The judge has made it pretty clear that the text that's wanted is exactly the text that was agreed in court. Nothing more. There really isn't much to discuss in this case. Remember this is already a compromise text and method of presentation which was changed according to Apple's request from the original proposal. See Groklaw for details.
Now; Tablet == iPad; oh, but then there are these Samsung people Apple had to sue. Oh, they are the same ones that make that great phone Jeff has. Looks like it has a really nice screen. Maybe I'll try one.
I would guess that this lawsuit being in the press so often is one of the things which really pushed Samsung ahead of other Android manufacturers. That and HTC completely messing up and becoming known as a Windows brand.
People only spend $200+ on objects they recognise and more or less understand. This is why Microsoft is pushing it's employees and partners so hard to buy Windows 8 mobile devices. They know that without users already out there nobody will buy.
While I generally agree that Apple is wasting it's time with this lawsuit I don't think it is hurting them anywhere except a few nerds have not put them in the same bucket as Microsoft. From the fourth quarter of 2010 through the middle of 2012, Samsung sold 1.4 million Galaxy Tab and Galaxy Tab 10.1 tablets, in the third quarter of 2012 Apple sold 14 million iPads. Apple must be REALLY hurting... from trying to think of things to do with all that money.
I don't think the suit has hurt either Samsung or Apple at all yet. For Apple it's been great publicity about their special features. For Samsung it's been great publicity that their Android tablets are more or less just as good as iOS and is pushing them forward as the most known source of Android tablets. In both cases that's a jump up from what they would expect. As they say "any publicity is good publicity".
When it comes to your numbers; have a look at this quote:
“Samsung is making tangible progress in the tablet business . For the third quarter alone, Samsung likely sold about four million tablets, of which two million came solely from the Galaxy Note 10.1 tablet,” said Shin Hyun-joon, an analyst at Dongbu Securities .
He estimates Samsung’s fourth-quarter tablet sales to increase by more than 50% from the third quarter.
That would more or less match with the ASUS story I put up recently and means that Android tablets are selling more than two million a month / eight million a quarter for those two manufacturers alone. That means that Google is likely to overtake Apple as the supplier of the most tablet operating systems somewhere early in 2013.
The numbers I have used are, of course, quite speculative. Better ones would be nice, but I guess we won't see the full truth till at least January / February when the Christmas numbers become available.
Not, the judge gave them the wording required, and they added marketing fluff to it.
You ignored him. Danious did not say "the judge gave them part of the wording required leaving them to fill in the rest of the notice". Your inability to see that kind of justifies CanHasDIY's comment.
Tell me that you wouldn't turn up in court for a murder trial and say "but I didn't kill him; it was the bullet I shot him with; why don't you try the bullet?"
spend more than a few weeks here and it becomes obvious that as long as google 'gives away' shiny software apps and other toys, people will defend them to the end of the earth.
I don't think it's that. Google used to get lots of bad press on Slashdot and the better shills still regularly push anti-Google stuff. I think that it was after Facebook got caught spreading lies about Google that plenty of us re-evaluated these things. When you look into it, most of the anti-Google stuff seems to be supported by Microsoft financed pressure groups. This is certainly true of the anti-trust stuff. When it comes to privacy, the difference between Google and Facebook is that Google only sells anonymized data, but that is very rarely mentioned.
Very few people around here actually think Google is truly good. They are clearly far lesser evil in a competition with Microsoft, Facebook and Apple. If people don't support Google there will be no benefit to be seen from companies which at least try not to do some of the more gregarious bad stuff. Not one of those other companies, for example, has ever even considered annoying China.
Yes, my bad for thinking the words you wrote described what you intended to say.
Let's just look at my words (subordinate clause elided)
a common opinion that[...]a loss of sales combined with Apple's iPad will completely eliminate most of them. Now Asustek's most recent results show that there may be a way out for those that can move away from their standard markets.
Two clearly contrasting and, in a sense contradictory sentences. 'It's a common opinion that'/'now we see that's not true'. Clearly it cannot be true that the PC manufacturers will be eliminated if they have a way out. It doesn't matter what "common opinion" means in your opinion, it's clear that the author of those words means it to mean "an opinion which is common". If, on Slashdot, I agreed with the opinion I would write "most people have realised that".
