5) Safari performance is up 6) Battery life is down 7) Non-Retina displays have legibility issues
Battery life is actually pretty much the same in my usage (I'm a developer with pre-release access) and in reviews.
But yeah, non-retina is on the way out. Fortunately the only non-retina devices supported are iPad 2 and iPad Mini. No no-retina phone makes the requirement cut.
You mean the empty space on the left and right of the button on all iPhones that's essentially wasted? If the entire face of the phone was the screen and the phone relied exclusively on soft buttons then you'd have a point. But as it stands now, there could be buttons on either side. Look at the S4 for an example.
The space that is usually used for a navigation title and a secondary button?
Yes, totally wasted. It would be like if Android put a bar at the top of every app that had a navigation title and some sort of back button, with a secondary button. Maybe they would call it something like the action bar.
Back in 2005 some car thieves in Malaysia tried to steal a Merc S Class with some kind of biometric immobilizer. When they realized they couldn't get the darn thing running without a finger print, they merely chopped the owner's finger off with a machete (I swear it's true: BBC Article).
I wonder who will be the first to lose an iPhone along with a finger.
If the phone goes long enough without being unlocked it reverts back to a passcode. So a chopped off finger won't get you in. Neither will law enforcement forcing you to touch the home button.
I'm also pretty sure the type of sensor in the 5S won't work with a "dead" finger anyway.
Firstly, if Apple is lying, and the fingerprint information is not stuck inside the chip like they say, hackers WILL discover it.
This is the absurd part. People are screaming that Apple could send the fingerprint to the NSA, and we'd have no idea. I'm sorry, I didn't know I was on the "My First Computer Forum" and not Slashdot. You guys know how to use packet sniffers, right? And I'm sure a few people here can read a decompiled Mach-O/Arm binary, right?
The idea that if Apple was sending around fingerprints they'd get away with it is really laughable. Remember the time they were storying GPS data on the phone and they got discovered real quick? That data didn't even leave the device. There are no secrets on the device or on the network. Sure, Apple may not put the source in a public place, but they put the binaries on every device, which is the next best thing,
People are playing dumb and putting up straw men arguments on purpose. I'm not saying we should blindly trust whatever Apple says. I'm saying that it somehow being unverifiable is a false claim.
http://tech.slashdot.org/story/13/07/30/2322253/google-argues-against-net-neutrality its a dupe. Its the same dumb points from anonymous cowards. Google want to charge businesses for attaching servers to the internet...and yet this has been twisted into a Net Neutrality argument, by changing the definition of Net Neutrality "discriminating or charging differentially by user, content, site, platform, application, type of attached equipment, and modes of communication" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Net_neutrality . I'm just shocked its not an Ars Technica...maybe they are still defending the iPhone launch.
Seems like it fits Net Neutrality perfectly to me. Google is discriminating based on content, right?
If Google is universally looking down on servers, they're going after people hosting things from Starcraft servers to running Bittorrent, right? If those are allowed behaviors, then they're discriminating based on type of content.
Google basically said "If you run a Starcraft server, that's ok. If you run an HTTP server, shame on you!" The irony is that an HTTP server is probably lower bandwidth than the other kinds of servers they allow. That's the sort of discrimination an "evil" company would do just to profit more of business use, the sort of thing that's not really grounded in common sense.
Really? Java is still the #1 language and will remain so for a long time to come. The toddlers will use the supposed hip languages all they want meanwhile most other devs are just using Java and solving real problems.
Oh and Java uptake is usually 1 to 2 years not 4.
I remember when Java was the language for "toddlers."
Libertarians (both big "L" and little "l") generally want free-markets.
I'm filing that under "still yet to be seen." I'm not convinced that if Libertarians obtained significant office they wouldn't have lots of money thrown at them and the exact same thing would happen. It's easy to make stands on principal when no one is trying to pressure you.
