First off, physical security is entirely beyond the scope of the OP's problem. If you want to secure your digital assets, you are going to require both an electronic and a physical policy because data can take either shape when leaving the building. The limitations of one side really have no bearing on the other side, and if one side is your job and the other is not, don't look at how the other team is doing to determine how much effort you put into your end of the task. The goalie doesn't just not bother if his strikers aren't doing well that day. You do your job, and let them do theirs.
Bad analogy. You can win with a good goalie and poor strikers or a poor goalie and good strikers, they add up. With security you're as good as the weakest link. To use a house analogy, if you're guarding the door and they're guarding the window are you really going for that blast-proof two inch steel door with three-factor authentication when the window is single layer glass with a simple hatch and no alarm?
Are you sure about this? While you can't create an arbitrary response with just a single frequency, different linear combinations of three single frequencies should be enough to create all possible responses. This is basic linear algebra, and it is equivalent to saying that you only need three linearly independent vectors to span a 3-dimensional space.
That is true but your analysis is wrong, that is not the mathematical equivalent because we can only send light with positive intensity. Say you had f1 = [1,0,0], f2 = [0,1,1/2] and f3 = [0,0,1]. Sure with a linear combination of vectors you can express [0,1,0] but only using negative intensity which is impossible.
What I don't understand is why the summary is focused on ARM beating Atom when the overall winner - in performance, in performance per watt, and in cost - was the Intel Ivy Bridge... by a huge margin.
Because this is slashdot and the AMD/ARM vs Intel bias is almost as strong as Linux vs Windows? Their best selling point is the APUs but in reality Intel is the one favored most by the move to decent integrated graphics, people still buy Intel but now instead of an AMD/nVidia entry level card many just stick with the integrated one, making GPU market share become more like CPU market share. And Intel is the one with a half-decent ARM competitor (Intel Medfield), AMD isn't ready to play in that arena at all. And don't get me started on Bulldozer and the high end...
Larger form factors would allow larger SLC SSD drives.
No, size is not the problem - cost is. If you can put 1TB of MLC flash in a drive, you can put 512GB SLC in the same form factor. The problem is it would cost many thousands of dollars.
Look at it this way: even with the reduced lifespan of high density NAND, you get something like 3000 writes out of them (used to be 10k for the 45nm stuff, but write amplification is below 1 these days due to compression). On a 180GB drive, that will get you a lifetime write count of 540 PB. To hit that writing 20GB of fresh data every single day (which is probably way more than what actually happens in practice, even with swapping, which is predominantly read-heavy, not write-heavy), the drive would last roughly 74 years...
Except 3000*180GB is 540TB, not PB. And I'd be very careful to equate writes with data. Downloading a 20GB torrent for example will lead to >>20GB writes as it writes data blocks and the SSD has to rewrite its physical blocks. A lot of apps write log files where one line = rewriting a block. I used an SSD very heavily and despite the 10k writes/cell rating it was worn out in 1,5 years, right now the health check on my replacement drive that I feel I've been treating nicely is already down to 64% in health after a little over a year. At this rate it'll only be good for another two years. This is with swap disabled, torrents downloaded to a regular 3.5" HDD but it runs 24/7 though.
I used a first-gen Intel x25-e as my only drive for several years
If you wrote that accurately you used an enterprise SSD using SLC cells good for 100k writes or so. For sure, if I say my 5k writes MLC will last me 3 years then a 100k drive would last me 60 years but your experience with that is pretty much entirely irrelevant to the current consumer market. A ten year old HDD can still be usable, I can pretty much guarantee a ten year old SSD in active use will not. I've accepted it due to the huge usability performance, but SSDs are very much consumables right now, if you can't afford to replace them regularly you shouldn't buy them.
Well, yes and no the chart is technically not wrong if you have a single frequency light source like a laser. The trouble is that most real world objects emit a spectrum of light. This chart shows the cone response relative to frequency so the cone's response is an integral over the spectrum*sensitivity. The problem is that in all commonly current display technologies (CRT, LCD, LED, OLED, 3-chip DLP) you only have a fixed number of frequencies to work with. For example say you have red (600nm), green (540nm) and blue (440nm). Well, it turns out you can't actually produce all combinations with just three wavelengths as real world objects do with infinite wavelengths.
