I'm not saying it's the case here but sometimes there's a difference between "optimal" (mathematically) and "what feels nice" or "what I expected to happen." You are after all dealing with people, who are notoriously irrational. I think that's what Nikker was getting at.
Exactly what I have been saying for years, nice to hear it from the mouth of a fanboi.
"Apple makes fashion accessories."
And for those of us with our sanity still intact:
"Who gives a shit if a tool matches the colour of my man-bag."
First off, grow up and cut that "fanboi" shit out. It makes you sound like a twelve year old.
Second, you missed my point which was that good design can add to a product (follow that link in my previous post to the wikipedia entry for applied esthetics.) Since you talk about fashion let's make a fashion analogy. Pants are pants but you can buy pants with a fashionable cut that are nicer to look at and feel more comfortable. The fashion has added to both the utility (comfort) and the enjoyment (looks nice.) Apple doesn't make fashion accessories, they make devices in which they have also invested time and effort to make them attractive and easy to use. It may not present an added value to you but it does for a lot of people.
And even after Apple is gobbling up the notebook market, I don't see many of the PC manufacturer so much as even copy them. Same plasticky, gimmicky shit notebooks as ever. Sure, Dell make copy MacBook Air with Adamo or whatever it's called (as useless as either were), and they may also make the shiny screens, or chicklet keyboards - but the bodies, the very first impression of a notebook on PCs has remains the same plasticky, unwiedly, fugly crap that they've been pushing out in 1998. No clean lines or anything like the Power Mac or moreso MacBook Pro. Boggles my mind.
And I say this as someone that would like to see nice computers on the PC front as I work on a PC desktop. I recently got a hand me down desktop and it was fucking gaudy - LED lights and gauges everywhere, like a poor man's F1 racer in computer case form. Tried to find something minimalistic, and the nicest thing I could find was a black case version of das keyboard.
*(I do love open source and open standards, but keep them the hell away from the GUI:D)
Apple seems to be the only esthetic company in IT today. The thought that making a computer or device look and feel good could help people feel more comfortable and so help them to better use those devices seems wholly foreign to the rest of the industry. Other companies can copy some aspects of the designs but they can't seem to grasp the philosophy behind it that makes it work.
Wow really ? The guy that presided over a 14% drop in phone sales is in line to become CEO and is willing to piss of the biggest customer of the profitable part of business to do so ? Talk about cutting off your nose to spite your face.
Maybe Google doesn't have a license to the patent in question ? Apple's whole case rests on the fact that they had a cross-licensing deal with the company Lodsys bought the patents from and that prevents developers from being sued for using the technology Apple has built that implements said patent.
Yeah between those versions Apple added : iChat, Safari, FileVault, Exposé, Fast User Switching, Spotlight, Dashboard, Quicktime 7, Quicktime X, Automator, VoiceOver, Core Image, Core Video, Rosetta, Time Machine, Spaces, BootCamp, Grand Central, LauchPad, Mission Control, Quartz Composer, etc., etc. But you know, other than that you're right it's the same system.
That doesn't matter, in fact it's a boon to whoever wrote the bimbots because then the account will have a lot more "friends" for the bimbot to extract exposed information from.
The issue is that they might not have such a big lead on any competition than people may think. That's an amazing thought because Google are still generally seen as untouchable. What the guy's saying is that a modern, nimble company can come in and eat some of Google's cake.
"Mr. Johnson, a former chief economist for the International Monetary Fund, estimated that China owns about $1 trillion in U.S. Treasury securities, or nearly half the $2.37 trillion stock of Treasury debt held by “foreign official” owners."
That's a trillion out of a total of 14 trillion. Plenty to economically ruin the US if they decided is worth a trillion dollars to them to do so. They just need to announce they want to sell a significant portion of it because they lack confidence in the dollar and the US economy will be in the toilet. Or they could just announce that they won't be buying half when the US next sells treasuries for the same effect.
That's because the US makes a big effort not to kill civilians,
While the US doesn't generally engage in atrocities (though there have been instances e.g. in Vietnam) their track record isn't exactly stellar. There's a big effort to keep it out of the US media, I'll grant you that but in the latest Iraq war there were a lot of reports of bombed hospitals and the like available to us not dependent on the US media.
not to plunder and destroy everything but rather protect and rebuild.
