop Often these older developers are just maintaining the existing system that they have coded decades ago. So there is no real push to upgrade and give them a new project just because it needs to support .NET
I guess you don't use terminal type 3270 too often. Control E is often configured to clear your field from the cursor to the end. So your password would be saved as what you typed minus the Ctrl-E... Unless you intentionally go back a few characters and do the ctrl-e last.
Back in the olden days of DOS my password often had Alt-219 atl-176 alt-177 and alt-178
While a first post off topic troll. I will relate it with the topic at hand.
The key reason why we don't have high resolution PC displays, is partially because the current Operating Systems, are not configured to use them.
Sure they may be able to support the resolution, however your start bar will be very tiny and unreadable, on windows, in Linux Unity will be this very thin little strip with some static in the corner, OS X will have a tiny doc. The apps will be too small to read, especially for older viewers who still keep their 20" screens at 800x600 display.
I have an RDP app for my iPhone, I configured the setting to connect to a windows server at the phone native resolution. The start bar wasn't that much bigger then 1 or 2 pixel high on at 300x200 display, on a 17" monitor.
Now many of the next generation Desktop Operating Systems, are trying to move away from the 72ppi idea, and make their systems more resolution independent. But they are not quite out there yet. Once the OS's start supporting these screens and displaying apps that are viewable, then the hardware makers will put more effort into making systems with such displays.
Correct Horse Battery Staple
One to Many... But a lot of those Many are characters you are not going to type with your keyboard.
Well it isn't that vague.
We figure out the average on how overweight Obese people are. So lets say on the average Americans are 50 lbs overweight.
Next we figure out how much soda these people drink/day/month/year....
Now across these people do people do don't drink soda are their on the average overweight by 25 lbs or are they near the 50 lbs mark like the rest of the population.
The Same with people who drink a lot of soda, are they overweight by 75 lbs on the average or are they at the 50 lbs mark too.
So if you find that the Non-Soda Drinkers are 25 lbs under the average, and the heavy drinkers are 25 lbs over the average, then you can expect Moderate Soda drinking accounts for 25 lbs. Then in that case perhaps you should put restrictions on it.
Now if the numbers are smaller say 5 lbs, and Obesity average is at 50 lbs. Then the policy to restrict soda isn't that helpful, and there are bigger fish to fry.
The "Feaking Out" is from the traditional PC people. The standard, Desktop CPU, Monitor, Key Board and Mouse. Is going out. So is the normal Clam-shell Laptop.
Performance isn't as big of a deal as it was 10/15 years ago.
1998 There was a huge difference if you had a 486 vs a P2. Or a system with 16 Megs of ram vs 32 megs.
Now in 2012 there is less of a difference between a Core 2 Duo and a Sandy Bridge Core i5, a System with 3gigs vs 8gigs.
Now it isn't that the new stuff isn't orders of magnitudes faster and better. But the stuff we use computers for doesn't fully utilize the hardware anymore.
We are preferring to say with slower computers and get systems that are smaller, longer battery, and overall just more portable. Because our needs for a computer isn't following Moors Law.