Sprint isn't remotely as expensive as Verizon. That's idiotic. They're generally HALF the price.
And with the much lower monthly fee of Sprint, you still get the same coverage as Verizon, because you can roam onto Verizon's network wherever necessary.
my Verizon phone and had high speed 4G everytime I decided to see how it works.
It's possible the building had a cellular antenna and repeater, as some do. I've maintained a few of those myself, for buildings with thick walls and no windows. They're also carrier specific, so it's pretty likely they had repeaters for AT&T and Verizon, and didn't for Sprint and probably T-Mobile...
It's in buildings WITHOUT those amenities (which is MOST of them), that Sprint's lower frequencies will give vastly better coverage on LTE (which YES, also includes VOICE calling).
The PTT over 3G/4G is not nearly the same as the old Nextel.
I've never been interested in it myself, even when I had an iDEN phone, but I'd be interested in hearing what's different / missing. Sprint did spend a lot of time developing PTT for CDMA before dropping iDEN.
And just how long have you been on T-Mobile, that you're now prepared to say you won't EVER see rate hikes, hidden fees, or degraded service, as you EVENTUALLY did with Sprint?
they now maintain an LTE network with the lowest reliability, highest number of dead spots, and slowest data rates
All of which they are aggressively working on. Yet again, see: Network Vision
It's to be expected after they restarted their 4G deployment from scratch after all others, after WiMax proved to be undesirable.
The other part is doing whatever they can to make existing contract subscribers pay more - the SEC filings themselves even state that as being their plan for keeping revenues up in fact.
Verizon has announced the same strategy, so I don't see why you keep harping on Sprint. Rate increases are to be expected, in the face of inflation and whatnot.
Sprint has a larger portion of their customers on pre-paid services, which will not be affected.
VHF TV channels can routinely travel 100miles+. That would mean at least the southern-half of the country could be exposed to TV broadcasts from South Korea from across the border.
However, radio is probably much better. AM/MW radio can travel up to 1,000 miles, and can be received with as little as a coil of wire (see: fox-hole radios). Simple AM radio can be extremely tiny, so easy to hide, and easy to make with a handful of electronics components and some skill.
Wifi doesn't work (or perhaps is configured for a few preselected networks only). And the TV tuner only gets 4 channels, so you can't watch the channels being broadcast by South Korea. And it doesn't have Google's common apps.
One of the reasons we see so much Windows in education is that its cheaper than Linux. Microsoft gives out free software and hardware deals to schools as "donations".
I've worked for two different universities in CA, and I've never seen anything donated from Microsoft.
They used-to have some serious sweetheart deals, like students and teachers getting copies of Windows, Office, Visual Studio, etc., for $10/each, basically the cost of stamping and shipping the CDs to you. But that's more or less a fringe benefit of site-licensing giving Microsoft large amounts of steady cash from the schools, and them wanting to make sure young people get off to a good start, pirating their stuff instead of experimenting with something else.
Even if Microsoft was somehow subsidizing hardware, there would be nothing stopping someone from wiping the OS and reinstalling Linux on the system.
I have actually seen Universities being quicker to switch to OpenOffice than corporations. It's a significant savings across several labs of computers, can be installed along-side MS Office just fine, in the event that some group still needs it, and their use of it mostly boils down to students following document-writing examples in the book, and printing out documents that look okay, so there's few legacy concerns, and limited interoperability issues as well.
Actually, Sprint's iDEN coverage was always GREAT. It's their CDMA coverage that wasn't as deep, and that's mostly because of the higher frequencies they had to use, where other carriers had ~800MHz frequencies to use. But having to maintain two entirely separate networks was expensive.
Why didn't Verizon do WiMax? Or did they, but didn't really advertise it because it wasn't market ready?
No, Verizon never deployed WiMax. You'd have to ask them why. Presumably, they were watching the still developing LTE standard process, and decided to wait for it to be completed, rather than adopting WiMax.
