well, if a website can see the header and therefore choose not to track the info they already have...
why not reverse the behaviour and instead introduce a "TRACKING IS OK" header, where a website may only track the user if this header exists. That would be opt-in, and is how it should be.
Companies that want to track user preferences etc should require the users express permission first - and even then that permission should be on a case-by-case basis, not a blanket "I do/dont allow tracking". With this method, it seems that you either trust all websites, or none...although I'd imagine features will be added that make it selective based on the website or base domain.
well, for the group that are forced to buy a new phone, this may well make them reconsider buying another motorola phone and instead look elsewhere.
the geeks/hackers would probably research the phone first and steer clear of it in the first place...if not - its a lesson learned and they will not buy from motorola again.
so really the only ones that will continue to buy motorola are the ones who didn't care about software updates anyway, hence my reasoning for saying that their logic is flawed if they think e-fuse is "working" for them.
The public will treat it the same as DRM, and eventually the public will learn to only choose "unlockable" phones, or knowingly give up that "right".
ah, must be a US-only thing. I think we have the reverse situation here in Australia where the carriers wipe their hands of the update and point customers to samsung instead.
actually I think that is the "right way" to do it, but it may take a while for some carriers to agree.
This is not a question of the OS, but a question of the app delivery model.
The same trick would be possible on iOS or WP7 but the app would be less likely to be approved (although some suspect apps have been approved in the past).
We are now in the digital age, where digital media can be consumed on so many different devices around the home and also ones we take with us.....except that the media companies are still in the stone age!
Here in Australia we can get digital music from itunes and bigpondmusic and that's about it. Thankfully bigpondmusic do MP3 and itunes is now DRM-free.
For video it is the same choice - itunes and bigpondmovies. And its been this way for years.
Its time for the media companies to wake up and smell the roses...
and their statement pretends that this lockdown is the feature that is bringing people to their phones ?!
I challenge Motorola, if they want to stand by their claims, ask your customers the following:
Did e-fuse contribute to you buying this phone? A: yes B: no, I bought it despite e-fuse. C: didnt care either way. D: what is this "e-fuse" you speak of?
I'd expect a lot of D's and maybe C's, and a number of B's as well. And there will be 1 person who ticked A (there always is).
For the vast majority of the smart phone crowd, they do not care. Just as long as they can get that "urgent" work email, post a picture of their lunch and tweet about how tired they are in the evening.
But surely this works both ways, and is actually in favour of motorola not locking their devices down as much. Those that dont care need not worry whether it can be rooted or not, but those that do care actually have a choice now.
not in our lifetime buddy, and pretty darn likely even our descendants wont see it either. humans will die out (war, climate change, disease, infertility etc) long before any new life is ever discovered.
We have a human who as yet cannot create life and has not witnessed life on any other planet, imagining that he knows what it takes to create life, and knows what a planet needs to have in order for life to originate.
Smell the irony.
So a planet like Earth which is the opposite of ideal for life has life on it (a LOT of life on it), and all the other known planets, some of which may be more likely to form life, do not have life on them (or at least so little life that we cannot see even a tiny speck of it).
I'm off to tell GM that the machinery in their factory is not suitable for making cars.
Mostly what people refer to as fragmentation is just that there are so many different devices. However I refer to this as "choice" because all of these devices run the same or similar version of android, and the user is informed of this before purchasing it.
If you choose not to go google, then you accept that you may not receive updates quickly, or at all.
However you are referring to those products which are not elligible for an update, like the initial run of android phones (G1, Magic/Dream etc). These are in fact still capable of running Android 2.2 through the likes of cyanogen, but to a degree this is the same as older iOS devices.
If you buy google, then Android has no fragmentation. people just need to be smarter with their choices if they are concerned about fragmentation.
but the numbers we are seeing point to most people not caring about fragmentation at all, making it a "non-issue" (for most people).
what if kids with a pre-existing mental illness have a greater tendancy to turn to video games for gratification and recreation? how would you know which way the correlation was? or what if both of these things were simply effects of a completely separate cause?
I sort of agree with you, but these are KIDS - who more than likely would never do housework or school work if there was a more favourable alternative given to them.
Essentially it means they didn't see any value in the school work vs playing games, and this could run deeper. It does not take into account parenting, background, and things like that (you cant guage that from a survey).
surveys also have a margin of error, where people for whatever reason answer incorrectly on purpose.
even your questions above do not discern whether the behaviour is just an outworking of a deeper issue. The video games may not be the cause, and I would suggest that all of these behaviours (including playing video games excessively) are simply effects of a greater root cause, such as a lack of self-esteem etc. which is more than likely "learnt" from dealings with real people in the first place.
its unlikely anyone developed a low self-esteem from playing computer games...but its very likely that those with a low self-esteem (gained from bad experiences in dealing with real people/peers) will turn to video games as a means of escape.