I know you probably had a terrible deprived upbringing in a Redmond suburb, but "a common opinion that" in no way means "I believe that". The submission that I was responding to had the title "PC Makers In Desperate Need of a Reboot" and includes phrases like "the trends that have turned selling PCs into one of technology's least profitable and slowest growing niches" and "Dell's market value has also plummeted by 60 percent, to about $20 billion, since the iPhone's release". Please go and argue with that article and not with me.
Whilst we're at it, please have a look at my other most recent comment where I've tried to explain why other people reasonably believe this and I actually do link to articles that show that Apple is / was until very recently the biggest "box" mover.
Look, basic reading comprehension would tell you that when someone says "it is a common opinion that" they mean "something I think is bullshit". Now, I didn't quite mean that, but my article is pretty clearly presenting against the idea that Apple will in future dominate the world. This means that I am not the right person to really argue with you, since I don't believe the things that you seem to want to accuse me of not managing to demonstrate. However, I believe that you should try to understand and present well the other side's arguments. Let's just take two quotes from the articles which you say "doesn't support your [sic] claims at all."
Apple shipped 20 million personal computing devices in the fourth quarter to claim 17% of the total market, according to analysts at Canalys. The numbers include about 15 million iPads and 5 million Macs.
That puts Apple ahead of former market leader Hewlett-Packard....
And yes, you can see the catastrophy that faces Microsoft, who once had over 80% of the computer market and also had 12% market share in smartphones with Windows Mobile. Microsoft could have been well poised to survive this transition into the newest computing era if it had nurtured its broad coalition to provide Windows based smartphones (which included Samsung, Sony, Motorola, LG, Dell, Lenovo etc and in 2011, Nokia too).
Just have a look through a few Post-PC articles and you will see plenty of people who believe that the Apple and the iPad will completely dominate the future of computing.
This viewpoint is not completely stupid. For most people in the world a tablet or even a mobile phone is a computing device capable of running all the software they would ever need. There are over 6 Billion mobile phone subscriptions worldwide; in ten years time almost all of them will be "smartphones" in the old sense of being able to run software and most or even the vast majority will be proper modern smartphones.
Once that happens, most applications will just simply cease to take the desktop into account. At that point the future of computing is entirely determined by mobile phone and possibly tablet requirements. Apple is still the dominant manufacture of these when you include phones, tablets, iPods and so on. This used to change if you then added in PC sales, but it doesn't any more. Apple fans believe this sets them up for dominance. I don't agree.
I believe that Android or an Android related system will be the dominant system. However, up till now there has been two big problems with that argument which the Apple fans could point out. Firstly Android users have not been using their phones as computers. They user fewer applications and they do less web browsing. That changed with the Samsung Galaxy series. Secondly, Android has been failing to get into the Tablet market. The news that not just Samsung, but also ASUS are selling huge quantities of tablets changes this completely. Within not so many months Android tablets will be outselling iOS tablets and the mobile operators will have to direct their marketing efforts to save Apple so that they can have a chance to maintain a second eco-system to compete with Google. The fact that Google is dominating with a Nexus tablet which is sold direct means that there is nothing that operators can consider doing to directly damage Android.
Does that cable power your device at the same time?
No, I think the OTC standard doesn't support both power and host mode at the same time. The device does support that though. I read on a forum that there has been success is a way of hacking that by connecting power to the correct pins. It would be really nice if someone linked to a pre-made cable which would do both host mode and power.
"How bad is HTC's current tailspin? So bad it makes Nokia look like a growth company. HTC's handset volume declined by -43% in the autumn quarter vs. Nokia's -23% volume decline.
By comparison with that "collapse" looks like a pretty safe way of putting it, so much so that I was a bit worried about understating it. Personally I don't think a single quarter fall back in volumes can reasonably be compared to a sustained quarter after quarter loss of sales. I guess that once they stop pushing Windows phones over their Android ones HTC will begin to recover.
Sorry; I meant to link to either this article or this article which would have made it clear what the measure was. It's personal computers in the strict sense of computers which designed for use by one person as opposed to "PCs" as in IBM PC clones.