Seems like Sprint jumped on WiMax because they needed *something* to offset the lack of coverage
That's purely your imagination. No doubt Sprint wanted a jump-start on the competition to develop 4G, and it was only when all other US carriers chose LTE that they realized their WiMax network would be a disadvantage. With 2G and 3G networks, it wasn't an issue that US carriers all chose different and incompatible standards, but with everyone going to LTE, compatibility now matters.
also keep in mind that Sprint was the very first company to technically offer 4g. Given that Sprint started first, and they're already dead last in aggregate 4g coverage and data rates, goes to show you just how horribly they are executing their "network vision" plan.
You're being very dishonest with the wording here. Yes, they started deploying WiMax before anyone else, but it's pretty easy to see (once you stop glossing over the IMPORTANT details) why they're behind, having to START OVER with LTE covering THE SAME AREAS AGAIN.
I don't know what it is you've really got against Sprint (or have got in favor of T-Mobile) but you're showing an incredible bias, and are twisting the facts to suit your world view.
From what I've heard, Sprint realized it was costing more to monitor and bill for data than the extra money they were receiving from the fines. It was actually cheaper to NOT monitor data.
Except they still have to monitor their customer's data usage, to enforce the 2.5GB limit on Boost Mobile and Virgin Mobile, as well as the various billing strategies employed by their numerous MVNOs like Ting, etc.
A) Your experience is hyper-local. There will always be some markets where one carrier has bad coverage. T-Mobile has extremely poor coverage in many, many more places than Sprint.
B) That forum post you linked to about roaming actually says Sprint's coverage in Phoenix is pretty good... Quite the opposite of your statement.
C) If you want to know Sprint's future, you should search for their "Network Vision" plan they've talked about extensive. Sprint is really set to leap-frog the other 3 carriers on LTE service area and particularly indoor and fringe coverage.
When I would find strong signal places to take/make calls, I would notice that other people were there on their phones in a loose cluster. A quick "Sprint user?" would garner bitter "Yep." and a comment about how shitty Sprint was or how soon their contract was up.
Now imagine the situation being COMPLETELY reversed when it comes to LTE... Verizon, AT&T, and T-Mobile customers are huddling together in those clusters of phone users to get decent download speeds, while Sprint LTE customers are getting a great high-speed signal from their seats.
That's exactly what the iDEN shut-off and Sprint's "Network Vision" roll-out will mean, and it's all happening within a year.
Sprint's unlimited data that can rarely be accessed and then only hotspotted with a $20/month fee.
You can use FoxFi/PDANet for tethering without paying the fee.
One thing that has been confusing for customers is the difference between Sprint's 4G WiMax and LTE. A lot of customers currently getting great WiMax coverage are buying LTE phones in areas that don't have LTE yet, not realizing there is a difference (stores should explain this better),
They shouldn't "explain this better" they should have make it a NON-ISSUE by offering dual WiMax/LTE phones as soon as they decided to roll-out LTE. Then Sprint could have started the LTE deployment in areas without WiMax first, and would quickly be able to claim the largest "4G" network. With WiMax they had several years head-start on their competitors, and they were too stupid to use it to their benefit. A shame, really.
Those concerned about power usage could choose to turn of either of the radios, but the unwashed masses would just charge their phone more often, and marvel at the high data speeds and great coverage...
Sprint's in the middle of a complete network overhaul (called network vision) that will bring LTE to almost every cell site by the end of 2014 while significantly upgrading both the antenna's and backhaul at most locations bringing better coverage and better speeds.
Not only that, they're also set to leap-frog their competitors and have the deepest LTE coverage of all, perhaps surpassing even their competitors' 3G coverage.
The difference between Verizon's coverage and Sprint's coverage was the spectrum... Verizon used their ~800MHz spectrum for their 3G radios, while Sprint had to use their 1900MHz spectrum for 3G. This is because their 800MHz spectrum was locked-up in use for 2G Nextel/iDEN. I know from experience that those Nextel/iDEN cell phones had GREAT coverage, easily matching Verizon's coverage. This becomes clear when driving through the mountains with both phones... Sprint's CDMA coverage in the same area is horrible crap.
