3) International calling via GV is WAY cheaper per minute than T-Mobile even with their extra $5/month add-on for cheaper international service.
Just a note - we pay TMobile $10/mo for unlimited long distance to countries like france and india (wife's line) - and unlimited SMS to cellphones in those countries. No worries, no overage. Does this not appear on your plan?
Regarding GV, it's just a nice little perk for me (kind of like my cheapo efax service - I have a fax at office and home, but being able to scan/pdf/fax digitally is worth $4/mo - GV is free and even more useful than the efax - but both are boosters to productivity they don't replace existing services/tools).
I can't imagine Google Reader costs more than Google Voice or even anywhere near as much. Yet, they cut reader while keeping voice. Cost isn't the reason Reader doesn't exist. Lack of engagement on G+ is why. The stupid part of the Reader debacle is that there isn't a Reader replacement in G+.
I won't be surprised, now that Google profits from phone companies' gouging their users (just like Apple, Blackberry and other handset manufacturers do), that they eventually drop voice as well, or just say it's an Android-only offering (not useful for us iOS users) or again, replaced as a G+ "feature".
For Craigslist and other uses for a disposable number where I don't trust the other party, Google Voice is very handy. Just this use alone makes it worth having.
Same here - I put my GV# on all my emails. I whitelist family/friends (and encourage them to use my direct number instead) but let everyone else hit voicemail with a message that says I'll call back soon.
I also give out my GV number to all those places that "require" a phone number. People/companies that you have done business with can legitimately spam you, and GV shields you from this kind of spam.
Furthermore, when I switched providers (from Verizon to TMobile), GV allowed me to have a semi-normal operation (combined with forwarding from old phone) during the month-long evaluation period (had to take this seriously - and yes, Tmobile is really decent for data/coverage in San Jose).
"Environmentalists" Will not be happy until we live like we did back in the 1700's. " False. Please stop lying. It's also a strawman. please learn to think. See 350.org, please follow your own advice, and learn to think about what is required to achieve a reduction of 30+ppm of CO2, hint it looks more like the Flintstones and less like the Jetsons.
Yeah, the Jetsons had tons of Carbon-emission from factories and tailpipes. Wait, if they did, it'd look more like Blade Runner than the Jetsons.
The complete failure of most countries to completely embrace nuclear power is what's forcing us to utilize carbon-emitting power sources. Nuclear power + EV's could easily cut down our emissions.
They're saying on iOS you have to make that transition in three months, not two years.
FTFY.
To look at it another way, if you don't transition when Apple does, you're hosed.
Untrue. Most Apps built for iOS5 are often a few recompiles away from running on iOS6. Of course, you'll need to do a bit of coding to get your App to use new libraries.
I don't see this being as problematic as some of the other posters think. Considering most trips are short, and cars will typically be charged overnight, I think swapping batteries at a swap station will be rare for most people.
Rare for most, very common for some. Plus, once you've driven EV, it's very hard to go back to ICE - when my Prius is capable of cruising without the gas motor running it's like I'm in a spaceship - and the Prius is a souped-up econobox.
It's also a major "stumbling block" for EVs - if this hurdle is passed, there is one less reason to go EV. Maybe not Model S, but their next design or the one afterwards will finally pierce the mass market (think iPad - broke the $500 barrier, became a mass market hit, started cannibalizing PC (even Mac) sales).
Tesla's goal is to lay the groundwork for their next big hit - by satisfying existing customers, and making their vision mainstream by many small steps. This is the hallmark of an innovative and successful company.
Electric cars are now pretty much in the same position as small cars were in the 70s. They will improve, and people will make their own decisions on which car is right for them.
I have to disagree here. In my grandmother's era, most V8 engines struggled to break 100hp. Plastics weren't invented/widely used in cars, so they were very heavy. Putting a I4 of the era into an all-steel car of that era is laughable. If anything, expectations for power/weight have increased.