The reason for this if you look at the response chart is that the curves overlap, you can't simply decompose them into three components you can set individually. Any wavelength you send to stimulate the M cones also stimulate the S or L cones. And our vision is particularly good at picking up on those differences, it's a two-stage process like illustrated here. Even if the mix in the SML cones is mostly right the Cg and Cb cells are extremely good at picking up on differences in the relative mix. Ideally you'd like more wavelengths or white light + a color wheel like used in single chip DLP, but it's not that easy and you need a signal with the extended information like xvYCC.
I just wish someone would make 3.5" drives besides OCZ. Hell - I wish someone would make 5.25" drives.
Why? You see an almost perfect scaling. The cost of 1x1024GB ~= 2x512GB ~= 4x256GB ~= 8x128GB. And since you can already put $2500 worth of flash in a 2.5" drive, what do you need 3.5" drives for? $10,000 drives? Or 5.25", $100,000 drives? The way things are going it's more likely my next SSD would be a mSATA drive...
Superior to x86? Sure there is. x86 is a mish mash of instructions many of which hardly anyone uses except for backwards compatibility, but that still cost real estate on the CPU die.
Actually the most obscure instructions are implemented in software (microcode) and don't take up any hardware at all except the storage space. This makes them hideously slow but modern compilers avoid them and if you're running very old legacy code it runs fast enough anyway. Anyway, I heard these arguments back in the 90s when processors had 5 million transistors. Now they have 1.5 billion transistors and you still keep talking about the few thousand - yes, thousands - of transistors required. Sigh.
BTW, last I read, a 2GHz Cortex A9 CPU based on a 40 nm process drew about 250 mW max, not 2W, though those numbers could easily be wrong.
The answers are really all at the site the GP linked. Performance optimized: 1.9W Power optimized: 0.5W (250 mW/core)
Anyway, Anandtech has a pretty good overview of actual phones. If you look at the normalized hours/watthour figures Medfield (the Xolo X900) is decidedly middle of the pack. It's not better than the ARM phones, but it's not terrible either. Of course newer ARM designs will beat it, but then again Intel isn't going to stand still either.
For example, taking your point about data bandwidth, because the x86 has so few registers, it has to do data IO a lot more compared to something like the PowerPC or SPARC.
I should point out that when AMD made x86-64 they had a choice of how many registers to add, I remember reading an article about it long ago. They tested it out a lot and found adding another 8 registers (r8-r15) was the ideal number - their processors have more than 16 internally but it was more effective to let the hardware optimize the rest at run time rather than exposing them to the compiler. So it's not like this is really fixed, in fact I can't see any problem with adding more registers at any time. If you added r16-r31, existing binaries would never use them while a recompile would give you all of them to work with. That neither AMD or Intel has chosen to do suggests they're pretty close to the ideal already.
Of course if you were researching a bio-weapon you can get an "all of the above" virus and ground zero could be the departure hall of a major international airport instead of some remote village in Nowhere, Africa. Who'd like to try "basic quarantine measures" on cities with millions of people? Not to mention all the commuters and such we didn't have during the Spanish Flu, chances are good your quarantine is broken even before you can even set it. That's really the scary thing about a bioweapon, you can bootstrap it on such an intensity that it will be practically impossible to contain.
Others could have copied the car, or the books or the records. But we, as a society, gave that right to the car company, the author, or the artist. Never mind WHY we did that. Those arguments are not germane, we did it, enshrined it in law, and it is what it is. (...) Does that fact somehow trump the law, wash away the artist's rights, and make copying anything legal?
No, but we can change the law to make it legal. You talk as if the first man who invented fire should have the rights to it from then until the end of time and society stole it from him. We copy each other all the time in all areas of life, the best way of learning something is to imitate and mimic others. Copyright is a carved out temporary exception to the normal state of things, if you have made something that qualifies as a creative work you get an exclusive period for as long as society feel is prudent. I've found there's little point in arguing because people like you tend to think you own the work, that even though you've sold it on CDs to millions of people it's your right to control what those millions of people do with it. You start with everything, and don't understand why the government should have any right to take it away.