Now AT&T and Verizon have their ~800MHz spectrum locked-up in 3G and are using higher frequencies for LTE. But Sprint just freed-up their ~800MHz spectrum by dropping iDEN/Nextel, and they're going to use it for LTE. And not only is that on the horizon, they're doing this all within the next year. So while the big two have their LTE networks crippled by higher frequency propagation, Sprint will have great coverage that blows past both of them.
Sprint also has the added bonus of cheap pre-paid service. For as little as $35/mo you can get this 800MHz LTE coverage through Virgin Mobile. We'll have to wait for more 800MHz LTE phones to come out, but other than that, it's a very exciting time for cell phone buyers, and Sprint.
Does ASCAP mean that they have some substantial reason to believe Pandora will not correctly handle emergency alerts?
I thought it went without saying that ASCAP is an evil rotting pit of darkness and stench, and that their accusations are surely a steaming pile of shit intended to screw over the world for their own benefit... My mistake.
Yes ASCAP is saying that because Pandora is mainly interested in the radio station to help securing lower royalties on their internet streams, they apparently must not be interested in running a radio station properly, and in the public's best interest. Of course ASCAP itself has less than zero interest in the public in a couple little cities in South Dakota, and would burn the place to the ground if it meant Pandora had to keep paying them as much money as they do now, so it makes absolutely no sense for ASCAP to object on behalf of the residents of those cities...
Clear Channel is the one who really stands to lose. CC has favorable licensing terms for their "iheartradio" service because they're a traditional broadcaster as well. Pandora just wants in on that sweetheart of a deal, rather than the leeches at ASCAP and their sister organization bleeding off the majority of Pandora's income, and causing Pandora listeners to tolerate far more ads, and having higher monthly fees than they should need by any rights.
When you use the public airwaves, you have to follow the government's rules. Always part of those rules is your service fulfilling some form of public interest. With TV, this means a certain number of hours of children programming, regular news programming, and some emergency news and emergency alert capabilities.
If you don't like the rules, you don't get to use the radio spectrum for free, and can purchase some spectrum from the FCC yourself, at very high rates like the cell phone companies do, and then you can broadcast, to whoever has your proprietary receiver, whatever you want...
Clear Channel got in trouble a while back because their highly automated operations meant no-one was around to answer the phone at a local radio station, so they didn't broadcast the alert the local police wanted to get out to the public, until many hours later. That's the kind of thing that gets broadcasters shut down. That's the kind of thing ASCAP is accusing Pandora *will* do in the future.
If Pandora does a good job running the radio station, more power to them. But they DO have many obligations to the public that they need to fulfill to be licensed by the FCC.
You can blame HR (and their superiors running the company) for continually trying to cut costs, going for ever less competent IT staff and just treating the horrible fallout as an externality. And perhaps even worse, for making it inefficient and hard to connect people with jobs...
Either they have crazy barriers like looking through linked-in and facebook for potential recruits, rather than job boards. Or just as bad, they outsource recruiting to 3rd parties, often the job is taken by many former call-center employees in India, who will spam the email addresses of every resume they can find in the entire country... I had to remove my phone number from my resume, because answering calls from recruiters, who rarely had a relevant or geographically practical assignmeny in mind, became a part-time job in itself.
I'm very higly skilled, and have a good strong work history, yet I find I have to move 100 miles in one direction or another every time I want to change jobs, because it's too damn difficult to find open positions near where I live, despite all being huge urban areas with obscene numbers of employers spread around, who presumably have jobs to fill.
What's with the second link, to the idiot with the blog? It adds nothing to the discussion at all, throws in some factual errors just for giggles... He specifically says this is going to be for "consumer use" when the Sony press release explicitly says "professional-use" right at the top.