Finding 0-60 times for old unmodified cars isn't all that easy, but the 1962 Lincoln Continental 7.0L V8 had a 0-60 time of 12.4 seconds with 300HP. Perhaps comparing to a new Lincoln would be appropriate, but a new Honda Civic with a not-terribly-exciting engine can do 0-60 in 9 seconds with about 140hp. You have to look pretty hard to find a car these days that takes more than 10 seconds to reach 60MPH. Stopping distances are much shorter, and new cars corner far better than the old ones. Driving requirements have actually gotten much more demanding, but weight and power advances have kept up.
While everything you said may be entirely accurate (and seems so), it does nothing to refute bws111's claims. In fact, if you take your facts and align them to bws111's analogy, it makes perfect sense. Right now, battery technology and charging methodology are still lacking for mass-market EV adoption. Personally, I'm thrilled that Tesla is releasing cars with reasonable range for commuters (I drive 75mi each day I commute - 160 is probably the minimum I would want in an EV), but I really wish there were more Volt-style plug-in hybrids available - I think they're the easiest next stepping stone (after "Prius" - i.e., the one that came before - now hybrids are mainstream).
Once battery tech gets to a point where it's long range enough for 99% of commuters and it's not $10k/pack, we'll be very ready for mass adoption of swap stations, charging points and all the economic activity that will enable/sustain it.
I think HSPA is more compatible between the two, and LTE might be as well once T-Mobile rolls that out. So you might be able to get 2G and 4G on both networks with the same hardware, but generally not 3G.
I'm on TMO with an iPhone5 and I see LTE, 4G, 3G and very occasionally, (E)dge on my top ribbon. However, this is with a model A1428 that's been retooled to work with TMO's 4G network (ie, bought after APR12).
I also have an unlocked ATT iPhone4 that gets 3G where we live. Haven't tested speeds - mom is using it and she hardly needs to mobile usage.
Yeah, my wife was paying the "data overage" every other month. Insane, $30 for 400MB of data, where it's essentially free for her now.
I put our old AT&T iPhone4 to use as my mom's daily driver and it's doing fine (San Jose) for getting 3G (which tmo/att call 4G) speeds. Hopefully when t-mobile moves over it's spectrum to use more of the 1900 PCS for 4G, coverage will get better. This doesn't help older devices like the iPhone OG/3G/3GS which were pretty much stuck on using AT&T frequencies - only HSPA+ supporting devices like the iPhone4 and later will benefit from t-mobile's rollout/refarm (IIRC, someone please correct me if I'm wrong on this).
A 4/4S (or equivalently radio-specced Android if that's your preference) would be decent, and an LTE iPhone5 gets me very very good coverage (again, outdoors - in larger buildings the higher frequency used by tmobile data fares poorer than ATT/VZ - not sure about sprint)
The UK is signatory to and has implemented all of these, in fact, it helped write most of them.
Let's face it, that UK no longer exists. Instead you have creeping US-style fascism in the form of your Tory "leadership". The current UK ministers would never sign those bills much less write them.
Seriously Verizon, $120+ for a basic data/voice plan?
Absent my equipment loans (ie, what a carrier subsidy should be - ie, limited duration, can pay of early to unlock completely, etc), I pay $110 for 5 lines. Each with it's own 500MB+tethering.
I get HD Voice on my iPhone5s (great for me and the wife to actually hear each other on the commute home), and unlike AT&T customers, I had Facetime over cellular for the past 2 months.
I used to pay around $100 for a single line on Verizon (wife paid same for AT&T).
The *only* downside is that data in very large buildings (museum, costco) can be literally zero. If you work in a large shielded building and don't have internal wifi, then you might want to reconsider - but that's what the test drive period is for. For all other things, tmobile has been about as reliable as either AT&T or VZ for a whole lot less and with better voice.
You two should suggest these ideas to your congressman. Something along those lines could work. It might actually get passed because the dems have never seen a tax they didn't like, and the repubs like ideas that could help businesses operate more efficiently, spending time providing products and services instead of fighting lawsuits. Both parties might like this.