This seems to be Sony's hedging of their bets that maybe handheld gaming devices are in their dying days. They get to turn the Vita into a pseudo-console/PS4 accessory and keep developers on the Vita platform in general. Maybe this is what Nintendo should be doing instead of a 2DS?
Nintendo's problem is really that the Wii U doesn't have any games. 3DS games are designed for dual screen and touch, so you can't put those on a TV, and a Wii U accessory to stream the games that don't exist for the Wii U solves nothing.
The approach they are taking is probably the best course of action: Fix the lack of games on the Wii U.
It's perfectly possible to negotiate on FRAND patents. It's very common to cross-license, for example, so no money changes hands between two or more companies for FRAND patents.
What FRAND really means is that anybody can automatically get a license for a set rate. They can negotiate down from there.
This can erect substantial barriers to entry, since a newcomer may have to pay FRAND rate on numerous patent bundles, but in that case the newcomer is attempting to use the work of others to get started, and arguably should pay more.
Sure, I'll buy cross licensing, but the license is also nondiscriminatory. You can't charge two people two different rates. That kind of crimps negotiation right there. If Motorola even offered Microsoft a price different than what they are charging someone else (I'm guessing based on that price that they did), that would be outside of FRAND.
And to your point, a newcomer could go back and ask for their price to be dropped if someone new entered that got a lower price. You really aren't supposed to be charging different companies different things.
Yes, the demands were exorbitant. The problem is that MS decided to immediately go to court rather than negotiate. Usually companies go back and forth and settle on a price. MS decided to short circuit that give and take and instead went straight to a court in Seattle. MS has never been one to compromise with anybody, and now all of a sudden when they have to negotiate with large companies they throw temper tantrums.
FRAND patents are supposed to have set rates. There is no negotiation.
Dictators would love for masses with clownlike minds like yours, who are ready to jump on the meme that those who dislike gigantic government are morally bad or evil.
There is nothing absolutist about it.
Here's my basic problem with your attitude...
If you had your way, the only people who would be left in government would be those who abuse it. Government works when everyone participates. The government isn't some giant black box. Everyone who's in government gets sent there by us, until people stop caring, or stop participating. Of course government becomes corrupt when the only people left who participate in it are the corrupt ones.
Ever wonder why the people who abuse governmental power the most are the ones who claim that government is too big/evil/useless? Because they want everyone out of their way. If everyone stops paying attention to government, they don't have anyone standing in there way.
So, with that attitude, you're working for the very sort of politicians you dislike. Whether or not you realize it yet. Disliking gigantic government is an absolutist position because it has nothing to do at all with the quality of government, which is the real concern. There are plenty of larger governments that have many happy citizens, and plenty of small governments that torture and kill people.
This seems to blow past the standardized testing itself being part of the problem, no?
I don't see standardized testing being part of the problem. Things like "teaching to the test" are just a rather obvious sign that the school in question no longer educates its students, but milks them for funding.
Isn't that exactly the behavior standardized testing encourages?
Less diligent students means lower test scores and less warm bodies in the classroom. That means less funding and hence. less money and power for the parasites running things.
This seems to blow past the standardized testing itself being part of the problem, no? Might be worth revisiting the premise here.
A better analogy would be taking some millionaires and throwing them in a ghetto. Bet you that ghetto would be nice and clean real quick.
I should also add, before the "What an awful idea crowd!" shows up, this is an actual urban planning technique. I live in on of the nicest buildings in town, but we're right across from low (and I do mean low) income housing. It's probably the shiniest low income housing I've seen in my life.
I bet if you sent your kids to the ghetto, you'd do everything you could to improve it!
I don't think her logic would be entirely off there... If everyone sent their kids to a ghetto, parents would be throwing their money at improving the ghetto.
But given that the entire point is to educate kids, and a ghetto doesn't really achieve that (aside from teaching your kids about dumpster diving among other things), this line of reasoning is a bit of a straw man, no? A better analogy would be taking some millionaires and throwing them in a ghetto. Bet you that ghetto would be nice and clean real quick.
