Awesome low budget movies were higher risk. There is no question they can win big but the lose big 3/4s of the time. A studio focusing on those types of movies can go for a long time without hitting one out of the park and run out of money. Hollywood isn't stupid.
If you're satisfied seeing a movie in the same "environment" as you could have done in 1983, for the same price, guess what: IT CAN BE DONE.
No it can't. You can't have a town movie theater around various restaurants where the teens hang out feeding the nighttime sidewalk culture. Large screens and a monolithic entertainment world where what you see in the movies people will want to talk about. No it can't be done. For better or worse you can't get the 1983 movie experience because we are a different country.
In all fairness this is one you can't blame on our culture. Blockbuster movies need to be international. International means they can't have as much culture. Pure action translates well to large audiences worldwide, the more plot the more character the worse it translates.
Yes that is different. Journalists today are very careful of noting what the source said vs. what they think. The use of quotation marks and the standards for them are a huge, huge improvement in history / journalism. Our understanding of translation is better and when documents are translated originals are carefully retained. I can't tell you what of our news reports survives 1000 years from now, so it isn't a fair comparison but today's journalism vs. what survived from then. No question ours is better.
The US voters have consistently supported the government taking secret and extra constitutional actions for the war on terror. They have not voted for doves. Lots of information has leaked about torture, about renditions, about people held indefinitely without trial... They don't know all the details but they know a lot. The American people understanding the policy reasonably well have been supportive. That support has been falling slowly.
As for voting for it directly and indirectly. Almost every national election there is a primary where hawks and doves are on the ballot. Frequently they have that choice in the general. They aren't consistently picking the doves.
We know they were frequently giving us biased versions of events. Details are missing that go against their case. We know this because when we can check the records with other medieval sources that's what we find. For many of the translations we can't tell what stuff is being added by scribes and what is in the original, we know it happens by comparing the Chronicles with themselves. We know for a fact some of the dates are wrong. We know some of the places are wrong. There were a lot of errors in moving from Latin to Middle English.
Of course it also has all sorts of bias problems about being focused on a small group of people at the time. I think they are clearly 3rd or 4th hand knowledge of events. I don't see how they represent a counter argument.
I suspect you are right. Mass data aggregation wasn't done. We know a great deal about what important people thought, but we don't have much information about how common their views are. So we what we have are just editorials and we make guesses as to how much to weigh those editorials and what facts ban be derived from them. Our historians are very skilled at that since this technique still exists in parallel with mass aggregation of data. But 500 years from now when people have good statistical data about everything they might not be good at sorting through non-representative editorials and trying to reverse engineer what was going on.
Paper records were frequently lost too. Losing 3% of the data per year for a century leaves: 6% behind. 6% of what we produce now is far more than was produced a century ago.
You are just dead wrong. Apple's ASP is $650, Samsung's is $300.
In terms of other niches the big niche is the USA. Samsung vs. Apple as a percentage of US smartphone sales (either by dollar or per unit). That's a critical market because of subsidies.
More importantly, the existence of its own ecosystem. Samsung customers are incidental customers. As a result when you look at numbers like total quarterly revenue, which include things like app store sales they are about even.
Spend on advertising (cost of sales and marketing) is a negative number it is part of "buying" marketshare. Samsung is at least 4:1 over Apple on this spend.
Churn is another very negative number for Samsung. A very larger percentage of Samsung high end customers become Apple customers, while a lot of people move up price point on Android.
Main reason I didn't include those is they don't seem to be key to every phone that came after the iPhone. There are cheap successful phones with poor design. Samsung's marketing is funny but I wouldn't say "reality distortion field" and for that matter I don't think Apple depended on that either. As for Desktop integration Apple itself has been moving away from it.
____
On (f) in 2007 BlackBerry had better desktop integration. Many of the other phones worked well with arbitrary desktop clients. So I don't see them even having had an edge here.
(e) They weren't the first with complex smartphone marketing. BlackBerry again had a cult of personality in 2007. Danger had done some very sophisticated things. Other companies like Motorola had some exciting marketing in the feature phone level.
(d) Not sure here. Certainly the phone looked very good. But there were other good looking phones.
OK good point for Americans on American soil we don't have secret trials yet. On the other hand for non-Americans for whom this is aimed at we do. After secret FISA trials we have summary punishment based on this evidence. You can be assassinated, hauled off to secret prison, investigated... And for Americans interfering with our Star Chamber is punishable by long sentences.