As a small inventor myself, doing R&D and rendering those inventions as software, I wouldn't mind a system where I could declare the value at "no more than $500,000" and the fee would be proportional.
Sadly those two bolded statements you mention are pretty far from the truth. Both parties are corrupted by megacorporations (mainly owned/run by the very wealthy) to the degree that only what benefits the megacorps gets passed (whether it benefits/harms small business or individuals seems to be a minor factor). Whether it's dems passing/continuing a tax cut for the wealthy, or the repubs passing big-brother legislation that makes everyone's life more bureacratic, both parties are are not representative of small business or individuals unless they get lobbied by hard cash.
Two decades ago, I might have agreed with both your idea and the parties' signatures. Now I don't think that's the case anymore. Consequently, I don't think any of these kind of ideas will go anywhere. Our "representatives"... aren't.
The Kinect is required because they want to encourage game devs to use the Kinect. If it were optional, developers may skip using some features since they may not be available. I don't see how it won't work if cam is obstructed.
Well, shit. Then perhaps they should have considered the privacy implications of mandating a 1984-style (well even more advanced actually) system as a requirement for their console shouldn't they?
The fact that they're still sticking to this as a *requirement* for playing games is pretty telling of their attitude... which is not respectful to their customers.
Go ahead, buy the XBone - I'll wait out this "show my kids dressing up in the living room to an always-on big brother" fad.
The big problem problem that new consoles are fighting for is: a reason to exist. Most games demo-ed so far look possible on the current generation of hardware. Crowd sources AI is an interesting twist, but possible on current consoles. Killer Instinct is an odd thing to revive, but it would play just as well on a PS3.
Suddenly Microsoft comes out with a console that: 1. Phones home every day. 2. Bans game lending. 3. Possibly cripples the used game market, or maybe not, nobody is really sure. 4. Requires Kinect to be always on, because that wasn't a disaapointment.
Their sales pitch of "You can play games that are basically last-gen games, but with fewer rights" has had shocking trouble resonating with consumers.
5. Integrates with PRISM natively, giving Big Gov (which is quite corrupt these days) a chance to look right into your living room. 6. ??? 7. Profit at the expense of your privacy.
Microsoft was the first big tech company to roll over for the NSA (that there's pretty good knowledge of NSA backdoors into Windows for years just shows their further corrupt nature). They give NSA exploit information prior to patching it.
There is no way I am going to give Microsoft (and the government by proxy) a device that can tell when I entered a room, when I leave, and what I'm holding for f*cks sake. Just for some games?
To those who think that Ouya and XBone/PS4 aren't comparable - I'll tell you something - when several of the options is anathema, the remainder, no matter how poor, are all I'm willing to commit to - that it costs so much less is a bonus. I still haven't figured out the Wii U, and I'm not sure I have time to.
Fun should be simple - I debug/analyze and get systems working at my day job - I don't need to mess with all that @ home.
So instead of just having the application fee proportional to the "value" of the patent, make it a yearly tax. If it's a small inventor, they can pay tax on that property that's so valuable - as long as they're pulling in massive licensing fees, they get taxed on that (additional to normal taxation) to support the patent office. If the property isn't making money, then the taxes are lower, but not nonexistant. If it's a big company maintaining a large warchest of intellectual property, they can pay yearly for the right to monopolize those inventions. This will keep them from hoarding useless patents.
Real property is taxed, and so we should treat imaginary property the same.
We need a Paula. Vulcans? Hell, I'd take Vogons at this point.
Paula: Look, many young men who should be able to move out, simply can't. It's called "failure to launch". And that's where I come in. Young men develop self-esteem best during a romantic relationship, so I simulate one. We have a memorable meeting. We get to know each other over a few casual meals, he helps me through an emotional crisis, then I meet his friends, if he has any... Then I let him teach me something... But the bottom line is, he bonds with me. He lets go of you. He moves out.