I work hard. I worry about retirement, about having kids. I can't AFFORD to spend "extra" to go green. I will do what is cheapest. If, in the long run, a 30 mpg car helps my pocketbook over a 50 mpg car, I'll get it. I make no apologies.
And here's the economic problem to global warming: there is no cost to damaging the planet.
Why do you train your kids to behave in a store? Because if they go around breaking things, you have to pay for them. That's a real, short term, economic cost, so you're going to make sure you train your kids not to break anything. Same reason you try not to speed (tickets), you try not to hit other people's cares (pay for the damage), or get in late to work (fired).
Yet, while all these things have costs, breaking the planet does not. You can damage our air supply with gas emissions from your car all you want, and no one says boo. The planet certainly can't sue you, and there is no "pay for the air you just broke" cost.
So that's where typically the government steps in. Break a river? You pay for it. Break a forest? Pay for it. No one is assuming the money will actually fix the problem (it's not as simple as buying a new forest), but it offers a short term incentive for these companies not to do these things by attaching a monetary cost to these public properties that they have damaged.
So what do we do? If you want to pollute the air, you need to pay for the air you polluted. Bet that would change your habits real quick if you actually had to pay the real cost for things.
Microsoft believes that 8.1 is so much like 8.0 that it won't need testing. They've stated this multiple times before.
Considering that they do actually do extensive testing and dogfooding, its probably reasonably safe.
It also means they are telling you that they didn't make any real changes and are charging you for the service pack they refuse to create for 8.0.
Oh c'mon...
Even Apple betas their minor patches to developers before release.
What Microsoft believes and what the reality is could be two different things. Even if they aren't, what's the harm in releasing a beta to give developers some assurance that nothing actually has changed?
Many open source projects and organizations aren't a business, and it can be challenging for nerds to keep track of tax rules for various organization types. Depending on where you have your base the rules may differ, and there may even be rules that exempt you from filing the taxes at all.
Which is why you get an accountant.
If you accept money, prepare to get an accountant. No one made X.Org accept money.
but instead of the boringly predictable GOOGLE IS EVIL!!!!1eleventy karma-whoring[1], shall we examine why exactly this third-party program broke with the new update?
Were they, perchance, using an undocumented API, or one that was known to be unstable?
The accusation (and the supplied evidence) is not that the API changed, it's that Google intentionally blocked this behavior with a white list.
Do you think that Snowden will prove to be the trigger to the 3rd WW? (but an information/electronic one this time)
It's amusing that one would think that the information WW hadn't been going on long before Snowden.
A quiet but always present information war has been going on for thousands of years. States spy on one another to try to learn everything. Technology has changed the nature of the game, but the game itself has always been there. Snowden's revelations are interesting for their information on domestic spying, but the level of international spying shouldn't be a surprise to anyway.
What is best? Stay in home and hoping that no bored neighbourn will kill you, or actually go out, make mistakes, and, guess what, be a human being? A Man? But not THE man of course.
Yes. Who cares what politicians do? If Wikileaks stands for anything, it stands for "Politicians make mistakes, let's just all move on and ignore them. So what?"
But can you build it and use it in your OS X system?
Yes.
There are even delta patches posted to match it to your current OS X system.
I should add that you can build it and run it even WITHOUT an OS X system. People used to run the core (called Darwin) on Intel boxes well before Apple supported Intel. There were even distributions with XWindows thrown on top.
Slashdot Mirror
You missed:
5) Safari performance is up
6) Battery life is down
7) Non-Retina displays have legibility issues
Battery life is actually pretty much the same in my usage (I'm a developer with pre-release access) and in reviews.
But yeah, non-retina is on the way out. Fortunately the only non-retina devices supported are iPad 2 and iPad Mini. No no-retina phone makes the requirement cut.