That's a joke, it's been true in exactly 1 case: world war 2. Again, in the latest middle eastern wars the "rebuilding effort" seem to be schemes to throw money at corporation friendly to the regime like Halliburton. What is built isn't worth shit, or it only gets half done and is of poor quality, funds go missing (9 billion of Iraqi oil money "missing" at last count), etc. (See for example Scandals, Military, Iraq War, Graft and Fraud
If they shifted to WWII era conquest and occupation you'd see profits - and roughly as much resentment as against the nazis (hello Godwin). The smart weapons are ridiculously expensive compared to just bombing the fuck out of everything. If they stopped giving a shit about protecting civilians and only protected themselves, answered all attacks with massive force, terrified the civilians into cooperating with them rather than Al-Quaeda you'd see costs plummet and profits soar. So it's not that war can't be profitable, just not the way the US is running them now.
The wars are plenty profitable. Not for the US government but for arms dealers, the corrupt contractors that swarm all over the occupied territories and the politicians that retire to cushy jobs on their boards. Follow the money (if it doesn't go "missing" that is.)
This is not a free speech issue, it's a private company deciding not to carry a category of products in its store. You may deplore that decision and take your business elsewhere. Apple probably made the right decision because these apps are in a legal "grey area" at best, from what I read in this thread rules governing DUI checkpoints differ from state to state and so selling this kind of app across the US and internationally could open them up to legal action.
The point isn't to catch those 2 but to discourage drunk driving for all by the threat of being nabbed by a random check. Because the honor system has been shown not to work in this case.
You're an idiot. It's a fascist police state because police do random spot checks to discourage driving under the influence, it's a common sense thing that adds to everyones's safety. When you're on a public highway operating a killing machine, checks to see if 1) you're fully licensed and 2) you're in full control of your faculties are perfectly warranted.
I have a personal domain which has the same problem. My domain name is a four letter latin word (not wanting to slashdot my poor server, I won't mention the name). There's a Belgian rock band with the same name, a video game with a similar name, and at least one medical ward in a Boston hospital which uses a typographical variation.
Deus, right ? Belgian pop knowledge FTW ! Also 1995 called and wants their web design back;-) I mean, frames, seriously ?
You can still remove tags apparently. What they are doing is using technology that makes something 95% of their users are doing easier, namely uploading pictures and then tagging all their friends in it. I don't see the problem.
Why would insurance companies be opposed to medical expert systems?
A computerized billing and coding system could analyze patient records, second-guess doctors, and reject claims faster than thousands of weak human employees...
Computers tend to be impartial and objective and if they are not it's easy to prove contrary to the corrupt human "experts" employed by bastard corporations the world over.
No, not really. I'd be more worried about finding a skilled doctor willing to work at 1/3 the salary they used to command. If costs go down considerably in a computer-controlled utopia, with malpractice claims reduced to almost nothing, the "demand" to pay doctors at their current rate would likely be reduced considerably too.
Plenty of doctors in Cuba. Contrary to popular belief there are doctors willing to work just for love of the job or for the status, money need not be the driving factor.
No, this is just another tool in the toolbox. Just like we could technically do away with pilots in many situations, in practice you still want a human there to deal with the unforeseen, make judgement calls and generally reassure people. Like the pilots the doctors will still need all the training and more to be able to deal with the additional equipment. This is definitely a positive evolution.
Actually that was a MINOR jailbreak because it was easily and quickly patched and so didn't last long. The major jailbreaks are the ones that exploit flaws in the bootrom code. Those are at once more difficult for Apple to patch because they require new hardware to be put out there and they are also impossible to exploit remotely, requiring physical access.
Nothing's stopping Apple from developing something like the "Chameleon Project" the IconFactory used to port their Twitteriffic to the mac but that's going to have to be an evolutionary process over the next 5 years and beyond.
I don't think so, look at the prices of current Apple hardware they are perfectly aligned now, which seems to indicate a strategy to me:
sub $500 : iPhone, iPods $500 - $1000 : iPad $1000-$2000 : MacBook through to iMac over $2000 : Mac Pro
Everything sub-$1000 is iOS, everything above is OSX. The only odd one out in the line is the Mac Mini which is probably why it gets so little love from Apple (and why its price has been going up ever since its release.)
Slashdot Mirror
I'm not saying it's the case here but sometimes there's a difference between "optimal" (mathematically) and "what feels nice" or "what I expected to happen." You are after all dealing with people, who are notoriously irrational. I think that's what Nikker was getting at.