That could also be read as a widespread conspiracy involving multiple companies to coordinate to commit felonies. The problem is the American people, have until recently been strongly supportive of this nonsense. The companies can't stand up to it until they know for sure a jury will never convict and they can't know that yet.
He is absolutely right that we shouldn't have secret courts issuing secret laws. Temporary gag orders are fine but they should expire rapidly and then what happened be subject to public scrutiny. Faretta v. California talked about how many of our laws for trial procedure and rights in the constitution evolved from a reaction against the Star Chamber. The core idea of the Star Chamber was secrecy to deal with defendants who were too powerful to be tried openly for fear the the realm could not control the impact, and we have decided to replicate this in full.
FWIW, I owned an IBM Ambra and liked it quite a bit. That was sort of a midway option at the time of the ValuePoint system:
MCA = high end Ambra = mid range Valuepoint = compete with Gateway
Anyway in terms of Microchannel being faster than ISA, as far as I know absolute best case it go up to 40 Mbytes/sec which was way way faster than ISA could hope for. As for the floppy that sounds miserable. I guess come to think of it the MCA machines I worked with came that way.
That is very pleasant. That's been my primary way of using a computer for many years, this one excluded (retina screen is too nice to shut away). If you want to use an external display you want your tablet to be playing the role of a wacom tablet. You draw on the laptop to induce changes on the screen while the screen exists for ease of reading things too small on your laptop. More how artists have liked to interact (ex: http://fc08.deviantart.net/fs70/i/2013/120/9/7/new_wacom_cintiq_13hd_acquired_and_hooked_up__by_jenniferkitty20-d63o5vf.jpg) then how business systems were setup.
There are going to be lots of hardware solutions in the future for desktop. But the focus right now is on laptop. People who use good laptops to power good desktops are mainly Mac users now. You all are a small niche and a small niche that has been dropping your spending since 2000. So if your target is which laptop system works best today with today's desktop hardware... I don't think there is much question about Mac at a high price point or Windows 7 at a low price point.
OK by "shitty" microchannel I assume you mean as compared to ISA. NuBus broke with 16 bit entirely, I agree much better than either technically. This would have been potentially better than MicroChannel for expensive machines.
Yeah, plug a floppy into the PC before you're even allowed to boot after installing a new MCA card. That was bullshit.
I remember DOS drivers being a pain. Don't remember the specifics but yeah you had to always mess with settings in config.sys when you made hardware changes. My guess is that was all the floppy did.
Who told me. Back then you had good speed tests in things like Computer Shopper and PCMagazine. The results were striking. I also personally used some of the PS/2s in HS / College.
I don't know about config floppies for Microchannel. But Microchannel was the first bus to make plug and play even possible. As for EISA, yeah EISA won OK so happens all the time someone loses. But if you don't like ISA/EISA the alternative was Microchannel. Voting against one is voting for the other.
It is funny Microsoft more so than any other tech company is the one trying to create an interface that works for keyboard / mouse vs. touch vs. digitizer. Companies like Apple have been of the opinion that each OS / hardware combination should be more or less unique and non flexible in their interface. You aren't disagreeing with them you are agreeing with them.
One of the whole points of Metro is to get rid of all the bitmaps and DPI assumptions in classic Win32 applications.
IBM was doing at the time: making shitty overpriced PCs with a wacky bus which caused as many problems as it solved that only entrenched IBM shops thought were worth buying.
I generally agree with you but... No way. The PS2s were, ignoring price far and away the best PCs on the market. The top of the line PS2 was, with the possible exception of Compaqs and then only rarely always much much faster than corresponding top of the line Dell, Gateway, Zeos, Tandem... Not worth the money, I'd agree. Crappy. No way.
As for Microchannel it was IMHO a great idea. There were huge problems with getting decent hard drive and video speeds that took years for Intel and motherboard manufacturers to overcome. There were huge problems with the interrupt based systems that only stopped existing when we finally moved away from PS2 keyboard and mice...
You should be looking at either touchscreen laptops for Metro which will make it a less rough transition or a Mac. You shouldn't be considering a traditional form factor non mac at all.
Unsupported embedded systems don't matter too much. As for home users with XP, I agree. It is going to be a virus feast for them unless those people use so few sites and do so little that they can't get affected. ISP's are probably going to have to just shut those infected systems off they aren't going to beg they are just going to slash service.
Slashdot Mirror
Awesome low budget movies were higher risk. There is no question they can win big but the lose big 3/4s of the time. A studio focusing on those types of movies can go for a long time without hitting one out of the park and run out of money. Hollywood isn't stupid.
