Eventually they may become economically viable once the price gets so ludicrous that only the super rich can afford to use it and it gets cheaper to buy new aircraft instead of paying the oil companies. This isn't going to happen soon. The price of petrol has doubled here in the UK in the last 15 years and yet there has been no significant reduction in traffic levels. Electric cars are very rare and expensive with few charging points, public transport is currently being mismanaged by the private sector with government subsidies and is a joke and cycling is very dangerous and impractical. The free market solving everything is as likely as Soviet communism solving everything.
Price goes up, there's no realistic alternative, people buy less of other things. That's the reality. Economics only works if there's an alternative and there isn't one. Public transport sucks and bikes and electric cars are extremely impractical. What alternative sources of energy are drivers going to switch to? Or airlines? Or anyone else who depends on fossil fuels?
Can you do bulk delete easily on the iPhone mail client yet? I wanted to clear a load of spurious notifications from my work iPhone back in 2011 and was told that no-one needed to do that by a load of idiot fanbois and I should be happy to have to delete 6000 emails one by one.
Given that devices that you can sideload apps on are not banned in China I'm not sure where you're going with this. Apple would have to remove the app from itunes but the user, if their own property didn't lock them out, would be able to obtain it from another source.
Of course if Apple didn't prevent users from loading whatever they like this would be a complete non-issue. This is only possible because Apple control what their users are allowed to do with their device, unless you're willing to invalidate your warranty or pay them an annual fee for the privilege.
Businesses' primary role is the efficient distribution of capital. Limited liability is not required for that. Limited liability is where the state protects the business owners from any ruinous consequences of their actions. What you're saying is that they should get that huge privilege but should be allowed to behave in any way they see fit irrespective of any detrimental effects on society.
Given that society has granted them the enormous privilege of limited liability it's not unreasonable to expect them to serve the public good, or at the very least not make the world a worse place to live.
You mean the bundling of bad debts together with good debts and calling them all good? The credit rating agencies all declaring these disasters as AAA? The selling on of debts so no-one had any interest in whether the person getting the loan could pay it back? This was all Clinton's fault? It wasn't the fault of the people who actually did these things?
I'm well aware of what you're saying but I see this time and again on here where someone says they have an issue and they are immediately denounced as a liar, shill or idiot. It just gets a bit tiresome.
That you can even write that is hilarious. I am never willing to trust a blue chip company's marketing department. They are paid to exaggerate and tell outright lies. Hacker groups on the other have a reputation to keep up so are far less likely to make claims like this if they're not true. It doesn't matter if Apple are dishonest when you have retards willing to queue for 4 and a half days to get a fucking phone.
The N95's main competitors during its lifetime were the LG Prada, Apple's iPhone and the Sony Ericsson W950i. The N95 managed to outsell its rivals. Despite Apple's much-hyped iPhone with its multi-touch technology, thin design and advanced web capabilities, the N95 had several key features against the iPhone, such as its camera with flash, video camera, 3G and 3.5G connectivity, GPS, third-party applications and several other features
Yeah the N Series was a huge failure *roll eyes*. By the way the consumer electronics market is not just USA-centric. It's developed world centric and Nokia has excellent brand recognition outside the US which is why Windows Phones are selling at all.
I don't know what country you live in but here in the UK Nokia has excellent brand recognition. I personally owned a few between about 1999 and 2005 and the N95 for example (released in 2007) was a huge success. I'm not interested in any forums full of 14 year old basement dwellers, I'm interested in the fact that quite a few people I know have been unfortunate enough to end up with a Windows phone because it had the Nokia name on it. I did own an N900 and it was a big disappointment which I couldn't wait to get away from. My memory goes back further than 3 years however to when Nokia was the top brand in the world (not counting the US) and sold phones by the truckload. Their business is fucked now but their brand is not. Microsoft didn't fork out 7 billion for a dead company, they forked it out for the world famous brand.
Nokia has brand recognition that HTC can only dream of. The only reason Windows Phone has any traction at all is because of the Nokia brand. Samsung probably aren't the leanest company on the planet but they're making plenty of money on phones. I'd hardly say the Galaxy S4 and Note 3 (or for that matter the HTC One) are in any kind of "race to the bottom".
