Its not a warranty issue to remove a removable add in storage.
Well that's the issue, it's NOT supposed to be removable storage. Even if it didn't "break" teh card it still wouldn't be general purpose removable storage. The phone reformats the card along with the internal storage to create a single Volume, kind of like a RAID mirror. Taking out the card would make you lose all your data, on both the card and the internal storage. The only reason it uses an SD card is because it's convenient to build, and it allows the different providers to use whatever size storage they want. In this phone, the SD card it not a user serviceable part.
Furthermore is there any warning on the phone that it alters SD cards as such? This sounds like a major defect in both the phones and the SD cards.
There is a yellow sticker completely covering the SD slot that says it will void your warranty if it is removed. I think that's' warning enough that it isn't a general purpose SD card slot. It also required an SD card that is certified as Windows Phone 7 complaint. Currently no such cards exist.
They don't use Steam in their games anymore than they use Wal-Mart in their games.
While this is true for most games, it's not true for all. New games like Just-Cause actually have steam programmed in to them. They won't work without steam, and you must install it as part of the installer. Once you install the game it's instantly linked to your steam account and you no longer need the disk. I think this is the type of steam integration they are complaining about.
Because this "Reading" aspect is what story was about. Companies reading people's publicly posted messages, and how some people consider that stalking.
So you wouldn't mind if someone follows you around and stares at you all day, or even better records everything you do with a video camera? After all by being in a public place you have indicated that you want to be seen.
I'd think they were strange, but that's how public places work.
When I post something online, whether it's to my blog or to/., I have expectations for that post's use. I expect that if it's copied it will be linked back to the original, I expect that it won't be used to market items to me (except where I have opted into the marketing), and I expect that no one's mining it for complaints related to their products.
Where are you getting these expectations from? The internet is public. Unless you are posting in a restricted area any can can and will read what you have to say. If you don't want everyone reading it, don't make it public.
There are many reasons to go outside; Getting food, meeting people, traveling. A message posted to a public website can only be used in one way, by others reading it.
Complaining about people reading your public messages is like complaining the people are listening to your music when you broadcast it over the radio.
The problem then is that no company to date has "4g" service. Hell, most of them have 3G service only by a very loose definition. It seems that, so far no consumer has been mislead into thinking one particular service is better than another; they all stink!
That's exactly the problem he's talking about... By saying they have 4G service they are taking away customers from 3G providers.
If I have a choice between 2 phone providers, with everything being equal, each provider has a 50% shot at my money. If one of them falsely claims 4G coverage then the odds are I'll mistakenly choose them.
I think your rationale should also have reasonable limitations. Yes, you're posting in public to a social networking site. So does that mean anything goes? Any possible use or abuse of said postings are perfectly okay and should occur without any limitations whatsoever? Or is the right to access public information a right that should also have a few limits placed on how it is exercised?
No, not everything goes. But I would have no right to complain about someone reading / recording what I posted on a public website. If I didn't want people to see it I would have written it in my diary, not on some website.
By posting to these kinds of social sites these people have indicated that they want to be heard. I wouldn't call it stalking if you are doing exactly what the "target" is asking you to do.
It defeats the whole purpose of a bidding system to state that only one company will be considered for bidding. I might be wrong here but I'm pretty sure that's illegal. Which is probably why they are suing.
But that's not whats happening. ANY vendor can bid on this contract. Google could bid on it they had a solution that involved Microsoft Software. As far as I can tell, Microsoft hasn't even bid on this.
They arent sticking to one vendor. ANY vendor is able to bid on this, including google. The requirement is that the solution must fully work with their existing Microsoft software. They want a Microsoft solution. Google (as the vendor) would be fully capable of offering them a solution based on Microsoft software, but they choose not to. They the government isn't making any deal with Microsoft in this case, they want to deal with any vendor that can give them a solution to their problem, which happens to involve Microsoft software.
It would be like the government collecting bids for Ford trucks. They will accept bids from anyone who can offer them Fords, including used car dealerships that are in no way connected to Ford.
This is creeping in to RPGs too, just look at games like Fable II. One button that "Does the right thing" for attacking, blocking, whatever. Plus no penalty for death... In fact, death actually helps you as it stuns all the enemies and knocks them away from you. It feels like you could practically win the game by just holding forward on the controller and tapping the same button once every second.
I thought New York was one of the states with a budget problem recently. Good job, paper pushers.
The signs are being replaced gradually as the old signs age out of service. The signs wold have needed replacing anyway so the money would have been spent one way or the other. When the time comes to replace a sign, they are replacing it with a mixed case sign instead of one in all caps.
Not only the ability to display what permissions an app requests, but the ability to deny the use of those features on a per feature basis for each app.
For instance, an app may request internet access (cellular radio or wifi), the user should be able to choose to limit that to just wifi or even turn off connectivity for that app all together.
