Die Gesamterscheinung der zwei oben gezeigten Produkte ist fast identisch, weil das GalaxyTab 10.1 alle unterscheidungskrÃftigen Elemente der Ausstattung des iPad 2 kopiert:... (vi) wenn das Produkt eingeschaltet ist, farbige Icons innerhalb des Displays
The general appearance of both above shown products is almost identical, because GalaxyTab 10.1 copied all substantially differentiated elements of iPad 2 features:... (vi) when the product is switched on, colored Icons on the display.
2 percentage points, not 2%. Think of it as call failure rates of 3% and 5% and now you're looking at a 66.7% difference (.05/.03 = 1.666.., hence.666... or 66.7% increase).
Mathematically you are right, but what this 66,7% increase really means? If you have 0.000000000000000005 and 0.000000000000000003 fail rate (meaning in the real life that a fail rate in both cases is insignificant) you will also have an increase of 66.7%.
Given statistic can be interpreted as a minor difference between 2G and 3G (as I see it) or like a significant 66,7% increase in the fail rate (as someone will see it from your numbers)
Seriously. The GPLv3 has probably done a fair bit more damage for being a submarine legal landmine as much as software patents have been submarine legal landmines in the adoption of standards.
Why is the GPLv3 Submarine legal mine (I will ignore lend part which doesn't make any sense)?
If you think about GPLv3 as a naval mine, the more appropriate analogy would be the big colored flashy mine with sound effects and hundred of billboards flashing and pointing on mine.
You can not accidentally bump into GPLv3 Code. It's clearly marked as such. If you use it in your proprietary software, in 99,99% you are doing it with the full knowledge of committing a copyright infringement. If you really accidentally incorporate GPL code in your proprietary software, nobody will sue you for millions of dollars, you will just be asked to remove the code.
The regulator went on to add that older phones passed the call testing with 97 percent success rate while latest Smartphones managed only 95 percent during the test.
It's just 2% difference (and we don't have any information about statistical population). So if they tested 100 2G phones and 100 smartphones, 3 2G phones and 5 3G phones where not suited for the given area. Wow, big deal...
So how can a software developer target all of them?
Why all of them? There are several big distributions: Debian (with derivatives including Ubuntu), Fedora, openSuse which every developer can target with very little effort. If the application is important for some other distribution somebody in community will find the way to use it on it's favorite distro or somebody will pay support for it.
The effort should not be bigger then targeting all of the Win2000/XP/Vista/7.
My Linux desktop is profitable because I'm siting in front of it. There is no profitable desktop by itself.
Then please allow me to rephrase it more directly: Catering to one user isn't profitable for a commercial off-the-shelf software developer.
Sure, but at home, I would define myself as an average user: browsing, e-mail, playing video an music sometimes, writing a letter once in 3 months. So, no "catering" needed and I have everything what I need on my Linux PC.
I can confirm for Starcraft II. Hell of a trouble to get it running, and then finally succeeded using "Internet version". The good point is that the original will never be scratched.
I could pick any hardware store around, walk in and ask them for linux compatible hardware and most of the time they'll just give me a blank stare or respond with "you simply have to try it out". Why else are there databases on the web of linux-compatible hardware ?
The problem is that if you go to the same hardware store and ask them for windows compatible hardware most of the time they'll will just give you the same blank stare.
Linux has hardware support for things 20 years old that almost no one needs on a modern computer. Windows 7/Vista has support for almost every piece of hardware being sold today -- Linux does not.
In the sense of the return on investment of a commercial off-the-shelf software developer, your desktop probably doesn't exist enough to be profitable by itself.
My Linux desktop is profitable because I'm siting in front of it. There is no profitable desktop by itself.
I enjoyed Diablo I, bought 2 LoD to play in the LAN, played it last year again from beginning, but I decided not to buy D3. First of all because they didn't created a Linux client (piece of cake for a OpenGL game wit already existing Mac client, but I suppose it will be playable under Wine) and now especially because of this always online crap. I never play MMO, I don't have time for it, and I don't want to be bullied by people actually living in BattleNet. I just want to play Single player sometimes and local LAN with friends.
Sorry Blizzard, but you will not get money from me this time.
Re hidden plasmoids: Some people prefer and use the "show desktop"-button. The rest of us puts plasmoids in the panel, where it is visible all the time (or however you like it.)
Or we use multiple desktops (CTRL F1-F4 per default)
That's funny, so neither are any of the Android tablets either then?
Exactly.
The iPad 2 is pretty much the most powerful tablet out there at the moment for the money - not that really has anything much to do with why it sells so well (that would be usability).
My personal opinion is that tablets are just a toys. They are not practical for some serious work and they are too big to be carried around. I prefer having a standard Laptop/PC at home/work plus a smartphone outside.
The hype is justified if you understand the technology, but since most customers don't then the hype from them is unjustified? Do you have any idea how that sounds?
