Actually, if you read the link, it's not a matter of cost, it's a matter of there's no way in hell any company in America could make 10,000 devices a day. The infrastructure and workforce is not there.
Apple makes three smart phones, a few iPads, several computers, some software, some wireless hardware and is the most valuable company in the world.
Samsung makes more smart phones than Apple and might even sell more smart phones than Apple, but still isn't as valuable as Apple.
Why do people keep making this a discussion about how many phones companies sell, when it's clearly a story about Apple being a valuable company that also happens to make smart phones as part of their lineup?
"Spending too much" is not dictated by Daniel Phillips, it is dictated by demand. I'm also very tired of this mythical "cost effective" alternative that exists. An iPhone from three months ago is $99. A brand new one is $199. Pretty much every Android phone costs that much. And even if you can find one for free, that's still $99 savings on a two year contract of $100-ish a month.
This is why iPhones sell so well. In addition to being pretty darn good phones, they aren't any more expensive from pretty crappy plasticky options on the Android side.
Should have, could have. RIM took too long to get rid of that horrible scroll wheel, terrible UI, and awful web browsing. So what if it was built for the enterprise back-end. This just goes to show that the consumer front end is just as important, if not more important.
See, if I had better programming concepts, I'd know how to properly apply the quote tags in html, but if I had better proofreading skills, I would have fixed it before I posted. Then again, if I had better programming skills, I'd run slashdot and fix the stupid fact you can't edit a post after posting, unlike every other message board on the Internet.
$356 million over 10 years is nothing, relatively speaking. Why is slashdot so enamored with headlines that sound like a lot of money but really isn't? For example, I was on a training contract for three years. Five people, $8 million. Five. People.
My wife just spent less than $100 on 6 e-books for the current semester. Sure, they expire, but I can count on zero fingers the number of times I've opened a text book from college 20 years ago.
I like your response. It's a refreshing change around here. Normally it goes something like:
"I've identified the software that I think fits your needs, but as a system admin, I can't be for sure because I know nothing about what you really do, but here's the software I dictate you must use, because I have a vested interest in my job security, so I need to keep pushing out crappy software I know how to support (and know will require lots of support)."
What's easier for a novice to figure out? Clicking around the UI until they figure out how to rename a file, or using a command line (that they probably didn't even know existed). Therein lies the power of the GUI.
Not sure why you are modded troll. Maybe it's the WAY you are saying it, but it's pretty much a universal truth. The left-brain/right-brain phenomenon is generally real. It's why non-programmers seem so illogical to programmers and why programmers have such horrible design sense to designers. It's a rare breed to have both skill sets.
And even in your own post you demonstrate the right-brain bias against left-brainers, furthering (anecdotally) this notion that there are two distinct ways to look at the world.
I'd have no reason to reject it without knowing anything about it.
Really? I mean, if Google actually engineered or manufactured anything that was remotely similar to a DSLR, I'd say, sure, give it a look, but they sell advertising using software engineering as a vehicle. What little hardware they make hardly lends itself towards being able to make a high quality camera with their existing business models.
Do you think Google can just throw some capital at making a DSLR and it will be worthy of any serious consideration?
I know there's a business term for all of this, but I'm not smart enough to know it.
That's a fanboy statement, and I hate calling people fanboys.
How about "they don't know the first thing about making a good camera because it's not their industry" for a good reason not to?
I'm an Apple fanboy, they've not given me any reason not to buy their computers, routers, tablets or phones, but if they made a car tomorrow, I wouldn't buy one. (had to get the car analogy in there somehow).
My Canon takes great pictures in full auto, given enough light. It's the quality of the optics that make the difference, not so much the electronics of the camera body.
Slashdot Mirror
Actually, if you read the link, it's not a matter of cost, it's a matter of there's no way in hell any company in America could make 10,000 devices a day. The infrastructure and workforce is not there.
The fact that the phone doesn't do the work and what they said is transmitted to Apple doesn't seem to register with most people.
It also doesn't matter to most people.
Something tells me you are overstating Blackberry's achievements in this arena, given their current market position.
I think the argument goes more like this:
Apple makes three smart phones, a few iPads, several computers, some software, some wireless hardware and is the most valuable company in the world.
Samsung makes more smart phones than Apple and might even sell more smart phones than Apple, but still isn't as valuable as Apple.