You mean the empty space on the left and right of the button on all iPhones that's essentially wasted? If the entire face of the phone was the screen and the phone relied exclusively on soft buttons then you'd have a point. But as it stands now, there could be buttons on either side. Look at the S4 for an example.
The space that is usually used for a navigation title and a secondary button?
Yes, totally wasted. It would be like if Android put a bar at the top of every app that had a navigation title and some sort of back button, with a secondary button. Maybe they would call it something like the action bar.
Oh wait, that's exactly what they do.
http://developer.android.com/guide/topics/ui/actionbar.html
Has Apple added extra buttons for a menu and a back button? That would be the most useful UI design change.
Even Android killed the menu button. It's a horrible idea. Users never notice the menu button.
Back in 2005 some car thieves in Malaysia tried to steal a Merc S Class with some kind of biometric immobilizer. When they realized they couldn't get the darn thing running without a finger print, they merely chopped the owner's finger off with a machete (I swear it's true: BBC Article).
I wonder who will be the first to lose an iPhone along with a finger.
If the phone goes long enough without being unlocked it reverts back to a passcode. So a chopped off finger won't get you in. Neither will law enforcement forcing you to touch the home button.
I'm also pretty sure the type of sensor in the 5S won't work with a "dead" finger anyway.
Firstly, if Apple is lying, and the fingerprint information is not stuck inside the chip like they say, hackers WILL discover it.
This is the absurd part. People are screaming that Apple could send the fingerprint to the NSA, and we'd have no idea. I'm sorry, I didn't know I was on the "My First Computer Forum" and not Slashdot. You guys know how to use packet sniffers, right? And I'm sure a few people here can read a decompiled Mach-O/Arm binary, right?
The idea that if Apple was sending around fingerprints they'd get away with it is really laughable. Remember the time they were storying GPS data on the phone and they got discovered real quick? That data didn't even leave the device. There are no secrets on the device or on the network. Sure, Apple may not put the source in a public place, but they put the binaries on every device, which is the next best thing,
People are playing dumb and putting up straw men arguments on purpose. I'm not saying we should blindly trust whatever Apple says. I'm saying that it somehow being unverifiable is a false claim.
http://tech.slashdot.org/story/13/07/30/2322253/google-argues-against-net-neutrality its a dupe. Its the same dumb points from anonymous cowards. Google want to charge businesses for attaching servers to the internet...and yet this has been twisted into a Net Neutrality argument, by changing the definition of Net Neutrality "discriminating or charging differentially by user, content, site, platform, application, type of attached equipment, and modes of communication" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Net_neutrality . I'm just shocked its not an Ars Technica...maybe they are still defending the iPhone launch.
Seems like it fits Net Neutrality perfectly to me. Google is discriminating based on content, right?
If Google is universally looking down on servers, they're going after people hosting things from Starcraft servers to running Bittorrent, right? If those are allowed behaviors, then they're discriminating based on type of content.
Google basically said "If you run a Starcraft server, that's ok. If you run an HTTP server, shame on you!" The irony is that an HTTP server is probably lower bandwidth than the other kinds of servers they allow. That's the sort of discrimination an "evil" company would do just to profit more of business use, the sort of thing that's not really grounded in common sense.
Really? Java is still the #1 language and will remain so for a long time to come. The toddlers will use the supposed hip languages all they want meanwhile most other devs are just using Java and solving real problems.
Oh and Java uptake is usually 1 to 2 years not 4.
I remember when Java was the language for "toddlers."
Careful with your over confidence.
Libertarians (both big "L" and little "l") generally want free-markets.
I'm filing that under "still yet to be seen." I'm not convinced that if Libertarians obtained significant office they wouldn't have lots of money thrown at them and the exact same thing would happen. It's easy to make stands on principal when no one is trying to pressure you.
This seems to be Sony's hedging of their bets that maybe handheld gaming devices are in their dying days. They get to turn the Vita into a pseudo-console/PS4 accessory and keep developers on the Vita platform in general. Maybe this is what Nintendo should be doing instead of a 2DS?