The hype can't be justified by any means. Do you have any idea what is hype: http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/hype It's pure propaganda and it doesn't have anything to do with quality or engineering.
Even non-technical people can appreciate good engineering. You don't have to know how bridges are built to appreciate that good ones don't collapse and bad ones do. If you then associate the good bridges with the companies that made them, does that mean that you only care about that company's logo?
If you have bridge company A and bridge company B who make "uncollapsible" bridges do you really care who made the bridge?
What is that with you and Apple engineers? Do you think that Apple engineers are the only good ones in the world? Do you think they are better then RIM, Nokia, Motorola, Samsung, LG,... engineers?
Your appraisal of the way you believe other people choose phones (i.e., by not caring about the specs) speaks volumes for how you choose your own purchases.
As the matter of fact, you are right. It does show how I choose what I buy
I bet you were one of the many crowing about the "underpowered" iPad with "no connectivity", and how that would mean it would be a total flop. It's not always about the raw specs of the device.
And you can't be more wrong... A product must convince me before I buy it. And the most important aspect of every product for me is price/performance ratio (performance eq raw power + design + usability + my subjective demands). iPhone/iPad are not even near the top of my price/performance ratio scale.
because there is now quite a bit of historical evidence of Apple building high-quality, well-engineered products.
I don't say that Apple products are not "high-quality, well-engineered products", they are. The hype around the products comes from the people who mostly do not have any idea about the technology and engineering behind. They see only the logo.
I can understand why that would be perplexing to you (a) don't mind fiddling with technology to get it to work, and (b) don't understand technology well enough to appreciate good engineering.
No, I just wanted to say that 69% of participants in the survey will give iPhones to someone else and they do not care abut anything related to the phone specifications. They do not care about solidly engineered appliance, they do not care about all the features. They care only about the logo.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm going to wait for HTML 6.
You didn't hear? Numbering is "out".
It will be just HTML in the future and the version numbers will be hidden from average users.
Die Gesamterscheinung der zwei oben gezeigten Produkte ist fast identisch, weil das GalaxyTab 10.1 alle unterscheidungskrÃftigen Elemente der Ausstattung des iPad 2 kopiert: ... (vi) wenn das Produkt eingeschaltet ist, farbige Icons innerhalb des Displays
The general appearance of both above shown products is almost identical, because GalaxyTab 10.1 copied all substantially differentiated elements of iPad 2 features: ... (vi) when the product is switched on, colored Icons on the display.
Better?
2 percentage points, not 2%. Think of it as call failure rates of 3% and 5% and now you're looking at a 66.7% difference (.05/.03 = 1.666.., hence .666... or 66.7% increase).
Mathematically you are right, but what this 66,7% increase really means? If you have 0.000000000000000005 and 0.000000000000000003 fail rate (meaning in the real life that a fail rate in both cases is insignificant) you will also have an increase of 66.7%.
Given statistic can be interpreted as a minor difference between 2G and 3G (as I see it) or like a significant 66,7% increase in the fail rate (as someone will see it from your numbers)
Seriously. The GPLv3 has probably done a fair bit more damage for being a submarine legal landmine as much as software patents have been submarine legal landmines in the adoption of standards.
Why is the GPLv3 Submarine legal mine (I will ignore lend part which doesn't make any sense)?
If you think about GPLv3 as a naval mine, the more appropriate analogy would be the big colored flashy mine with sound effects and hundred of billboards flashing and pointing on mine.
You can not accidentally bump into GPLv3 Code. It's clearly marked as such. If you use it in your proprietary software, in 99,99% you are doing it with the full knowledge of committing a copyright infringement. If you really accidentally incorporate GPL code in your proprietary software, nobody will sue you for millions of dollars, you will just be asked to remove the code.
The regulator went on to add that older phones passed the call testing with 97 percent success rate while latest Smartphones managed only 95 percent during the test.
It's just 2% difference (and we don't have any information about statistical population). So if they tested 100 2G phones and 100 smartphones, 3 2G phones and 5 3G phones where not suited for the given area. Wow, big deal...
There's plenty of companies, pushing out dists
So how can a software developer target all of them?
Why all of them? There are several big distributions: Debian (with derivatives including Ubuntu), Fedora, openSuse which every developer can target with very little effort. If the application is important for some other distribution somebody in community will find the way to use it on it's favorite distro or somebody will pay support for it.
The effort should not be bigger then targeting all of the Win2000/XP/Vista/7.
My Linux desktop is profitable because I'm siting in front of it. There is no profitable desktop by itself.
Then please allow me to rephrase it more directly: Catering to one user isn't profitable for a commercial off-the-shelf software developer.
Sure, but at home, I would define myself as an average user: browsing, e-mail, playing video an music sometimes, writing a letter once in 3 months. So, no "catering" needed and I have everything what I need on my Linux PC.
I can confirm for Starcraft II. Hell of a trouble to get it running, and then finally succeeded using "Internet version". The good point is that the original will never be scratched.