Reminds me of overhearing a salesperson trying to convince a customer to put down the iPhone she was holding and buy an Android phone (I suspect higher commission on the Android).
"And another advantage is you don't have to pay for any applications unlike the iPhone. It's really easy and everyone does it."
I wept for Android developers.
Why weep - I thought the only valid business model (unless you're on the super-popular end of the power curve distribution) was ad-based apps.
Has this changed recently? Have people been actually paying for their Android apps?
These are exactly the questions that need to be asked - or will have to be asked when iOS7 is gold.
I do have a concern that this, while not crippling the 2nd hand market, might force Apple into the gatekeeper of resales - a position that is very powerful and corrupting.
I hope they make it easy to facilitate resales, or I might consider alternatives for my next smartphone.
Looking at all the work Apple has done on that Mac Pro and Macbook Air, it seems they aren't putting all their eggs in the mobile basket any more.
Good to see some common sense. Post-PC is marketing hype. The PC will be standard technology for at least the next 100 years.
You could easily translate Post-PC as Post-Windows and it's a far more accurate term (without being acrimonious). Apple (and Google) is stepping into the gaping void that MSFT has left open with their Win8/Surface boondoggle/catastrophe.
The "PC" will always exist, however, it may consist of a healthy mix of OSX, Windows and ChromeOS (and linux).
OS X has THE worst multi-monitor support in the industry... I like to run XCode in full-screen mode (more real estate for dual pane mode)....
So what you're really saying is that "full-screen" mode was useless for you. I use multiple monitors on my MBP, and it's still better at supporting my shitty workplace external monitors than my Thinkpad (prev years model) was. Doing a preso doesn't FUBAR my MBP multi-monitor setup like it did my Thinkpad. BetterSnapTool fixes most of the aero-snap features that Win7 had over OSX.
I never use full-screen, now I might (if IT blesses us with 10.9 any time soon).
I assume they are worried about what else he plans on releasing. If he has much more damning evidence (Which I assume he does) they want to get into the fold of Mother USA's arms to squeeze... hug him into silence before he says much more.
If he's smart, those dumps are dead-man triggered. NSA knows this, for sure. Meanwhile, having him extradited and "Manning'ed" isn't going to go over well at all for PR.
Snowden may actually have a stronger hand than everyone fears.
They will buy them as fast as Microsoft can make them. No matter what Microsoft does, people will buy it. Look at Win8 for proof -- it's not selling well, but it's still selling.
Well, sure, but you have to keep in mind - about 25% of the US population suffers from some form of mental retardation.
Now, you're slandering the "learning difference" people.
Really, 25% of the US is dumb as rocks. They don't have the mental retardation excuse - they're not born that way, they just refuse to learn what's good for them.
Apple is sometimes described as a company that came back from the brink, but for the most part still do what they always did: upper-middle-end computer-driven consumer hardware. IBM went from mostly hardware to mostly services.
I'd disagree - I think Apple did essentially re-invent itself when it switched from Apple Computer to Apple back in '07.
It realized it's future was mobile devices, and despite it's massively profitable iPod franchise, effectively cannibalized it completely with the touch-based offerings, iPhone and iPad. Prior to this change Apple was a Mac/iPod company, afterwards it was the iPhone company (and still is).
You mean Windows 8 is the greatest thing to happen for Apple.
Microsofts screw ups tend to benefit Apple more than Linux.
For now, and it's really all despite Apple essentially not caring about gaining "ground". Because they're the only other reasonable option corps have to a standard WinTel box/book. However, ChromeOS has been getting better and better, and I strongly feel it will rapidly gain a good chunk of the corporate market once it hits a certain feature parity with mainstream desktop OSs.
As long as Microsoft keeps confusing the nascent tablet market with it's entrenched and highly profitable desktop OS market, it will continue to be open to attack from other desktop OS alternatives.
Slashdot Mirror
Now the good points:
3) International calling via GV is WAY cheaper per minute than T-Mobile even with their extra $5/month add-on for cheaper international service.