No it can't. You can't have a town movie theater around various restaurants where the teens hang out feeding the nighttime sidewalk culture. Large screens and a monolithic entertainment world where what you see in the movies people will want to talk about. No it can't be done. For better or worse you can't get the 1983 movie experience because we are a different country.
I think what changed is budgets.
Lone Ranger $215m
R.I.P.D. $130m
etc...
They are all high budget and all being released at the same time. Too much high end product.
Exactly, this desire for international release is a big part of the problem.
Of course without international release budgets need to come down.
In all fairness this is one you can't blame on our culture. Blockbuster movies need to be international. International means they can't have as much culture. Pure action translates well to large audiences worldwide, the more plot the more character the worse it translates.
This one you can blame the 3rd world.
Yes that is different. Journalists today are very careful of noting what the source said vs. what they think. The use of quotation marks and the standards for them are a huge, huge improvement in history / journalism. Our understanding of translation is better and when documents are translated originals are carefully retained. I can't tell you what of our news reports survives 1000 years from now, so it isn't a fair comparison but today's journalism vs. what survived from then. No question ours is better.
The US voters have consistently supported the government taking secret and extra constitutional actions for the war on terror. They have not voted for doves. Lots of information has leaked about torture, about renditions, about people held indefinitely without trial... They don't know all the details but they know a lot. The American people understanding the policy reasonably well have been supportive. That support has been falling slowly.
As for voting for it directly and indirectly. Almost every national election there is a primary where hawks and doves are on the ballot. Frequently they have that choice in the general. They aren't consistently picking the doves.
The Holder memo and the 3 part test... if you want to call that a "determination" and not a trial, OK.
We know they were frequently giving us biased versions of events. Details are missing that go against their case. We know this because when we can check the records with other medieval sources that's what we find. For many of the translations we can't tell what stuff is being added by scribes and what is in the original, we know it happens by comparing the Chronicles with themselves. We know for a fact some of the dates are wrong. We know some of the places are wrong. There were a lot of errors in moving from Latin to Middle English.
Of course it also has all sorts of bias problems about being focused on a small group of people at the time. I think they are clearly 3rd or 4th hand knowledge of events. I don't see how they represent a counter argument.
I suspect you are right. Mass data aggregation wasn't done. We know a great deal about what important people thought, but we don't have much information about how common their views are. So we what we have are just editorials and we make guesses as to how much to weigh those editorials and what facts ban be derived from them. Our historians are very skilled at that since this technique still exists in parallel with mass aggregation of data. But 500 years from now when people have good statistical data about everything they might not be good at sorting through non-representative editorials and trying to reverse engineer what was going on.
Paper records were frequently lost too. Losing 3% of the data per year for a century leaves: 6% behind. 6% of what we produce now is far more than was produced a century ago.
You are just dead wrong. Apple's ASP is $650, Samsung's is $300.
In terms of other niches the big niche is the USA. Samsung vs. Apple as a percentage of US smartphone sales (either by dollar or per unit). That's a critical market because of subsidies.
And if you go global there are still problems on the high end, Samsung vs. Apple as percentage of profits for global handset industry: http://static.squarespace.com/static/50363cf324ac8e905e7df861/t/519e8e3ce4b0cc7b8379f6a3/1369345596655/Screen%20Shot%202013-05-23%20at%2010.46.17%20PM.png?format=1500w
More importantly, the existence of its own ecosystem. Samsung customers are incidental customers.
As a result when you look at numbers like total quarterly revenue, which include things like app store sales they are about even.
Spend on advertising (cost of sales and marketing) is a negative number it is part of "buying" marketshare. Samsung is at least 4:1 over Apple on this spend.
Churn is another very negative number for Samsung. A very larger percentage of Samsung high end customers become Apple customers, while a lot of people move up price point on Android.
They do it all the time. When the public starts to disagree with the law and refuses to convict whole areas of law can become unenforceable.
Main reason I didn't include those is they don't seem to be key to every phone that came after the iPhone. There are cheap successful phones with poor design. Samsung's marketing is funny but I wouldn't say "reality distortion field" and for that matter I don't think Apple depended on that either. As for Desktop integration Apple itself has been moving away from it.
____
On (f) in 2007 BlackBerry had better desktop integration. Many of the other phones worked well with arbitrary desktop clients. So I don't see them even having had an edge here.
(e) They weren't the first with complex smartphone marketing. BlackBerry again had a cult of personality in 2007. Danger had done some very sophisticated things. Other companies like Motorola had some exciting marketing in the feature phone level.