If we continue like that both Windows and Linux are dead.
And the winner (weight 1.4MB) is:
MenuetOS
I could pick any hardware store around, walk in and ask them for linux compatible hardware and most of the time they'll just give me a blank stare or respond with "you simply have to try it out". Why else are there databases on the web of linux-compatible hardware ?
The problem is that if you go to the same hardware store and ask them for windows compatible hardware most of the time they'll will just give you the same blank stare.
Linux has hardware support for things 20 years old that almost no one needs on a modern computer. Windows 7/Vista has support for almost every piece of hardware being sold today -- Linux does not.
Says who?
Show us some arguments (like e.g http://www.linux-drivers.org/index.html)
So then my desktop does not exist?
In the sense of the return on investment of a commercial off-the-shelf software developer, your desktop probably doesn't exist enough to be profitable by itself.
My Linux desktop is profitable because I'm siting in front of it. There is no profitable desktop by itself.
I enjoyed Diablo I, bought 2 LoD to play in the LAN, played it last year again from beginning, but I decided not to buy D3. First of all because they didn't created a Linux client (piece of cake for a OpenGL game wit already existing Mac client, but I suppose it will be playable under Wine) and now especially because of this always online crap. I never play MMO, I don't have time for it, and I don't want to be bullied by people actually living in BattleNet. I just want to play Single player sometimes and local LAN with friends.
Sorry Blizzard, but you will not get money from me this time.
They're like Battlestar Galactica, a ship with such old technology that a computer virus doesn't even phase them.
Err... Battlestar Galactica survived and eventually won the war against Cylons. And the technology was not so old, they just switched the network off.
After reading several times I still can't find any news here...
Re hidden plasmoids: Some people prefer and use the "show desktop"-button. The rest of us puts plasmoids in the panel, where it is visible all the time (or however you like it.)
Or we use multiple desktops (CTRL F1-F4 per default)
Typical american..... First he looks like an idiot.... then he confirms it.
Typical Eurotrash, all talk and zero innovation.
Typical Anonymous Cowards
Have you compared a Motorola Xoom to an iPad2? One of them is a collapsed bridge and the other isn't.
Have you compared them?
What means "collapsed bridge" for you? Have you tried Motorola Xoom and it exploded in your hands?
That's funny, so neither are any of the Android tablets either then?
Exactly.
The iPad 2 is pretty much the most powerful tablet out there at the moment for the money - not that really has anything much to do with why it sells so well (that would be usability).
My personal opinion is that tablets are just a toys. They are not practical for some serious work and they are too big to be carried around. I prefer having a standard Laptop/PC at home/work plus a smartphone outside.
The hype is justified if you understand the technology, but since most customers don't then the hype from them is unjustified? Do you have any idea how that sounds?
The hype can't be justified by any means. Do you have any idea what is hype: http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/hype
It's pure propaganda and it doesn't have anything to do with quality or engineering.
Even non-technical people can appreciate good engineering. You don't have to know how bridges are built to appreciate that good ones don't collapse and bad ones do. If you then associate the good bridges with the companies that made them, does that mean that you only care about that company's logo?
If you have bridge company A and bridge company B who make "uncollapsible" bridges do you really care who made the bridge? ... engineers?
What is that with you and Apple engineers? Do you think that Apple engineers are the only good ones in the world? Do you think they are better then RIM, Nokia, Motorola, Samsung, LG,
Yes, yes you did.
Your appraisal of the way you believe other people choose phones (i.e., by not caring about the specs) speaks volumes for how you choose your own purchases.
As the matter of fact, you are right. It does show how I choose what I buy
I bet you were one of the many crowing about the "underpowered" iPad with "no connectivity", and how that would mean it would be a total flop. It's not always about the raw specs of the device.
And you can't be more wrong... A product must convince me before I buy it. And the most important aspect of every product for me is price/performance ratio (performance eq raw power + design + usability + my subjective demands). iPhone/iPad are not even near the top of my price/performance ratio scale.
because there is now quite a bit of historical evidence of Apple building high-quality, well-engineered products.
I don't say that Apple products are not "high-quality, well-engineered products", they are. The hype around the products comes from the people who mostly do not have any idea about the technology and engineering behind. They see only the logo.
I can understand why that would be perplexing to you (a) don't mind fiddling with technology to get it to work, and (b) don't understand technology well enough to appreciate good engineering.
(c) being embedded engineer myself
If your determining factor on a new phone is megapixels on the camera, a smart phone is probably not the market you're in.
I didn't say a word about how I choose a new phone.
No, I just wanted to say that 69% of participants in the survey will give iPhones to someone else and they do not care abut anything related to the phone specifications. They do not care about solidly engineered appliance, they do not care about all the features.
They care only about the logo.
No, because all Facebook users will just use both Facebook and Google+ (you can't apply XOR operation on those two operands)