Re:The reason there is no camera
on
iPad Review
·
· Score: 1
I have a different theory. Most of the people who just bought their iPad will buy another when it comes with a camera. Why spend the development resources now for such little benefit, when you can dedicate the same resources towards other features and sell more later?
Re:CmdrTaco drags big brass ones along the ground
on
iPad Review
·
· Score: 1
The iPad is something out of Star Trek or HHGTTG, the sort of thing nerds have been dreaming about for decades.
I've always wondered when computers would resemble the pads from ST:TNG. But I've always wondered just how one would use a pad. Star Trek never really showed anybody doing anything more than reading on them, maybe pushing a button or two.
I think the iPad has come up with an actual way of using such a device, but I'm still reserving my cash for now. It's not worth the cash quite yet -- while others might see the use, I'm unconvinced.
Bottom line is that the iPad is a glimpse at what the future of (casual) computing is going to look like. If you don't want to get onboard, that's fine, but don't cry when you realize the train has left the station without you.
Fortunately, the train will still be around for a long time. Apple is taking a risk -- and maybe a big one. If the idea catches on, you'll only have to wait a couple years and the Android or (help me) Windows Mobile versions will pop up.
By then, the question won't be "how can we use this device?" but rather "which one should I buy?"
In the meantime, I say we let the early adopters explore and take the risk. If it's just a toy and a fad, then it will pass with many people being out a few hundred bucks. If it's the best thing since sliced bread, then we might pass into the next epoch of computing devices. Or maybe it'll just be mildly interesting and find a niche market.
We'll just have to wait and see.
Re:CmdrTaco drags big brass ones along the ground
on
iPad Review
·
· Score: 1
However, I'll need something with an OS that is more friendly toward open source development and is not tied to a single source for apps.
I imagine it wouldn't take much to port Android over to a tablet format. That would severely avoid barriers to enter the "pad" market, and I suspect that a hardware combination you're looking for would be available quite readily as a result. USB and SD is guaranteed, for example.
We've seen a seemingly never ending parade of illegal and barbaric behaviour come to light in both Iraq and Afghanistan
Welcome to war, where barbaric behavior is a prerequisite to success.
Not that is has to be that way, but otherwise it is what it is.
Re:It's not a computer, it's a living-room applian
on
iPad Review
·
· Score: 1
Before, the trend was getting information digitized and into your home.
Now the trend is getting the information to wherever you are. Maybe that's the niche that the iPad will fill.
What's interesting is that I can't see myself using the iPad how Apple envisions it, but I can see many, many possible uses for it. I wonder how people will actually use their iPads.
Re:It's not a computer, it's a living-room applian
on
iPad Review
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
Reading the newspaper, watching TV, playing games, finding recipes. Stuff that we did before computers, just an electronic version of such stuff.
But we like doing those on a computer. Now Apple is trying to introduce a new paradigm that's backwards from previous trends, where daily tasks are being pushed to our home computer. No wonder many (especially geeks) are resisting.
On the other hand, smart phones are increasingly being used as entertainment devices (a concept that always seemed strange to me), so maybe this isn't quite a shot in the dark -- maybe the new paradigm is already coming, and Apple is just ahead of the game. It certainly explains the design.
I think the author intended to use a comma, in which case it should be:
Even though the in-house-designed 1GHz A4 chip got little official comments from Apple, the touch screen's instantaneous responses prove that it is outstandingly fast.
And that's only the beginning. It got "little" comments? (Should probably be "few.") How many "responses" does it have? (Should probably be singular or "response time(s).")
Exactly. While it's not nearly so explicit, MS has been able to collect the web addresses you enter into the address bar. Ever fat finger an address? Ever get sent to a MS search page instead? Enough data on typos can give you some good data on the addresses you meant to type in.
Google went the next step and does the search on all addresses, not just bad ones. People also enter addresses into the search field, too. It's just that Google made the relationship between the address bar and search bar more explicit.
For once, however, it's nice to see MS point out the problem, instead of copying the feature. Kudos to them on that.
There's just more room for natural variation in the climate (and especially weather) system than there is room for memory in the human head.
While I now know it's not completely correct, this is exactly how chaotic systems were first explained to me: there is a pattern, but the pattern is so long and complex that we can't tell what it is. But within our view is enough of a pattern to make rough guesses.
That the weather varies (sometimes wildly) from how we model it is completely expected.
I think the current poll is informative here. While I suspect that the average IQ of a slashdot reader is indeed above average, The percentage of "super genius" is probably exaggerated.
The lesson is that while 1/40th of the population falls under the "supertasker" category, the number that claim to be is much, much higher. My estimate would be 1/4th or more perceive themselves that way. And that's a dangerous perception to have.
The house of commons is democratically elected. Therefore, the one thing they care about most is getting votes. Taxes and control are a means to an end, not the end in themselves.
There's other theories, too, that NASA could help with. Such as current spikes or other hardware problems.