If the nexus 7 is the most open tablet experience possible I have a terrible dystopian future for you. Now if it was running linux (i don't mean the advertising giant's linux re-imagined to track you, i mean something like plasma active) had a usb port, hdmi port and a sd card, then it would be a different story.
The Nexus does have a USB port; Oh, you say, but that's device only. No; just buy one of these cables and you have a USB host port you can connect to a hub.
Once you've got that + a version of Ubuntu which works on the device, getting Plasma Active running should be "trivial".
It looks like the distopian future does have an escape clause.
But if you had a solar powered jet engine you could chase the sun. And you would never need to waste energy on landing lights.
Why stop at that? If you had a solar powered transporter you could just go straight from wherever you are to wherever you want to be in two simple steps. In fact, once we can completely ignore basic laws of energy conservation and so on, why not just use a solar powered magic wand and will yourself to already be wherever you want to be?
Now I was going to ask "what use would that be" but then I thought. If you want to know differences between Microsoft associates and normal people then put your app on Win phone as well. There will be pretty limited market for the data but I guess antitrust lawyers, Google and IBM will pay well for that data.
... they are x86, so battery life and/or weight probably are a bit sucky.
hmm..
try the Ahmdal tablet frame. It's advertised as if it was a tablet but in fact weighs over two tonnes (machine only) and comes with it's own water cooling kit. It doesn't have any of the features of a modern tablet, but it does allow you to run your favourite 1970s mainframe software as you and your free team of sherpas (with purchase of the 64k version) lug it around for you. Please note: batteries are an extra add on and require a separate truck to transport.
proactively tagged and tracked by their ISP and cell phone carrier who sell their information to the highest bidder.
In the civilised world this is illegal and the mobile networks are legally required to provide proper privacy. In fact, employees occasionally go to jail for breaching telecom privacy rules. It does happen in some countries but that is an exception. There are plenty of us who would spend money to have that kind of privacy guarantee extended to internet connections.
Meego was fantasy bullshit. Maemo would have been their winning ticket
They were perfectly capable of doing either or both. There's been a huge amount of propaganda trying to say that Nokia was in a state of panic. In fact they could afford to keep paying for development more or less indefinitely; even whilst developing four platforms at once (Symbian, S40, Meego & Maemo) they had huge revenues and large profits (their "failed" smartphones were actually delivering increasing profits; not just sales) just before they Eloped the company with the famous "let's burn the platforms" speech. Symbian had increasing sales and their low end phone were stable so they had the market access which could allow them to sell the phones. The only things they had to do was select one within half a year, keep with it as a main priority for a year or two and maintain backwards compatibility with Symbian and series 40 accessories and they would have a good chance of developing an "eco-system".
But you are talking about one one hundredth of one percent of the Android user base.
In relative terms, that issue matters to nobody.
These are the "early adopters"; the (former) HTC fanatics. The are the people that buy a phone based on specifications and potential. Everybody else buys a phone based on what other people say. If the early adopters don't buy, the first followers don't come in. If they don't come in then the rest of the customers never arrive.
Further, you place the blame on the wrong party. Blame the carriers.
Every serious phone manufacturer gets around this by providing both carrier locked phones with whatever the carrier wants and completely unlocked phones without subsidies designed for people that care.
Nokia is all in, however. If Microsoft releases a Surface phone, it's a vote of no-confidence in their main Windows Phone partner's ability to get it done. Or in it's ability to survive, given how well WP7 went for Nokia.
You do not, suddenly in six months, find the ability to develop phone hardware. Building up basic radio competences took Apple about ten years. This is one of the reasons they spent a long time doing iPod type, WiFi only devices.
This is a deliberate and reasonably long term plan to kill Nokia. It may have been a conditional plan; they thought that if Nokia went well enough they would let them continue as a partner. More likely, the whole thing was a set up as with Sendo. They've planned from the beginning that Microsoft should displace Nokia as a leading phone manufacturer.
