This would be a good thing - if Samsung were going to commit to security updates on their official refurbs for a reasonable lifetime based on the purchase of the refurb as a 'new' device for its purchaser. While a year old Samsung flagship might compare favorably with a new 'flagship killer' from OnePlus or ZTE or Asus, the new mid-ranger would at least offer a reasonable chance of keeping up with vital updates.
What's worse is that you've already payed a patent royalty when you bought the card. But then you have to pay again for the ability to read it. That, IMO, is the biggest problem with data format patents. It's one thing to charge the producer of a file format a royalty - if they want to use the format, pay up. But it's another thing entirely to charge the consumer of a file another royalty. They didn't choose the format of the file, they simply bought it and want to be able to use it. We're not talking about a license for the software to read the file - we're talking about legally reverse-engineered software being slapped with a patent royalty.
The same applies to media codecs. If Apple or Amazon (or Google for that matter) want to sell you media files compressed with Microsoft's (or anyone else's) wonderful algorithm, they should pay for the privilege (assuming there's a valid patent on the algorithm). But at that point, the royalty's been paid, and the consumer shouldn't have to be restricted to playback on devices based on whether another royalty was paid.
Maybe if royalties could only be collected at the production end, they'd be higher. But that would only make non-encumbered formats a bigger bargain...
The problem is the $10 price tag. Even if this patent is valid, it's only value is compatibility with Windows desktops - i.e., the Windows desktop monopoly has made FAT-based filesystems a de-facto standard. Microsoft is charging an exhorbitant fee for the ability to use SD cards way out of proportion to the value of the software in question. Put another way, if any OEM's were still willing to make Windows phones, Microsoft would charge them $10 or less for a whole OS, including FAT filesystem compatibility. I doubt they charge makers of cameras or other devices with SD card support anywhere near that much. But for Android OEM's, it's 'pay us for Windows - or pay us even more not to use Windows'. Abusive at least, possibly illegal...?
Of course, Wikileaks shouldn't be attacking anyone. Just providing a platform to let whistleblowers get the stuff out, and yes, applying some minimal amount of journalistic responsibility to the process - like not going on TV and pretty much admitting you're carrying out vendettas...
I assume you *are* interested in having drivers for the devices you use. Even the open source ones (i.e. Intel's graphics drivers) are dependent on the manufacturer's perception that desktop Linux is important enough for them to pay any attention to. Likewise, though Google produces Chrome and ChromeOS - both linux-friendly, and both hugely responsible for the rest of the stuff you use your linux desktop for working - i.e., all the web stuff, Netflix, etc. But Google tends to get distracted too. Luckily, they use Linux desktops internally...
So, you might not think the 'battle' is relevant to you, but if desktop linux becomes so much of an afterthoght that, oh..., OEM's start removing the option to turn off secure boot, or whatever, you just might have to have to live without the linux you use - or at least your linux is likely to become a lot less useful.
Donating to Johnson's campaign might make sense - assuming you want his message heard, and that your donation will help that. Actually voting for him is a vote for Trump if you would otherwise have voted for Clinton - and vice versa. There's no point claiming that your 'personal integrity' prevents voting for one of the two viable choices. Abstaining (which a Johnson vote essentially would be) isn't a particularly virtuous stance - no matter how much you flatter yourself that it is.
It's more like - do you want a professional, equivocating, truth-shading, politician, or an amateur, flat-out liar who says completely insane shit all the time along with its complete opposite from minute to minute.
This Hillary and Trump are 'both liars' argument is a big part of the reason Hillary lies - and used a private email server in the first place. She's a 'liar' to the extent that you can play gotcha with things she says - and many do and have. And she tried to hide her email to prevent it from becoming fodder for the same gotcha games. But as a President, she's essentially pursuing the policies she says she is. As a President, God help us, Trump would be a blank slate, pursuing God knows what. The only thing we do know about him is that he'll say anything and it's polar opposite if you allow him to keep talking and give him enough time.
