I have nothing against social networking integrated right into a browser. It's up to you whether it's a bad idea or not. If it doesn't feel right to you then you also have to know it doesn't necessarily appear wrong to everybody. It's not about being busy or lazy, it's about convenience. However if it's me, if I want to do those social networking at their respective site, I'll just get the right browser. However if I want to do it without leaving the page I'm currently on, I'll just get the right plugin, which means social networking integration in a browser is not my cup of tea.
Think of it like this, people might used to hate integrated download manager in a browser and say "if I want to download I'll just open my download manager software" but today it's a welcomed feature.
Sounds like ad hominem. And this is the real problem with most Linuxfags; they're too arrogant to acknowledge things that are not problems to them but actually are problems to others. It's not surprising that desktop Linux is dead.
Filtering the explicit material from search result is one thing, but can any search engine be simpler than what we already have in Google or Bing? Adult content are already filtered by default and they're already simple enough that even my 5-year old nephew can use them with no fuss.
Perhaps what the people want is a schoolkid version of the existing search engines that will assist the kids in their homework right out of the box?
Apple is not a software business, it's a hardware business (10% of their revenue is software and that includes all their high-end software packages and OS).
Then they should choose between software business or hardware business. Choosing both means monopoly (or should I say anti-competitive in this case?). We could say the same thing to M$ too if they build specific hardware for their Windows.
Slashdot Mirror
Any chance that this post was backdated? You know, post scheduling...
I have nothing against social networking integrated right into a browser. It's up to you whether it's a bad idea or not. If it doesn't feel right to you then you also have to know it doesn't necessarily appear wrong to everybody. It's not about being busy or lazy, it's about convenience. However if it's me, if I want to do those social networking at their respective site, I'll just get the right browser. However if I want to do it without leaving the page I'm currently on, I'll just get the right plugin, which means social networking integration in a browser is not my cup of tea. Think of it like this, people might used to hate integrated download manager in a browser and say "if I want to download I'll just open my download manager software" but today it's a welcomed feature.
we'd have Javapods & Javapads instead
Sounds like ad hominem. And this is the real problem with most Linuxfags; they're too arrogant to acknowledge things that are not problems to them but actually are problems to others. It's not surprising that desktop Linux is dead.
but Symbian is also open source
computers can explode even without explosives inside it. At least Hollywood are giving the terrorists their idea
well, he might have predicted about the youtube, facebook, twitter, even slashdot!
so it's neither 'law' or 'observation'; it's a 'prediction'
Facepalm...
So I heard somebody said atheism is a religion, that's why they're call 'atheist'. Now can I embrace science and become a 'scientist'?
...big eyes, child-like faces...
which reminds me of some anime characters
Filtering the explicit material from search result is one thing, but can any search engine be simpler than what we already have in Google or Bing? Adult content are already filtered by default and they're already simple enough that even my 5-year old nephew can use them with no fuss. Perhaps what the people want is a schoolkid version of the existing search engines that will assist the kids in their homework right out of the box?
Do you know what the word "monopoly" means?
yes, I know. It's 'anti-competitiveness' on steroids
Apple is not a software business, it's a hardware business (10% of their revenue is software and that includes all their high-end software packages and OS).
Then they should choose between software business or hardware business. Choosing both means monopoly (or should I say anti-competitive in this case?). We could say the same thing to M$ too if they build specific hardware for their Windows.
Why must everything be labeled "open source?"
Which makes me think "open-source hardware" is a new term for "DIY hardware".
I wonder what Microsoft had to say about this?
MacOSX is the 10th OS I left behind. No to mention tens of Linux distros though...