I don't think you have any such power over other people unless we as a society grant you those powers. You start with nothing except your original work and you can do whatever you want with it but if you give copies to anyone they can do whatever they want with them, including sharing it with a million of their closest friends on P2P. Everything you take for granted is an exclusivity granted by the grace of society - for a time. And we as a society can change our mind, that is we the people and not you the copyright holders. If we feel that copyright is no longer the best way to "To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts" or we feel it's hurting society more than it's helping, then we can simply cease. Because what you had was granted, not owned. And that is why IP is such a fraudulent terminology.
Imagine you wanted to start an online music store, a la iTunes. You would contact Capitol Records* and ask for a license to sell and distribute thousands of copies of their music. Do you think they'd say "sure, no problem. That'll be $1"? Or would they say "that'll be 33% of gross sales, with a minimum of $15k for any work per year since you don't have an established track record, and a minimum of $50k for any song in the top-40, plus we want an escrow payment in advance, plus, etc. etc. etc."?
Yes, but if a burger store made a joke a sold one single dollar meal calling it a McDonald's meal, McDonald's couldn't argue that because the only way to legally serve a McD burger is to pay a $15k franchise fee, their actual damages from lost sales is $15001 (they could possibly argue loss of reputation though). Any sane judge would reason that this customer would then likely have gone to a real McD and paid $1, which is the only actual loss.
So no one in a swarm ever uploads more than a single copy? Kazaa would disable uploading once it uploaded a full copy of a work? I don't remember it working that way.
No, that is why I said on average. But there's no proof Thomas-Rasset was above average, in fact they have no proof she actually uploaded anything at all only that that the files were made available. Hence the "making available = distribution" issue, which was dropped. I was just pointing out that even so the average peer in the swarm does not net contribute any upload bandwidth because it consumed just as much downloading as it provides uploading.
That's the distinction... If Thomas was only a leecher and never uploaded copies, then she could make a reasonable argument about $1. But once she distributed, then she's into the "reasonable royalties and license fees" range.
Not really, in a P2P swarm there's obviously one upload for every download. So by downloading she consumed an upload from another peer and by uploading back herself to a 1.0 ratio - which will be the average - the swarm is only returned to the neutral position. The upload she provided is cancelled out by the one she consumed and in net there is only one extra copy which she could have been bought for $1. If there's 100 people in a swarm there's 100 copies and each person caused 1/100th of that which is 1 copy, only in RIAA math did 100 people each cause 100 copies leading to 10000 infringments.
Who was saying no to building Windows smartphones? But Elop apparently wasn't satisfied with only that. He had to kill the burning platform (Symbian) as well as the blooming platform (MeeGo).
How many horses do you want to ride at once? Many of the problems Nokia had was over the internal divide between Symbian and MeeGo, now you'd make it a three way race instead of a two way race. Apple picked a horse called iOS and rode that. Samsung and a few other picked one called Android and rode that. Nokia tried for a split with one foot on Symbian, one on MeeGo and the result was disaster. Yes, Nokia was in huge trouble already when Elop took over. Adding another platform would just make everything worse. Okay maybe he picked the wrong horse, but at least he picked one.
Too many people are arguing pro-Finish type of socialism, but that's why Finland is going to lose more and more jobs. All socialists do is drive investment capital out of their countries somewhere else. Good for 'somewhere else', bad for those socialist countries.
And investment capital doesn't flee the US for China and India because it's cheaper there? In capitalism, money goes where the slave labor is cheapest, the working conditions poorest and the regulations the weakest. You get fucked until you're the cheapest bidder for the job and by moving the jobs around workers are forced to underbid each other until they're all dirt poor. This whole "workers must stand up for themselves" and fight for social security and decent working conditions through laws and unions is just a communism. You hear that sound? It's the 1% laughing over you.
I know it's very slashdotty to blame Microsoft for everything, but Nokia was in deep shit well before Elop. Moving to Microsoft Phone was a "If you're falling off a cliff, you might as well flap your arms and try to fly" move. He'll probably get the blame here as they hit rock bottom but Nokia threw themselves off the cliff.
They also make incredibly popular low cost phones that sell millions in the developing world.
Have sold. But the latest figures for 2011 is that there's now 6 billion cell phone subscribers, or 86.7% of the world's population, though some have more one subscription for home and one for work. That means there's not many more new people left to sell to, while in established markets people now buy smart phones and dump their dumb/feature phones for practically nothing. So that market is dying very shortly too.