Umm, desktop systems and apps may not be the growth business they once were, but they still make Microsoft billions. It's not that they want out of those businesses - it's that they're trying to keep up with the overall industry move to the cloud. Not that it would be a bad idea for Microsoft to start basing their cloud operations on Linux - assuming they could get more out of their hardware that way. Maybe they really are thinking along those lines, and want their software to work there - for their own purposes. That'd be pretty forward-looking.
Of course, Occam's Razor would favor locking admins into their Windows-specific toolset as the explanation...
An unlocked bootloader is a must if you want to keep your phone for more than 2 years. My Nexus 4 is on the latest Marshmallow version (just got a security upgrade yesterday), thanks to Cyanogenmod 13. I had unlocked the bootloader out of the box, but stayed rooted and on the stock ROM until Google stopped updating it. Rooting would've been nice, but timely updates from Google was even nicer - until they stopped coming...
But since we're talking about bootloaders and warranties, there's a controversy over the ZTE Axon 7, which is being sold with an option to unlock the bootloader. But if you exercise that option (even ask for the key without actually unlocking), they void your warranty. Pretty nasty, since I'd like to buy one of those, unlock it and then leave it on stock until ZTE stops supporting it (like I did with my Nexus). The reason to unlock the bootloader right away, is that unlocking wipes all your data. So, it's better to get that out of the way upfront. But not if you're going to void the warranty on a brand new device...
It's not that Mozilla didn't play an important role in keeping open web standards alive, but Google took it a step farther by building applications with what many would've thought an impossible or impractical level of 'desktop-like' functionality. And doing it with a name that gave the efforts credibility. Not saying that only a multibillion dollar company can do that - but it helps in getting the pointy-heads to take notice. Many companies today standardize on Chrome, when those same companies used to refuse to allow employees to install Firefox. That could just be a sign of how much progress has been made, and I don't want to wade into chicken-and-egg scenarios...
And Google didn't hijack WebKit. Apple took WebKit from KDE, and that's what open source is really about. Both Apple and Google were free to do what they did, and KDE and Apple were not free to prevent it. I think the KDE folks are happy about it - not so sure about Apple. In any case, today we live in a world where Microsoft is struggling to keep up with the open standards embodied by Chrome, Safari, Mozilla and Opera - just to remain relevant. And that's a good thing.
And then there's Android. Sure, it sits on top of open source technologies that were already there. But somehow nobody else made a success of it. Maybe PalmOS could've been the linux-based mobile OS winner - but somehow I doubt it. Palm was trying to be Apple. Google was trying to be the Open Source Microsoft - and, yeah, there are problems associated with that, but without Android, it would've ended up iOS vs Windows phone - tightly coupled with Office and Exchange. I think today's mess is a whole lot better than that...
And ChromeOS. Whether you like it or not, it serves the purpose of defining a set of use cases where a standards-compliant browser (any one of them) really can be the OS. And any other OS is free to emulate those use cases with open source tools. ChromeOS ends up being a big competitor for 'I set my mom up with a Linux desktop' scenarios, but then again, it makes it so that real linux desktop users aren't left out in the cold, application-wise, for banking, e-commerce, printing, etc.
So, yeah, Google may have been given credit in the popular view for some stuff with a much more complex history - but then the GNU/Linux crowd would claim the same about Linux itself. Those who care about such things know about them, and I guess those who care even more that others don't know about them are out of luck...
What exactly about the linux kernel is preventing Android from being that single OS that spans IOT, mobile and the desktop already?
All I can think of is that the linux driver model counts too heavily on everything being open source. I.e., the kernel interfaces are allowed to change to the point that hardware manufacturers - without the motivation to keep up - don't keep up with kernel changes. That holds Android back, since it either has to stick with an old kernel, or obsolete old hardware faster than necessary. But the funny thing is that OEM's are awful at keeping up with Android updates anyway, despite whatever efforts Google makes at backward compatibility for hardware.
So, unless this new kernel is targeted at having a super-stable binary driver ABI, what does it offer that linux can't?