So I think this study interprets the results wrongly. I'd be looking into what caused the social deficiency in the first place, because I'd say that falls back on other factors, and not video games.
Hell, this study was nothing more then a survey anyways.. from the Reuters article...
The questions included things like having neglected household chores to spend more time on video games, doing poorly on a school assignment or test as a result, or playing video games to escape from problems or bad feelings.
to me all of those things would apply to 99% of kids.
SO the study has found that:
* Kids enjoy games more than schoolwork and household chores. * Kids perform poorly at school work when they dont spend much time on it. * Kids use video games to escape from reality (um, almost everyone does things LIKE video games to escape reality - eg, watch movies, read books, pretty much anything non-fiction).
so this just tells me that all of the kids in the survey are quite normal then.
nothing to see here...just another "study" which already had the conclusion it wanted mapped out before it began.
further, how can they link it to mental illness?? most mental illnesses aren't diagnosed until late teens/early twenties, and yet this only went up to the 8th grade...?!
No one is saying that, they are just saying that the study is not proof. It may SUGGEST a link, but it does not prove one.
Let me knock it down in one hit. Suppose people with a mental illness (particularly social phobia) were more likely to play video games than those who are more socially active. This would explain the study and also cast doubt on it at the same time.
It all comes down to one thing:
correlation is not causation.
Say that over and over until your tongue falls out. It MAY be, but this study doesn't prove it. and in fact most such studies never will.
So you can link certain behaviours...big deal. How do you know which was the cause and which is the effect. Or maybe they are both effects of a separate cause altogether?? This study does nothing to explore these questions.
define geek. There are many types of geeks, so just being a geek doesn't mean you're more likely to use one or the other OS.
eg. anyone who is into games will run Windows. End of story.
However, how many software developers prefer Windows these days? I'd say it depends on what languages/APIs they use. If they're a.NET/VB/VC type, then MS is their bread-and-butter. However for anything else there almost always is a preference for Linux or OSX.
Your reasoning is also flawed. You mention windows is popular because it gets things done, doesn't crash and has drivers for everything. My (k)ubuntu desktop does all of that. And for anyone who uses it, it does it just as well. I think Windows is a little more convenient overall, but only in the things you might occasionally want to do, and sometimes only because it is the most common (including all the flow-on effects of that).
Then how do you explain Microsoft, which has never had a very positive image, yet managed to dominate both the desktop operating system and Web browser markets?
Just goes to show you, backroom deals and monopolist strongarming also have their place in business, and can sometimes trump "image."
hmmm, I think you'll find MS has actually had a pretty positive image globally. You're talking about MS not having a good image to IT professionals (and even then there's probably a 50-50 split) - but if you look at it from the point of view of the general public and especially management in any company, MS looks quite attractive.
Who wouldn't want relatively stable, high-quality products to run every part of your business, all integrated together and backed by a multi-billion dollar company? Sure, that is marketing-speak, and we know the real story, but this is about company IMAGE, and I think MS still have that. They have slipped a bit in recent years however...mainly due to Bill Gates leaving and Steve Ballmer running the show...which is an interesting comparison to Apple.
I never understood the volatility of Apple's stock. Jobs could stub his toe and the stock would drop. Someone who works at Infinite Loop could get constipated, and the stock would drop. Someone's iPhone could get a scratch on the front glass, and the stock would drop.
Why is Apple's stock so prone to heavy fluctuation at the even the slightest hint of something not being perfect?
Its because history shows that Apple have failed before when Steve Jobs was not at the wheel.
Its not that Apple will fail without Steve Jobs, its that the world loses CONFIDENCE in Apple when Steve Jobs is not in control.
meh, its not 2 different terms - its the same thing.
My original comment above is basically to say that what some people call "fragmentation", I refer to as the product of offering choice to users. Its a side-effect and one cant have it both ways.
I prefer the android platform with all its variations, while others prefer iOS with all its limitations. Its just your preference that determines how you see the issue...
I'm a developer and I disagree with you. If I were developing an app, I may target 2.0 or 1.6, but I'd still be making sure it works on a Nexus One and Nexus S first.
If those 2 phones are not on your testing list, you're doing it wrong, or not serious about your app.
Slashdot Mirror
well, if a website can see the header and therefore choose not to track the info they already have...
why not reverse the behaviour and instead introduce a "TRACKING IS OK" header, where a website may only track the user if this header exists. That would be opt-in, and is how it should be.
