I have a dock for my Bionic, but it's not as simple as, say, dropping a POTS wireless phone in its cradle. The USB port is not designed for ease of connecting like is required for a doc and still needs to be aligned and a bit force used to connect and disconnect it. It still takes two hands and often 'sticks' when picking it up. Before you ask, no it's not a cheep dock either, its a Seidio. The micro USB port was not designed to be a docking connector, and with todays WiFi enabled phones, I connect to my home network when the phone is in range. I don't need a USB connector at all, I need power to charge and that's it.
Maybe I'm missing something, but don't the charging pads have to get their electricity from the mains somehow? It seems like a very marginal saving in time and convenience.
You don't have to worry about plugging in the phone all the time. When you want to use it, you just pick it up and there's no wire in the way. All you need is a charge pad on your desk, next to your 'lounging' chair, by the bed... wherever. It's as simple as setting the phone down and it's charging. No fumbling with cords or trying to align it just right in the dock.
FTFA: Yes, it turns out the the GS 4 does in fact have Qi wireless charging capabilities. Provided its available in your region and your carrier chooses to support it.
Why the region limitations and carrier "stamp of approval"? This, in my mind, says the U.S. cell providers are looking for a way to charge for charging. I can see it now, $.02/hour while sitting on the charge pad. For an extra $20.00/month, unlimited charging via the charge pad.
After market battery covers are available for the S3 and many other phones. The connectors and software are built in, but it seems it's the carriers who are stopping this. I currently have a Droid Bionic. Verizon made available for a limited time an inductive charging system, but try to find it now.
Why in the hell is induction charging not a standard feature for phones yet? Battery life would be less of an issue if we could just set the phone down on a charge pad and not worry about having to plug the thing in all the time. I'd be more than happy to have several charge pads around the house and at the office.
Hell, toothbrushes have had this technology for years.
Biggest annoyance keeping me from using Chrome more is the lack of a clear address bar plug-in. Linux has this wonderful feature of being able to highlight something then middle clicking to past it. Takes a couple of clicks away from a cut-n-paste action and is real easy to do while surfing around. Without a way to clear the address bar, this is useless. I've been using Linux for over 15 years, don't remember when it was introduced but I've become so accustomed to it, I really can't do without it.
Interesting way to look at it and something I didn't consider. However, even though that would apply to the overall picture of FaceBook, going back to the OC, it doesn't apply to my original question.
"Not having a right to the data but still having access to it" != "hacking" anymore than considering a janitor of a building a lockpicker if he has a master key and goes into a room he's been told to stay out of. It may get him in trouble, but he did not break into the room.
Please tell me where in that statement you got the idea he was implying Zuckerberg is a hacker. Even using the popular, but incorrect, definition of hacker does not apply here as Mark Zuckerberg owns Facebook and I'm sure he has no need to "hack" into the system to get at any information he wants.
Kind of like when AT&T collapsed under it's own weight in the 70's? Wait, our government stepped in and fixed that. Too bad our government is owned by the mega corporations now. I doubt we'll see anything like that again.
If you're talking out loud, why not just call the other person? Or, you know, think of the other people on the road and wait until you're not in the car fucking driving somewhere?
Why does it cost so little to build, and yet so much (relatively) to maintain? Just over 100K to built, and almost 50K annually to maintain?
Probably, because it will take a few people a couple of months to install, and one or two permanent maintainers who have to be paid a yearly salary. Even with only one, however, $50,000 a year is way under what I think it will actually cost unless they duel or tri purpose the maintainer and dived his salary between projects. Once up and running, the only thing to do will be replace/reboot a transceiver every now and then, and they'd be fools to not have at least a 1% to 2% stock of spares.
Wouldn't something like this use twice the fuel needed to get to Mars? They don't accelerate the whole way, and having to stop in the middle and accelerate again, only to have to decelerate again when you reach Mars seems pointless and wasteful. I'll admit I'm not a rocket scientist or physicist, but I doubt there's a way to carry enough fuel to do a full burn all the way to Mars, even with a fuelling point half way there. At least not with fuel loaded before take off. If you're going to load up fuel after you leave Earth, why not just use a bigger fuel tank and have enough to get you there without stopping before you head out.
Prior to Facebook, etc. there was AOL and Compuserve which had their own "walled gardens" and gated versions of the Internet.
Believe it or not, there was internet prior to AOL and Compuserve, and I don't recall Compuserver offering internet connectivity. AOL wasn't an ISP as we think of them today. They, like Compuserve, were nothing more than a massive bulletin board community which just happened to offer a portal to the internet in their latter years. It started off with Usenet access, and I do remember the shitstorm when AOL opened those floodgates. What a sad time that was. That, IMHO, is where the old, free internet started to die. As soon as the masses started flowing in, the corporations followed and started herding them into fenced in pastures ready to start plucking money out of their pockets.