Sony is big into MO discs, as a more expensive alternative to tape for archiving and backup. So I expect this will be just another entrant into that market, still lagging far behind magnetic tape in capacity. They claim insane reliability, but then again, some expensive tape manufacturers will offer insurance that'll pay for data recovery for the next 25 years, just like Sony does with their MO discs.
If they weren't completely proprietary, IT folks might seriously consider MO. But as long as it's Sony-only, with high mark-up and no hope on the horizon of cheaper media and drives coming along in the future, or even hope of being able to source replacements in a couple decades, the market will just keep shrinking. Unless there are strict requirements that perfectly match up with Sony's MO format, using Sony's proprietary gear never enters my mind.
Maybe this will find a market in pre-production, editing, or even digital cinema, instead of shipping those hard drives around, but there's really no interest in another optical disc format in the consumer market, as Blu-ray hasn't even seen wide adoption, and far more convenient alternatives become ever more economical.
Nokia signed up with Microsoft in early 2011 they had been making a fairly healthy profit, so had no urgent need for the cash they were sitting on and certainly weren't desperate for more.
Unless company insiders saw exactly this coming, and were going crazy trying to raise cash, and Microsoft was the biggest infusion available.
It certainly sounds like they need to thank Microsoft for their cash reserves...
...you made a mistake by ditching symbian and focusing on Windows...hmmm.....
No, they made a mistake by focusing on Windows, and another mistake by not dumping Symbian far sooner, and another mistake by very slowly dragging out the development of MeeGo, and many, many more mistakes before that.
Can't we just accept that Nokia is a massively dysfunctional company that is unable to EVER make a good decision, and just NEEDS to go away at this point, so it can be replaced with something less awful?
It's clear that Windows Phone was a horrible choice. How could they not see this coming when everyone was yelling at them telling them they were making a mistake?
They might have been blinded by the billions of dollars Microsoft gave them, right when Nokia was in serious trouble and desperate for cash...
Nokia was making bad decisions for YEARS at that point, which got them into the trouble they were facing. Is it any wonder they would make yet another bad decision? Particularly when things had gotten so bad that there was no easy out, and Microsoft offered a magical fantasy-land answer that solved all their problems and brought them back to their previous dominant position.
Just pretend Nokia went bankrupt shortly before Elop took over, and move on with your life. They're just an animated corpse.
This belief in the honesty of bureaucrats and their willingness to destroy their lives and careers for the greater good always puzzles me.
There's no "belief" involved. It's a fact that there have been more classified information leaks under our current president than ever before. Look it up.
One would think that a Pentagon plan to commit terrorist attacks against US citizens on American soil in a false flag operation to justify the invasion of another country
Conspiracy nuts dance lightly around this case, trying NOT to accidentally admit to the actual FACTS, which declaw this story dramatically. Operation Northwoods was specifically NOT supposed to result in any US civilian deaths. They were to be "staged" and "simulated" terrorist attacks.
Slashdot Mirror
Sprint isn't remotely as expensive as Verizon. That's idiotic. They're generally HALF the price.
And with the much lower monthly fee of Sprint, you still get the same coverage as Verizon, because you can roam onto Verizon's network wherever necessary.
It's possible the building had a cellular antenna and repeater, as some do. I've maintained a few of those myself, for buildings with thick walls and no windows. They're also carrier specific, so it's pretty likely they had repeaters for AT&T and Verizon, and didn't for Sprint and probably T-Mobile...
It's in buildings WITHOUT those amenities (which is MOST of them), that Sprint's lower frequencies will give vastly better coverage on LTE (which YES, also includes VOICE calling).
I've never been interested in it myself, even when I had an iDEN phone, but I'd be interested in hearing what's different / missing. Sprint did spend a lot of time developing PTT for CDMA before dropping iDEN.
And just how long have you been on T-Mobile, that you're now prepared to say you won't EVER see rate hikes, hidden fees, or degraded service, as you EVENTUALLY did with Sprint?