Think about it from a simple brand damage point of view. If Microsoft allows Nokia to continue in competition with them then there is a direct comparison between Microsoft and Nokia (and the other partners). If Nokia does better than Microsoft then this sends a message: Microsoft is a Loser company. Nokia is better. This will come back to Microsoft's other products. The other partners may be better off. Microsoft may figure that the Chinese manufacturer's will take the bottom end (equivalent to current consumer PCs) whilst they take the high end. They will figure on having a better brand position. With Nokia being a Scandinavian brand which had a long term association with high quality, solid products that's never going to be nearly so clear.
There's nothing in the moderating FAQ that says it's against the rules to downmod for being wrong, just for disagreeing, which is not the same thing.
I would say "disagree" is a broader category than wrong. It's basically the psychological state of thinking that something is wrong which can happen both when it's wrong and when you yourself are wrong and disagree with something which is right. In both cases you shouldn't down mod for just because you think something is wrong.
However, there's a huge difference between being wrong and being boring and repetitively wrong. When someone posts something new and interesting about global warming scepticisim; that means for me something I haven't heard before; I will never mod it down. When someone posts something stupid like "temperatures have been going down recently" then I expect them to post a link to one of the stronger and clearer explanations of why that's wrong and then explain something new and interesting. Five years ago that might have been something about selective use of weather stations. Now you have to also debunk the statistical analysis that shows that this was actually wrong
If something is wrong, definitely don't mod it up. You can never be sure why the person was wrong and there are plenty of other people who will do that if they find it interesting. If you remember clear debunkings of that information on Slashdot before even in a different article and there's nothing new in the new comment then it's boring and not advancing the debate. You should mod it redundant.
Claim 1-If two showers in an apartment building with common hot water supply are turned on, hot water is provided to both. But if four showers are turned on each automatically receives a reduced amount of hot water. Claim 2-If a toilet is flushed while a shower is turned on, the reduced cold water supply changes the mix of hot and cold water, making the shower water temperature hotter. whilst the apartment building has an internet connection
Don't think you fully get this. You patented hundreds of years old technology for which there is clear prior art. I fixed that for you. Your patent should now stand up in court.
People leave because their friends wanted them to join them somewhere else, or because they thought they could get rich quick by leaving an established stable company and joining a startup, or because a spouse was relocating across the country, or even because they'd just been there long enough and wanted to see something else.
Excellent answer
Even better if you can add "by the way, if you want to talk with Jeff, the last guy to have your post, I think he's coming along with us for a beer on thursday; he even promised he'd spend a day or so with the next guy to pick up the post when that's needed."
I have never understood the attitude that if you leave the company you become an unperson. I always ask the guys who work for me to give me a bit of warning before they hand in their notice and preferably to warn me if they start job hunting. Almost all of them have, and sometimes I've even had almost half a year's worth of an experts time where I knew he was leaving and he was willing to train up a bunch of people (it took about three!!) to replace him.
BTW: simple management question: how do you get Jeff to agree to come in specially to spend a day training up his replacement?
Slashdot Mirror
The judge has made it pretty clear that the text that's wanted is exactly the text that was agreed in court. Nothing more. There really isn't much to discuss in this case. Remember this is already a compromise text and method of presentation which was changed according to Apple's request from the original proposal. See Groklaw for details.
Before; Tablet == iPad. Give me an iPad please.
Now; Tablet == iPad; oh, but then there are these Samsung people Apple had to sue. Oh, they are the same ones that make that great phone Jeff has. Looks like it has a really nice screen. Maybe I'll try one.
I would guess that this lawsuit being in the press so often is one of the things which really pushed Samsung ahead of other Android manufacturers. That and HTC completely messing up and becoming known as a Windows brand.
People only spend $200+ on objects they recognise and more or less understand. This is why Microsoft is pushing it's employees and partners so hard to buy Windows 8 mobile devices. They know that without users already out there nobody will buy.
While I generally agree that Apple is wasting it's time with this lawsuit I don't think it is hurting them anywhere except a few nerds have not put them in the same bucket as Microsoft. From the fourth quarter of 2010 through the middle of 2012, Samsung sold 1.4 million Galaxy Tab and Galaxy Tab 10.1 tablets, in the third quarter of 2012 Apple sold 14 million iPads. Apple must be REALLY hurting... from trying to think of things to do with all that money.