Companies that want to track user preferences etc should require the users express permission first - and even then that permission should be on a case-by-case basis, not a blanket "I do/dont allow tracking". With this method, it seems that you either trust all websites, or none...although I'd imagine features will be added that make it selective based on the website or base domain.
well, for the group that are forced to buy a new phone, this may well make them reconsider buying another motorola phone and instead look elsewhere.
the geeks/hackers would probably research the phone first and steer clear of it in the first place...if not - its a lesson learned and they will not buy from motorola again.
so really the only ones that will continue to buy motorola are the ones who didn't care about software updates anyway, hence my reasoning for saying that their logic is flawed if they think e-fuse is "working" for them.
The public will treat it the same as DRM, and eventually the public will learn to only choose "unlockable" phones, or knowingly give up that "right".
ah, must be a US-only thing. I think we have the reverse situation here in Australia where the carriers wipe their hands of the update and point customers to samsung instead.
actually I think that is the "right way" to do it, but it may take a while for some carriers to agree.
I wonder if there is room for google to host a 2nd app store that is vetted, thereby having the best of both worlds.
Or better, they should have a certification system for apps, so that apps market with the tick of approval are guaranteed "safe" by google.
This is not a question of the OS, but a question of the app delivery model.
The same trick would be possible on iOS or WP7 but the app would be less likely to be approved (although some suspect apps have been approved in the past).
its not just the record companies.
We are now in the digital age, where digital media can be consumed on so many different devices around the home and also ones we take with us.....except that the media companies are still in the stone age!
Here in Australia we can get digital music from itunes and bigpondmusic and that's about it. Thankfully bigpondmusic do MP3 and itunes is now DRM-free.
For video it is the same choice - itunes and bigpondmovies. And its been this way for years.
Its time for the media companies to wake up and smell the roses...
and their statement pretends that this lockdown is the feature that is bringing people to their phones ?!
I challenge Motorola, if they want to stand by their claims, ask your customers the following:
Did e-fuse contribute to you buying this phone?
A: yes
B: no, I bought it despite e-fuse.
C: didnt care either way.
D: what is this "e-fuse" you speak of?
I'd expect a lot of D's and maybe C's, and a number of B's as well. And there will be 1 person who ticked A (there always is).
However, for that to happen, people need to care.
For the vast majority of the smart phone crowd, they do not care. Just as long as they can get that "urgent" work email, post a picture of their lunch and tweet about how tired they are in the evening.
But surely this works both ways, and is actually in favour of motorola not locking their devices down as much. Those that dont care need not worry whether it can be rooted or not, but those that do care actually have a choice now.
I was just about to say what your sig already said.
They've never charged for an update for the galaxy s/nexus s...which are the phones referred to by the parent.
exactly. so should we stop kids playing computer games or should we be more aware of mental illnesses and work on fixing those?
And I'm willing to bet its not that simple either.
not in our lifetime buddy, and pretty darn likely even our descendants wont see it either. humans will die out (war, climate change, disease, infertility etc) long before any new life is ever discovered.
still feeling comfortable?
Well, therein lies the interesting thing.
We have a human who as yet cannot create life and has not witnessed life on any other planet, imagining that he knows what it takes to create life, and knows what a planet needs to have in order for life to originate.
Smell the irony.
So a planet like Earth which is the opposite of ideal for life has life on it (a LOT of life on it), and all the other known planets, some of which may be more likely to form life, do not have life on them (or at least so little life that we cannot see even a tiny speck of it).
I'm off to tell GM that the machinery in their factory is not suitable for making cars.
it depends.
Mostly what people refer to as fragmentation is just that there are so many different devices. However I refer to this as "choice" because all of these devices run the same or similar version of android, and the user is informed of this before purchasing it.
If you choose not to go google, then you accept that you may not receive updates quickly, or at all.
However you are referring to those products which are not elligible for an update, like the initial run of android phones (G1, Magic/Dream etc). These are in fact still capable of running Android 2.2 through the likes of cyanogen, but to a degree this is the same as older iOS devices.
If you buy google, then Android has no fragmentation. people just need to be smarter with their choices if they are concerned about fragmentation.
but the numbers we are seeing point to most people not caring about fragmentation at all, making it a "non-issue" (for most people).
what if kids with a pre-existing mental illness have a greater tendancy to turn to video games for gratification and recreation? how would you know which way the correlation was?
or what if both of these things were simply effects of a completely separate cause?
I sort of agree with you, but these are KIDS - who more than likely would never do housework or school work if there was a more favourable alternative given to them.
Essentially it means they didn't see any value in the school work vs playing games, and this could run deeper. It does not take into account parenting, background, and things like that (you cant guage that from a survey).
surveys also have a margin of error, where people for whatever reason answer incorrectly on purpose.
even your questions above do not discern whether the behaviour is just an outworking of a deeper issue. The video games may not be the cause, and I would suggest that all of these behaviours (including playing video games excessively) are simply effects of a greater root cause, such as a lack of self-esteem etc. which is more than likely "learnt" from dealings with real people in the first place.
its unlikely anyone developed a low self-esteem from playing computer games...but its very likely that those with a low self-esteem (gained from bad experiences in dealing with real people/peers) will turn to video games as a means of escape.