Or to put it another way, every single google product is a useful service that can be supported by advertising tied to what you're searching for. Obviously, Google is in business to make money - or maybe to be more charitable, to stay in business so that its founders' vision can continue to be realized. Less charitably, well, there have been compromises along the way...
As a side benefit, though, they've done a lot for the open source movement - if only in promoting the web as the primary platform for application development. That has made it possible for something like ChromeOS to be viable - and along with it, for desktop Linux to also be viable. Not to mention MacOS, iOS and Android. In pre-Google days, MacOS was wholly dependent on the availability of native Microsoft apps for its marketplace viability. Now, Google can't take all the credit for this, but I don't think any other organization has done as much to make sure that open standards ruled the day.
your idea came out of a Guardian article that focused on sulfur oxide emissions to the exclusion of everything else
You're giving him a lot of credit. This makes it sound like he actually read the article in question instead of just parroting some talking head on Fox (who probably didn't read it either - relying instead on a direct heads-up from what ever industry-funded think tank actually wrote the article).
Well, I'm guessing you wouldn't advise leaving my N4 on the last-supported Kit-Kat version. I'm using Cyanogenmod 13, which is a pretty well-known commodity. It may have some of its own bugs, but it also has some of its own security enhancements - like the ability to turn root on and off on demand.
There's advertising (clearly marked as such) and so-called 'native advertising' (disguised as an article you might want to read - curated by a source you think you trust). This is straddling that line. Nobody cares about advertising on Slashdot (if only because they've got it blocked). Everybody should care about native advertising everywhere - since it dilutes the value of journalism in general.
...especially when the real problems are 500 billion companies Samsung and Verizon.
I'm oddly finding myself thinking that this exploit could actually be used to enhance security on phones with locked bootloaders and unreliable updates from their manufacturers. I'm seriously considering buying an Axon 7, because the hardware looks great. But if I can't install ROMs to keep the thing current on security updates, I don't want it. To tell the truth, even if ZTE were to provide timely updates for the first 2 years, I'd be seriously on the fence. My current phone, a Nexus 4, is no longer supported by Google, but I still have it up to date thanks to its unlocked bootloader. I don't know if Google likes that or not, but I suspect they're fine with it. ZTE, on the other hand, would definitely prefer for me to shove the thing in a drawer and buy a new one after two years, which sucks - but happens to coincide nicely with content providers that don't want you to have root access. We've reached the point where buying new hardware in order to keep up with new OS features is a losing game, and the industry needs to learn to live with a 5 year upgrade cycle - cause that's where it's going, if only consumers would insist on it...
How about padding the compressed data with a random length string of random stuff. Wouldn't add much to the payload size, but it'd screw up the ability to manipulate the compression to help you guess the contents.
Perhaps it is flamebait, but it brings up an interesting (to me) question. At this stage of the game, Apple makes most of its money off of its mobile devices. Sure, it still sells Macs - and people still like and buy them. But Mac's aren't their core business any more - and their single-supplier model has kept that part of their business capped at a pretty modest volume.
Maybe now it would finally make sense for Apple to license OS/X to other OEM's. That way, they'd make some money off of the software (they could charge at least as much as Microsoft does), and possibly grow the ecosystem. I suppose there'd be a chance of HP or Samsung building devices could outsell Apple's, but Apple's certainly capable of competing with the best. And they don't have to license it to low end crap OEM's. And, of course, they wouldn't license iOS, but while OS/X is still relevant, they ought to consider taking a chance.
I'm not saying this because I want a Mac clone - I personally don't like OS/X much, and I use Linux at home. But it'd be interesting to see the market shaken up a bit.
I imagine they co-locate content on the premises of cable operators in PA. And, barring that, they'll probably be absorbed someday by Comcast - headquartered in Philadelphia - if Comcast has anything to say about it.