I don't think the suit has hurt either Samsung or Apple at all yet. For Apple it's been great publicity about their special features. For Samsung it's been great publicity that their Android tablets are more or less just as good as iOS and is pushing them forward as the most known source of Android tablets. In both cases that's a jump up from what they would expect. As they say "any publicity is good publicity".
When it comes to your numbers; have a look at this quote:
That would more or less match with the ASUS story I put up recently and means that Android tablets are selling more than two million a month / eight million a quarter for those two manufacturers alone. That means that Google is likely to overtake Apple as the supplier of the most tablet operating systems somewhere early in 2013.
The numbers I have used are, of course, quite speculative. Better ones would be nice, but I guess we won't see the full truth till at least January / February when the Christmas numbers become available.
Danious already told you
You ignored him. Danious did not say "the judge gave them part of the wording required leaving them to fill in the rest of the notice". Your inability to see that kind of justifies CanHasDIY's comment.
Tell me that you wouldn't turn up in court for a murder trial and say "but I didn't kill him; it was the bullet I shot him with; why don't you try the bullet?"
spend more than a few weeks here and it becomes obvious that as long as google 'gives away' shiny software apps and other toys, people will defend them to the end of the earth.
I don't think it's that. Google used to get lots of bad press on Slashdot and the better shills still regularly push anti-Google stuff. I think that it was after Facebook got caught spreading lies about Google that plenty of us re-evaluated these things. When you look into it, most of the anti-Google stuff seems to be supported by Microsoft financed pressure groups. This is certainly true of the anti-trust stuff. When it comes to privacy, the difference between Google and Facebook is that Google only sells anonymized data, but that is very rarely mentioned.
Very few people around here actually think Google is truly good. They are clearly far lesser evil in a competition with Microsoft, Facebook and Apple. If people don't support Google there will be no benefit to be seen from companies which at least try not to do some of the more gregarious bad stuff. Not one of those other companies, for example, has ever even considered annoying China.
There are some videos on Youtube.
Yes, my bad for thinking the words you wrote described what you intended to say.
Let's just look at my words (subordinate clause elided)
Two clearly contrasting and, in a sense contradictory sentences. 'It's a common opinion that'/'now we see that's not true'. Clearly it cannot be true that the PC manufacturers will be eliminated if they have a way out. It doesn't matter what "common opinion" means in your opinion, it's clear that the author of those words means it to mean "an opinion which is common". If, on Slashdot, I agreed with the opinion I would write "most people have realised that".
Nexus seems pretty difficult to get outside the main markets where it is sold. Where I live you can get them on the grey market.
I know you probably had a terrible deprived upbringing in a Redmond suburb, but "a common opinion that" in no way means "I believe that". The submission that I was responding to had the title "PC Makers In Desperate Need of a Reboot" and includes phrases like "the trends that have turned selling PCs into one of technology's least profitable and slowest growing niches" and "Dell's market value has also plummeted by 60 percent, to about $20 billion, since the iPhone's release". Please go and argue with that article and not with me.
Whilst we're at it, please have a look at my other most recent comment where I've tried to explain why other people reasonably believe this and I actually do link to articles that show that Apple is / was until very recently the biggest "box" mover.
Just have a look through a few Post-PC articles and you will see plenty of people who believe that the Apple and the iPad will completely dominate the future of computing.
This viewpoint is not completely stupid. For most people in the world a tablet or even a mobile phone is a computing device capable of running all the software they would ever need. There are over 6 Billion mobile phone subscriptions worldwide; in ten years time almost all of them will be "smartphones" in the old sense of being able to run software and most or even the vast majority will be proper modern smartphones.
Once that happens, most applications will just simply cease to take the desktop into account. At that point the future of computing is entirely determined by mobile phone and possibly tablet requirements. Apple is still the dominant manufacture of these when you include phones, tablets, iPods and so on. This used to change if you then added in PC sales, but it doesn't any more. Apple fans believe this sets them up for dominance. I don't agree.