Thank you.
Exactly what I have been saying for years, nice to hear it from the mouth of a fanboi.
"Apple makes fashion accessories."
And for those of us with our sanity still intact:
"Who gives a shit if a tool matches the colour of my man-bag."
First off, grow up and cut that "fanboi" shit out. It makes you sound like a twelve year old.
Second, you missed my point which was that good design can add to a product (follow that link in my previous post to the wikipedia entry for applied esthetics.) Since you talk about fashion let's make a fashion analogy. Pants are pants but you can buy pants with a fashionable cut that are nicer to look at and feel more comfortable. The fashion has added to both the utility (comfort) and the enjoyment (looks nice.) Apple doesn't make fashion accessories, they make devices in which they have also invested time and effort to make them attractive and easy to use. It may not present an added value to you but it does for a lot of people.
And even after Apple is gobbling up the notebook market, I don't see many of the PC manufacturer so much as even copy them. Same plasticky, gimmicky shit notebooks as ever. Sure, Dell make copy MacBook Air with Adamo or whatever it's called (as useless as either were), and they may also make the shiny screens, or chicklet keyboards - but the bodies, the very first impression of a notebook on PCs has remains the same plasticky, unwiedly, fugly crap that they've been pushing out in 1998. No clean lines or anything like the Power Mac or moreso MacBook Pro. Boggles my mind.
And I say this as someone that would like to see nice computers on the PC front as I work on a PC desktop. I recently got a hand me down desktop and it was fucking gaudy - LED lights and gauges everywhere, like a poor man's F1 racer in computer case form. Tried to find something minimalistic, and the nicest thing I could find was a black case version of das keyboard.
*(I do love open source and open standards, but keep them the hell away from the GUI :D)
Apple seems to be the only esthetic company in IT today. The thought that making a computer or device look and feel good could help people feel more comfortable and so help them to better use those devices seems wholly foreign to the rest of the industry. Other companies can copy some aspects of the designs but they can't seem to grasp the philosophy behind it that makes it work.
Wow really ? The guy that presided over a 14% drop in phone sales is in line to become CEO and is willing to piss of the biggest customer of the profitable part of business to do so ? Talk about cutting off your nose to spite your face.
Maybe Google doesn't have a license to the patent in question ? Apple's whole case rests on the fact that they had a cross-licensing deal with the company Lodsys bought the patents from and that prevents developers from being sued for using the technology Apple has built that implements said patent.
Yeah between those versions Apple added : iChat, Safari, FileVault, Exposé, Fast User Switching, Spotlight, Dashboard, Quicktime 7, Quicktime X, Automator, VoiceOver, Core Image, Core Video, Rosetta, Time Machine, Spaces, BootCamp, Grand Central, LauchPad, Mission Control, Quartz Composer, etc., etc. But you know, other than that you're right it's the same system.
I think he meant falsified in the scientific sense as in "possible to disprove through experiment."
That doesn't matter, in fact it's a boon to whoever wrote the bimbots because then the account will have a lot more "friends" for the bimbot to extract exposed information from.
The issue is that they might not have such a big lead on any competition than people may think. That's an amazing thought because Google are still generally seen as untouchable. What the guy's saying is that a modern, nimble company can come in and eat some of Google's cake.
No, they can dump them on the market destroying the US treasury market though.
Yeah it's basically a M.A.D. scenario, all bets are off if one of the two tries anything.
"Mr. Johnson, a former chief economist for the International Monetary Fund, estimated that China owns about $1 trillion in U.S. Treasury securities, or nearly half the $2.37 trillion stock of Treasury debt held by “foreign official” owners."
That's a trillion out of a total of 14 trillion. Plenty to economically ruin the US if they decided is worth a trillion dollars to them to do so. They just need to announce they want to sell a significant portion of it because they lack confidence in the dollar and the US economy will be in the toilet. Or they could just announce that they won't be buying half when the US next sells treasuries for the same effect.
That's because the US makes a big effort not to kill civilians,
While the US doesn't generally engage in atrocities (though there have been instances e.g. in Vietnam) their track record isn't exactly stellar. There's a big effort to keep it out of the US media, I'll grant you that but in the latest Iraq war there were a lot of reports of bombed hospitals and the like available to us not dependent on the US media.
not to plunder and destroy everything but rather protect and rebuild.