*as long as Linux isn't running a GUI. From Microsoft's point of view you don't need a Linux partition any more. You can do your Linux script development under their Ubuntu on Windows thingy - and after all, Linux is only a server OS. No need for the GUI stuff. Of course no current Linux desktop users are going to be satisfied with that - but maybe some folks will find it useful as an addon to their current Windows-centric desktop worlds.
It seems like MS has accepted that they've lost the battle (if not the war) as far as Linux as a cloud-based app server is concerned. But it looks like they're still hoping that's the only place Linux will get traction. Of course, it's already got traction in mobile too, and MS seems resigned to that. But they're still in panic mode where the traditional is concerned. It's bad enough that they can't do anything about this ChromeOS thing. But on desktop PC's that also run Windows, they're still in control...
the sad truth is trump and "trump" are 2 different people. one the real person and the other a troll created by faux media outrage. the attacks on him only make him stronger
It's not as though that faux media outrage were not Trumps intention. It serves Trump's purpose of diverting attention away from his many shortcomings - and his opponent's many strengths being put forward by this week's Democratic infomercial. Yep, we're all talking about whether "Trump" is committing treason, and by virtue of being distracted from questioning it, accepting the underlying meme that there's something nefarious to find in the emails Clinton deleted in the course of, y'know, dealing with an email inbox. No matter that there's zero evidence that there's anything beyond the more or less routine stuff that's already been found - and found not to merit prosecution.
It's a 'brilliant' strategy that only works because the media is so stupid and predictable. Whether or not it will backfire and destroy any shred of credibility Trump may have will not be known until November.
What it is is Birtherism 2.0. It has nothing to do with the Russians or treason or anything else remotely relevant. It's just another way to slip the sinister "missing emails" meme into the discussion. We all end up arguing about the inflammatory tone and whether it's a joke or not, but the basic message communicated (for which there's no evidence whatsoever) is "of course, Hillary was hiding nefarious stuff that was in deleted emails that she 'just claims' were personal. It doesn't matter that there wasn't likely anything earth-shattering there. It didn't matter that Obama was born in Hawaii. He's just feeding the fire of conspiracy theorists that are just looking for something to justify their gut hatred - of Obama back then, and of Hillary now.
Like knowingly allowing soldiers and an Ambassador to die in Benghazi and then blaming it all on a Youtube video?
That also is not treason.
Not only is it not treason, it didn't happen.
At some point addressing the 'treason' argument gives a pass to the basic distortion of the facts behind the argument. Nobody 'allowed' soldiers and an Ambassador to die. Some pretty extensive security arrangements proved to be not secure enough. Nobody's best moment, but a far cry from 'allowing' people to die. And going on talk shows and saying "at this point, we think this happened as part of a protest over a YouTube video" is also a far cry from "blaming it all on a YouTube video". It's more "we don't have all the facts yet - there are rumors that we're looking into". All I can say is the OP statement about treason is way more of a blatant lie than "I didn't send emails marked classified" - which turned out to be pretty much true (in an 'exception that proves the rule' kind of way). But why let the nuanced facts get in the way of a stupid political diatribe...
Nothing about GNOME3, KDE4, SystemD, etc prevents Linux from being packaged as the unix-like server of your wet dreams. But those things do help make it a viable desktop system. Of course, they also make it too much of a moving target to be a wildly successful desktop system, but hey... the desktop is changing and losing relevance. Android and ChromeOS are certainly relevant in what seems to be rising to replace the traditional desktop.
I don't see how games are the issue on Android devices. There are plenty of games available - and as Android becomes more and more dominant, there will only be more. Hell, even MS Office is available native on Android devices.
But where WINE shines is in allowing you to run that odd Windows app that isn't available on MacOS or Linux. I use the 'wineskins' WINE wrapper to provide a version of a WIN32 app I wrote at work for mac users. This app is no longer in heavy development, and my company would never pay to rewrite it, but it's in regular use. Of course it's the Intel part of the equation that makes this announcement none too useful. But if WINELIB will soon support porting WIN32 C code to ARM Android, that'd be pretty useful - to me, at least...
