Because it's a laggy, buggy, pre-iOS trash OS. Unlike every other modern mobile OS it doesn't prioritize the UI thread and thus will never stop lagging, no matter how fast the hardware gets.
That phone is freaking amazing. MeeGo is ridiculously functional, smooth, and open. It's beautiful. Not the trashy piece of laggy junk that is Android- but instead a truly beautiful and open platform.
If Nokia had pushed MeeGo they would have been absolutely shocked at how well it would have sold. People are DESPERATE for an iOS alternative, and Android is such a sucky, laggy, buggy piece of trash that consumers would have lapped MeeGo up like water in a desert.
There's no such thing as a free market. There isn't a single market in the world that has zero barrier of entry, perfect competition, perfectly rational consumers, and so on and so forth. I hate it when people keep bandying about that term. It's just a hypothetical academic concept, like "frictionless surfaces" in high school physics.
Sigh. You idiots... regulation forcing private corporations to comply with stricter pollution laws would force those companies to invest more money into capital investment. This creates jobs, which are sorely needed in our current recession.
I think this is a response to the underwhelming hardware Sony and Microsoft are rumored to be planning on releasing. If those companies' greedy executives get their way, we'll end up with a "next-generation" of consoles in 2013 with underpowered 2010 hardware, which they'll sell at a hefty hardware margin. They're probably also unwilling to allow Steam to operate on their consoles, so rather than be locked out Valve is going to go forward on its own.
The batteries aren't the problem. Even in the Leaf the battery costs around $6000. The rest of the car is infinitely easier to produce than an ICE. The insanely high cost of EVs can be attributed to manufacturers requiring extremely high margins to "recoup investment", and a lack of mass production and economy of scale. Once China gets involved EV prices should drop off a cliff.
EVs won't be more expensive forever. The Leaf batteries are around $6000. The rest of the car is infinitely easier to produce than an ICE. The insanely high cost of EVs can be attributed to manufacturers requiring extremely high margins to "recoup investment", and a lack of mass production and economy of scale.
Considering the Leaf's battery costs around $6000-7000, and the rest of the car is infinitely easier to build than an ICE-carrying car, in 5 years mass production and falling battery costs will make 150-200 mile cars quite cheap.
I think what's more important is optimizing textbooks to be as easy to use as possible. It seems like everyone misses this point. One author writes a book, releases a few new editions, and that's the end of the lifecycle. Each author has his or her strengths and weaknesses, and rather than combining the strengths of various textbooks to make one super book, you can a bunch of separate and unrelated books.
You hit on a major point. They had momentum, and they blew it. After all they're run by engineers who are completely out of touch with mass cultural social trends. I think the only company who could possibly dethrone facebook is Apple, but with Steve Jobs gone I don't think even they could do it right anymore.
The extra cost is absolutely minimal. Seriously. The % of devices that fail within 2 years but not within 1 year is absolutely tiny. Once you've gotten past the "infant mortality" prone stage of 3-6 months, the chances of your device surviving in the long term is much, much larger.
The barrier of entry is so high because it costs enormous amounts of money to build giant towers with antennas across the country, and run fiber to each and every tower. T-Mobile's puny network will cost $9 billion to upgrade to LTE. AT&T, Sprint, and Verizon will require even more money. And then there's the need to buy spectrum. The initial capital to start up a wireless company is insanely high. Apple's the only one I think who could do it and even has the incentive to do it. But Tim Cook's busy showering/wasting $30 billion of dividends in 3 years on Apple's useless shareholders.
>The only potentially viable solution to cellular telephony is precisely the same as it is for DSL service, cable service, and other services with huge infrastructure overhead: publicly owned infrastructure.
Have you seen Australia's National Broadband Network? They provide fixed wireless LTE service to the 4% of really remote rural citizens who are too far away to roll fiber out to. The wireless networks are capable of up to 12 mbps (soon to be upgraded to 25, and when LTE-A comes out upgraded to 50 mbps), and built out and owned entirely by the government. The wireless providers come in and compete by providing service over those government-owned towers. This is the kind of pricing a major ISP is planning to offer: "This means that Internode will offer four NBN wireless plans, at $49.95, $69.96, $89.95 and $139.95 price points, and with 30GB, 300GB, 600GB and 1TB of monthly quota respectively." (http://delimiter.com.au/2012/04/02/internode-launches-nbn-wireless-reveals-pricing/)
You're right. The government should operate all infrastructure over which private services can run. It's an incredibly simple (and effective) concept, but you see numerous states and municipalities selling off their public utilities to private entities for short term profit.
You're an idiot. It will cost T-Mobile $9 billion to upgrade their puny network to LTE. Even more for Sprint, even more for AT&T and Verizon. The barrier of entry is humongous even if you don't include cost of spectrum.
Apple's hardware advantages last a year to a year and a half at most. You'll see retina Android tablets by next year easily, and 1080p tablets by the end of this year. Retail has never had the barrier of entry infrastructure markets like mobile wireless has.
Wow, you're really misunderstanding what you're reading. Verizon's margins may go down, but their overall profits go up from the massive number of postpaid subscribers shelling out huge amounts of money per iPhone.
Think about how insanely profitable AT&T became from exclusivity over the iPhone, and how many people stick with them because none of the other 2 or 3 major carriers offer decent service where they live.
Slashdot Mirror
Because it's a laggy, buggy, pre-iOS trash OS. Unlike every other modern mobile OS it doesn't prioritize the UI thread and thus will never stop lagging, no matter how fast the hardware gets.
That phone is freaking amazing. MeeGo is ridiculously functional, smooth, and open. It's beautiful. Not the trashy piece of laggy junk that is Android- but instead a truly beautiful and open platform.