Just a note - we pay TMobile $10/mo for unlimited long distance to countries like france and india (wife's line) - and unlimited SMS to cellphones in those countries. No worries, no overage. Does this not appear on your plan?
Regarding GV, it's just a nice little perk for me (kind of like my cheapo efax service - I have a fax at office and home, but being able to scan/pdf/fax digitally is worth $4/mo - GV is free and even more useful than the efax - but both are boosters to productivity they don't replace existing services/tools).
This.
I can't imagine Google Reader costs more than Google Voice or even anywhere near as much. Yet, they cut reader while keeping voice.
Cost isn't the reason Reader doesn't exist. Lack of engagement on G+ is why. The stupid part of the Reader debacle is that there isn't a Reader replacement in G+.
I won't be surprised, now that Google profits from phone companies' gouging their users (just like Apple, Blackberry and other handset manufacturers do), that they eventually drop voice as well, or just say it's an Android-only offering (not useful for us iOS users) or again, replaced as a G+ "feature".
For Craigslist and other uses for a disposable number where I don't trust the other party, Google Voice is very handy. Just this use alone makes it worth having.
Same here - I put my GV# on all my emails. I whitelist family/friends (and encourage them to use my direct number instead) but let everyone else hit voicemail with a message that says I'll call back soon.
I also give out my GV number to all those places that "require" a phone number. People/companies that you have done business with can legitimately spam you, and GV shields you from this kind of spam.
Furthermore, when I switched providers (from Verizon to TMobile), GV allowed me to have a semi-normal operation (combined with forwarding from old phone) during the month-long evaluation period (had to take this seriously - and yes, Tmobile is really decent for data/coverage in San Jose).
"Environmentalists" Will not be happy until we live like we did back in the 1700's. "
False. Please stop lying. It's also a strawman. please learn to think.
See 350.org, please follow your own advice, and learn to think about what is required to achieve a reduction of 30+ppm of CO2, hint it looks more like the Flintstones and less like the Jetsons.
Yeah, the Jetsons had tons of Carbon-emission from factories and tailpipes. Wait, if they did, it'd look more like Blade Runner than the Jetsons.
The complete failure of most countries to completely embrace nuclear power is what's forcing us to utilize carbon-emitting power sources. Nuclear power + EV's could easily cut down our emissions.
They're saying on iOS you have to make that transition in three months, not two years.
FTFY.
To look at it another way, if you don't transition when Apple does, you're hosed.
Untrue. Most Apps built for iOS5 are often a few recompiles away from running on iOS6. Of course, you'll need to do a bit of coding to get your App to use new libraries.
I don't see this being as problematic as some of the other posters think. Considering most trips are short, and cars will typically be charged overnight, I think swapping batteries at a swap station will be rare for most people.
Rare for most, very common for some. Plus, once you've driven EV, it's very hard to go back to ICE - when my Prius is capable of cruising without the gas motor running it's like I'm in a spaceship - and the Prius is a souped-up econobox.
It's also a major "stumbling block" for EVs - if this hurdle is passed, there is one less reason to go EV. Maybe not Model S, but their next design or the one afterwards will finally pierce the mass market (think iPad - broke the $500 barrier, became a mass market hit, started cannibalizing PC (even Mac) sales).
Tesla's goal is to lay the groundwork for their next big hit - by satisfying existing customers, and making their vision mainstream by many small steps. This is the hallmark of an innovative and successful company.
...
Electric cars are now pretty much in the same position as small cars were in the 70s. They will improve, and people will make their own decisions on which car is right for them.
I have to disagree here. In my grandmother's era, most V8 engines struggled to break 100hp. Plastics weren't invented/widely used in cars, so they were very heavy. Putting a I4 of the era into an all-steel car of that era is laughable. If anything, expectations for power/weight have increased.