Why do people keep making this a discussion about how many phones companies sell, when it's clearly a story about Apple being a valuable company that also happens to make smart phones as part of their lineup?
"Spending too much" is not dictated by Daniel Phillips, it is dictated by demand. I'm also very tired of this mythical "cost effective" alternative that exists. An iPhone from three months ago is $99. A brand new one is $199. Pretty much every Android phone costs that much. And even if you can find one for free, that's still $99 savings on a two year contract of $100-ish a month.
This is why iPhones sell so well. In addition to being pretty darn good phones, they aren't any more expensive from pretty crappy plasticky options on the Android side.
Should have, could have. RIM took too long to get rid of that horrible scroll wheel, terrible UI, and awful web browsing. So what if it was built for the enterprise back-end. This just goes to show that the consumer front end is just as important, if not more important.
See, if I had better programming concepts, I'd know how to properly apply the quote tags in html, but if I had better proofreading skills, I would have fixed it before I posted. Then again, if I had better programming skills, I'd run slashdot and fix the stupid fact you can't edit a post after posting, unlike every other message board on the Internet.
Programming concepts don't become outdated a few years later. If you are teaching a specific language, and not the concepts, you are doing it wrong.
The same problem is evident in K-12 where they are teaching our kids "how to use PowerPoint", instead of "how to communicate effectively".
Exactly this. Math is the compulsory component and programming is the elective for those who have the desire and aptitude.
Half-assed is hyphenated, you insensitive clod!
$356 million over 10 years is nothing, relatively speaking. Why is slashdot so enamored with headlines that sound like a lot of money but really isn't? For example, I was on a training contract for three years. Five people, $8 million. Five. People.
...buying a $500 tablet that has thousands of uses--buying cheaper books being just one of them. This is why we bought an iPad and not a Kindle.
My wife just spent less than $100 on 6 e-books for the current semester. Sure, they expire, but I can count on zero fingers the number of times I've opened a text book from college 20 years ago.
I like your response. It's a refreshing change around here. Normally it goes something like:
"I've identified the software that I think fits your needs, but as a system admin, I can't be for sure because I know nothing about what you really do, but here's the software I dictate you must use, because I have a vested interest in my job security, so I need to keep pushing out crappy software I know how to support (and know will require lots of support)."
I only read this part:
do I dump $20K into moving everything to an MS solution
The answer is no. The answer is always no.
What's easier for a novice to figure out? Clicking around the UI until they figure out how to rename a file, or using a command line (that they probably didn't even know existed). Therein lies the power of the GUI.
they always seem to pick shiny over usability.
So says the hyper-logical, left-brained geek living in his mom's basement?
What you think qualifies as "usability" is nowhere near the usability spectrum of the average user.
Not sure why you are modded troll. Maybe it's the WAY you are saying it, but it's pretty much a universal truth. The left-brain/right-brain phenomenon is generally real. It's why non-programmers seem so illogical to programmers and why programmers have such horrible design sense to designers. It's a rare breed to have both skill sets.
And even in your own post you demonstrate the right-brain bias against left-brainers, furthering (anecdotally) this notion that there are two distinct ways to look at the world.
I'm afraid to click either link. Probably a virus.
A image is not MS responsibility.
Of course not. It's a business model.
I have a Vista install since 2007 still running as fast as when I installed it
So what you are saying is it is still as slow today, but no slower than when you installed it in 2007. Baby steps, Microsoft. Baby steps.
I'd have no reason to reject it without knowing anything about it.
Really? I mean, if Google actually engineered or manufactured anything that was remotely similar to a DSLR, I'd say, sure, give it a look, but they sell advertising using software engineering as a vehicle. What little hardware they make hardly lends itself towards being able to make a high quality camera with their existing business models.
Do you think Google can just throw some capital at making a DSLR and it will be worthy of any serious consideration?
I know there's a business term for all of this, but I'm not smart enough to know it.
That's a fanboy statement, and I hate calling people fanboys.
How about "they don't know the first thing about making a good camera because it's not their industry" for a good reason not to?
I'm an Apple fanboy, they've not given me any reason not to buy their computers, routers, tablets or phones, but if they made a car tomorrow, I wouldn't buy one. (had to get the car analogy in there somehow).
My Canon takes great pictures in full auto, given enough light. It's the quality of the optics that make the difference, not so much the electronics of the camera body.
I don't recall Google ever making high quality cameras.