All of which they are aggressively working on. Yet again, see: Network Vision
It's to be expected after they restarted their 4G deployment from scratch after all others, after WiMax proved to be undesirable.
Verizon has announced the same strategy, so I don't see why you keep harping on Sprint. Rate increases are to be expected, in the face of inflation and whatnot.
Sprint has a larger portion of their customers on pre-paid services, which will not be affected.
VHF TV channels can routinely travel 100miles+. That would mean at least the southern-half of the country could be exposed to TV broadcasts from South Korea from across the border.
However, radio is probably much better. AM/MW radio can travel up to 1,000 miles, and can be received with as little as a coil of wire (see: fox-hole radios). Simple AM radio can be extremely tiny, so easy to hide, and easy to make with a handful of electronics components and some skill.
Wifi doesn't work (or perhaps is configured for a few preselected networks only). And the TV tuner only gets 4 channels, so you can't watch the channels being broadcast by South Korea. And it doesn't have Google's common apps.
That's really it... TFA is super-crap.
I'd be very interested to hear how the performance on a variety of smartphones compares to Intel/AMD CPUs.
Anybody got some benchmarks to share?
From TFA:
Why the hell don't we have a mob of /. volunteers lined-up to go help them?
High school girls + Linux
How is it possible that has this comment thread has not devolved into a morass of sexism and obscene jokes?
I've worked for two different universities in CA, and I've never seen anything donated from Microsoft.
They used-to have some serious sweetheart deals, like students and teachers getting copies of Windows, Office, Visual Studio, etc., for $10/each, basically the cost of stamping and shipping the CDs to you. But that's more or less a fringe benefit of site-licensing giving Microsoft large amounts of steady cash from the schools, and them wanting to make sure young people get off to a good start, pirating their stuff instead of experimenting with something else.
Even if Microsoft was somehow subsidizing hardware, there would be nothing stopping someone from wiping the OS and reinstalling Linux on the system.
I have actually seen Universities being quicker to switch to OpenOffice than corporations. It's a significant savings across several labs of computers, can be installed along-side MS Office just fine, in the event that some group still needs it, and their use of it mostly boils down to students following document-writing examples in the book, and printing out documents that look okay, so there's few legacy concerns, and limited interoperability issues as well.
Actually, Sprint's iDEN coverage was always GREAT. It's their CDMA coverage that wasn't as deep, and that's mostly because of the higher frequencies they had to use, where other carriers had ~800MHz frequencies to use. But having to maintain two entirely separate networks was expensive.
No, Verizon never deployed WiMax. You'd have to ask them why. Presumably, they were watching the still developing LTE standard process, and decided to wait for it to be completed, rather than adopting WiMax.
That's purely your imagination. No doubt Sprint wanted a jump-start on the competition to develop 4G, and it was only when all other US carriers chose LTE that they realized their WiMax network would be a disadvantage. With 2G and 3G networks, it wasn't an issue that US carriers all chose different and incompatible standards, but with everyone going to LTE, compatibility now matters.
You're being very dishonest with the wording here. Yes, they started deploying WiMax before anyone else, but it's pretty easy to see (once you stop glossing over the IMPORTANT details) why they're behind, having to START OVER with LTE covering THE SAME AREAS AGAIN.
I don't know what it is you've really got against Sprint (or have got in favor of T-Mobile) but you're showing an incredible bias, and are twisting the facts to suit your world view.
Except they still have to monitor their customer's data usage, to enforce the 2.5GB limit on Boost Mobile and Virgin Mobile, as well as the various billing strategies employed by their numerous MVNOs like Ting, etc.
A) Your experience is hyper-local. There will always be some markets where one carrier has bad coverage. T-Mobile has extremely poor coverage in many, many more places than Sprint.
B) That forum post you linked to about roaming actually says Sprint's coverage in Phoenix is pretty good... Quite the opposite of your statement.