Finding 0-60 times for old unmodified cars isn't all that easy, but the 1962 Lincoln Continental 7.0L V8 had a 0-60 time of 12.4 seconds with 300HP. Perhaps comparing to a new Lincoln would be appropriate, but a new Honda Civic with a not-terribly-exciting engine can do 0-60 in 9 seconds with about 140hp. You have to look pretty hard to find a car these days that takes more than 10 seconds to reach 60MPH. Stopping distances are much shorter, and new cars corner far better than the old ones. Driving requirements have actually gotten much more demanding, but weight and power advances have kept up.
While everything you said may be entirely accurate (and seems so), it does nothing to refute bws111's claims. In fact, if you take your facts and align them to bws111's analogy, it makes perfect sense. Right now, battery technology and charging methodology are still lacking for mass-market EV adoption. Personally, I'm thrilled that Tesla is releasing cars with reasonable range for commuters (I drive 75mi each day I commute - 160 is probably the minimum I would want in an EV), but I really wish there were more Volt-style plug-in hybrids available - I think they're the easiest next stepping stone (after "Prius" - i.e., the one that came before - now hybrids are mainstream).
Once battery tech gets to a point where it's long range enough for 99% of commuters and it's not $10k/pack, we'll be very ready for mass adoption of swap stations, charging points and all the economic activity that will enable/sustain it.
For now, Tesla is blazing the trail.
Why can't they keep at least two major versions simultaneously released? This isn't rocket surgery.
Cutting costs and eventually killing the product.
I think HSPA is more compatible between the two, and LTE might be as well once T-Mobile rolls that out. So you might be able to get 2G and 4G on both networks with the same hardware, but generally not 3G.
I'm on TMO with an iPhone5 and I see LTE, 4G, 3G and very occasionally, (E)dge on my top ribbon. However, this is with a model A1428 that's been retooled to work with TMO's 4G network (ie, bought after APR12).
I also have an unlocked ATT iPhone4 that gets 3G where we live. Haven't tested speeds - mom is using it and she hardly needs to mobile usage.
Yeah, my wife was paying the "data overage" every other month. Insane, $30 for 400MB of data, where it's essentially free for her now.
I put our old AT&T iPhone4 to use as my mom's daily driver and it's doing fine (San Jose) for getting 3G (which tmo/att call 4G) speeds. Hopefully when t-mobile moves over it's spectrum to use more of the 1900 PCS for 4G, coverage will get better. This doesn't help older devices like the iPhone OG/3G/3GS which were pretty much stuck on using AT&T frequencies - only HSPA+ supporting devices like the iPhone4 and later will benefit from t-mobile's rollout/refarm (IIRC, someone please correct me if I'm wrong on this).
A 4/4S (or equivalently radio-specced Android if that's your preference) would be decent, and an LTE iPhone5 gets me very very good coverage (again, outdoors - in larger buildings the higher frequency used by tmobile data fares poorer than ATT/VZ - not sure about sprint)
The UK is signatory to and has implemented all of these, in fact, it helped write most of them.
Let's face it, that UK no longer exists. Instead you have creeping US-style fascism in the form of your Tory "leadership". The current UK ministers would never sign those bills much less write them.
Seriously Verizon, $120+ for a basic data/voice plan?
Absent my equipment loans (ie, what a carrier subsidy should be - ie, limited duration, can pay of early to unlock completely, etc), I pay $110 for 5 lines. Each with it's own 500MB+tethering.
I get HD Voice on my iPhone5s (great for me and the wife to actually hear each other on the commute home), and unlike AT&T customers, I had Facetime over cellular for the past 2 months.
I used to pay around $100 for a single line on Verizon (wife paid same for AT&T).
The *only* downside is that data in very large buildings (museum, costco) can be literally zero. If you work in a large shielded building and don't have internal wifi, then you might want to reconsider - but that's what the test drive period is for. For all other things, tmobile has been about as reliable as either AT&T or VZ for a whole lot less and with better voice.
