You make valid points, but it is the nature of the game you're ignoring. Microsoft does specialize in software while Apple is more hardware-based, but Microsoft's main product regardless has been most affected by Apple's software. Likewise, Apple's hardware along with their software solutions have always dealt with Microsoft as their main competition.
The rivalry is just huge, and any strategically-sound opportunities to directly impact each other are usually taken advantage of.
...will learn how to mod people up here in a minute.
So basically, what is happening is actually "normal", it was just unexpected during the last few decades and took people by surprise. The way you explain it, it seems to me it is just economics running its course. There's no ticking time bomb that will destroy the US economy, it's just that for the time being China happens to harbor a large portion of our manufacturing and production. There was never some conspiracy concerning China undermining our economy, they were simply the cheapest country to use for manufacturing and that is the status quo.
Why do a lot of people have such a gloomy outlook on this situation? Do we have a huge problem on our hands, or are we just walking through a forest with an opening visible in the distance?
Please don't flame, this is genuine curiousity. I wish I fully understood the fundamentals of the relationship between China and the US. It seems to me, even through my veil of misunderstanding, that the Chinese economy has a stranglehold on the US economy due to inflation (or something along those lines). I want to know why this is incurable. Is it true that I could take $10,000 from the US and go to China and have x10 the shopping spree than I could in the States? Is that where the problem lies? I'm all about reading and doing research, but I just don't understand where to begin. I'm simply confused by the whole situation.
Not looking for rude comments, also not looking for a hand-out, but if someone more versed in economics than myself could give me a brief explanation or a step in the right direction I'd be very grateful.
My exact same thoughts as I read the summary/article; why would netbooks fade away? They fill a gap that must be filled: an ultra-portable computer. Laptops are not the same, and phones have nowhere near the capabilities for a lot of people. Yes, mobile phones are getting more and more technologically advanced by the quarter, and yes, I'm loving every bit of it, but netbooks will still hold their own.
Would it be possible to legally hold the company to their agreement? Having built up a few botnets several years ago (just for the sake of doing it, no spam/DDoS), I wouldn't trust them. It makes sense that the authors of malicious code wouldn't risk their creation on what could be a sting by AV companies without some sort of legal ramifications... Also, I couldn't imagine it would be *too* difficult to create your own antivirus sand beach for newly-created viruses to test themselves in. A lot of the aforementioned AV's are cheap or free for the sake of the advantages they would give and the edge one's malware could have.
I believe you're a bit off track. Breakthrough status is given to an achievement or accomplishment resulting in a relatively large number of newly opened doors. These doors lead even further down the path of progress in the field. As you chip away at a problem, you slowly open up various doors and make progress towards an ultimate objective. Usually, a surprising discovery is considered a breakthrough simply because the scientists involved weren't slowly opening doors, the surprise instantly opened them up. Simply put, yes, usually milestones referred to as "breakthroughs" are just surprising discoveries, but if a general cure for cancer were discovered today it would also be considered a "breakthrough" despite decades of research prior to it.
First post ever, finally took the leap after two years worth of lurking.
Slashdot Mirror
It's the best after insufflating approximately ten milligrams.
You make valid points, but it is the nature of the game you're ignoring. Microsoft does specialize in software while Apple is more hardware-based, but Microsoft's main product regardless has been most affected by Apple's software. Likewise, Apple's hardware along with their software solutions have always dealt with Microsoft as their main competition. The rivalry is just huge, and any strategically-sound opportunities to directly impact each other are usually taken advantage of.
It is called "industry/market analysis," would you prefer it didn't exist? Is it even logical for it to not exist?
...will learn how to mod people up here in a minute.
So basically, what is happening is actually "normal", it was just unexpected during the last few decades and took people by surprise. The way you explain it, it seems to me it is just economics running its course. There's no ticking time bomb that will destroy the US economy, it's just that for the time being China happens to harbor a large portion of our manufacturing and production. There was never some conspiracy concerning China undermining our economy, they were simply the cheapest country to use for manufacturing and that is the status quo.
Why do a lot of people have such a gloomy outlook on this situation? Do we have a huge problem on our hands, or are we just walking through a forest with an opening visible in the distance?
Please don't flame, this is genuine curiousity. I wish I fully understood the fundamentals of the relationship between China and the US. It seems to me, even through my veil of misunderstanding, that the Chinese economy has a stranglehold on the US economy due to inflation (or something along those lines). I want to know why this is incurable. Is it true that I could take $10,000 from the US and go to China and have x10 the shopping spree than I could in the States? Is that where the problem lies? I'm all about reading and doing research, but I just don't understand where to begin. I'm simply confused by the whole situation.
Not looking for rude comments, also not looking for a hand-out, but if someone more versed in economics than myself could give me a brief explanation or a step in the right direction I'd be very grateful.
My exact same thoughts as I read the summary/article; why would netbooks fade away? They fill a gap that must be filled: an ultra-portable computer. Laptops are not the same, and phones have nowhere near the capabilities for a lot of people. Yes, mobile phones are getting more and more technologically advanced by the quarter, and yes, I'm loving every bit of it, but netbooks will still hold their own.
What if its existence is expected but its nature is unknown? Is that considered a surprise?
It is possible, look up polymorphic code. I've seen it implemented personally by my mentor though I've never worked with it myself. Neat stuff.
Would it be possible to legally hold the company to their agreement? Having built up a few botnets several years ago (just for the sake of doing it, no spam/DDoS), I wouldn't trust them. It makes sense that the authors of malicious code wouldn't risk their creation on what could be a sting by AV companies without some sort of legal ramifications... Also, I couldn't imagine it would be *too* difficult to create your own antivirus sand beach for newly-created viruses to test themselves in. A lot of the aforementioned AV's are cheap or free for the sake of the advantages they would give and the edge one's malware could have.
I believe you're a bit off track. Breakthrough status is given to an achievement or accomplishment resulting in a relatively large number of newly opened doors. These doors lead even further down the path of progress in the field. As you chip away at a problem, you slowly open up various doors and make progress towards an ultimate objective. Usually, a surprising discovery is considered a breakthrough simply because the scientists involved weren't slowly opening doors, the surprise instantly opened them up. Simply put, yes, usually milestones referred to as "breakthroughs" are just surprising discoveries, but if a general cure for cancer were discovered today it would also be considered a "breakthrough" despite decades of research prior to it.
First post ever, finally took the leap after two years worth of lurking.