Not that Microsoft didn't abuse their monopoly, but Netscape made a helluva good job of shooting themselves in the foot to the point that for the Mozilla reboot they decided to outright scrap the Netscape code base and start over. And I can attest to that, the last incarnations of the Netscape 4.x series were horrible, buggy, unstable abominations that deserved to be put out of its misery.
Well, just like I'm not required to go through a brain wipe when I leave things that are related to my generic skills like notes or tips or whatever I must admit I feel are just as much mine as the company's, regardless of what the IP agreement said. But a lot of people go past that and start looking at the work products like "theirs", which is starting to get a far darker shade of gray. They're the company's scripts, not your scripts. They're the company's processes and routines, not your processes and routines. They're the company's customers, not your customers. That said, the biggest danger aren't those with an overly strong attachment to their own works, it's those that grab the whole company's IP.
Well apparently big and high PPI is more expensive and complicated than small and high PPI, but first the iPhone (3.5"), then the iPad (9.7") and now the MPB (15.4") it's pretty obvious to connect the dots on where this is going. I'd be very surprised if we did not have a high PPI iMac/Display within a year or so. Particularly since 4K TVs are finally starting to pop up in the market place, although still at outrageous prices.
They survived Vista so they'll survive Windows 8, Microsoft is far too entrenched to flop in one generation. Much like Intel when they were selling PIVs and Itanics, they still come back to be on top of the game. I run Windows 7, it works very well and with extended support even my Home Premium is supported until 2020. It's not like there's going to be a pressing need to use Win8 for many years yet, assuming it actually ends up that bad.
Yes, but only so long and so far as the police demand they preserve it as a crime scene or as evidence. They don't have an obligation to anyone else, they don't have to keep the servers powered (unless the police ask them to), they don't have to supply the bandwidth (unless the police wants the data), they could possibly get permission to just tape out the contents, recycle the servers and preserve those as the evidence. Nothing gives them any kind of obligation to continue providing a hosting service, only to preserve evidence as required by the police.
Slashdot Mirror
First off, physical security is entirely beyond the scope of the OP's problem. If you want to secure your digital assets, you are going to require both an electronic and a physical policy because data can take either shape when leaving the building. The limitations of one side really have no bearing on the other side, and if one side is your job and the other is not, don't look at how the other team is doing to determine how much effort you put into your end of the task. The goalie doesn't just not bother if his strikers aren't doing well that day. You do your job, and let them do theirs.
Bad analogy. You can win with a good goalie and poor strikers or a poor goalie and good strikers, they add up. With security you're as good as the weakest link. To use a house analogy, if you're guarding the door and they're guarding the window are you really going for that blast-proof two inch steel door with three-factor authentication when the window is single layer glass with a simple hatch and no alarm?
Are you sure about this? While you can't create an arbitrary response with just a single frequency, different linear combinations of three single frequencies should be enough to create all possible responses. This is basic linear algebra, and it is equivalent to saying that you only need three linearly independent vectors to span a 3-dimensional space.
That is true but your analysis is wrong, that is not the mathematical equivalent because we can only send light with positive intensity. Say you had f1 = [1,0,0], f2 = [0,1,1/2] and f3 = [0,0,1]. Sure with a linear combination of vectors you can express [0,1,0] but only using negative intensity which is impossible.
What I don't understand is why the summary is focused on ARM beating Atom when the overall winner - in performance, in performance per watt, and in cost - was the Intel Ivy Bridge... by a huge margin.
Because this is slashdot and the AMD/ARM vs Intel bias is almost as strong as Linux vs Windows? Their best selling point is the APUs but in reality Intel is the one favored most by the move to decent integrated graphics, people still buy Intel but now instead of an AMD/nVidia entry level card many just stick with the integrated one, making GPU market share become more like CPU market share. And Intel is the one with a half-decent ARM competitor (Intel Medfield), AMD isn't ready to play in that arena at all. And don't get me started on Bulldozer and the high end...
Larger form factors would allow larger SLC SSD drives.
No, size is not the problem - cost is. If you can put 1TB of MLC flash in a drive, you can put 512GB SLC in the same form factor. The problem is it would cost many thousands of dollars.
