I doubt seriously that Apple didn't know who he was to begin with. If they remote killed the phone, then it was reported as stolen. It's also extremely unlikely that they didn't know exactly who that specific phone was assigned to.
Sotomayor is a judge, not a politician. It is her purpose to interpret the law.
According to your logic, even though she outright stated that in her opinion that corporations should not have the same rights as people, you still claim she is pro-corporation?
[From the link above] "But Justice Sotomayor suggested the majority might have it all wrong — and that instead the court should reconsider the 19th century rulings that first afforded corporations the same rights people have.
Judges “created corporations as persons, gave birth to corporations as persons,” she said. “There could be an argument made that that was the court’s error to start with[imbuing] a creature of state law with human characteristics.”
You make a common mistake, assuming that because one is "Pro Intellectual Property", that a person must also be "Pro-Corporatist", which is not the case.
Not all IP is owned by corporations. Simple boolean logic should give you the answer to that one. Just because some IP is owned by corporations, and she is Pro IP, that doesn't make Pro-IP == Pro-Corp.
She is not pro-corporation as stated above. One of her first comments while being questioned made that very clear. She believes corporations should NOT be granted any rights of a 'person'.
I don't think it was pulled because it was a man's breast, but rather because the people involved were of questionable age, and it promotes the idea of sexting in general, which has some ugly legal connotations as well when combined with youth/teens. We all know too well that the law has been twisted to actually prosecute teenagers who sext. I can understand their reasoning for pulling it.
Actually that's not quite correct. You are authorized to USE the software in question, you do not own it. You only have a license to use it. Depending on the terms of the license, it could be legal for Sony to make such a move. That said, I will be VERY interested to see what happens with the consumer laws in the UK, which seem to be a bit more stern than those we have in the U.S.
The fact that the device was sold with certain capabilities which are now no longer available is something that smacks of a classic class action lawsuit waiting to happen.
So you are willing to give up privacy in place of plugging a cable in. To each his own, but the end result is the same. Unless you were to wipe both the phone and your PC, your bookmarks would survive in either case as well.
All he discovered is he prefers a laptop. I would imagine some people feel the same about a laptop, a desktop, or a smartphone. To imply his experience will equate to the millions that will be sold is a bit farfetched.
Some of his statements are pedantic to the extreme. "Too much effort" to swipe a finger instead of hitting a spacebar?
"Too much effort to look down"? or somesuch nonsense?
The only thing I read into this, is that he disliked the idea of it before he even tried it, and lo and behold, he found what he expected to see. There is nothing wrong with this as everyone is entitled to his or her own opinion. I just find it interesting that someone will place such value in someone else's personal tastes. The parent went so far as to proclaim that MacWorld itself hated the device, which is obviously not the case.
I love Apple products, but I have no use for an iPad. I have a smartphone and a laptop. I have no need for something in between. I dont' want one. Not for any flaw I might find in the device, but it simply doesn't fit my needs. Rather than buying it anyway and proclaiming it was awful knowing it doesn't fit my needs, I simply chose to pass it by. This contributor obviously didn't approach it in that fashion. It is a bit disingenuous to portray an open mind when from the very first sentences, he makes it very obvious he had an intense dislike of the screen size.
"It's just me, my iPad, and an actual usable device, my trusty 13-inch MacBook" " As always, the page loaded quickly and looked great, for a smallish screen. Oh wait, I forgot, we don't compare the iPad screen to something reasonable like a 13-inch MacBook screen" "Soon, though, the thrill of the Imax-like-by-comparison-to-the-iPhone screen was tempered by the hassle of trying to compare items on multiple Web pages." "In addition to not being able to place pages side by side, switching between pages involves multiple taps, separated by a scan of a bunch of tiny thumbnails." "But even this is a lot of work. A lot more work than merely pressing the spacebar every time I want to advance by a screenful. Instead, I have to swipe, and hope that the screen scrolls far enough, but not too far. " "Fortunately, there's no TV in my current location, so I don't have to wonder why I would watch a tiny iPad screen instead of a TV."
Although I agree a new flavor of Linux is never a bad thing, the strengths that made OS/2 a contender back in the day don't exist now. There were very few viable desktop operating systems back then to choose from. Today is a vastly different landscape. From a technical standpoint this is interesting stuff, but certainly not something to write home about. I just don't see something like this making much of an impact to the current landscape.
Yes. Attach it to each, and the bookmarks will be synced. Anything created on the phone will be pushed to the PC and anything on the PC will be pushed to the phone.
The same is true for the iTunes sync, except your bookmarks are kept locally, rather than shared on Opera servers. It is a two-way sync from phone to PC and vice versa.