If Nokia had pushed MeeGo they would have been absolutely shocked at how well it would have sold. People are DESPERATE for an iOS alternative, and Android is such a sucky, laggy, buggy piece of trash that consumers would have lapped MeeGo up like water in a desert.
There's no such thing as a free market. There isn't a single market in the world that has zero barrier of entry, perfect competition, perfectly rational consumers, and so on and so forth. I hate it when people keep bandying about that term. It's just a hypothetical academic concept, like "frictionless surfaces" in high school physics.
Enforcement of greenhouse regulations actually forces corporations to invest more money into capital spending, which creates jobs.
Sigh. You idiots... regulation forcing private corporations to comply with stricter pollution laws would force those companies to invest more money into capital investment. This creates jobs, which are sorely needed in our current recession.
I think this is a response to the underwhelming hardware Sony and Microsoft are rumored to be planning on releasing. If those companies' greedy executives get their way, we'll end up with a "next-generation" of consoles in 2013 with underpowered 2010 hardware, which they'll sell at a hefty hardware margin. They're probably also unwilling to allow Steam to operate on their consoles, so rather than be locked out Valve is going to go forward on its own.
The batteries aren't the problem. Even in the Leaf the battery costs around $6000. The rest of the car is infinitely easier to produce than an ICE. The insanely high cost of EVs can be attributed to manufacturers requiring extremely high margins to "recoup investment", and a lack of mass production and economy of scale. Once China gets involved EV prices should drop off a cliff.
EVs won't be more expensive forever. The Leaf batteries are around $6000. The rest of the car is infinitely easier to produce than an ICE. The insanely high cost of EVs can be attributed to manufacturers requiring extremely high margins to "recoup investment", and a lack of mass production and economy of scale.
Considering the Leaf's battery costs around $6000-7000, and the rest of the car is infinitely easier to build than an ICE-carrying car, in 5 years mass production and falling battery costs will make 150-200 mile cars quite cheap.
It's also useless since it costs so much. Why not just remove the ICE and add more battery? For $50k you could get massive range.
Of course if it's just for textbook reading or even basic tools then a tablet is far more useful.
I think what's more important is optimizing textbooks to be as easy to use as possible. It seems like everyone misses this point. One author writes a book, releases a few new editions, and that's the end of the lifecycle. Each author has his or her strengths and weaknesses, and rather than combining the strengths of various textbooks to make one super book, you can a bunch of separate and unrelated books.
You hit on a major point. They had momentum, and they blew it. After all they're run by engineers who are completely out of touch with mass cultural social trends. I think the only company who could possibly dethrone facebook is Apple, but with Steve Jobs gone I don't think even they could do it right anymore.
Actually, yes there are more numbers between 1 and 3 than between 1 and 2 or 2 and 3.
The extra cost is absolutely minimal. Seriously. The % of devices that fail within 2 years but not within 1 year is absolutely tiny. Once you've gotten past the "infant mortality" prone stage of 3-6 months, the chances of your device surviving in the long term is much, much larger.
He even capitalized "free market". He must've been a troll. He couldn't possibly be serious, could he?
Is there a term for the psychological condition of being a pathological liar?
You realize... in Europe the operators charge 1/2 that price and have 3 times higher tower density than AT&T?
The barrier of entry is so high because it costs enormous amounts of money to build giant towers with antennas across the country, and run fiber to each and every tower. T-Mobile's puny network will cost $9 billion to upgrade to LTE. AT&T, Sprint, and Verizon will require even more money. And then there's the need to buy spectrum. The initial capital to start up a wireless company is insanely high. Apple's the only one I think who could do it and even has the incentive to do it. But Tim Cook's busy showering/wasting $30 billion of dividends in 3 years on Apple's useless shareholders.
>The only potentially viable solution to cellular telephony is precisely the same as it is for DSL service, cable service, and other services with huge infrastructure overhead: publicly owned infrastructure.
Have you seen Australia's National Broadband Network? They provide fixed wireless LTE service to the 4% of really remote rural citizens who are too far away to roll fiber out to. The wireless networks are capable of up to 12 mbps (soon to be upgraded to 25, and when LTE-A comes out upgraded to 50 mbps), and built out and owned entirely by the government. The wireless providers come in and compete by providing service over those government-owned towers. This is the kind of pricing a major ISP is planning to offer: "This means that Internode will offer four NBN wireless plans, at $49.95, $69.96, $89.95 and $139.95 price points, and with 30GB, 300GB, 600GB and 1TB of monthly quota respectively." (http://delimiter.com.au/2012/04/02/internode-launches-nbn-wireless-reveals-pricing/)
You're right. The government should operate all infrastructure over which private services can run. It's an incredibly simple (and effective) concept, but you see numerous states and municipalities selling off their public utilities to private entities for short term profit.
You're an idiot. It will cost T-Mobile $9 billion to upgrade their puny network to LTE. Even more for Sprint, even more for AT&T and Verizon. The barrier of entry is humongous even if you don't include cost of spectrum.
Apple's hardware advantages last a year to a year and a half at most. You'll see retina Android tablets by next year easily, and 1080p tablets by the end of this year. Retail has never had the barrier of entry infrastructure markets like mobile wireless has.
Wow, you're really misunderstanding what you're reading. Verizon's margins may go down, but their overall profits go up from the massive number of postpaid subscribers shelling out huge amounts of money per iPhone.
Think about how insanely profitable AT&T became from exclusivity over the iPhone, and how many people stick with them because none of the other 2 or 3 major carriers offer decent service where they live.