You two should suggest these ideas to your congressman. Something along those lines could work. It might actually get passed because the dems have never seen a tax they didn't like, and the repubs like ideas that could help businesses operate more efficiently, spending time providing products and services instead of fighting lawsuits. Both parties might like this.
As a small inventor myself, doing R&D and rendering those inventions as software, I wouldn't mind a system where I could declare the value at "no more than $500,000" and the fee would be proportional.
Sadly those two bolded statements you mention are pretty far from the truth. Both parties are corrupted by megacorporations (mainly owned/run by the very wealthy) to the degree that only what benefits the megacorps gets passed (whether it benefits/harms small business or individuals seems to be a minor factor). Whether it's dems passing/continuing a tax cut for the wealthy, or the repubs passing big-brother legislation that makes everyone's life more bureacratic, both parties are are not representative of small business or individuals unless they get lobbied by hard cash.
Two decades ago, I might have agreed with both your idea and the parties' signatures. Now I don't think that's the case anymore. Consequently, I don't think any of these kind of ideas will go anywhere. Our "representatives" ... aren't.
Citation needed about that.
The Kinect is required because they want to encourage game devs to use the Kinect. If it were optional, developers may skip using some features since they may not be available. I don't see how it won't work if cam is obstructed.
Well, shit. Then perhaps they should have considered the privacy implications of mandating a 1984-style (well even more advanced actually) system as a requirement for their console shouldn't they?
The fact that they're still sticking to this as a *requirement* for playing games is pretty telling of their attitude... which is not respectful to their customers.
Go ahead, buy the XBone - I'll wait out this "show my kids dressing up in the living room to an always-on big brother" fad.
The big problem problem that new consoles are fighting for is: a reason to exist. Most games demo-ed so far look possible on the current generation of hardware. Crowd sources AI is an interesting twist, but possible on current consoles. Killer Instinct is an odd thing to revive, but it would play just as well on a PS3.
Suddenly Microsoft comes out with a console that:
1. Phones home every day.
2. Bans game lending.
3. Possibly cripples the used game market, or maybe not, nobody is really sure.
4. Requires Kinect to be always on, because that wasn't a disaapointment.
Their sales pitch of "You can play games that are basically last-gen games, but with fewer rights" has had shocking trouble resonating with consumers.
5. Integrates with PRISM natively, giving Big Gov (which is quite corrupt these days) a chance to look right into your living room.
6. ???
7. Profit at the expense of your privacy.
Microsoft was the first big tech company to roll over for the NSA (that there's pretty good knowledge of NSA backdoors into Windows for years just shows their further corrupt nature). They give NSA exploit information prior to patching it.
There is no way I am going to give Microsoft (and the government by proxy) a device that can tell when I entered a room, when I leave, and what I'm holding for f*cks sake. Just for some games?
To those who think that Ouya and XBone/PS4 aren't comparable - I'll tell you something - when several of the options is anathema, the remainder, no matter how poor, are all I'm willing to commit to - that it costs so much less is a bonus. I still haven't figured out the Wii U, and I'm not sure I have time to.
Fun should be simple - I debug/analyze and get systems working at my day job - I don't need to mess with all that @ home.
Won't help with already issued patents though.
So instead of just having the application fee proportional to the "value" of the patent, make it a yearly tax. If it's a small inventor, they can pay tax on that property that's so valuable - as long as they're pulling in massive licensing fees, they get taxed on that (additional to normal taxation) to support the patent office. If the property isn't making money, then the taxes are lower, but not nonexistant. If it's a big company maintaining a large warchest of intellectual property, they can pay yearly for the right to monopolize those inventions. This will keep them from hoarding useless patents.
Real property is taxed, and so we should treat imaginary property the same.
We need a Paula. Vulcans? Hell, I'd take Vogons at this point.
Paula: Look, many young men who should be able to move out, simply can't. It's called "failure to launch". And that's where I come in. Young men develop self-esteem best during a romantic relationship, so I simulate one. We have a memorable meeting. We get to know each other over a few casual meals, he helps me through an emotional crisis, then I meet his friends, if he has any... Then I let him teach me something... But the bottom line is, he bonds with me. He lets go of you. He moves out.