C) If you want to know Sprint's future, you should search for their "Network Vision" plan they've talked about extensive. Sprint is really set to leap-frog the other 3 carriers on LTE service area and particularly indoor and fringe coverage.
Now imagine the situation being COMPLETELY reversed when it comes to LTE... Verizon, AT&T, and T-Mobile customers are huddling together in those clusters of phone users to get decent download speeds, while Sprint LTE customers are getting a great high-speed signal from their seats.
That's exactly what the iDEN shut-off and Sprint's "Network Vision" roll-out will mean, and it's all happening within a year.
You can use FoxFi/PDANet for tethering without paying the fee.
They shouldn't "explain this better" they should have make it a NON-ISSUE by offering dual WiMax/LTE phones as soon as they decided to roll-out LTE. Then Sprint could have started the LTE deployment in areas without WiMax first, and would quickly be able to claim the largest "4G" network. With WiMax they had several years head-start on their competitors, and they were too stupid to use it to their benefit. A shame, really.
Those concerned about power usage could choose to turn of either of the radios, but the unwashed masses would just charge their phone more often, and marvel at the high data speeds and great coverage...
Not only that, they're also set to leap-frog their competitors and have the deepest LTE coverage of all, perhaps surpassing even their competitors' 3G coverage.
The difference between Verizon's coverage and Sprint's coverage was the spectrum... Verizon used their ~800MHz spectrum for their 3G radios, while Sprint had to use their 1900MHz spectrum for 3G. This is because their 800MHz spectrum was locked-up in use for 2G Nextel/iDEN. I know from experience that those Nextel/iDEN cell phones had GREAT coverage, easily matching Verizon's coverage. This becomes clear when driving through the mountains with both phones... Sprint's CDMA coverage in the same area is horrible crap.
Now AT&T and Verizon have their ~800MHz spectrum locked-up in 3G and are using higher frequencies for LTE. But Sprint just freed-up their ~800MHz spectrum by dropping iDEN/Nextel, and they're going to use it for LTE. And not only is that on the horizon, they're doing this all within the next year. So while the big two have their LTE networks crippled by higher frequency propagation, Sprint will have great coverage that blows past both of them.
Sprint also has the added bonus of cheap pre-paid service. For as little as $35/mo you can get this 800MHz LTE coverage through Virgin Mobile. We'll have to wait for more 800MHz LTE phones to come out, but other than that, it's a very exciting time for cell phone buyers, and Sprint.
I thought it went without saying that ASCAP is an evil rotting pit of darkness and stench, and that their accusations are surely a steaming pile of shit intended to screw over the world for their own benefit... My mistake.
Yes ASCAP is saying that because Pandora is mainly interested in the radio station to help securing lower royalties on their internet streams, they apparently must not be interested in running a radio station properly, and in the public's best interest. Of course ASCAP itself has less than zero interest in the public in a couple little cities in South Dakota, and would burn the place to the ground if it meant Pandora had to keep paying them as much money as they do now, so it makes absolutely no sense for ASCAP to object on behalf of the residents of those cities...
Clear Channel is the one who really stands to lose. CC has favorable licensing terms for their "iheartradio" service because they're a traditional broadcaster as well. Pandora just wants in on that sweetheart of a deal, rather than the leeches at ASCAP and their sister organization bleeding off the majority of Pandora's income, and causing Pandora listeners to tolerate far more ads, and having higher monthly fees than they should need by any rights.
When you use the public airwaves, you have to follow the government's rules. Always part of those rules is your service fulfilling some form of public interest. With TV, this means a certain number of hours of children programming, regular news programming, and some emergency news and emergency alert capabilities.
If you don't like the rules, you don't get to use the radio spectrum for free, and can purchase some spectrum from the FCC yourself, at very high rates like the cell phone companies do, and then you can broadcast, to whoever has your proprietary receiver, whatever you want...