It doesn't matter if the text is 'wrapped' if it's illegible due to extreme zoom levels attempting to fit it all on a single page. Did you try browsing to Slashdot with it? As to reloading the page, doesn't that defeat the purpose of getting more speed if you have to reload every page when you want to switch from landscape to portrait? I think you would be surprised at how often people switch from portrait to landscape when browsing. Zooming is crap on this app, and no amount of lipstick will make it pretty Problems with pages in Safari? I don't recall any that don't work, sans flash only pages. The issues with Opera go a bit deeper in regards to fidelity. You also didn't mention privacy, meaning you have to trust the proxy completely for all data.
Ditto on the spell checker and default browser.
The above are valid concerns and I don't think the linked article is 'garbage'. This app should stand on it's merits, or fall due to it's lack of them. It has speed, but little else going for it.
It really is that bad. Although some people may find it useful in very low bandwidth situations, it is a struggle to use on the websites I frequent (Slashdot being one of them). It was totally unintuative, very unfriendly when zooming between the two zoom levels, and just a struggle to use. Browsing shouldn't be a struggle. I think the worst part of it was the zoom. You were either all the way out, or zoomed in to some pre-determined value that either had you scrolling left, right, up, or down to find something, or you were zoomed out to 20,000 feet with an illegible mess of lines, bars, and tiny graphics. There was no in-between.
As to why Apple approved it, I don't see this as much different than a PDF viewer, although I would say it is much less user friendly than a typical viewer.
I remove it after trying it. It was just too painful to use.
This one person doesn't speak for MacWorld. He is a contributor (right up there with blogger). If you actually read the piece, he obviously dislikes the small screen. He reiterates that point many times in many different ways, meaning he won't be satisfied with any small screen for regular day to day use. The article is more of a piece about the wasted time trying to do real 'work' on a small screen than a statement about the iPad itself.
As to the article summary, they should realize that YouTube already pushes H.264 to Apple mobile devices.
The same law applies in Texas. If you are past a clearly marked 'Stop' line before the traffic line turns red, it is legal to continue through the intersection regardless of the light color.
"(d) An operator of a vehicle facing only a steady red signal shall stop at a clearly marked stop line. In the absence of a stop line, the operator shall stop before entering the crosswalk on the near side of the intersection"
Unfortunately, many cities in Texas are making up imaginary 'stop lines' that don't actually exist, moving the legal 'point of no return' farther from the intersection, and collecting citation fees as a result.
Marketing sells a product. It's rather meaningless after the product is sold since the user doesn't have to rely on marketing to form an opinion. They form them from using the product directly. Claiming Apple is 'shitty' and then admitting that people think they are good is a bit contradictory. The simple fact is, that they have some of the best satisfaction rates in the industry, and THAT is money you can bank on.
There were over a million apps downloaded to iPads the first day of it's release and over half a million sold in a week. Exactly what sort of distortion reality are YOU standing in?
Apple also controls a huge share of the mobile browser market by huge margins. It doesn't matter how much hardware is out there in the mobile market, but who's actually using it to browse the web. When it comes to mobile devices, Apple DOES have a say in future mobile browsing trends:
You seem to equate {something_new = assumed_goodness} without reasoning that sometimes you don't have to put something new in just because it's 'new'. Apple has actually been good about adding useful features, while ignoring flash (no pun intended). If a new idea make sense, or offers potential, then yes, but just tossing something in because it's the latest fad doesn't make much sense. I would also argue that the changes Apple has done to the iPhone are a bit more than cosmetic. The app store wasn't available until v2.0. Wireless-G wasn't available on the 1st gen. Copy/Paste. MMS. These were lacking on the initial hardware or software. Enough folks clamored for them that Apple included them. Same with Multitasking outside of the core apps, which will show up in v4.0.
A cosmetic change is just for show with no real world usefulness. These are not cosmetic as they are meaningful and useful to some portions of the iPhone population.
It's far more likely that someone didn't do a proper inverse telecine on their NTSC material in an attempt to deinterlace it, or they just chopped a frame to reduce the frame count, usually using a poor "find the two closest matching frames and remove one" method. Neither of which works out very well 100% of the time.
If you were watching the stream directly on your TV via a tuner, then I'd say the tuner software was doing one of the above as well.
This type of mistake is VERY evident when watching a video source with a ticker at the bottom of the screen.
Of course iPhone users have a choice. The ratings for apps are right there on the app page, along with user comments. If they get abusive with ads (and there are already some apps that tried this), the users complain, and the app gets a low rating. Since there are more apps than you can throw a phone at, it's rarely difficult to find one you like, even among the free offerings.
