For a very arbitrary definition of "decent". The fact remains that you will never be able to match the typing speed achieved on a keyboard, even with limited travel, when typing on a tablet's screen.
I bet you can't type on a Blackberry keyboard as fast as a desktop computer keyboard either.
So what? Different interfaces have different "limitations", if you want to call it that. I suspect most people aren't typing so much at one time that they need to be able to type entire novels quickly. (Of course they also have other benefits.)
That's 80 gallons per year for the 12000 mile per year driver, or $320 per year. Now if the system costs $1500 more, the ROI isn't there or isn't compelling, especially with the maintenance risk. If it's $300 more, then it's compelling.
A less than 5 year âoepayoffâ isnâ(TM)t compelling? (Iâ(TM)m not saying there arenâ(TM)t other reasons not to do this â" arenâ(TM)t flywheels dangerous?) People should do a lot more long term spending thinking.. Then maybe weâ(TM)d get off of the subsidized phone model, which is more expensive in the long run for many if not most people.
On the other hand, something like Android fares much better, because Google has actually taken care to promote keyboard support throughout the OS - there are many useful keyboard shortcuts, like switching apps or keyboard layouts, and browser has a bunch of its own as well (e.g. Ctrl+L to activate the address bar).
Is that really easier than just "touch the URL field with your finger"? (BTW, ^L is just the analog of cmd-L, which has been the standard for a long time.)
On a full computer, I can see (and daily take advantage of) the argument that keyboard shortcuts are easier, but when you have the device in your hand and are already interacting with the screen with your fingers, seems like a lot of keyboard shortcuts with a virtual keyboard are actually more difficult than direct manipulation.
So you're saying that heating cancer cells 1 degree F kills them, but doesn't kill non-cancer cells?
If so, why?
If so, why doesn't that mean that you couldn't just cause someone with cancer to get "a fever" to raise one's temperature? (If you're raising the temperature you can measure up to a couple of degrees, wouldn't that mean you're raising the entire body's temperature by at least a degree?)
This is tangential, but I thought it was funny, but also sighed, when I saw that one of the Koch Brothers' foundations was one of the sponsors of either Nova or Nova ScienceNow.
(I probably even agree with some of their political leanings, but their whole "defeat Obama" attitude rather than "fight for the beliefs/policies we like" leaves a bad taste in my mouth.)
The overlays have existed for well over a decade. (Some say 9/11 started the crawl on news channels, but at least channel bugs were around before that.)
DVRs let me 30 second skip over commercials. (I actually don't mind most "product placement", even though it bugs some people as much as regular commercials bug me.)
Does MS have a "fat" strategy where ARM & x86 binaries can be put into one blob (as far as GUI user is concerned), so someone can sell a "single" app that runs on both RT & the full one?
(Analogous to PowerPC/Intel fat apps or x86/x86_64 apps on the Mac, and presumably other computers long before that.)
Yeah, that obscure author nobody's heard of, Stephen King.. Sure wish more people would read his books.
(SK is my favorite author. At least once when there was a leap second added to a year, Letterman told a joke along the lines of "Just enough time for Stephen King to churn out another book.")
And so on, until you're right back to spending $120/month for the half-dozen or so channels you passionately care about, another 20 or so that you might watch once in a blue moon, and 6,000 you don't care about, but had to buy to get 3 of the other 20.
I think your prices are purposefully exaggerated. I wish we were at least given the choice to buy individual channels. Give me the actual prices it would cost to pay for each channel from my end.. I could even imagine it being sort of a hybrid between perfect a la carte and what we have now. For example, minimum $20 or whatever per month, which includes OTA rebroadcasts + X channels out of basic/expanded basic lineup. For everything else (including more basic/expanded basic or premium), there's a specific price you have to pay.
Even if packages continued on, having both means would let people make the specific choice for them.
I would pay JUST AS MUCH AS I AM NOW for the channels I care about. That would make the cable company MORE money since they wouldn't have to pay licensing fees for the channels I don't want. (They would also lose a little bit from things, like home shopping, that pay the cable companies.) This would, however, give specific feedback to the cable companies about what channels I actually care about.
(BTW, yes, you *could* extrapolate that to PPV for individual shows. *IF* the price were low enough, I could do that too. However, the PPV prices through existing means are ridiculous, so things like Netflix all you can eat streaming for older content are more reasonable, IMHO. I'm only a netflix DVD customer currently, though.)
1) No incentive to younger people to shell out $50-$60 per month (base rate). It's hard enough for younger people to find money in the first place, let alone spend it on stupid shit. It's basically a cell phone plan, or Internet plan in terms of cost. What does it deliver that is as attractive, or more attractive, to younger people than Amazon, Netflix, YouTube, Hulu or pirating ?