In reality, NASA may be a perfect choice given their experience with designing fault-tolerant systems. That means everything from protecting the system from the environment to software validation. The control systems in a car have become very complex, approaching that of airplanes and rockets. I think NASA is a good choice, although I might have gone with an aerospace company instead, such as Boeing, Lockheed, Northrop, EADS, etc.
But texting? My goodness, talk about over-engineering a problem! Why go through all that when you can just use an indicator light?
Hmmm... I think I have a new electronics project. As a new father, an easy way to see if a diaper is wet would be very handy. Just slip the sensor in and clip the light somewhere.
It's good to separate the human element from killing, at least for the soldier. Just knowing you've probably killed someone else is bad enough -- do we have to make it personal?
The people making the high-level decision to drop bombs are already removed, no matter what technology we use. Why put any more mental or emotional strain on those that have to do the dirty work?
In the end, we defeated ourselves. And so we do write the history books, but from a viewpoint of self-criticism. Quite a change from all previous wars. Had the war gone differently, history would look back with a completely different perspective.
This is actually changing somewhat, at least when it comes to open source. Go through the repository for any major Linux distro and note how many pre-1.0 packages there are. They may be "pre-release," but that doesn't mean that the quality is terrible.
Remember that an increment in the major version indicates a significant "milestone" of one type or another. Traditionally, the milestone has been the addition of a major set of features. But some open-source packages are using it to mean "release quality." In other words, 1.0 is actually very stable and feature-complete, and that's the milestone that's been achieved to warrant the major-version change.
That's not to say this is universal. A well-known example would be KDE 4.0 (please, let's keep flames, trolls, and holy wars to a minimum), which was a huge leap from the 3.x series. The jump made the major-version change necessary, but everybody admits that it was never ready (nor meant to be ready) for daily use.
In the commercial world, however, releases mark a money-making milestone: the company can now market a large set of new features to sell! "Now with more bugs!" should be on the box. That's why the traditional model of software versions makes you wary of the big 1.0.
Time has nothing to do with it. Absolutely nothing.
It's all about making an analogy. For some reason, cars are a particularly common choice.
The advantage of the analogy is that almost anybody can understand the meaning at a glance and with very little effort. Time plays a part of the effort, of course, but it's not the core component. In the end, a person will try to imagine how big X, Y, and Z are and realize, "So X by Y by Z is about the size of a small car... maybe a Cooper?"
Why not just make that leap for them, and move on to more interesting things (such as the nuke-powered part)?
Slashdot Mirror
I have a different theory. Most of the people who just bought their iPad will buy another when it comes with a camera. Why spend the development resources now for such little benefit, when you can dedicate the same resources towards other features and sell more later?
The iPad is something out of Star Trek or HHGTTG, the sort of thing nerds have been dreaming about for decades.
I've always wondered when computers would resemble the pads from ST:TNG. But I've always wondered just how one would use a pad. Star Trek never really showed anybody doing anything more than reading on them, maybe pushing a button or two.
I think the iPad has come up with an actual way of using such a device, but I'm still reserving my cash for now. It's not worth the cash quite yet -- while others might see the use, I'm unconvinced.
Bottom line is that the iPad is a glimpse at what the future of (casual) computing is going to look like. If you don't want to get onboard, that's fine, but don't cry when you realize the train has left the station without you.
Fortunately, the train will still be around for a long time. Apple is taking a risk -- and maybe a big one. If the idea catches on, you'll only have to wait a couple years and the Android or (help me) Windows Mobile versions will pop up.
By then, the question won't be "how can we use this device?" but rather "which one should I buy?"
In the meantime, I say we let the early adopters explore and take the risk. If it's just a toy and a fad, then it will pass with many people being out a few hundred bucks. If it's the best thing since sliced bread, then we might pass into the next epoch of computing devices. Or maybe it'll just be mildly interesting and find a niche market.
We'll just have to wait and see.
However, I'll need something with an OS that is more friendly toward open source development and is not tied to a single source for apps.
I imagine it wouldn't take much to port Android over to a tablet format. That would severely avoid barriers to enter the "pad" market, and I suspect that a hardware combination you're looking for would be available quite readily as a result. USB and SD is guaranteed, for example.
We've seen a seemingly never ending parade of illegal and barbaric behaviour come to light in both Iraq and Afghanistan
Welcome to war, where barbaric behavior is a prerequisite to success.
Not that is has to be that way, but otherwise it is what it is.
Before, the trend was getting information digitized and into your home.
Now the trend is getting the information to wherever you are. Maybe that's the niche that the iPad will fill.
What's interesting is that I can't see myself using the iPad how Apple envisions it, but I can see many, many possible uses for it. I wonder how people will actually use their iPads.
Reading the newspaper, watching TV, playing games, finding recipes. Stuff that we did before computers, just an electronic version of such stuff.
But we like doing those on a computer. Now Apple is trying to introduce a new paradigm that's backwards from previous trends, where daily tasks are being pushed to our home computer. No wonder many (especially geeks) are resisting.
On the other hand, smart phones are increasingly being used as entertainment devices (a concept that always seemed strange to me), so maybe this isn't quite a shot in the dark -- maybe the new paradigm is already coming, and Apple is just ahead of the game. It certainly explains the design.
but ever try to really -read- anything on a LCD screen for a long period of time?