I believe that Android or an Android related system will be the dominant system. However, up till now there has been two big problems with that argument which the Apple fans could point out. Firstly Android users have not been using their phones as computers. They user fewer applications and they do less web browsing. That changed with the Samsung Galaxy series. Secondly, Android has been failing to get into the Tablet market. The news that not just Samsung, but also ASUS are selling huge quantities of tablets changes this completely. Within not so many months Android tablets will be outselling iOS tablets and the mobile operators will have to direct their marketing efforts to save Apple so that they can have a chance to maintain a second eco-system to compete with Google. The fact that Google is dominating with a Nexus tablet which is sold direct means that there is nothing that operators can consider doing to directly damage Android.
Does that cable power your device at the same time?
No, I think the OTC standard doesn't support both power and host mode at the same time. The device does support that though. I read on a forum that there has been success is a way of hacking that by connecting power to the correct pins. It would be really nice if someone linked to a pre-made cable which would do both host mode and power.
From the summary of linked discussion.
By comparison with that "collapse" looks like a pretty safe way of putting it, so much so that I was a bit worried about understating it. Personally I don't think a single quarter fall back in volumes can reasonably be compared to a sustained quarter after quarter loss of sales. I guess that once they stop pushing Windows phones over their Android ones HTC will begin to recover.
Sorry; I meant to link to either this article or this article which would have made it clear what the measure was. It's personal computers in the strict sense of computers which designed for use by one person as opposed to "PCs" as in IBM PC clones.
If the nexus 7 is the most open tablet experience possible I have a terrible dystopian future for you. Now if it was running linux (i don't mean the advertising giant's linux re-imagined to track you, i mean something like plasma active) had a usb port, hdmi port and a sd card, then it would be a different story.
The Nexus does have a USB port; Oh, you say, but that's device only. No; just buy one of these cables and you have a USB host port you can connect to a hub.
Once you've got that + a version of Ubuntu which works on the device, getting Plasma Active running should be "trivial".
It looks like the distopian future does have an escape clause.
But if you had a solar powered jet engine you could chase the sun. And you would never need to waste energy on landing lights.
Why stop at that? If you had a solar powered transporter you could just go straight from wherever you are to wherever you want to be in two simple steps. In fact, once we can completely ignore basic laws of energy conservation and so on, why not just use a solar powered magic wand and will yourself to already be wherever you want to be?
Now I was going to ask "what use would that be" but then I thought. If you want to know differences between Microsoft associates and normal people then put your app on Win phone as well. There will be pretty limited market for the data but I guess antitrust lawyers, Google and IBM will pay well for that data.
hmm..
try the Ahmdal tablet frame. It's advertised as if it was a tablet but in fact weighs over two tonnes (machine only) and comes with it's own water cooling kit. It doesn't have any of the features of a modern tablet, but it does allow you to run your favourite 1970s mainframe software as you and your free team of sherpas (with purchase of the 64k version) lug it around for you. Please note: batteries are an extra add on and require a separate truck to transport.
Verizon must operate in a non civilised world then.
Correct.
proactively tagged and tracked by their ISP and cell phone carrier who sell their information to the highest bidder.
In the civilised world this is illegal and the mobile networks are legally required to provide proper privacy. In fact, employees occasionally go to jail for breaching telecom privacy rules. It does happen in some countries but that is an exception. There are plenty of us who would spend money to have that kind of privacy guarantee extended to internet connections.
Meego was fantasy bullshit. Maemo would have been their winning ticket
They were perfectly capable of doing either or both. There's been a huge amount of propaganda trying to say that Nokia was in a state of panic. In fact they could afford to keep paying for development more or less indefinitely; even whilst developing four platforms at once (Symbian, S40, Meego & Maemo) they had huge revenues and large profits (their "failed" smartphones were actually delivering increasing profits; not just sales) just before they Eloped the company with the famous "let's burn the platforms" speech. Symbian had increasing sales and their low end phone were stable so they had the market access which could allow them to sell the phones. The only things they had to do was select one within half a year, keep with it as a main priority for a year or two and maintain backwards compatibility with Symbian and series 40 accessories and they would have a good chance of developing an "eco-system".
But you are talking about one one hundredth of one percent of the Android user base. In relative terms, that issue matters to nobody.