"Lack of lock-in means I can find and use an alternative without ads. Or better yet, use an open source alternative if one exists. iPhone users have no such choice."
You assume that most of the public pirates games if given the opportunity, and doing so still requires technical knowledge. I don't think that's the case at all. Someone with computer knowledge would probably do so (hence the news for nerds), but some typical home user? Unlikely.
Correction. This won't end well for geeks and in the end, for Sony. Hackers will take advantage of this work to crack it wide open and make piracy of the PS3 a trivial thing. Sony brought this on themselves. Most, however, won't care or even notice that the option is gone. Hell, even I never messed with it the Linux option on my PS3 (yes, I know my geek card is at risk). I'm irritated that they can just remove it, but I didn't buy it to run linux. I have any number of laptops and desktops that can do the same and I don't put Linux on all of them either;)
Is this News for Nerds? Definitely. Is it news to Joe Public? Not in the slightest.
It's more than that. This could have huge implications for no-power flash storage, and it has lower power requirements than the phase-change memory that is currently the top dog. I'm also curious about the 'data processing' blurb in TFA:
"They are simpler than today’s semiconducting transistors, can store information even in the absence of an electrical current and, according to a report in Nature, can be used for both data processing and storage applications."
"He said the company could have a competitor to flash memory in three years that would have a capacity of 20 gigabytes a square centimeter."
"The new material offers an approach that is radically different from a promising type of storage called “phase-change memory” being pursued by I.B.M., Intel and other companies. In a phase-change memory, heat is used to shift a glassy material from an amorphous to a crystalline state and back. The switching speed of these systems is slower and requires more power, the H.P. scientists say."
Slashdot Mirror
I doubt seriously that Apple didn't know who he was to begin with. If they remote killed the phone, then it was reported as stolen. It's also extremely unlikely that they didn't know exactly who that specific phone was assigned to.
Sotomayor is a judge, not a politician. It is her purpose to interpret the law.
According to your logic, even though she outright stated that in her opinion that corporations should not have the same rights as people, you still claim she is pro-corporation?
[From the link above]
"But Justice Sotomayor suggested the majority might have it all wrong — and that instead the court should reconsider the 19th century rulings that first afforded corporations the same rights people have.
Judges “created corporations as persons, gave birth to corporations as persons,” she said. “There could be an argument made that that was the court’s error to start with[imbuing] a creature of state law with human characteristics.”
You make a common mistake, assuming that because one is "Pro Intellectual Property", that a person must also be "Pro-Corporatist", which is not the case.
Not all IP is owned by corporations. Simple boolean logic should give you the answer to that one. Just because some IP is owned by corporations, and she is Pro IP, that doesn't make Pro-IP == Pro-Corp.
Sotomayor is definitely pro IP, but she is NOT pro corporation. The two are not mutually inclusive.
http://www.webpronews.com/topnews/2009/06/05/whats-sotomayors-stance-on-intellectual-property
She is not pro-corporation as stated above. One of her first comments while being questioned made that very clear. She believes corporations should NOT be granted any rights of a 'person'.
http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2009/09/17/is-sotomayors-corporations-arent-people-comment-a-harbinger/tab/article/
I don't think it was pulled because it was a man's breast, but rather because the people involved were of questionable age, and it promotes the idea of sexting in general, which has some ugly legal connotations as well when combined with youth/teens. We all know too well that the law has been twisted to actually prosecute teenagers who sext. I can understand their reasoning for pulling it.
If I recall correctly, it does (or at least it did on my old PS3). It's the first thing you see when you turn it on.
Actually that's not quite correct. You are authorized to USE the software in question, you do not own it. You only have a license to use it. Depending on the terms of the license, it could be legal for Sony to make such a move. That said, I will be VERY interested to see what happens with the consumer laws in the UK, which seem to be a bit more stern than those we have in the U.S.
The fact that the device was sold with certain capabilities which are now no longer available is something that smacks of a classic class action lawsuit waiting to happen.
So you are willing to give up privacy in place of plugging a cable in. To each his own, but the end result is the same. Unless you were to wipe both the phone and your PC, your bookmarks would survive in either case as well.
If I recall, it works for Safari, and Internet Explorer.
All he discovered is he prefers a laptop. I would imagine some people feel the same about a laptop, a desktop, or a smartphone. To imply his experience will equate to the millions that will be sold is a bit farfetched.
Some of his statements are pedantic to the extreme. "Too much effort" to swipe a finger instead of hitting a spacebar?