Clear Channel got in trouble a while back because their highly automated operations meant no-one was around to answer the phone at a local radio station, so they didn't broadcast the alert the local police wanted to get out to the public, until many hours later. That's the kind of thing that gets broadcasters shut down. That's the kind of thing ASCAP is accusing Pandora *will* do in the future.
If Pandora does a good job running the radio station, more power to them. But they DO have many obligations to the public that they need to fulfill to be licensed by the FCC.
You can blame HR (and their superiors running the company) for continually trying to cut costs, going for ever less competent IT staff and just treating the horrible fallout as an externality. And perhaps even worse, for making it inefficient and hard to connect people with jobs...
Either they have crazy barriers like looking through linked-in and facebook for potential recruits, rather than job boards. Or just as bad, they outsource recruiting to 3rd parties, often the job is taken by many former call-center employees in India, who will spam the email addresses of every resume they can find in the entire country... I had to remove my phone number from my resume, because answering calls from recruiters, who rarely had a relevant or geographically practical assignmeny in mind, became a part-time job in itself.
I'm very higly skilled, and have a good strong work history, yet I find I have to move 100 miles in one direction or another every time I want to change jobs, because it's too damn difficult to find open positions near where I live, despite all being huge urban areas with obscene numbers of employers spread around, who presumably have jobs to fill.
What's with the second link, to the idiot with the blog? It adds nothing to the discussion at all, throws in some factual errors just for giggles... He specifically says this is going to be for "consumer use" when the Sony press release explicitly says "professional-use" right at the top.
Sony is big into MO discs, as a more expensive alternative to tape for archiving and backup. So I expect this will be just another entrant into that market, still lagging far behind magnetic tape in capacity. They claim insane reliability, but then again, some expensive tape manufacturers will offer insurance that'll pay for data recovery for the next 25 years, just like Sony does with their MO discs.
If they weren't completely proprietary, IT folks might seriously consider MO. But as long as it's Sony-only, with high mark-up and no hope on the horizon of cheaper media and drives coming along in the future, or even hope of being able to source replacements in a couple decades, the market will just keep shrinking. Unless there are strict requirements that perfectly match up with Sony's MO format, using Sony's proprietary gear never enters my mind.
Maybe this will find a market in pre-production, editing, or even digital cinema, instead of shipping those hard drives around, but there's really no interest in another optical disc format in the consumer market, as Blu-ray hasn't even seen wide adoption, and far more convenient alternatives become ever more economical.
Unless company insiders saw exactly this coming, and were going crazy trying to raise cash, and Microsoft was the biggest infusion available.
It certainly sounds like they need to thank Microsoft for their cash reserves...
I don't buy it. They're making some very strange decisions for a company that supposedly ISN'T desperate for cash:
http://news.cnet.com/8301-1035_3-57556961-94/nokia-sells-finnish-headquarters-amid-financial-troubles/
No, they made a mistake by focusing on Windows, and another mistake by not dumping Symbian far sooner, and another mistake by very slowly dragging out the development of MeeGo, and many, many more mistakes before that.
Can't we just accept that Nokia is a massively dysfunctional company that is unable to EVER make a good decision, and just NEEDS to go away at this point, so it can be replaced with something less awful?
They might have been blinded by the billions of dollars Microsoft gave them, right when Nokia was in serious trouble and desperate for cash...
Nokia was making bad decisions for YEARS at that point, which got them into the trouble they were facing. Is it any wonder they would make yet another bad decision? Particularly when things had gotten so bad that there was no easy out, and Microsoft offered a magical fantasy-land answer that solved all their problems and brought them back to their previous dominant position.
Just pretend Nokia went bankrupt shortly before Elop took over, and move on with your life. They're just an animated corpse.
There's no "belief" involved. It's a fact that there have been more classified information leaks under our current president than ever before. Look it up.
Conspiracy nuts dance lightly around this case, trying NOT to accidentally admit to the actual FACTS, which declaw this story dramatically. Operation Northwoods was specifically NOT supposed to result in any US civilian deaths. They were to be "staged" and "simulated" terrorist attacks.