Nintendo's problem is really that the Wii U doesn't have any games. 3DS games are designed for dual screen and touch, so you can't put those on a TV, and a Wii U accessory to stream the games that don't exist for the Wii U solves nothing.
The approach they are taking is probably the best course of action: Fix the lack of games on the Wii U.
It's perfectly possible to negotiate on FRAND patents. It's very common to cross-license, for example, so no money changes hands between two or more companies for FRAND patents.
What FRAND really means is that anybody can automatically get a license for a set rate. They can negotiate down from there.
This can erect substantial barriers to entry, since a newcomer may have to pay FRAND rate on numerous patent bundles, but in that case the newcomer is attempting to use the work of others to get started, and arguably should pay more.
Sure, I'll buy cross licensing, but the license is also nondiscriminatory. You can't charge two people two different rates. That kind of crimps negotiation right there. If Motorola even offered Microsoft a price different than what they are charging someone else (I'm guessing based on that price that they did), that would be outside of FRAND.
And to your point, a newcomer could go back and ask for their price to be dropped if someone new entered that got a lower price. You really aren't supposed to be charging different companies different things.
in the mean time microsoft has no issue charging a similar percentage to android manufacturers
http://bgr.com/2013/05/01/microsofts-android-licensing-agreements-earnings/
That's a bundle of multiple patents, and none of them are FRAND.
Comparing Apples to Oranges.
Yes, the demands were exorbitant. The problem is that MS decided to immediately go to court rather than negotiate. Usually companies go back and forth and settle on a price. MS decided to short circuit that give and take and instead went straight to a court in Seattle. MS has never been one to compromise with anybody, and now all of a sudden when they have to negotiate with large companies they throw temper tantrums.
FRAND patents are supposed to have set rates. There is no negotiation.
Dictators would love for masses with clownlike minds like yours, who are ready to jump on the meme that those who dislike gigantic government are morally bad or evil.
There is nothing absolutist about it.
Here's my basic problem with your attitude...
If you had your way, the only people who would be left in government would be those who abuse it. Government works when everyone participates. The government isn't some giant black box. Everyone who's in government gets sent there by us, until people stop caring, or stop participating. Of course government becomes corrupt when the only people left who participate in it are the corrupt ones.
Ever wonder why the people who abuse governmental power the most are the ones who claim that government is too big/evil/useless? Because they want everyone out of their way. If everyone stops paying attention to government, they don't have anyone standing in there way.
So, with that attitude, you're working for the very sort of politicians you dislike. Whether or not you realize it yet. Disliking gigantic government is an absolutist position because it has nothing to do at all with the quality of government, which is the real concern. There are plenty of larger governments that have many happy citizens, and plenty of small governments that torture and kill people.
This seems to blow past the standardized testing itself being part of the problem, no?
I don't see standardized testing being part of the problem. Things like "teaching to the test" are just a rather obvious sign that the school in question no longer educates its students, but milks them for funding.
Isn't that exactly the behavior standardized testing encourages?
Yes, those who doubt massive, growing, and all-encompassing government, and don't wish to be pwned by it, are morally suspect.
Dictators throughout history could not be more pleased useful idiots are trying to build this meme.
Let's refute an absolutist meme with another absolutist meme! Yay absolutes! C'mon sheeple! Everyone break from the herd and follow this herd!
Less diligent students means lower test scores and less warm bodies in the classroom. That means less funding and hence. less money and power for the parasites running things.
This seems to blow past the standardized testing itself being part of the problem, no? Might be worth revisiting the premise here.
A better analogy would be taking some millionaires and throwing them in a ghetto. Bet you that ghetto would be nice and clean real quick.
I should also add, before the "What an awful idea crowd!" shows up, this is an actual urban planning technique. I live in on of the nicest buildings in town, but we're right across from low (and I do mean low) income housing. It's probably the shiniest low income housing I've seen in my life.