"Too much effort to look down"? or somesuch nonsense?
The only thing I read into this, is that he disliked the idea of it before he even tried it, and lo and behold, he found what he expected to see. There is nothing wrong with this as everyone is entitled to his or her own opinion. I just find it interesting that someone will place such value in someone else's personal tastes. The parent went so far as to proclaim that MacWorld itself hated the device, which is obviously not the case.
I love Apple products, but I have no use for an iPad. I have a smartphone and a laptop. I have no need for something in between. I dont' want one. Not for any flaw I might find in the device, but it simply doesn't fit my needs. Rather than buying it anyway and proclaiming it was awful knowing it doesn't fit my needs, I simply chose to pass it by. This contributor obviously didn't approach it in that fashion. It is a bit disingenuous to portray an open mind when from the very first sentences, he makes it very obvious he had an intense dislike of the screen size.
"It's just me, my iPad, and an actual usable device, my trusty 13-inch MacBook"
" As always, the page loaded quickly and looked great, for a smallish screen. Oh wait, I forgot, we don't compare the iPad screen to something reasonable like a 13-inch MacBook screen"
"Soon, though, the thrill of the Imax-like-by-comparison-to-the-iPhone screen was tempered by the hassle of trying to compare items on multiple Web pages."
"In addition to not being able to place pages side by side, switching between pages involves multiple taps, separated by a scan of a bunch of tiny thumbnails."
"But even this is a lot of work. A lot more work than merely pressing the spacebar every time I want to advance by a screenful. Instead, I have to swipe, and hope that the screen scrolls far enough, but not too far. "
"Fortunately, there's no TV in my current location, so I don't have to wonder why I would watch a tiny iPad screen instead of a TV."
Although I agree a new flavor of Linux is never a bad thing, the strengths that made OS/2 a contender back in the day don't exist now. There were very few viable desktop operating systems back then to choose from. Today is a vastly different landscape. From a technical standpoint this is interesting stuff, but certainly not something to write home about. I just don't see something like this making much of an impact to the current landscape.
Yes. Attach it to each, and the bookmarks will be synced. Anything created on the phone will be pushed to the PC and anything on the PC will be pushed to the phone.
The same is true for the iTunes sync, except your bookmarks are kept locally, rather than shared on Opera servers. It is a two-way sync from phone to PC and vice versa.
You do realize that bookmarks are synced in iTunes if you choose that option? Works on both Windows, and Mac.
It doesn't matter if the text is 'wrapped' if it's illegible due to extreme zoom levels attempting to fit it all on a single page. Did you try browsing to Slashdot with it?
As to reloading the page, doesn't that defeat the purpose of getting more speed if you have to reload every page when you want to switch from landscape to portrait? I think you would be surprised at how often people switch from portrait to landscape when browsing.
Zooming is crap on this app, and no amount of lipstick will make it pretty
Problems with pages in Safari? I don't recall any that don't work, sans flash only pages. The issues with Opera go a bit deeper in regards to fidelity.
You also didn't mention privacy, meaning you have to trust the proxy completely for all data.
Ditto on the spell checker and default browser.
The above are valid concerns and I don't think the linked article is 'garbage'. This app should stand on it's merits, or fall due to it's lack of them. It has speed, but little else going for it.
It really is that bad. Although some people may find it useful in very low bandwidth situations, it is a struggle to use on the websites I frequent (Slashdot being one of them). It was totally unintuative, very unfriendly when zooming between the two zoom levels, and just a struggle to use. Browsing shouldn't be a struggle. I think the worst part of it was the zoom. You were either all the way out, or zoomed in to some pre-determined value that either had you scrolling left, right, up, or down to find something, or you were zoomed out to 20,000 feet with an illegible mess of lines, bars, and tiny graphics. There was no in-between.
As to why Apple approved it, I don't see this as much different than a PDF viewer, although I would say it is much less user friendly than a typical viewer.
I remove it after trying it. It was just too painful to use.
This one person doesn't speak for MacWorld. He is a contributor (right up there with blogger). If you actually read the piece, he obviously dislikes the small screen. He reiterates that point many times in many different ways, meaning he won't be satisfied with any small screen for regular day to day use. The article is more of a piece about the wasted time trying to do real 'work' on a small screen than a statement about the iPad itself.
As to the article summary, they should realize that YouTube already pushes H.264 to Apple mobile devices.
The same law applies in Texas. If you are past a clearly marked 'Stop' line before the traffic line turns red, it is legal to continue through the intersection regardless of the light color.