(d) Not sure here. Certainly the phone looked very good. But there were other good looking phones.
OK good point for Americans on American soil we don't have secret trials yet. On the other hand for non-Americans for whom this is aimed at we do. After secret FISA trials we have summary punishment based on this evidence. You can be assassinated, hauled off to secret prison, investigated... And for Americans interfering with our Star Chamber is punishable by long sentences.
That could also be read as a widespread conspiracy involving multiple companies to coordinate to commit felonies. The problem is the American people, have until recently been strongly supportive of this nonsense. The companies can't stand up to it until they know for sure a jury will never convict and they can't know that yet.
He is absolutely right that we shouldn't have secret courts issuing secret laws. Temporary gag orders are fine but they should expire rapidly and then what happened be subject to public scrutiny. Faretta v. California talked about how many of our laws for trial procedure and rights in the constitution evolved from a reaction against the Star Chamber. The core idea of the Star Chamber was secrecy to deal with defendants who were too powerful to be tried openly for fear the the realm could not control the impact, and we have decided to replicate this in full.
FWIW, I owned an IBM Ambra and liked it quite a bit. That was sort of a midway option at the time of the ValuePoint system:
MCA = high end
Ambra = mid range
Valuepoint = compete with Gateway
Anyway in terms of Microchannel being faster than ISA, as far as I know absolute best case it go up to 40 Mbytes/sec which was way way faster than ISA could hope for. As for the floppy that sounds miserable. I guess come to think of it the MCA machines I worked with came that way.
That is very pleasant. That's been my primary way of using a computer for many years, this one excluded (retina screen is too nice to shut away). If you want to use an external display you want your tablet to be playing the role of a wacom tablet. You draw on the laptop to induce changes on the screen while the screen exists for ease of reading things too small on your laptop. More how artists have liked to interact (ex: http://fc08.deviantart.net/fs70/i/2013/120/9/7/new_wacom_cintiq_13hd_acquired_and_hooked_up__by_jenniferkitty20-d63o5vf.jpg) then how business systems were setup.
There are going to be lots of hardware solutions in the future for desktop. But the focus right now is on laptop. People who use good laptops to power good desktops are mainly Mac users now. You all are a small niche and a small niche that has been dropping your spending since 2000. So if your target is which laptop system works best today with today's desktop hardware... I don't think there is much question about Mac at a high price point or Windows 7 at a low price point.
OK by "shitty" microchannel I assume you mean as compared to ISA. NuBus broke with 16 bit entirely, I agree much better than either technically. This would have been potentially better than MicroChannel for expensive machines.
I remember DOS drivers being a pain. Don't remember the specifics but yeah you had to always mess with settings in config.sys when you made hardware changes. My guess is that was all the floppy did.
Who told me. Back then you had good speed tests in things like Computer Shopper and PCMagazine. The results were striking. I also personally used some of the PS/2s in HS / College.
I don't know about config floppies for Microchannel. But Microchannel was the first bus to make plug and play even possible. As for EISA, yeah EISA won OK so happens all the time someone loses. But if you don't like ISA/EISA the alternative was Microchannel. Voting against one is voting for the other.
It is funny Microsoft more so than any other tech company is the one trying to create an interface that works for keyboard / mouse vs. touch vs. digitizer. Companies like Apple have been of the opinion that each OS / hardware combination should be more or less unique and non flexible in their interface. You aren't disagreeing with them you are agreeing with them.
One of the whole points of Metro is to get rid of all the bitmaps and DPI assumptions in classic Win32 applications.
I generally agree with you but... No way. The PS2s were, ignoring price far and away the best PCs on the market. The top of the line PS2 was, with the possible exception of Compaqs and then only rarely always much much faster than corresponding top of the line Dell, Gateway, Zeos, Tandem... Not worth the money, I'd agree. Crappy. No way.
As for Microchannel it was IMHO a great idea. There were huge problems with getting decent hard drive and video speeds that took years for Intel and motherboard manufacturers to overcome. There were huge problems with the interrupt based systems that only stopped existing when we finally moved away from PS2 keyboard and mice...
You should be looking at either touchscreen laptops for Metro which will make it a less rough transition or a Mac. You shouldn't be considering a traditional form factor non mac at all.
Unsupported embedded systems don't matter too much. As for home users with XP, I agree. It is going to be a virus feast for them unless those people use so few sites and do so little that they can't get affected. ISP's are probably going to have to just shut those infected systems off they aren't going to beg they are just going to slash service.