For new users, if you like tinkering, the galaxy tab is for you. Otherwise, get an iPad, to have *today* the reference tablet, or a Galaxy Tab 2 to have an old version of *tomorrow* reference tablet (Galaxy Tab 3). Unless you need flash, in that case, buy a laptop.
I think the problem there is that the people buying tablets, certainly the people buying iPads, buy them expressly because they do not want to tinker. Who wants to wrestle another device, another interface ? Ease of use is the primary selling point, not the specs which are again uselessly quoted in TFA.
If you're the kind that likes to do a lot of handwaving about openness while boring all your friends and have a 'DIY attitude' (read: lots of free time), buy the Galaxy Tab. Everyone else, stay away until they either become significantly cheaper than the iPad or Android has caught up in marketshare and polish (which, conveniently, is always 6 months from now.)
Why not indeed ? People like to paint Google as some kind of altruistic entity but look at who they are taking on here, their direct competitors. Google are the Microsoft of the new millennium: they have a very profitable core business in search and advertising that could possibly be threatened from developments in other markets so they take on all those companies and go into the phone business, the browser business, the netbook business, social networking, TV streaming, etc. All to keep others from having the power to turn away those eyeballs from Google.
Granted, they have a very novel way of destabilizing the competition using open source like that. And I'm not knocking it, there has undoubtably been a net benefit to consumers from both the competition and the open sourced software. But lets stay real here, how much money would Google invest in V8 if MPEG LA folded, what would be the business case for it? Likewise Android, if it became really dominant it would go stale quicker than you could say "not our core business." Apple and Microsoft aren't the only sleazy corporations here, they are ALL playing a sleazy game.
Who are we to judge any of the areas outside EUSia?
It's called the universal declaration of human rights for a reason. Like the americans say "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights." This is actually one of the few achievements of western, and indeed human, culture worth fighting for.
It's pretty clear Apple doesn't care for people who use the Mini in this way since they've also removed Front Row. They want you to use the AppleTV 2 instead and stream media. I just hope they don't kill the market for the Mini this way since I quite like them.
Having a lock feature is nice. But auto-locking the document seems like a nuisance. There are lots of documents that I edit on-and-off on a monthly or yearly schedule. I don't want to have an extra click just because I haven't touched that file in awhile. In fact, since OS X is pushing more and more for auto-backups and auto-versioning, auto-locking seems unnecessary. If you can always revert changes, then there's no need to give the user an extra 'are you sure you want to change this document' roadblock. To me, it's inconsistent for them to be pushing auto-saving/backup/versioning but also have auto-locking.
The auto-lock period is configurable to up to 1 year before a document auto-locks or you may disable it all together. The setting is hidden in "Preferences" > "Time Machine" > "Options"
Nothing, because Apple has very graciously avoided putting any kind of DRM or activation on OSX. In the past I've downloaded OSX releases from torrent sites to have quicker access before actually going into the store and buying a DVD when I could find the time. Now with the App Store I can totally skip that first step.
You must've missed the part where they released a new Mac Mini today without a DVD drive. The writing is on the wall for optical media as far as Apple's concerned. Apple's betting big on the internet and "the cloud" and like always aren't shy about dragging everyone along with them.
All those curves in the arab letters would've made the project infinitely more complex. Latin block letters are nice and easy though, just straight canals.
Those Dubai artificial "World" islands are already sinking back into the sea and they're what, 3 years old now ? I doubt this'll last 50 years beyond the arrogant asshole's death.
Like this is the only reason. These people are slavers and it's an outrage the west supports these regimes. I mean just read this article about Dubai :
"It is an open secret that once you hire a maid, you have absolute power over her. You take her passport – everyone does; you decide when to pay her, and when – if ever – she can take a break; and you decide who she talks to. She speaks no Arabic. She cannot escape.
In a Burger King, a Filipino girl tells me it is "terrifying" for her to wander the malls in Dubai because Filipino maids or nannies always sneak away from the family they are with and beg her for help. "They say – 'Please, I am being held prisoner, they don't let me call home, they make me work every waking hour seven days a week.'"