"(d) An operator of a vehicle facing only a steady red signal shall stop at a clearly marked stop line. In the absence of a stop line, the operator shall stop before entering the crosswalk on the near side of the intersection"
http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/18/1805.asp
Unfortunately, many cities in Texas are making up imaginary 'stop lines' that don't actually exist, moving the legal 'point of no return' farther from the intersection, and collecting citation fees as a result.
Marketing sells a product. It's rather meaningless after the product is sold since the user doesn't have to rely on marketing to form an opinion. They form them from using the product directly. Claiming Apple is 'shitty' and then admitting that people think they are good is a bit contradictory. The simple fact is, that they have some of the best satisfaction rates in the industry, and THAT is money you can bank on.
http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/survey_apples_app_store_customer_satisfaction_android_close_second.php
http://internet2go.net/news/hardware/apple-retains-customer-satisfaction-crown
There were over a million apps downloaded to iPads the first day of it's release and over half a million sold in a week. Exactly what sort of distortion reality are YOU standing in?
Apple also controls a huge share of the mobile browser market by huge margins. It doesn't matter how much hardware is out there in the mobile market, but who's actually using it to browse the web. When it comes to mobile devices, Apple DOES have a say in future mobile browsing trends:
http://www.tipb.com/2009/03/02/iphone-mobile-browser-share-67/
Try harder...
Doesn't NoScript allow element specific blocking?
http://noscript.net/
You seem to equate {something_new = assumed_goodness} without reasoning that sometimes you don't have to put something new in just because it's 'new'. Apple has actually been good about adding useful features, while ignoring flash (no pun intended). If a new idea make sense, or offers potential, then yes, but just tossing something in because it's the latest fad doesn't make much sense. I would also argue that the changes Apple has done to the iPhone are a bit more than cosmetic. The app store wasn't available until v2.0. Wireless-G wasn't available on the 1st gen. Copy/Paste. MMS. These were lacking on the initial hardware or software. Enough folks clamored for them that Apple included them. Same with Multitasking outside of the core apps, which will show up in v4.0.
A cosmetic change is just for show with no real world usefulness. These are not cosmetic as they are meaningful and useful to some portions of the iPhone population.
It's far more likely that someone didn't do a proper inverse telecine on their NTSC material in an attempt to deinterlace it, or they just chopped a frame to reduce the frame count, usually using a poor "find the two closest matching frames and remove one" method. Neither of which works out very well 100% of the time.
If you were watching the stream directly on your TV via a tuner, then I'd say the tuner software was doing one of the above as well.
This type of mistake is VERY evident when watching a video source with a ticker at the bottom of the screen.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverse_telecine#Reverse_telecine_.28a.k.a._IVTC.2Finverse_telecine.29
Of course iPhone users have a choice. The ratings for apps are right there on the app page, along with user comments. If they get abusive with ads (and there are already some apps that tried this), the users complain, and the app gets a low rating. Since there are more apps than you can throw a phone at, it's rarely difficult to find one you like, even among the free offerings.
"Lack of lock-in means I can find and use an alternative without ads. Or better yet, use an open source alternative if one exists. iPhone users have no such choice."
You assume that most of the public pirates games if given the opportunity, and doing so still requires technical knowledge. I don't think that's the case at all. Someone with computer knowledge would probably do so (hence the news for nerds), but some typical home user? Unlikely.
Correction. This won't end well for geeks and in the end, for Sony. Hackers will take advantage of this work to crack it wide open and make piracy of the PS3 a trivial thing. Sony brought this on themselves. Most, however, won't care or even notice that the option is gone. Hell, even I never messed with it the Linux option on my PS3 (yes, I know my geek card is at risk). I'm irritated that they can just remove it, but I didn't buy it to run linux. I have any number of laptops and desktops that can do the same and I don't put Linux on all of them either ;)
Is this News for Nerds? Definitely. Is it news to Joe Public? Not in the slightest.
It's more than that. This could have huge implications for no-power flash storage, and it has lower power requirements than the phase-change memory that is currently the top dog. I'm also curious about the 'data processing' blurb in TFA:
"They are simpler than today’s semiconducting transistors, can store information even in the absence of an electrical current and, according to a report in Nature, can be used for both data processing and storage applications."
"He said the company could have a competitor to flash memory in three years that would have a capacity of 20 gigabytes a square centimeter."
"The new material offers an approach that is radically different from a promising type of storage called “phase-change memory” being pursued by I.B.M., Intel and other companies. In a phase-change memory, heat is used to shift a glassy material from an amorphous to a crystalline state and back. The switching speed of these systems is slower and requires more power, the H.P. scientists say."