This would be pretty awesome from an end user perspective, but would cause havoc with the ad supported applications on the market. Though I suppose that could be worked around by having the application state if a permission is optional or required. If the user denies a required permission the app won't install.
Slashdot Mirror
I love the fact that they actually get the people to PAY to infect their own computer. That's simply brilliant.
Bah, that should be RAID stripe, not Raid Mirror.
Well that's the issue, it's NOT supposed to be removable storage. Even if it didn't "break" teh card it still wouldn't be general purpose removable storage. The phone reformats the card along with the internal storage to create a single Volume, kind of like a RAID mirror. Taking out the card would make you lose all your data, on both the card and the internal storage. The only reason it uses an SD card is because it's convenient to build, and it allows the different providers to use whatever size storage they want. In this phone, the SD card it not a user serviceable part.
There is a yellow sticker completely covering the SD slot that says it will void your warranty if it is removed. I think that's' warning enough that it isn't a general purpose SD card slot. It also required an SD card that is certified as Windows Phone 7 complaint. Currently no such cards exist.
While this is true for most games, it's not true for all. New games like Just-Cause actually have steam programmed in to them. They won't work without steam, and you must install it as part of the installer. Once you install the game it's instantly linked to your steam account and you no longer need the disk. I think this is the type of steam integration they are complaining about.
Maybe it works, you know, better than sugarless gum?
Because this "Reading" aspect is what story was about. Companies reading people's publicly posted messages, and how some people consider that stalking.
If you used privacy settings then it isn't public.
I'm talking about what you post in a public area.
I'd think they were strange, but that's how public places work.
Where are you getting these expectations from? The internet is public. Unless you are posting in a restricted area any can can and will read what you have to say. If you don't want everyone reading it, don't make it public.
There are many reasons to go outside; Getting food, meeting people, traveling. A message posted to a public website can only be used in one way, by others reading it.
Complaining about people reading your public messages is like complaining the people are listening to your music when you broadcast it over the radio.
That's exactly the problem he's talking about... By saying they have 4G service they are taking away customers from 3G providers.
If I have a choice between 2 phone providers, with everything being equal, each provider has a 50% shot at my money. If one of them falsely claims 4G coverage then the odds are I'll mistakenly choose them.
So if I don't want to get stalked I... shouldn't go outside?
Going outside isn't an invitation for someone to follow you. However posting a message in a public social website IS an invitation to read it.
Going outside isn't an invitation for someone to follow you. However posting a message in a public social website IS an invitation to read it.
Going outside isn't an invitation for someone to follow you. However posting a message in a public social website IS an invitation to read it.
Going outside isn't inviting people to follow you. Posting on a public social website is inviting people to read your post.
No, not everything goes. But I would have no right to complain about someone reading / recording what I posted on a public website. If I didn't want people to see it I would have written it in my diary, not on some website.
By posting to these kinds of social sites these people have indicated that they want to be heard. I wouldn't call it stalking if you are doing exactly what the "target" is asking you to do.
But that's not whats happening. ANY vendor can bid on this contract. Google could bid on it they had a solution that involved Microsoft Software. As far as I can tell, Microsoft hasn't even bid on this.
They arent sticking to one vendor. ANY vendor is able to bid on this, including google. The requirement is that the solution must fully work with their existing Microsoft software. They want a Microsoft solution. Google (as the vendor) would be fully capable of offering them a solution based on Microsoft software, but they choose not to. They the government isn't making any deal with Microsoft in this case, they want to deal with any vendor that can give them a solution to their problem, which happens to involve Microsoft software.
It would be like the government collecting bids for Ford trucks. They will accept bids from anyone who can offer them Fords, including used car dealerships that are in no way connected to Ford.
This is creeping in to RPGs too, just look at games like Fable II. One button that "Does the right thing" for attacking, blocking, whatever. Plus no penalty for death... In fact, death actually helps you as it stuns all the enemies and knocks them away from you. It feels like you could practically win the game by just holding forward on the controller and tapping the same button once every second.
I didn't know he was still alive. So much for assumptions.
I only knew he was still alive because of this song.
http://www.jonathancoulton.com/songdetails/Mandelbrot%20Set
Google IS a search engine... Their whole business model is designed around helping people find things.
It still feels kind of wrong though.
I thought New York was one of the states with a budget problem recently. Good job, paper pushers.
The signs are being replaced gradually as the old signs age out of service. The signs wold have needed replacing anyway so the money would have been spent one way or the other. When the time comes to replace a sign, they are replacing it with a mixed case sign instead of one in all caps.
Not only the ability to display what permissions an app requests, but the ability to deny the use of those features on a per feature basis for each app.
For instance, an app may request internet access (cellular radio or wifi), the user should be able to choose to limit that to just wifi or even turn off connectivity for that app all together.
This would be pretty awesome from an end user perspective, but would cause havoc with the ad supported applications on the market. Though I suppose that could be worked around by having the application state if a permission is optional or required. If the user denies a required permission the app won't install.