You know what would successfully kill off all these botnets ? If MS held a "piracy amnesty day" where everyone could bring in their PC to a team of volunteer geeks and have them install a legit and fully patched version of Windows in place of the virus ridden downloaded hacked version they have. 1 day, good PR and all they need to do is eat the virtual cost of the pirated versions.
This is why in Belgium some people are trying to get rid of jury trials. There was a judgement by the EU court of human rights that a particular case was unlawful because the jury did not provide motivation for the verdict. So now we have a compromise where jury trials still exist but the jury also has to provide a detailed reasoning as to why they pronounced the verdict given. In theory that should at least force the jury to be able to give a reasonable account of why according to the law they find the accused guilty/innocent.
Because it is reasonable to assume someone intelligent committing a crime would leave the phone at home while it is much less likely that someone would take your phone surrupticiously and commit a crime while carrying it all before you have a chance to report it missing. The two situation aren't exactly comparable.
Don't know about you but my location and my cell phone's location are closely correlated. So unless you can offer an explanation that creates a reasonable doubt that that wasn't the case (e.g. I reported it stolen) it's a pretty good assumption.
That entire article sounds pretty familiar to me. "People with DSPS can be called extreme night owls. They feel most alert and say they function best and are most creative in the evening and at night. DSPS patients cannot simply force themselves to sleep early. They may toss and turn for hours in bed, and sometimes not sleep at all, before reporting to work or school." Pretty much sums it up.
I have. If I had my way I'd work nothing but nights. Unfortunately there's other considerations to be made like making sure you still see the kids and making sure you don't become "invisible" to your employer/manager. Someone in another comment described it as having your "mind work(ing) clearly as if it's unwrapped from a fog" which is a pretty accurate description, for me the fog lifts at around 23:00. I guess I'm a freak but there are people like us out there.
You can't tell me it doesn't impact his life. Sleeping during the day is HARD. The body doesn't want to adjust to it.
Not all of us are day dwellers, some are night owls. Personally, I'm at my sharpest at night but then my family has been calling me "the nightwatchman" since I was about 8.
People need it, shift workers don't get very much of it. Just the bit most get in passing going to & from work helps allot. Without it, people are in general a bit more unhappy & lethargic.
"These "lumivores" reject the safety of darkness and appear to seek out light. Sickening."
But considering a modern Mac is just a PC running a different OS, you can still buy a pretty good PC for less than what you would pay for a Mac.
You can build a "pretty good" PC for less than a mac if you only compare the specs. Once you throw in things like service, build quality, noise level, footprint and intangibles like style, macs own their category. But sometimes pretty good is good enough.
Now, someone who *wants* a Mac won't hesitate to pay the premium, but what we were talking about here (I think) is previous PC customers who have decided to make the switch.
You've got that exactly backward. People who are prepared to pay a premium when buying a PC don't hesitate to chose a mac. There are no "nice" PC's anymore, all I see are half assed attempts by the likes of HP and ricer monstrocities while the rest are in a race to the bottom.
Apple's customer base is relatively fixed, and that means that when the cheap-end of the PC market falters, their "percentage" of the market grows without needing any sales growth.
I'm pretty sure all those college kids with their MacBooks weren't using macs 10 years ago. Those are all switchers. Most Apple users I know are switchers (as am I.)
In addition, Apple released a major refresh on their most popular models this quarter (something folks have been waiting on after years of Core 2), so they were able to satisfy a lot of pent-up demand.
While that's true what we're seeing isn't a one time peak. Mac sales have been steadily climbing year after year.
So, this is not some "amazing" milestone, nor is it an indicator of impressive growth for Apple in the PC market. Instead, Apple merely traded places with Acer, and pumped their share a little due to the largest lineup refresh in over a year.
I'd say they traded places with the likes of HP and Sony on the premium end of the market which Apple completely owns. PC makers have basically given up on the high end. Most high end laptops for example are trying to copy Apple, some more blatantly than others.
Slashdot Mirror
For new users, if you like tinkering, the galaxy tab is for you. Otherwise, get an iPad, to have *today* the reference tablet, or a Galaxy Tab 2 to have an old version of *tomorrow* reference tablet (Galaxy Tab 3). Unless you need flash, in that case, buy a laptop.