Turn off automatic updates. I have two screens and I do just fine when booted in Windows (7, never had duel screens with XP), even while gaming. Hell, I like it while gaming as I can have the keyboard shortcuts or whatever else I want on the one screen while playing on the other. You may have to set your game to windowed mode and maximize it on one screen to get it to not try to use both screens, but so? It's not a deal breaker for me to actually have to make an effort to do something I want.
Windows sucks with multiple screens...
Again, just because you think something sucks, doesn't make it suck.
My car doesn't haul things as good as a truck, cars suck!
If you need to haul something, then yes cars do suck.
If you want to play games, then Linux sucks.
If you want freedom and choice in software, Windows sucks.
If you want freedom and choice in hardware, Apple sucks.
Everything sucks for some purpose or for some people.
Seriously, you are a tool h4rr4r, it gets old after a while.
What gets old is people saying something sucks because it sucks for them.
I use Linux as my primary OS because I like it. I use Windows as my gaming OS because some games I like don't run on Linux/Wine well or at all. Neither OS sucks (for me) for the purpose I use it, but they do suck (for me) for the purpose I use the other.
A requirement for a MOOC may be that they must be free, but the "definition" of the acronym is 'Massive Open Online Course'. Saying "free MOOC", or stating that a MOOC is free is quite different from saying "ATM machine" or "PIN number", where the redundancy is actually one of the words in the acronym being repeated.
I will admit I didn't look up the requirements for a MOOC, but, although I wasn't making an argument only asking a question, I will stand by my argument that there is no redundancy in the phrase "free MOOC".
You did answer my question though, By pointing me to the requirements of a MOOC you showed me where you got the idea that MOOC and free together are redundant.
Why is "Free MOOC" a redundant phrase? Open doesn’t necessarily have to mean free. It could mean open to anyone regardless of previous educational experience - meaning no prerequisite course (or proof thereof) required.
Slashdot Mirror
I have a dock for my Bionic, but it's not as simple as, say, dropping a POTS wireless phone in its cradle. The USB port is not designed for ease of connecting like is required for a doc and still needs to be aligned and a bit force used to connect and disconnect it. It still takes two hands and often 'sticks' when picking it up. Before you ask, no it's not a cheep dock either, its a Seidio. The micro USB port was not designed to be a docking connector, and with todays WiFi enabled phones, I connect to my home network when the phone is in range. I don't need a USB connector at all, I need power to charge and that's it.
Maybe I'm missing something, but don't the charging pads have to get their electricity from the mains somehow? It seems like a very marginal saving in time and convenience.
You don't have to worry about plugging in the phone all the time. When you want to use it, you just pick it up and there's no wire in the way. All you need is a charge pad on your desk, next to your 'lounging' chair, by the bed... wherever. It's as simple as setting the phone down and it's charging. No fumbling with cords or trying to align it just right in the dock.
FTFA: Yes, it turns out the the GS 4 does in fact have Qi wireless charging capabilities. Provided its available in your region and your carrier chooses to support it.
Why the region limitations and carrier "stamp of approval"? This, in my mind, says the U.S. cell providers are looking for a way to charge for charging. I can see it now, $.02/hour while sitting on the charge pad. For an extra $20.00/month, unlimited charging via the charge pad.
After market battery covers are available for the S3 and many other phones. The connectors and software are built in, but it seems it's the carriers who are stopping this. I currently have a Droid Bionic. Verizon made available for a limited time an inductive charging system, but try to find it now.
Why in the hell is induction charging not a standard feature for phones yet? Battery life would be less of an issue if we could just set the phone down on a charge pad and not worry about having to plug the thing in all the time. I'd be more than happy to have several charge pads around the house and at the office.
Hell, toothbrushes have had this technology for years.
Unless there's profit to be made. To hell with everything, if there's profit to be made.
Biggest annoyance keeping me from using Chrome more is the lack of a clear address bar plug-in. Linux has this wonderful feature of being able to highlight something then middle clicking to past it. Takes a couple of clicks away from a cut-n-paste action and is real easy to do while surfing around. Without a way to clear the address bar, this is useless. I've been using Linux for over 15 years, don't remember when it was introduced but I've become so accustomed to it, I really can't do without it.
Interesting way to look at it and something I didn't consider. However, even though that would apply to the overall picture of FaceBook, going back to the OC, it doesn't apply to my original question.
"Not having a right to the data but still having access to it" != "hacking" anymore than considering a janitor of a building a lockpicker if he has a master key and goes into a room he's been told to stay out of. It may get him in trouble, but he did not break into the room.
Please tell me where in that statement you got the idea he was implying Zuckerberg is a hacker. Even using the popular, but incorrect, definition of hacker does not apply here as Mark Zuckerberg owns Facebook and I'm sure he has no need to "hack" into the system to get at any information he wants.