Slashdot Mirror
This would be a good thing - if Samsung were going to commit to security updates on their official refurbs for a reasonable lifetime based on the purchase of the refurb as a 'new' device for its purchaser. While a year old Samsung flagship might compare favorably with a new 'flagship killer' from OnePlus or ZTE or Asus, the new mid-ranger would at least offer a reasonable chance of keeping up with vital updates.
What's worse is that you've already payed a patent royalty when you bought the card. But then you have to pay again for the ability to read it. That, IMO, is the biggest problem with data format patents. It's one thing to charge the producer of a file format a royalty - if they want to use the format, pay up. But it's another thing entirely to charge the consumer of a file another royalty. They didn't choose the format of the file, they simply bought it and want to be able to use it. We're not talking about a license for the software to read the file - we're talking about legally reverse-engineered software being slapped with a patent royalty.
The same applies to media codecs. If Apple or Amazon (or Google for that matter) want to sell you media files compressed with Microsoft's (or anyone else's) wonderful algorithm, they should pay for the privilege (assuming there's a valid patent on the algorithm). But at that point, the royalty's been paid, and the consumer shouldn't have to be restricted to playback on devices based on whether another royalty was paid.
Maybe if royalties could only be collected at the production end, they'd be higher. But that would only make non-encumbered formats a bigger bargain...
The problem is the $10 price tag. Even if this patent is valid, it's only value is compatibility with Windows desktops - i.e., the Windows desktop monopoly has made FAT-based filesystems a de-facto standard. Microsoft is charging an exhorbitant fee for the ability to use SD cards way out of proportion to the value of the software in question. Put another way, if any OEM's were still willing to make Windows phones, Microsoft would charge them $10 or less for a whole OS, including FAT filesystem compatibility. I doubt they charge makers of cameras or other devices with SD card support anywhere near that much. But for Android OEM's, it's 'pay us for Windows - or pay us even more not to use Windows'. Abusive at least, possibly illegal...?
Of course, Wikileaks shouldn't be attacking anyone. Just providing a platform to let whistleblowers get the stuff out, and yes, applying some minimal amount of journalistic responsibility to the process - like not going on TV and pretty much admitting you're carrying out vendettas...
I assume you *are* interested in having drivers for the devices you use. Even the open source ones (i.e. Intel's graphics drivers) are dependent on the manufacturer's perception that desktop Linux is important enough for them to pay any attention to. Likewise, though Google produces Chrome and ChromeOS - both linux-friendly, and both hugely responsible for the rest of the stuff you use your linux desktop for working - i.e., all the web stuff, Netflix, etc. But Google tends to get distracted too. Luckily, they use Linux desktops internally...
So, you might not think the 'battle' is relevant to you, but if desktop linux becomes so much of an afterthoght that, oh..., OEM's start removing the option to turn off secure boot, or whatever, you just might have to have to live without the linux you use - or at least your linux is likely to become a lot less useful.
Donating to Johnson's campaign might make sense - assuming you want his message heard, and that your donation will help that. Actually voting for him is a vote for Trump if you would otherwise have voted for Clinton - and vice versa. There's no point claiming that your 'personal integrity' prevents voting for one of the two viable choices. Abstaining (which a Johnson vote essentially would be) isn't a particularly virtuous stance - no matter how much you flatter yourself that it is.
It's more like - do you want a professional, equivocating, truth-shading, politician, or an amateur, flat-out liar who says completely insane shit all the time along with its complete opposite from minute to minute.
This Hillary and Trump are 'both liars' argument is a big part of the reason Hillary lies - and used a private email server in the first place. She's a 'liar' to the extent that you can play gotcha with things she says - and many do and have. And she tried to hide her email to prevent it from becoming fodder for the same gotcha games. But as a President, she's essentially pursuing the policies she says she is. As a President, God help us, Trump would be a blank slate, pursuing God knows what. The only thing we do know about him is that he'll say anything and it's polar opposite if you allow him to keep talking and give him enough time.