Look at it this way: even with the reduced lifespan of high density NAND, you get something like 3000 writes out of them (used to be 10k for the 45nm stuff, but write amplification is below 1 these days due to compression). On a 180GB drive, that will get you a lifetime write count of 540 PB. To hit that writing 20GB of fresh data every single day (which is probably way more than what actually happens in practice, even with swapping, which is predominantly read-heavy, not write-heavy), the drive would last roughly 74 years...
Except 3000*180GB is 540TB, not PB. And I'd be very careful to equate writes with data. Downloading a 20GB torrent for example will lead to >>20GB writes as it writes data blocks and the SSD has to rewrite its physical blocks. A lot of apps write log files where one line = rewriting a block. I used an SSD very heavily and despite the 10k writes/cell rating it was worn out in 1,5 years, right now the health check on my replacement drive that I feel I've been treating nicely is already down to 64% in health after a little over a year. At this rate it'll only be good for another two years. This is with swap disabled, torrents downloaded to a regular 3.5" HDD but it runs 24/7 though.
I used a first-gen Intel x25-e as my only drive for several years
If you wrote that accurately you used an enterprise SSD using SLC cells good for 100k writes or so. For sure, if I say my 5k writes MLC will last me 3 years then a 100k drive would last me 60 years but your experience with that is pretty much entirely irrelevant to the current consumer market. A ten year old HDD can still be usable, I can pretty much guarantee a ten year old SSD in active use will not. I've accepted it due to the huge usability performance, but SSDs are very much consumables right now, if you can't afford to replace them regularly you shouldn't buy them.
Well, yes and no the chart is technically not wrong if you have a single frequency light source like a laser. The trouble is that most real world objects emit a spectrum of light. This chart shows the cone response relative to frequency so the cone's response is an integral over the spectrum*sensitivity. The problem is that in all commonly current display technologies (CRT, LCD, LED, OLED, 3-chip DLP) you only have a fixed number of frequencies to work with. For example say you have red (600nm), green (540nm) and blue (440nm). Well, it turns out you can't actually produce all combinations with just three wavelengths as real world objects do with infinite wavelengths.
The reason for this if you look at the response chart is that the curves overlap, you can't simply decompose them into three components you can set individually. Any wavelength you send to stimulate the M cones also stimulate the S or L cones. And our vision is particularly good at picking up on those differences, it's a two-stage process like illustrated here. Even if the mix in the SML cones is mostly right the Cg and Cb cells are extremely good at picking up on differences in the relative mix. Ideally you'd like more wavelengths or white light + a color wheel like used in single chip DLP, but it's not that easy and you need a signal with the extended information like xvYCC.
I just wish someone would make 3.5" drives besides OCZ. Hell - I wish someone would make 5.25" drives.
Why? You see an almost perfect scaling. The cost of 1x1024GB ~= 2x512GB ~= 4x256GB ~= 8x128GB. And since you can already put $2500 worth of flash in a 2.5" drive, what do you need 3.5" drives for? $10,000 drives? Or 5.25", $100,000 drives? The way things are going it's more likely my next SSD would be a mSATA drive...
Superior to x86? Sure there is. x86 is a mish mash of instructions many of which hardly anyone uses except for backwards compatibility, but that still cost real estate on the CPU die.
Actually the most obscure instructions are implemented in software (microcode) and don't take up any hardware at all except the storage space. This makes them hideously slow but modern compilers avoid them and if you're running very old legacy code it runs fast enough anyway. Anyway, I heard these arguments back in the 90s when processors had 5 million transistors. Now they have 1.5 billion transistors and you still keep talking about the few thousand - yes, thousands - of transistors required. Sigh.
BTW, last I read, a 2GHz Cortex A9 CPU based on a 40 nm process drew about 250 mW max, not 2W, though those numbers could easily be wrong.
The answers are really all at the site the GP linked.
Performance optimized: 1.9W
Power optimized: 0.5W (250 mW/core)
Anyway, Anandtech has a pretty good overview of actual phones. If you look at the normalized hours/watthour figures Medfield (the Xolo X900) is decidedly middle of the pack. It's not better than the ARM phones, but it's not terrible either. Of course newer ARM designs will beat it, but then again Intel isn't going to stand still either.
For example, taking your point about data bandwidth, because the x86 has so few registers, it has to do data IO a lot more compared to something like the PowerPC or SPARC.