Current shows *without commercials* (if you use a DVR). I'm (mostly) ignoring the pirating part.
You don't need to rent "a box". A Cable Card will do just fine. (You can own the box that uses the Cable Card.)
BTW, at least from discussion on tivocommunity from people more familiar with the new regulation, the OTA rebroadcasts are STILL required to be copy freely (e.g. able to be downloaded from your Tivo or other device to a computer, etc.)
The episode of Motorweek I saw over the weekend had a car under $13,000. I can't figure out via their web site which car it was (no full summaries), and apparently it was a rerun of a recent show (so it wasn't the latest episode). If the episode survives on my TiVo, I'll try to remember to post a followup.
The Lords' program was called "Cash for Clunkers," and it took ~700,000 used cars off the market by literally destroying the engines intentionally (by pouring some powder directly into the engine and running it until died).
That was to get fuel inefficient cars off the road. Maybe destroying them was to ensure the already-claimed cars weren't sold again and then claimed again?
(This doesn't mean I was for this program, since it used my tax money. But I do think that getting inefficient cars off the road is a good thing in general.)
the best you can do is chose the one who the press pays the most attention to living up to what he says he will do.
Currently that means only Republicans.
In this case, of course, choosing Republican means Mitt.
Except when he says he's pro-choice, then against it, then says another weasel thing this week that makes it sound like he doesn't want to repeal Roe vs. Wade, then has to correct himself soon afterwards.
Except when he says he's against government mandated health care, but he strongly fought for and signed a bill doing basically exactly the same thing that "Obamacare" does. If he honestly changed his mind, that would be fine, but I've never heard him say one word against his state's health care law. That makes him a hypocrite.
BTW, I'm a Republican, I switched to vote for Ron Paul in 2008 (in the primary of course). But in this case, I'd rather vote for someone who is at least _more_ consistent, even if it's consistent in things I largely don't agree with. (I DO agree with some of the previous examples given.. I'd much rather have them use drone strikes than have our soldiers get killed.) Plus, I semi-seriously think he deserves a vote JUST for getting rid of Bin Laden. Romney said we shouldn't even keep going after him.
How cute that you think that a $300K home is a "rich" home. There have been a _few_ homes in the $300Ks in the past few years that I've seen, but pretty much $399K starting, and that's for 1 or 2 bedrooms, 1 bath. Even those are starting to go well into the $400Ks.
Slashdot Mirror
If it's premium only, why are other tablets with similar hardware specs priced the same?
I bet you can't type on a Blackberry keyboard as fast as a desktop computer keyboard either.
So what? Different interfaces have different "limitations", if you want to call it that. I suspect most people aren't typing so much at one time that they need to be able to type entire novels quickly. (Of course they also have other benefits.)
A less than 5 year âoepayoffâ isnâ(TM)t compelling? (Iâ(TM)m not saying there arenâ(TM)t other reasons not to do this â" arenâ(TM)t flywheels dangerous?) People should do a lot more long term spending thinking.. Then maybe weâ(TM)d get off of the subsidized phone model, which is more expensive in the long run for many if not most people.
They already created the Earth, what else do you want?
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minor_characters_from_The_Hitchhiker%27s_Guide_to_the_Galaxy#Frankie_and_Benjy_Mouse)
OK, sorry, I thought this was about virtual keyboards. I didn't RTFA. Sorry.
Is that really easier than just "touch the URL field with your finger"? (BTW, ^L is just the analog of cmd-L, which has been the standard for a long time.)
On a full computer, I can see (and daily take advantage of) the argument that keyboard shortcuts are easier, but when you have the device in your hand and are already interacting with the screen with your fingers, seems like a lot of keyboard shortcuts with a virtual keyboard are actually more difficult than direct manipulation.
So you're saying that heating cancer cells 1 degree F kills them, but doesn't kill non-cancer cells?
If so, why?
If so, why doesn't that mean that you couldn't just cause someone with cancer to get "a fever" to raise one's temperature? (If you're raising the temperature you can measure up to a couple of degrees, wouldn't that mean you're raising the entire body's temperature by at least a degree?)
This is tangential, but I thought it was funny, but also sighed, when I saw that one of the Koch Brothers' foundations was one of the sponsors of either Nova or Nova ScienceNow.
(I probably even agree with some of their political leanings, but their whole "defeat Obama" attitude rather than "fight for the beliefs/policies we like" leaves a bad taste in my mouth.)
The overlays have existed for well over a decade. (Some say 9/11 started the crawl on news channels, but at least channel bugs were around before that.)