Umm, desktop systems and apps may not be the growth business they once were, but they still make Microsoft billions. It's not that they want out of those businesses - it's that they're trying to keep up with the overall industry move to the cloud. Not that it would be a bad idea for Microsoft to start basing their cloud operations on Linux - assuming they could get more out of their hardware that way. Maybe they really are thinking along those lines, and want their software to work there - for their own purposes. That'd be pretty forward-looking.
Of course, Occam's Razor would favor locking admins into their Windows-specific toolset as the explanation...
An unlocked bootloader is a must if you want to keep your phone for more than 2 years. My Nexus 4 is on the latest Marshmallow version (just got a security upgrade yesterday), thanks to Cyanogenmod 13. I had unlocked the bootloader out of the box, but stayed rooted and on the stock ROM until Google stopped updating it. Rooting would've been nice, but timely updates from Google was even nicer - until they stopped coming...
But since we're talking about bootloaders and warranties, there's a controversy over the ZTE Axon 7, which is being sold with an option to unlock the bootloader. But if you exercise that option (even ask for the key without actually unlocking), they void your warranty. Pretty nasty, since I'd like to buy one of those, unlock it and then leave it on stock until ZTE stops supporting it (like I did with my Nexus). The reason to unlock the bootloader right away, is that unlocking wipes all your data. So, it's better to get that out of the way upfront. But not if you're going to void the warranty on a brand new device...
It's not that Mozilla didn't play an important role in keeping open web standards alive, but Google took it a step farther by building applications with what many would've thought an impossible or impractical level of 'desktop-like' functionality. And doing it with a name that gave the efforts credibility. Not saying that only a multibillion dollar company can do that - but it helps in getting the pointy-heads to take notice. Many companies today standardize on Chrome, when those same companies used to refuse to allow employees to install Firefox. That could just be a sign of how much progress has been made, and I don't want to wade into chicken-and-egg scenarios...
And Google didn't hijack WebKit. Apple took WebKit from KDE, and that's what open source is really about. Both Apple and Google were free to do what they did, and KDE and Apple were not free to prevent it. I think the KDE folks are happy about it - not so sure about Apple. In any case, today we live in a world where Microsoft is struggling to keep up with the open standards embodied by Chrome, Safari, Mozilla and Opera - just to remain relevant. And that's a good thing.
And then there's Android. Sure, it sits on top of open source technologies that were already there. But somehow nobody else made a success of it. Maybe PalmOS could've been the linux-based mobile OS winner - but somehow I doubt it. Palm was trying to be Apple. Google was trying to be the Open Source Microsoft - and, yeah, there are problems associated with that, but without Android, it would've ended up iOS vs Windows phone - tightly coupled with Office and Exchange. I think today's mess is a whole lot better than that...
And ChromeOS. Whether you like it or not, it serves the purpose of defining a set of use cases where a standards-compliant browser (any one of them) really can be the OS. And any other OS is free to emulate those use cases with open source tools. ChromeOS ends up being a big competitor for 'I set my mom up with a Linux desktop' scenarios, but then again, it makes it so that real linux desktop users aren't left out in the cold, application-wise, for banking, e-commerce, printing, etc.
So, yeah, Google may have been given credit in the popular view for some stuff with a much more complex history - but then the GNU/Linux crowd would claim the same about Linux itself. Those who care about such things know about them, and I guess those who care even more that others don't know about them are out of luck...
What exactly about the linux kernel is preventing Android from being that single OS that spans IOT, mobile and the desktop already?
All I can think of is that the linux driver model counts too heavily on everything being open source. I.e., the kernel interfaces are allowed to change to the point that hardware manufacturers - without the motivation to keep up - don't keep up with kernel changes. That holds Android back, since it either has to stick with an old kernel, or obsolete old hardware faster than necessary. But the funny thing is that OEM's are awful at keeping up with Android updates anyway, despite whatever efforts Google makes at backward compatibility for hardware.
So, unless this new kernel is targeted at having a super-stable binary driver ABI, what does it offer that linux can't?