These are the "early adopters"; the (former) HTC fanatics. The are the people that buy a phone based on specifications and potential. Everybody else buys a phone based on what other people say. If the early adopters don't buy, the first followers don't come in. If they don't come in then the rest of the customers never arrive.
Further, you place the blame on the wrong party. Blame the carriers.
Every serious phone manufacturer gets around this by providing both carrier locked phones with whatever the carrier wants and completely unlocked phones without subsidies designed for people that care.
Nokia is all in, however. If Microsoft releases a Surface phone, it's a vote of no-confidence in their main Windows Phone partner's ability to get it done. Or in it's ability to survive, given how well WP7 went for Nokia.
You do not, suddenly in six months, find the ability to develop phone hardware. Building up basic radio competences took Apple about ten years. This is one of the reasons they spent a long time doing iPod type, WiFi only devices.
This is a deliberate and reasonably long term plan to kill Nokia. It may have been a conditional plan; they thought that if Nokia went well enough they would let them continue as a partner. More likely, the whole thing was a set up as with Sendo. They've planned from the beginning that Microsoft should displace Nokia as a leading phone manufacturer.
Think about it from a simple brand damage point of view. If Microsoft allows Nokia to continue in competition with them then there is a direct comparison between Microsoft and Nokia (and the other partners). If Nokia does better than Microsoft then this sends a message: Microsoft is a Loser company. Nokia is better. This will come back to Microsoft's other products. The other partners may be better off. Microsoft may figure that the Chinese manufacturer's will take the bottom end (equivalent to current consumer PCs) whilst they take the high end. They will figure on having a better brand position. With Nokia being a Scandinavian brand which had a long term association with high quality, solid products that's never going to be nearly so clear.
[Citation needed]
There's nothing in the moderating FAQ that says it's against the rules to downmod for being wrong, just for disagreeing, which is not the same thing.
I would say "disagree" is a broader category than wrong. It's basically the psychological state of thinking that something is wrong which can happen both when it's wrong and when you yourself are wrong and disagree with something which is right. In both cases you shouldn't down mod for just because you think something is wrong.
However, there's a huge difference between being wrong and being boring and repetitively wrong. When someone posts something new and interesting about global warming scepticisim; that means for me something I haven't heard before; I will never mod it down. When someone posts something stupid like "temperatures have been going down recently" then I expect them to post a link to one of the stronger and clearer explanations of why that's wrong and then explain something new and interesting. Five years ago that might have been something about selective use of weather stations. Now you have to also debunk the statistical analysis that shows that this was actually wrong
If something is wrong, definitely don't mod it up. You can never be sure why the person was wrong and there are plenty of other people who will do that if they find it interesting. If you remember clear debunkings of that information on Slashdot before even in a different article and there's nothing new in the new comment then it's boring and not advancing the debate. You should mod it redundant.
Claim 1-If two showers in an apartment building with common hot water supply are turned on, hot water is provided to both. But if four showers are turned on each automatically receives a reduced amount of hot water. Claim 2-If a toilet is flushed while a shower is turned on, the reduced cold water supply changes the mix of hot and cold water, making the shower water temperature hotter. whilst the apartment building has an internet connection
Don't think you fully get this. You patented hundreds of years old technology for which there is clear prior art. I fixed that for you. Your patent should now stand up in court.
But in silicon valley you can't answer that well.
Hmm ... let's see...
People leave because their friends wanted them to join them somewhere else, or because they thought they could get rich quick by leaving an established stable company and joining a startup, or because a spouse was relocating across the country, or even because they'd just been there long enough and wanted to see something else.
Excellent answer
Even better if you can add "by the way, if you want to talk with Jeff, the last guy to have your post, I think he's coming along with us for a beer on thursday; he even promised he'd spend a day or so with the next guy to pick up the post when that's needed."
I have never understood the attitude that if you leave the company you become an unperson. I always ask the guys who work for me to give me a bit of warning before they hand in their notice and preferably to warn me if they start job hunting. Almost all of them have, and sometimes I've even had almost half a year's worth of an experts time where I knew he was leaving and he was willing to train up a bunch of people (it took about three!!) to replace him.
BTW: simple management question: how do you get Jeff to agree to come in specially to spend a day training up his replacement?