Slashdot Mirror
Eventually they may become economically viable once the price gets so ludicrous that only the super rich can afford to use it and it gets cheaper to buy new aircraft instead of paying the oil companies. This isn't going to happen soon. The price of petrol has doubled here in the UK in the last 15 years and yet there has been no significant reduction in traffic levels. Electric cars are very rare and expensive with few charging points, public transport is currently being mismanaged by the private sector with government subsidies and is a joke and cycling is very dangerous and impractical. The free market solving everything is as likely as Soviet communism solving everything.
You're lucky enough to live in a country with good public transport and bicycle friendly policies. I'm not.
Price goes up, there's no realistic alternative, people buy less of other things. That's the reality. Economics only works if there's an alternative and there isn't one. Public transport sucks and bikes and electric cars are extremely impractical. What alternative sources of energy are drivers going to switch to? Or airlines? Or anyone else who depends on fossil fuels?
[Citation needed]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Light_pen
Can you do bulk delete easily on the iPhone mail client yet? I wanted to clear a load of spurious notifications from my work iPhone back in 2011 and was told that no-one needed to do that by a load of idiot fanbois and I should be happy to have to delete 6000 emails one by one.
What does that have to do with anything?
Given that devices that you can sideload apps on are not banned in China I'm not sure where you're going with this. Apple would have to remove the app from itunes but the user, if their own property didn't lock them out, would be able to obtain it from another source.
Of course if Apple didn't prevent users from loading whatever they like this would be a complete non-issue. This is only possible because Apple control what their users are allowed to do with their device, unless you're willing to invalidate your warranty or pay them an annual fee for the privilege.
Businesses' primary role is the efficient distribution of capital. Limited liability is not required for that. Limited liability is where the state protects the business owners from any ruinous consequences of their actions. What you're saying is that they should get that huge privilege but should be allowed to behave in any way they see fit irrespective of any detrimental effects on society.
Given that society has granted them the enormous privilege of limited liability it's not unreasonable to expect them to serve the public good, or at the very least not make the world a worse place to live.
Someone with an ID that low probably isn't all that young. I created this one 13 years ago.
So then how is it the government's fault? The people involved were in no way forced to do any of this stupid stuff.
So the government sent in the military and forced these people to do these obviously incredibly stupid and wrong things?
You mean the bundling of bad debts together with good debts and calling them all good? The credit rating agencies all declaring these disasters as AAA? The selling on of debts so no-one had any interest in whether the person getting the loan could pay it back? This was all Clinton's fault? It wasn't the fault of the people who actually did these things?
I'm well aware of what you're saying but I see this time and again on here where someone says they have an issue and they are immediately denounced as a liar, shill or idiot. It just gets a bit tiresome.
I've never seen it either but that doesn't mean it hasn't happened to the OP.
And that's the other major problem with OSS: "I don't have the issue therefore it isn't happening to anyone and you're just an idiot".
http://support.apple.com/kb/PH11229
The cloud is effectively a reinvention of the mainframe. IBM should sue them.
So marketing departments don't lie and queuing for nearly 5 days to get a phone isn't really stupid? I'd love to live in your delusional little world.
That you can even write that is hilarious. I am never willing to trust a blue chip company's marketing department. They are paid to exaggerate and tell outright lies. Hacker groups on the other have a reputation to keep up so are far less likely to make claims like this if they're not true. It doesn't matter if Apple are dishonest when you have retards willing to queue for 4 and a half days to get a fucking phone.
From Wikipedia:
Yeah the N Series was a huge failure *roll eyes*. By the way the consumer electronics market is not just USA-centric. It's developed world centric and Nokia has excellent brand recognition outside the US which is why Windows Phones are selling at all.
I don't know what country you live in but here in the UK Nokia has excellent brand recognition. I personally owned a few between about 1999 and 2005 and the N95 for example (released in 2007) was a huge success. I'm not interested in any forums full of 14 year old basement dwellers, I'm interested in the fact that quite a few people I know have been unfortunate enough to end up with a Windows phone because it had the Nokia name on it. I did own an N900 and it was a big disappointment which I couldn't wait to get away from. My memory goes back further than 3 years however to when Nokia was the top brand in the world (not counting the US) and sold phones by the truckload. Their business is fucked now but their brand is not. Microsoft didn't fork out 7 billion for a dead company, they forked it out for the world famous brand.
Nokia has brand recognition that HTC can only dream of. The only reason Windows Phone has any traction at all is because of the Nokia brand. Samsung probably aren't the leanest company on the planet but they're making plenty of money on phones. I'd hardly say the Galaxy S4 and Note 3 (or for that matter the HTC One) are in any kind of "race to the bottom".