I think the problem there is that the people buying tablets, certainly the people buying iPads, buy them expressly because they do not want to tinker. Who wants to wrestle another device, another interface ? Ease of use is the primary selling point, not the specs which are again uselessly quoted in TFA.
If you're the kind that likes to do a lot of handwaving about openness while boring all your friends and have a 'DIY attitude' (read: lots of free time), buy the Galaxy Tab. Everyone else, stay away until they either become significantly cheaper than the iPad or Android has caught up in marketshare and polish (which, conveniently, is always 6 months from now.)
Why not indeed ? People like to paint Google as some kind of altruistic entity but look at who they are taking on here, their direct competitors. Google are the Microsoft of the new millennium: they have a very profitable core business in search and advertising that could possibly be threatened from developments in other markets so they take on all those companies and go into the phone business, the browser business, the netbook business, social networking, TV streaming, etc. All to keep others from having the power to turn away those eyeballs from Google.
Granted, they have a very novel way of destabilizing the competition using open source like that. And I'm not knocking it, there has undoubtably been a net benefit to consumers from both the competition and the open sourced software. But lets stay real here, how much money would Google invest in V8 if MPEG LA folded, what would be the business case for it? Likewise Android, if it became really dominant it would go stale quicker than you could say "not our core business." Apple and Microsoft aren't the only sleazy corporations here, they are ALL playing a sleazy game.
That's the local culture.
Who are we to judge any of the areas outside EUSia?
It's called the universal declaration of human rights for a reason. Like the americans say "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights." This is actually one of the few achievements of western, and indeed human, culture worth fighting for.
It's pretty clear Apple doesn't care for people who use the Mini in this way since they've also removed Front Row. They want you to use the AppleTV 2 instead and stream media. I just hope they don't kill the market for the Mini this way since I quite like them.
Having a lock feature is nice. But auto-locking the document seems like a nuisance. There are lots of documents that I edit on-and-off on a monthly or yearly schedule. I don't want to have an extra click just because I haven't touched that file in awhile. In fact, since OS X is pushing more and more for auto-backups and auto-versioning, auto-locking seems unnecessary. If you can always revert changes, then there's no need to give the user an extra 'are you sure you want to change this document' roadblock. To me, it's inconsistent for them to be pushing auto-saving/backup/versioning but also have auto-locking.
The auto-lock period is configurable to up to 1 year before a document auto-locks or you may disable it all together. The setting is hidden in "Preferences" > "Time Machine" > "Options"
Nothing, because Apple has very graciously avoided putting any kind of DRM or activation on OSX. In the past I've downloaded OSX releases from torrent sites to have quicker access before actually going into the store and buying a DVD when I could find the time. Now with the App Store I can totally skip that first step.
You must've missed the part where they released a new Mac Mini today without a DVD drive. The writing is on the wall for optical media as far as Apple's concerned. Apple's betting big on the internet and "the cloud" and like always aren't shy about dragging everyone along with them.
All those curves in the arab letters would've made the project infinitely more complex. Latin block letters are nice and easy though, just straight canals.
Those Dubai artificial "World" islands are already sinking back into the sea and they're what, 3 years old now ? I doubt this'll last 50 years beyond the arrogant asshole's death.
Like this is the only reason. These people are slavers and it's an outrage the west supports these regimes. I mean just read this article about Dubai :
"It is an open secret that once you hire a maid, you have absolute power over her. You take her passport – everyone does; you decide when to pay her, and when – if ever – she can take a break; and you decide who she talks to. She speaks no Arabic. She cannot escape.
In a Burger King, a Filipino girl tells me it is "terrifying" for her to wander the malls in Dubai because Filipino maids or nannies always sneak away from the family they are with and beg her for help. "They say – 'Please, I am being held prisoner, they don't let me call home, they make me work every waking hour seven days a week.'"
You know what would successfully kill off all these botnets ? If MS held a "piracy amnesty day" where everyone could bring in their PC to a team of volunteer geeks and have them install a legit and fully patched version of Windows in place of the virus ridden downloaded hacked version they have. 1 day, good PR and all they need to do is eat the virtual cost of the pirated versions.