I should point out that when AMD made x86-64 they had a choice of how many registers to add, I remember reading an article about it long ago. They tested it out a lot and found adding another 8 registers (r8-r15) was the ideal number - their processors have more than 16 internally but it was more effective to let the hardware optimize the rest at run time rather than exposing them to the compiler. So it's not like this is really fixed, in fact I can't see any problem with adding more registers at any time. If you added r16-r31, existing binaries would never use them while a recompile would give you all of them to work with. That neither AMD or Intel has chosen to do suggests they're pretty close to the ideal already.
Of course if you were researching a bio-weapon you can get an "all of the above" virus and ground zero could be the departure hall of a major international airport instead of some remote village in Nowhere, Africa. Who'd like to try "basic quarantine measures" on cities with millions of people? Not to mention all the commuters and such we didn't have during the Spanish Flu, chances are good your quarantine is broken even before you can even set it. That's really the scary thing about a bioweapon, you can bootstrap it on such an intensity that it will be practically impossible to contain.
Others could have copied the car, or the books or the records. But we, as a society, gave that right to the car company, the author, or the artist. Never mind WHY we did that. Those arguments are not germane, we did it, enshrined it in law, and it is what it is. (...) Does that fact somehow trump the law, wash away the artist's rights, and make copying anything legal?
No, but we can change the law to make it legal. You talk as if the first man who invented fire should have the rights to it from then until the end of time and society stole it from him. We copy each other all the time in all areas of life, the best way of learning something is to imitate and mimic others. Copyright is a carved out temporary exception to the normal state of things, if you have made something that qualifies as a creative work you get an exclusive period for as long as society feel is prudent. I've found there's little point in arguing because people like you tend to think you own the work, that even though you've sold it on CDs to millions of people it's your right to control what those millions of people do with it. You start with everything, and don't understand why the government should have any right to take it away.
I don't think you have any such power over other people unless we as a society grant you those powers. You start with nothing except your original work and you can do whatever you want with it but if you give copies to anyone they can do whatever they want with them, including sharing it with a million of their closest friends on P2P. Everything you take for granted is an exclusivity granted by the grace of society - for a time. And we as a society can change our mind, that is we the people and not you the copyright holders. If we feel that copyright is no longer the best way to "To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts" or we feel it's hurting society more than it's helping, then we can simply cease. Because what you had was granted, not owned. And that is why IP is such a fraudulent terminology.
Imagine you wanted to start an online music store, a la iTunes. You would contact Capitol Records* and ask for a license to sell and distribute thousands of copies of their music. Do you think they'd say "sure, no problem. That'll be $1"? Or would they say "that'll be 33% of gross sales, with a minimum of $15k for any work per year since you don't have an established track record, and a minimum of $50k for any song in the top-40, plus we want an escrow payment in advance, plus, etc. etc. etc."?
Yes, but if a burger store made a joke a sold one single dollar meal calling it a McDonald's meal, McDonald's couldn't argue that because the only way to legally serve a McD burger is to pay a $15k franchise fee, their actual damages from lost sales is $15001 (they could possibly argue loss of reputation though). Any sane judge would reason that this customer would then likely have gone to a real McD and paid $1, which is the only actual loss.
So no one in a swarm ever uploads more than a single copy? Kazaa would disable uploading once it uploaded a full copy of a work? I don't remember it working that way.
No, that is why I said on average. But there's no proof Thomas-Rasset was above average, in fact they have no proof she actually uploaded anything at all only that that the files were made available. Hence the "making available = distribution" issue, which was dropped. I was just pointing out that even so the average peer in the swarm does not net contribute any upload bandwidth because it consumed just as much downloading as it provides uploading.
That's the distinction... If Thomas was only a leecher and never uploaded copies, then she could make a reasonable argument about $1. But once she distributed, then she's into the "reasonable royalties and license fees" range.
Not really, in a P2P swarm there's obviously one upload for every download. So by downloading she consumed an upload from another peer and by uploading back herself to a 1.0 ratio - which will be the average - the swarm is only returned to the neutral position. The upload she provided is cancelled out by the one she consumed and in net there is only one extra copy which she could have been bought for $1. If there's 100 people in a swarm there's 100 copies and each person caused 1/100th of that which is 1 copy, only in RIAA math did 100 people each cause 100 copies leading to 10000 infringments.