Or to put it another way, every single google product is a useful service that can be supported by advertising tied to what you're searching for. Obviously, Google is in business to make money - or maybe to be more charitable, to stay in business so that its founders' vision can continue to be realized. Less charitably, well, there have been compromises along the way...
As a side benefit, though, they've done a lot for the open source movement - if only in promoting the web as the primary platform for application development. That has made it possible for something like ChromeOS to be viable - and along with it, for desktop Linux to also be viable. Not to mention MacOS, iOS and Android. In pre-Google days, MacOS was wholly dependent on the availability of native Microsoft apps for its marketplace viability. Now, Google can't take all the credit for this, but I don't think any other organization has done as much to make sure that open standards ruled the day.
your idea came out of a Guardian article that focused on sulfur oxide emissions to the exclusion of everything else
You're giving him a lot of credit. This makes it sound like he actually read the article in question instead of just parroting some talking head on Fox (who probably didn't read it either - relying instead on a direct heads-up from what ever industry-funded think tank actually wrote the article).
Well, I'm guessing you wouldn't advise leaving my N4 on the last-supported Kit-Kat version. I'm using Cyanogenmod 13, which is a pretty well-known commodity. It may have some of its own bugs, but it also has some of its own security enhancements - like the ability to turn root on and off on demand.
There's advertising (clearly marked as such) and so-called 'native advertising' (disguised as an article you might want to read - curated by a source you think you trust). This is straddling that line. Nobody cares about advertising on Slashdot (if only because they've got it blocked). Everybody should care about native advertising everywhere - since it dilutes the value of journalism in general.
...especially when the real problems are 500 billion companies Samsung and Verizon.
I'm oddly finding myself thinking that this exploit could actually be used to enhance security on phones with locked bootloaders and unreliable updates from their manufacturers. I'm seriously considering buying an Axon 7, because the hardware looks great. But if I can't install ROMs to keep the thing current on security updates, I don't want it. To tell the truth, even if ZTE were to provide timely updates for the first 2 years, I'd be seriously on the fence. My current phone, a Nexus 4, is no longer supported by Google, but I still have it up to date thanks to its unlocked bootloader. I don't know if Google likes that or not, but I suspect they're fine with it. ZTE, on the other hand, would definitely prefer for me to shove the thing in a drawer and buy a new one after two years, which sucks - but happens to coincide nicely with content providers that don't want you to have root access. We've reached the point where buying new hardware in order to keep up with new OS features is a losing game, and the industry needs to learn to live with a 5 year upgrade cycle - cause that's where it's going, if only consumers would insist on it...
How about padding the compressed data with a random length string of random stuff. Wouldn't add much to the payload size, but it'd screw up the ability to manipulate the compression to help you guess the contents.
Perhaps it is flamebait, but it brings up an interesting (to me) question. At this stage of the game, Apple makes most of its money off of its mobile devices. Sure, it still sells Macs - and people still like and buy them. But Mac's aren't their core business any more - and their single-supplier model has kept that part of their business capped at a pretty modest volume.
Maybe now it would finally make sense for Apple to license OS/X to other OEM's. That way, they'd make some money off of the software (they could charge at least as much as Microsoft does), and possibly grow the ecosystem. I suppose there'd be a chance of HP or Samsung building devices could outsell Apple's, but Apple's certainly capable of competing with the best. And they don't have to license it to low end crap OEM's. And, of course, they wouldn't license iOS, but while OS/X is still relevant, they ought to consider taking a chance.
I'm not saying this because I want a Mac clone - I personally don't like OS/X much, and I use Linux at home. But it'd be interesting to see the market shaken up a bit.
I imagine they co-locate content on the premises of cable operators in PA. And, barring that, they'll probably be absorbed someday by Comcast - headquartered in Philadelphia - if Comcast has anything to say about it.