Kind of like when AT&T collapsed under it's own weight in the 70's? Wait, our government stepped in and fixed that. Too bad our government is owned by the mega corporations now. I doubt we'll see anything like that again.
because the real estate prices are a lot less past my train stop
Yes, everyone on the planet spends as much as they can afford on their house and upgrades with every raise/job change.
Not to insult, but you sound a bit snobbish to me.
If you're talking out loud, why not just call the other person? Or, you know, think of the other people on the road and wait until you're not in the car fucking driving somewhere?
So this will be a free (as in beer) and anonymous WiFi? I wonder how there are going to cope with abuses.
A buttload of cameras and IP triangulation via the devices MAC?
Come on guy, do you not watch CSI/NCIS? With that much RF bouncing around, it wouldn't surprise me if they could identify you by your dental records.
Why does it cost so little to build, and yet so much (relatively) to maintain? Just over 100K to built, and almost 50K annually to maintain?
Probably, because it will take a few people a couple of months to install, and one or two permanent maintainers who have to be paid a yearly salary. Even with only one, however, $50,000 a year is way under what I think it will actually cost unless they duel or tri purpose the maintainer and dived his salary between projects. Once up and running, the only thing to do will be replace/reboot a transceiver every now and then, and they'd be fools to not have at least a 1% to 2% stock of spares.
Company policy isn't law. Too bad for them at least.
1. Successful crack demonstrates to hardware makers that the DRM is just a waste of resources.
Yeah, because that's worked so well on the gaming software industry.
Wouldn't something like this use twice the fuel needed to get to Mars? They don't accelerate the whole way, and having to stop in the middle and accelerate again, only to have to decelerate again when you reach Mars seems pointless and wasteful. I'll admit I'm not a rocket scientist or physicist, but I doubt there's a way to carry enough fuel to do a full burn all the way to Mars, even with a fuelling point half way there. At least not with fuel loaded before take off. If you're going to load up fuel after you leave Earth, why not just use a bigger fuel tank and have enough to get you there without stopping before you head out.
Prior to Facebook, etc. there was AOL and Compuserve which had their own "walled gardens" and gated versions of the Internet.
Believe it or not, there was internet prior to AOL and Compuserve, and I don't recall Compuserver offering internet connectivity. AOL wasn't an ISP as we think of them today. They, like Compuserve, were nothing more than a massive bulletin board community which just happened to offer a portal to the internet in their latter years. It started off with Usenet access, and I do remember the shitstorm when AOL opened those floodgates. What a sad time that was. That, IMHO, is where the old, free internet started to die. As soon as the masses started flowing in, the corporations followed and started herding them into fenced in pastures ready to start plucking money out of their pockets.
Its nothing that hasn't been done for as long as I've used computers.
Come on BitZtream, we've been over this many times before. This is " on a mobile device ", so it's never been done before. Get with the times, man.
Turn off automatic updates. I have two screens and I do just fine when booted in Windows (7, never had duel screens with XP), even while gaming. Hell, I like it while gaming as I can have the keyboard shortcuts or whatever else I want on the one screen while playing on the other. You may have to set your game to windowed mode and maximize it on one screen to get it to not try to use both screens, but so? It's not a deal breaker for me to actually have to make an effort to do something I want.
Windows sucks with multiple screens...
Again, just because you think something sucks, doesn't make it suck.
TLDR: Don't be lazy, you'll miss out on a lot...
I highly doubt the higher income is due to the platform. That's like saying Benz owners make way more money than Chevy owners. It's a no brainier.
My car doesn't haul things as good as a truck, cars suck!
If you need to haul something, then yes cars do suck.
If you want to play games, then Linux sucks.
If you want freedom and choice in software, Windows sucks.
If you want freedom and choice in hardware, Apple sucks.
Everything sucks for some purpose or for some people.
Seriously, you are a tool h4rr4r, it gets old after a while.
What gets old is people saying something sucks because it sucks for them.
I use Linux as my primary OS because I like it. I use Windows as my gaming OS because some games I like don't run on Linux/Wine well or at all. Neither OS sucks (for me) for the purpose I use it, but they do suck (for me) for the purpose I use the other.
Here ya go...
A requirement for a MOOC may be that they must be free, but the "definition" of the acronym is 'Massive Open Online Course'. Saying "free MOOC", or stating that a MOOC is free is quite different from saying "ATM machine" or "PIN number", where the redundancy is actually one of the words in the acronym being repeated.
I will admit I didn't look up the requirements for a MOOC, but, although I wasn't making an argument only asking a question, I will stand by my argument that there is no redundancy in the phrase "free MOOC".
You did answer my question though, By pointing me to the requirements of a MOOC you showed me where you got the idea that MOOC and free together are redundant.
Why is "Free MOOC" a redundant phrase? Open doesn’t necessarily have to mean free. It could mean open to anyone regardless of previous educational experience - meaning no prerequisite course (or proof thereof) required.