So I think this study interprets the results wrongly. I'd be looking into what caused the social deficiency in the first place, because I'd say that falls back on other factors, and not video games.
Hell, this study was nothing more then a survey anyways.. from the Reuters article...
The questions included things like having neglected household chores to spend more time on video games, doing poorly on a school assignment or test as a result, or playing video games to escape from problems or bad feelings.
to me all of those things would apply to 99% of kids.
SO the study has found that:
* Kids enjoy games more than schoolwork and household chores.
* Kids perform poorly at school work when they dont spend much time on it.
* Kids use video games to escape from reality (um, almost everyone does things LIKE video games to escape reality - eg, watch movies, read books, pretty much anything non-fiction).
so this just tells me that all of the kids in the survey are quite normal then.
nothing to see here...just another "study" which already had the conclusion it wanted mapped out before it began.
further, how can they link it to mental illness?? most mental illnesses aren't diagnosed until late teens/early twenties, and yet this only went up to the 8th grade...?!
No one is saying that, they are just saying that the study is not proof. It may SUGGEST a link, but it does not prove one.
Let me knock it down in one hit. Suppose people with a mental illness (particularly social phobia) were more likely to play video games than those who are more socially active. This would explain the study and also cast doubt on it at the same time.
It all comes down to one thing:
correlation is not causation.
Say that over and over until your tongue falls out. It MAY be, but this study doesn't prove it. and in fact most such studies never will.
So you can link certain behaviours...big deal. How do you know which was the cause and which is the effect. Or maybe they are both effects of a separate cause altogether?? This study does nothing to explore these questions.
galaxy s, nexus s...
but if no one liked Apple, the iphone wouldn't have gotten off the ground at all. What was your point again?
define geek. There are many types of geeks, so just being a geek doesn't mean you're more likely to use one or the other OS.
eg. anyone who is into games will run Windows. End of story.
However, how many software developers prefer Windows these days? I'd say it depends on what languages/APIs they use. If they're a .NET/VB/VC type, then MS is their bread-and-butter. However for anything else there almost always is a preference for Linux or OSX.
Your reasoning is also flawed. You mention windows is popular because it gets things done, doesn't crash and has drivers for everything. My (k)ubuntu desktop does all of that. And for anyone who uses it, it does it just as well. I think Windows is a little more convenient overall, but only in the things you might occasionally want to do, and sometimes only because it is the most common (including all the flow-on effects of that).
Then how do you explain Microsoft, which has never had a very positive image, yet managed to dominate both the desktop operating system and Web browser markets?
Just goes to show you, backroom deals and monopolist strongarming also have their place in business, and can sometimes trump "image."
hmmm, I think you'll find MS has actually had a pretty positive image globally. You're talking about MS not having a good image to IT professionals (and even then there's probably a 50-50 split) - but if you look at it from the point of view of the general public and especially management in any company, MS looks quite attractive.
Who wouldn't want relatively stable, high-quality products to run every part of your business, all integrated together and backed by a multi-billion dollar company? Sure, that is marketing-speak, and we know the real story, but this is about company IMAGE, and I think MS still have that. They have slipped a bit in recent years however...mainly due to Bill Gates leaving and Steve Ballmer running the show...which is an interesting comparison to Apple.
I never understood the volatility of Apple's stock. Jobs could stub his toe and the stock would drop. Someone who works at Infinite Loop could get constipated, and the stock would drop. Someone's iPhone could get a scratch on the front glass, and the stock would drop.
Why is Apple's stock so prone to heavy fluctuation at the even the slightest hint of something not being perfect?
Its because history shows that Apple have failed before when Steve Jobs was not at the wheel.
Its not that Apple will fail without Steve Jobs, its that the world loses CONFIDENCE in Apple when Steve Jobs is not in control.
meh, its not 2 different terms - its the same thing.
My original comment above is basically to say that what some people call "fragmentation", I refer to as the product of offering choice to users. Its a side-effect and one cant have it both ways.
I prefer the android platform with all its variations, while others prefer iOS with all its limitations. Its just your preference that determines how you see the issue...
you mean like 4.2?
try running 4.0 on older ipods...
try running 4.0+ on the original iphone - yes it runs, but very badly. depends on your definition of "doesnt work".
I'm a developer and I disagree with you. If I were developing an app, I may target 2.0 or 1.6, but I'd still be making sure it works on a Nexus One and Nexus S first.
If those 2 phones are not on your testing list, you're doing it wrong, or not serious about your app.