Don't forget you're posting on slashdot. We don't even "really -read-" the articles.
Now I do not know which story to believe.
None of 'em. Seriously.
Even then, the second clause is missing a definite article.
I think the author intended to use a comma, in which case it should be:
Even though the in-house-designed 1GHz A4 chip got little official comments from Apple, the touch screen's instantaneous responses prove that it is outstandingly fast.
And that's only the beginning. It got "little" comments? (Should probably be "few.") How many "responses" does it have? (Should probably be singular or "response time(s).")
Overall, a very poorly written sentence.
Exactly. While it's not nearly so explicit, MS has been able to collect the web addresses you enter into the address bar. Ever fat finger an address? Ever get sent to a MS search page instead? Enough data on typos can give you some good data on the addresses you meant to type in.
Google went the next step and does the search on all addresses, not just bad ones. People also enter addresses into the search field, too. It's just that Google made the relationship between the address bar and search bar more explicit.
For once, however, it's nice to see MS point out the problem, instead of copying the feature. Kudos to them on that.
There's just more room for natural variation in the climate (and especially weather) system than there is room for memory in the human head.
While I now know it's not completely correct, this is exactly how chaotic systems were first explained to me: there is a pattern, but the pattern is so long and complex that we can't tell what it is. But within our view is enough of a pattern to make rough guesses.
That the weather varies (sometimes wildly) from how we model it is completely expected.
I think the current poll is informative here. While I suspect that the average IQ of a slashdot reader is indeed above average, The percentage of "super genius" is probably exaggerated.
The lesson is that while 1/40th of the population falls under the "supertasker" category, the number that claim to be is much, much higher. My estimate would be 1/4th or more perceive themselves that way. And that's a dangerous perception to have.
The house of commons is democratically elected. Therefore, the one thing they care about most is getting votes. Taxes and control are a means to an end, not the end in themselves.
Thank you! I'm now going to reenact this scene whenever I watch the movie, just to make it complete.
You mean there are products not made in China?
There's other theories, too, that NASA could help with. Such as current spikes or other hardware problems.
In reality, NASA may be a perfect choice given their experience with designing fault-tolerant systems. That means everything from protecting the system from the environment to software validation. The control systems in a car have become very complex, approaching that of airplanes and rockets. I think NASA is a good choice, although I might have gone with an aerospace company instead, such as Boeing, Lockheed, Northrop, EADS, etc.
I wish I could find some data on this, but I've always suspected that the largest cost comes from billing the customer.
Probably isn't true, but still fun to think about.
A bit like morse code only with a lower bandwidth.
More like a new IP protocol.
Sorry ... couldn't resist.
But texting? My goodness, talk about over-engineering a problem! Why go through all that when you can just use an indicator light?
Hmmm... I think I have a new electronics project. As a new father, an easy way to see if a diaper is wet would be very handy. Just slip the sensor in and clip the light somewhere.
It's good to separate the human element from killing, at least for the soldier. Just knowing you've probably killed someone else is bad enough -- do we have to make it personal?
The people making the high-level decision to drop bombs are already removed, no matter what technology we use. Why put any more mental or emotional strain on those that have to do the dirty work?
In the end, we defeated ourselves. And so we do write the history books, but from a viewpoint of self-criticism. Quite a change from all previous wars. Had the war gone differently, history would look back with a completely different perspective.
Everybody knows 1.0 of anything is full of bugs.
This is actually changing somewhat, at least when it comes to open source. Go through the repository for any major Linux distro and note how many pre-1.0 packages there are. They may be "pre-release," but that doesn't mean that the quality is terrible.
Remember that an increment in the major version indicates a significant "milestone" of one type or another. Traditionally, the milestone has been the addition of a major set of features. But some open-source packages are using it to mean "release quality." In other words, 1.0 is actually very stable and feature-complete, and that's the milestone that's been achieved to warrant the major-version change.
That's not to say this is universal. A well-known example would be KDE 4.0 (please, let's keep flames, trolls, and holy wars to a minimum), which was a huge leap from the 3.x series. The jump made the major-version change necessary, but everybody admits that it was never ready (nor meant to be ready) for daily use.
In the commercial world, however, releases mark a money-making milestone: the company can now market a large set of new features to sell! "Now with more bugs!" should be on the box. That's why the traditional model of software versions makes you wary of the big 1.0.
As the article shows, it only takes a small modification:
1a) Find chicks with high SAT scores
1b) Offer big $$ to marry you
Egg donation: yet another way that a high SAT score help you get through college.
Time has nothing to do with it. Absolutely nothing.
It's all about making an analogy. For some reason, cars are a particularly common choice.
The advantage of the analogy is that almost anybody can understand the meaning at a glance and with very little effort. Time plays a part of the effort, of course, but it's not the core component. In the end, a person will try to imagine how big X, Y, and Z are and realize, "So X by Y by Z is about the size of a small car ... maybe a Cooper?"
Why not just make that leap for them, and move on to more interesting things (such as the nuke-powered part)?