Reminds me of overhearing a salesperson trying to convince a customer to put down the iPhone she was holding and buy an Android phone (I suspect higher commission on the Android).
"And another advantage is you don't have to pay for any applications unlike the iPhone. It's really easy and everyone does it."
I wept for Android developers.
Why weep - I thought the only valid business model (unless you're on the super-popular end of the power curve distribution) was ad-based apps.
Has this changed recently? Have people been actually paying for their Android apps?
These are exactly the questions that need to be asked - or will have to be asked when iOS7 is gold.
I do have a concern that this, while not crippling the 2nd hand market, might force Apple into the gatekeeper of resales - a position that is very powerful and corrupting.
I hope they make it easy to facilitate resales, or I might consider alternatives for my next smartphone.
Looking at all the work Apple has done on that Mac Pro and Macbook Air, it seems they aren't putting all their eggs in the mobile basket any more.
Good to see some common sense. Post-PC is marketing hype. The PC will be standard technology for at least the next 100 years.
You could easily translate Post-PC as Post-Windows and it's a far more accurate term (without being acrimonious). Apple (and Google) is stepping into the gaping void that MSFT has left open with their Win8/Surface boondoggle/catastrophe.
The "PC" will always exist, however, it may consist of a healthy mix of OSX, Windows and ChromeOS (and linux).
OS X has THE worst multi-monitor support in the industry... I like to run XCode in full-screen mode (more real estate for dual pane mode)....
So what you're really saying is that "full-screen" mode was useless for you. I use multiple monitors on my MBP, and it's still better at supporting my shitty workplace external monitors than my Thinkpad (prev years model) was. Doing a preso doesn't FUBAR my MBP multi-monitor setup like it did my Thinkpad. BetterSnapTool fixes most of the aero-snap features that Win7 had over OSX.
I never use full-screen, now I might (if IT blesses us with 10.9 any time soon).
I assume they are worried about what else he plans on releasing. If he has much more damning evidence (Which I assume he does) they want to get into the fold of Mother USA's arms to squeeze... hug him into silence before he says much more.
If he's smart, those dumps are dead-man triggered. NSA knows this, for sure.
Meanwhile, having him extradited and "Manning'ed" isn't going to go over well at all for PR.
Snowden may actually have a stronger hand than everyone fears.
They will buy them as fast as Microsoft can make them. No matter what Microsoft does, people will buy it. Look at Win8 for proof -- it's not selling well, but it's still selling.
Well, sure, but you have to keep in mind - about 25% of the US population suffers from some form of mental retardation.
Now, you're slandering the "learning difference" people.
Really, 25% of the US is dumb as rocks. They don't have the mental retardation excuse - they're not born that way, they just refuse to learn what's good for them.
Apple is sometimes described as a company that came back from the brink, but for the most part still do what they always did: upper-middle-end computer-driven consumer hardware. IBM went from mostly hardware to mostly services.
I'd disagree - I think Apple did essentially re-invent itself when it switched from Apple Computer to Apple back in '07.
It realized it's future was mobile devices, and despite it's massively profitable iPod franchise, effectively cannibalized it completely with the touch-based offerings, iPhone and iPad. Prior to this change Apple was a Mac/iPod company, afterwards it was the iPhone company (and still is).
You mean Windows 8 is the greatest thing to happen for Apple.
Microsofts screw ups tend to benefit Apple more than Linux.
For now, and it's really all despite Apple essentially not caring about gaining "ground". Because they're the only other reasonable option corps have to a standard WinTel box/book. However, ChromeOS has been getting better and better, and I strongly feel it will rapidly gain a good chunk of the corporate market once it hits a certain feature parity with mainstream desktop OSs.
As long as Microsoft keeps confusing the nascent tablet market with it's entrenched and highly profitable desktop OS market, it will continue to be open to attack from other desktop OS alternatives.