Who was saying no to building Windows smartphones? But Elop apparently wasn't satisfied with only that. He had to kill the burning platform (Symbian) as well as the blooming platform (MeeGo).
How many horses do you want to ride at once? Many of the problems Nokia had was over the internal divide between Symbian and MeeGo, now you'd make it a three way race instead of a two way race. Apple picked a horse called iOS and rode that. Samsung and a few other picked one called Android and rode that. Nokia tried for a split with one foot on Symbian, one on MeeGo and the result was disaster. Yes, Nokia was in huge trouble already when Elop took over. Adding another platform would just make everything worse. Okay maybe he picked the wrong horse, but at least he picked one.
Too many people are arguing pro-Finish type of socialism, but that's why Finland is going to lose more and more jobs. All socialists do is drive investment capital out of their countries somewhere else. Good for 'somewhere else', bad for those socialist countries.
And investment capital doesn't flee the US for China and India because it's cheaper there? In capitalism, money goes where the slave labor is cheapest, the working conditions poorest and the regulations the weakest. You get fucked until you're the cheapest bidder for the job and by moving the jobs around workers are forced to underbid each other until they're all dirt poor. This whole "workers must stand up for themselves" and fight for social security and decent working conditions through laws and unions is just a communism. You hear that sound? It's the 1% laughing over you.
I know it's very slashdotty to blame Microsoft for everything, but Nokia was in deep shit well before Elop. Moving to Microsoft Phone was a "If you're falling off a cliff, you might as well flap your arms and try to fly" move. He'll probably get the blame here as they hit rock bottom but Nokia threw themselves off the cliff.
They also make incredibly popular low cost phones that sell millions in the developing world.
Have sold. But the latest figures for 2011 is that there's now 6 billion cell phone subscribers, or 86.7% of the world's population, though some have more one subscription for home and one for work. That means there's not many more new people left to sell to, while in established markets people now buy smart phones and dump their dumb/feature phones for practically nothing. So that market is dying very shortly too.
Not that Microsoft didn't abuse their monopoly, but Netscape made a helluva good job of shooting themselves in the foot to the point that for the Mozilla reboot they decided to outright scrap the Netscape code base and start over. And I can attest to that, the last incarnations of the Netscape 4.x series were horrible, buggy, unstable abominations that deserved to be put out of its misery.
Well, just like I'm not required to go through a brain wipe when I leave things that are related to my generic skills like notes or tips or whatever I must admit I feel are just as much mine as the company's, regardless of what the IP agreement said. But a lot of people go past that and start looking at the work products like "theirs", which is starting to get a far darker shade of gray. They're the company's scripts, not your scripts. They're the company's processes and routines, not your processes and routines. They're the company's customers, not your customers. That said, the biggest danger aren't those with an overly strong attachment to their own works, it's those that grab the whole company's IP.
Well apparently big and high PPI is more expensive and complicated than small and high PPI, but first the iPhone (3.5"), then the iPad (9.7") and now the MPB (15.4") it's pretty obvious to connect the dots on where this is going. I'd be very surprised if we did not have a high PPI iMac/Display within a year or so. Particularly since 4K TVs are finally starting to pop up in the market place, although still at outrageous prices.
They survived Vista so they'll survive Windows 8, Microsoft is far too entrenched to flop in one generation. Much like Intel when they were selling PIVs and Itanics, they still come back to be on top of the game. I run Windows 7, it works very well and with extended support even my Home Premium is supported until 2020. It's not like there's going to be a pressing need to use Win8 for many years yet, assuming it actually ends up that bad.
Yes, but only so long and so far as the police demand they preserve it as a crime scene or as evidence. They don't have an obligation to anyone else, they don't have to keep the servers powered (unless the police ask them to), they don't have to supply the bandwidth (unless the police wants the data), they could possibly get permission to just tape out the contents, recycle the servers and preserve those as the evidence. Nothing gives them any kind of obligation to continue providing a hosting service, only to preserve evidence as required by the police.
Cease, verb. To stop, as in cease and desist.
Sieze, verb. To take away, as in sieze one's property.
sieze
1. Common misspelling of seize.
Perhaps you should read your own signature?