This is why in Belgium some people are trying to get rid of jury trials. There was a judgement by the EU court of human rights that a particular case was unlawful because the jury did not provide motivation for the verdict. So now we have a compromise where jury trials still exist but the jury also has to provide a detailed reasoning as to why they pronounced the verdict given. In theory that should at least force the jury to be able to give a reasonable account of why according to the law they find the accused guilty/innocent.
Because it is reasonable to assume someone intelligent committing a crime would leave the phone at home while it is much less likely that someone would take your phone surrupticiously and commit a crime while carrying it all before you have a chance to report it missing. The two situation aren't exactly comparable.
Don't know about you but my location and my cell phone's location are closely correlated. So unless you can offer an explanation that creates a reasonable doubt that that wasn't the case (e.g. I reported it stolen) it's a pretty good assumption.
Occam's razor.
"By all means let's be open-minded, but not so open-minded that our brains drop out."
- Richard Dawkins
That entire article sounds pretty familiar to me. "People with DSPS can be called extreme night owls. They feel most alert and say they function best and are most creative in the evening and at night. DSPS patients cannot simply force themselves to sleep early. They may toss and turn for hours in bed, and sometimes not sleep at all, before reporting to work or school." Pretty much sums it up.
I have. If I had my way I'd work nothing but nights. Unfortunately there's other considerations to be made like making sure you still see the kids and making sure you don't become "invisible" to your employer/manager. Someone in another comment described it as having your "mind work(ing) clearly as if it's unwrapped from a fog" which is a pretty accurate description, for me the fog lifts at around 23:00. I guess I'm a freak but there are people like us out there.
You can't tell me it doesn't impact his life. Sleeping during the day is HARD. The body doesn't want to adjust to it.
Not all of us are day dwellers, some are night owls. Personally, I'm at my sharpest at night but then my family has been calling me "the nightwatchman" since I was about 8.
People need it, shift workers don't get very much of it. Just the bit most get in passing going to & from work helps allot. Without it, people are in general a bit more unhappy & lethargic.
"These "lumivores" reject the safety of darkness and appear to seek out light. Sickening."
But considering a modern Mac is just a PC running a different OS, you can still buy a pretty good PC for less than what you would pay for a Mac.
You can build a "pretty good" PC for less than a mac if you only compare the specs. Once you throw in things like service, build quality, noise level, footprint and intangibles like style, macs own their category. But sometimes pretty good is good enough.
Now, someone who *wants* a Mac won't hesitate to pay the premium, but what we were talking about here (I think) is previous PC customers who have decided to make the switch.
You've got that exactly backward. People who are prepared to pay a premium when buying a PC don't hesitate to chose a mac. There are no "nice" PC's anymore, all I see are half assed attempts by the likes of HP and ricer monstrocities while the rest are in a race to the bottom.
Apple's customer base is relatively fixed, and that means that when the cheap-end of the PC market falters, their "percentage" of the market grows without needing any sales growth.
I'm pretty sure all those college kids with their MacBooks weren't using macs 10 years ago. Those are all switchers. Most Apple users I know are switchers (as am I.)
In addition, Apple released a major refresh on their most popular models this quarter (something folks have been waiting on after years of Core 2), so they were able to satisfy a lot of pent-up demand.
While that's true what we're seeing isn't a one time peak. Mac sales have been steadily climbing year after year.
So, this is not some "amazing" milestone, nor is it an indicator of impressive growth for Apple in the PC market. Instead, Apple merely traded places with Acer, and pumped their share a little due to the largest lineup refresh in over a year.
I'd say they traded places with the likes of HP and Sony on the premium end of the market which Apple completely owns. PC makers have basically given up on the high end. Most high end laptops for example are trying to copy Apple, some more blatantly than others.
I wouldn't have expected this in a down economy, considering the mac's premium price. I'm a little surprised.
Often a "cheap" PC is just a false economy. IMHO, YMMV, etc.
This. The "I'm a Mac, I'm a PC" commercial series twisted what "PC" meant to make it out to be a Windows machine. PC means Personal Computer, people.
Actually they did one of those commercials where "Mac" specifically says he's "a PC too".