Microsoft Loves Linux*
*as long as Linux isn't running a GUI. From Microsoft's point of view you don't need a Linux partition any more. You can do your Linux script development under their Ubuntu on Windows thingy - and after all, Linux is only a server OS. No need for the GUI stuff. Of course no current Linux desktop users are going to be satisfied with that - but maybe some folks will find it useful as an addon to their current Windows-centric desktop worlds.
It seems like MS has accepted that they've lost the battle (if not the war) as far as Linux as a cloud-based app server is concerned. But it looks like they're still hoping that's the only place Linux will get traction. Of course, it's already got traction in mobile too, and MS seems resigned to that. But they're still in panic mode where the traditional is concerned. It's bad enough that they can't do anything about this ChromeOS thing. But on desktop PC's that also run Windows, they're still in control...
the sad truth is trump and "trump" are 2 different people. one the real person and the other a troll created by faux media outrage. the attacks on him only make him stronger
It's not as though that faux media outrage were not Trumps intention. It serves Trump's purpose of diverting attention away from his many shortcomings - and his opponent's many strengths being put forward by this week's Democratic infomercial. Yep, we're all talking about whether "Trump" is committing treason, and by virtue of being distracted from questioning it, accepting the underlying meme that there's something nefarious to find in the emails Clinton deleted in the course of, y'know, dealing with an email inbox. No matter that there's zero evidence that there's anything beyond the more or less routine stuff that's already been found - and found not to merit prosecution.
It's a 'brilliant' strategy that only works because the media is so stupid and predictable. Whether or not it will backfire and destroy any shred of credibility Trump may have will not be known until November.
What it is is Birtherism 2.0. It has nothing to do with the Russians or treason or anything else remotely relevant. It's just another way to slip the sinister "missing emails" meme into the discussion. We all end up arguing about the inflammatory tone and whether it's a joke or not, but the basic message communicated (for which there's no evidence whatsoever) is "of course, Hillary was hiding nefarious stuff that was in deleted emails that she 'just claims' were personal. It doesn't matter that there wasn't likely anything earth-shattering there. It didn't matter that Obama was born in Hawaii. He's just feeding the fire of conspiracy theorists that are just looking for something to justify their gut hatred - of Obama back then, and of Hillary now.
Like knowingly allowing soldiers and an Ambassador to die in Benghazi and then blaming it all on a Youtube video?
That also is not treason.
Not only is it not treason, it didn't happen.
At some point addressing the 'treason' argument gives a pass to the basic distortion of the facts behind the argument. Nobody 'allowed' soldiers and an Ambassador to die. Some pretty extensive security arrangements proved to be not secure enough. Nobody's best moment, but a far cry from 'allowing' people to die. And going on talk shows and saying "at this point, we think this happened as part of a protest over a YouTube video" is also a far cry from "blaming it all on a YouTube video". It's more "we don't have all the facts yet - there are rumors that we're looking into". All I can say is the OP statement about treason is way more of a blatant lie than "I didn't send emails marked classified" - which turned out to be pretty much true (in an 'exception that proves the rule' kind of way). But why let the nuanced facts get in the way of a stupid political diatribe...
Nothing about GNOME3, KDE4, SystemD, etc prevents Linux from being packaged as the unix-like server of your wet dreams. But those things do help make it a viable desktop system. Of course, they also make it too much of a moving target to be a wildly successful desktop system, but hey... the desktop is changing and losing relevance. Android and ChromeOS are certainly relevant in what seems to be rising to replace the traditional desktop.
I don't see how games are the issue on Android devices. There are plenty of games available - and as Android becomes more and more dominant, there will only be more. Hell, even MS Office is available native on Android devices.
But where WINE shines is in allowing you to run that odd Windows app that isn't available on MacOS or Linux. I use the 'wineskins' WINE wrapper to provide a version of a WIN32 app I wrote at work for mac users. This app is no longer in heavy development, and my company would never pay to rewrite it, but it's in regular use. Of course it's the Intel part of the equation that makes this announcement none too useful. But if WINELIB will soon support porting WIN32 C code to ARM Android, that'd be pretty useful - to me, at least...