I bet if you sent your kids to the ghetto, you'd do everything you could to improve it!
I don't think her logic would be entirely off there... If everyone sent their kids to a ghetto, parents would be throwing their money at improving the ghetto.
But given that the entire point is to educate kids, and a ghetto doesn't really achieve that (aside from teaching your kids about dumpster diving among other things), this line of reasoning is a bit of a straw man, no? A better analogy would be taking some millionaires and throwing them in a ghetto. Bet you that ghetto would be nice and clean real quick.
I work hard. I worry about retirement, about having kids. I can't AFFORD to spend "extra" to go green. I will do what is cheapest. If, in the long run, a 30 mpg car helps my pocketbook over a 50 mpg car, I'll get it. I make no apologies.
And here's the economic problem to global warming: there is no cost to damaging the planet.
Why do you train your kids to behave in a store? Because if they go around breaking things, you have to pay for them. That's a real, short term, economic cost, so you're going to make sure you train your kids not to break anything. Same reason you try not to speed (tickets), you try not to hit other people's cares (pay for the damage), or get in late to work (fired).
Yet, while all these things have costs, breaking the planet does not. You can damage our air supply with gas emissions from your car all you want, and no one says boo. The planet certainly can't sue you, and there is no "pay for the air you just broke" cost.
So that's where typically the government steps in. Break a river? You pay for it. Break a forest? Pay for it. No one is assuming the money will actually fix the problem (it's not as simple as buying a new forest), but it offers a short term incentive for these companies not to do these things by attaching a monetary cost to these public properties that they have damaged.
So what do we do? If you want to pollute the air, you need to pay for the air you polluted. Bet that would change your habits real quick if you actually had to pay the real cost for things.
Microsoft believes that 8.1 is so much like 8.0 that it won't need testing. They've stated this multiple times before.
Considering that they do actually do extensive testing and dogfooding, its probably reasonably safe.
It also means they are telling you that they didn't make any real changes and are charging you for the service pack they refuse to create for 8.0.
Oh c'mon...
Even Apple betas their minor patches to developers before release.
What Microsoft believes and what the reality is could be two different things. Even if they aren't, what's the harm in releasing a beta to give developers some assurance that nothing actually has changed?
Many open source projects and organizations aren't a business, and it can be challenging for nerds to keep track of tax rules for various organization types. Depending on where you have your base the rules may differ, and there may even be rules that exempt you from filing the taxes at all.
Which is why you get an accountant.
If you accept money, prepare to get an accountant. No one made X.Org accept money.
but instead of the boringly predictable GOOGLE IS EVIL!!!!1eleventy karma-whoring[1], shall we examine why exactly this third-party program broke with the new update?
Were they, perchance, using an undocumented API, or one that was known to be unstable?
The accusation (and the supplied evidence) is not that the API changed, it's that Google intentionally blocked this behavior with a white list.
Do you think that Snowden will prove to be the trigger to the 3rd WW? (but an information/electronic one this time)
It's amusing that one would think that the information WW hadn't been going on long before Snowden.
A quiet but always present information war has been going on for thousands of years. States spy on one another to try to learn everything. Technology has changed the nature of the game, but the game itself has always been there. Snowden's revelations are interesting for their information on domestic spying, but the level of international spying shouldn't be a surprise to anyway.
What is best? Stay in home and hoping that no bored neighbourn will kill you, or actually go out, make mistakes, and, guess what, be a human being? A Man? But not THE man of course.
Yes. Who cares what politicians do? If Wikileaks stands for anything, it stands for "Politicians make mistakes, let's just all move on and ignore them. So what?"
But can you build it and use it in your OS X system?
Yes.
There are even delta patches posted to match it to your current OS X system.
I should add that you can build it and run it even WITHOUT an OS X system. People used to run the core (called Darwin) on Intel boxes well before Apple supported Intel. There were even distributions with XWindows thrown on top.