DVRs let me 30 second skip over commercials. (I actually don't mind most "product placement", even though it bugs some people as much as regular commercials bug me.)
Devil's Advocate: Does Google releasing iOS apps mean that Google is giving a clear statement that Google doesn't believe in the Android strategy?
Does MS have a "fat" strategy where ARM & x86 binaries can be put into one blob (as far as GUI user is concerned), so someone can sell a "single" app that runs on both RT & the full one?
(Analogous to PowerPC/Intel fat apps or x86/x86_64 apps on the Mac, and presumably other computers long before that.)
I don't think all campuses were open even in the 1980s.
Yeah, that obscure author nobody's heard of, Stephen King.. Sure wish more people would read his books.
(SK is my favorite author. At least once when there was a leap second added to a year, Letterman told a joke along the lines of "Just enough time for Stephen King to churn out another book.")
You can write your own (cross platform) Infocom-style (i.e. Z-machine) games with the Inform language.
http://www.inform-fiction.org/I7/Welcome.html
I think your prices are purposefully exaggerated. I wish we were at least given the choice to buy individual channels. Give me the actual prices it would cost to pay for each channel from my end.. I could even imagine it being sort of a hybrid between perfect a la carte and what we have now. For example, minimum $20 or whatever per month, which includes OTA rebroadcasts + X channels out of basic/expanded basic lineup. For everything else (including more basic/expanded basic or premium), there's a specific price you have to pay.
Even if packages continued on, having both means would let people make the specific choice for them.
I would pay JUST AS MUCH AS I AM NOW for the channels I care about. That would make the cable company MORE money since they wouldn't have to pay licensing fees for the channels I don't want. (They would also lose a little bit from things, like home shopping, that pay the cable companies.) This would, however, give specific feedback to the cable companies about what channels I actually care about.
(BTW, yes, you *could* extrapolate that to PPV for individual shows. *IF* the price were low enough, I could do that too. However, the PPV prices through existing means are ridiculous, so things like Netflix all you can eat streaming for older content are more reasonable, IMHO. I'm only a netflix DVD customer currently, though.)
Current shows *without commercials* (if you use a DVR). I'm (mostly) ignoring the pirating part.
You don't need to rent "a box". A Cable Card will do just fine. (You can own the box that uses the Cable Card.)
BTW, at least from discussion on tivocommunity from people more familiar with the new regulation, the OTA rebroadcasts are STILL required to be copy freely (e.g. able to be downloaded from your Tivo or other device to a computer, etc.)
Which is every other driver except for you.
The episode of Motorweek I saw over the weekend had a car under $13,000. I can't figure out via their web site which car it was (no full summaries), and apparently it was a rerun of a recent show (so it wasn't the latest episode). If the episode survives on my TiVo, I'll try to remember to post a followup.
That was to get fuel inefficient cars off the road. Maybe destroying them was to ensure the already-claimed cars weren't sold again and then claimed again?
(This doesn't mean I was for this program, since it used my tax money. But I do think that getting inefficient cars off the road is a good thing in general.)
Don't you mean imperative languages? The languages you mention (BASIC, Pascal, Java) are all imperative languages.
Functional programming is very different (and weird, IMHO).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Functional_language
Where do programmers make more than managers? Heck, doesn't *your* manager likely make more than you?
In this case, of course, choosing Republican means Mitt.
Except when he says he's pro-choice, then against it, then says another weasel thing this week that makes it sound like he doesn't want to repeal Roe vs. Wade, then has to correct himself soon afterwards.
Except when he says he's against government mandated health care, but he strongly fought for and signed a bill doing basically exactly the same thing that "Obamacare" does. If he honestly changed his mind, that would be fine, but I've never heard him say one word against his state's health care law. That makes him a hypocrite.
BTW, I'm a Republican, I switched to vote for Ron Paul in 2008 (in the primary of course). But in this case, I'd rather vote for someone who is at least _more_ consistent, even if it's consistent in things I largely don't agree with. (I DO agree with some of the previous examples given.. I'd much rather have them use drone strikes than have our soldiers get killed.) Plus, I semi-seriously think he deserves a vote JUST for getting rid of Bin Laden. Romney said we shouldn't even keep going after him.
How cute that you think that a $300K home is a "rich" home. There have been a _few_ homes in the $300Ks in the past few years that I've seen, but pretty much $399K starting, and that's for 1 or 2 bedrooms, 1 bath. Even those are starting to go well into the $400Ks.
Why is it necessary to give my tax money to stupid insurance companies and a car company that makes cars that people don't want to buy?