That's a joke, it's been true in exactly 1 case: world war 2. Again, in the latest middle eastern wars the "rebuilding effort" seem to be schemes to throw money at corporation friendly to the regime like Halliburton. What is built isn't worth shit, or it only gets half done and is of poor quality, funds go missing (9 billion of Iraqi oil money "missing" at last count), etc. (See for example Scandals, Military, Iraq War, Graft and Fraud
If they shifted to WWII era conquest and occupation you'd see profits - and roughly as much resentment as against the nazis (hello Godwin). The smart weapons are ridiculously expensive compared to just bombing the fuck out of everything. If they stopped giving a shit about protecting civilians and only protected themselves, answered all attacks with massive force, terrified the civilians into cooperating with them rather than Al-Quaeda you'd see costs plummet and profits soar. So it's not that war can't be profitable, just not the way the US is running them now.
The wars are plenty profitable. Not for the US government but for arms dealers, the corrupt contractors that swarm all over the occupied territories and the politicians that retire to cushy jobs on their boards. Follow the money (if it doesn't go "missing" that is.)
This is not a free speech issue, it's a private company deciding not to carry a category of products in its store. You may deplore that decision and take your business elsewhere. Apple probably made the right decision because these apps are in a legal "grey area" at best, from what I read in this thread rules governing DUI checkpoints differ from state to state and so selling this kind of app across the US and internationally could open them up to legal action.
The point isn't to catch those 2 but to discourage drunk driving for all by the threat of being nabbed by a random check. Because the honor system has been shown not to work in this case.
You're an idiot. It's a fascist police state because police do random spot checks to discourage driving under the influence, it's a common sense thing that adds to everyones's safety. When you're on a public highway operating a killing machine, checks to see if 1) you're fully licensed and 2) you're in full control of your faculties are perfectly warranted.
I have a personal domain which has the same problem. My domain name is a four letter latin word (not wanting to slashdot my poor server, I won't mention the name). There's a Belgian rock band with the same name, a video game with a similar name, and at least one medical ward in a Boston hospital which uses a typographical variation.
Deus, right ? Belgian pop knowledge FTW ! Also 1995 called and wants their web design back ;-) I mean, frames, seriously ?
You can still remove tags apparently. What they are doing is using technology that makes something 95% of their users are doing easier, namely uploading pictures and then tagging all their friends in it. I don't see the problem.
Why would insurance companies be opposed to medical expert systems?
A computerized billing and coding system could analyze patient records, second-guess doctors, and reject claims faster than thousands of weak human employees...
Computers tend to be impartial and objective and if they are not it's easy to prove contrary to the corrupt human "experts" employed by bastard corporations the world over.
No, not really. I'd be more worried about finding a skilled doctor willing to work at 1/3 the salary they used to command. If costs go down considerably in a computer-controlled utopia, with malpractice claims reduced to almost nothing, the "demand" to pay doctors at their current rate would likely be reduced considerably too.
Plenty of doctors in Cuba. Contrary to popular belief there are doctors willing to work just for love of the job or for the status, money need not be the driving factor.
No, this is just another tool in the toolbox. Just like we could technically do away with pilots in many situations, in practice you still want a human there to deal with the unforeseen, make judgement calls and generally reassure people. Like the pilots the doctors will still need all the training and more to be able to deal with the additional equipment. This is definitely a positive evolution.
That's just common sense, you don't let your livelihood depend on one vendor no matter how small you think the risk may be.
Actually that was a MINOR jailbreak because it was easily and quickly patched and so didn't last long. The major jailbreaks are the ones that exploit flaws in the bootrom code. Those are at once more difficult for Apple to patch because they require new hardware to be put out there and they are also impossible to exploit remotely, requiring physical access.
Nothing's stopping Apple from developing something like the "Chameleon Project" the IconFactory used to port their Twitteriffic to the mac but that's going to have to be an evolutionary process over the next 5 years and beyond.
I don't think so, look at the prices of current Apple hardware they are perfectly aligned now, which seems to indicate a strategy to me:
sub $500 : iPhone, iPods
$500 - $1000 : iPad
$1000-$2000 : MacBook through to iMac
over $2000 : Mac Pro
Everything sub-$1000 is iOS, everything above is OSX. The only odd one out in the line is the Mac Mini which is probably why it gets so little love from Apple (and why its price has been going up ever since its release.)