One is a bunch of look and feel patents and functionality patents and mostly Apple is doing the suing.
The other are a bunch of older patents about communication. And there Apple is supposed to be paying 2.5% if it is not under a co-licensing but thinks that's too high because their phones aren't $40... and in that one I have a tough time seeing how Apple is going to win.
Apple picked a fist fight. Motorola/Google had a knife and told Apple to back off. Apple instead charged and now got stabbed
You aren't supposed to touch the screen if you have a big screen. You might want to use a touch pad that mimics the screen like the a Wacom Cintiq (but cheaper I assume).
Mostly they don't care. The way they generate revenue is by selling their stream to search engines (which the scraping method would be useful for) and by selling position on search (which scraping methods would preserve). As long as you aren't manipulating the data on your side, your fine.
Now of course you could pull down thousands of search results, scrape and reorder via. a scrape. And then at that point they need to start breaking the scraping apps.
They don't care about popular if it doesn't translate into revenue. Control of promoted tweets and the unique ability to sell the stream to search engines are the two revenue sources. I would assume those are the two things they don't want to have applications alter.
The big problem is when you start doing crossovers with other applications (like facebook) you have to create a unique search that isn't twitter specific...
Take the bank example. The corporation doesn't want to claim they were as a corporate function accessing a bank account they aren't legally entitled to access. That the sort of thing that gets corporations hundreds of millions of dollar fines.
There are lots of wiretapping laws that apply to both parties. Google when they have SSL traffic has an expectation of privacy. They haven't been notified that the person logging in is using a wiretapped / compromised machine.
I'm not sure how the courts will rule on this one but the first time this setup is used to do something like have IT clean out someone's brokerage account by snooping their SSL traffic I suspect the company will be found liable.
I saw the list about creating an CA on the client. I hadn't thought of that. I stand corrected. That's the of thing that would be really hard to train users against.
Macports is hosted out of http://www.macosforge.org./ But yeah they pay about 10 people to clean up open source distribution and get them working on a BSD style system.
No by going with hardware based rendering and increased resolution the rMBP is amazing for multimedia. You can do pixel perfect video in 1/3rd of the screen. Of course for photo's the video memory is fine. Also don't forget you have 450 mb / sec hard drives. The problem with their setup is that it doesn't work well for creating in advance a large number of frames / textures and storing them on the video card but that's fine for anything but gaming.
Apple's belief is they have lost the gaming market. They don't make a gaming laptop. Interestingly enough when you get to laptops over $1k a nice sized percentage of the non Apple laptops that do sell are gaming. So gamers willing to drop $1k or more represent about 1/18th of Apple's sales in laptops. There just not setup for gamers.
Actually it is. I don't understand how they pull this off. It doesn't make sense I'm sure there is some serious trickery going on, but yes they look sharp.
BS I use one everyday. The benefit you get is exactly what's claimed. Resolution quality photos and graphic resolutions are amazing. Working with video can be pixel perfect while you manipulate it.
I find it impossible to go back to a low res monitor anymore.
OK that makes sense. But using the discrete graphics should allow for excellent video and worse battery life (about an hour). Were that the only problem the impact would be battery life only not all the other issues.
Slashdot Mirror
No there is "FRAND crap". But the FRAND rate was 2.5% which is a lot higher in a $700 phone than on a $40 phone.
No there are two issues.
One is a bunch of look and feel patents and functionality patents and mostly Apple is doing the suing.
The other are a bunch of older patents about communication. And there Apple is supposed to be paying 2.5% if it is not under a co-licensing but thinks that's too high because their phones aren't $40... and in that one I have a tough time seeing how Apple is going to win.
Apple picked a fist fight. Motorola/Google had a knife and told Apple to back off. Apple instead charged and now got stabbed
You aren't supposed to touch the screen if you have a big screen. You might want to use a touch pad that mimics the screen like the a Wacom Cintiq (but cheaper I assume).
Mostly they don't care. The way they generate revenue is by selling their stream to search engines (which the scraping method would be useful for) and by selling position on search (which scraping methods would preserve). As long as you aren't manipulating the data on your side, your fine.
Now of course you could pull down thousands of search results, scrape and reorder via. a scrape. And then at that point they need to start breaking the scraping apps.
They don't care about popular if it doesn't translate into revenue. Control of promoted tweets and the unique ability to sell the stream to search engines are the two revenue sources. I would assume those are the two things they don't want to have applications alter.
The big problem is when you start doing crossovers with other applications (like facebook) you have to create a unique search that isn't twitter specific...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xenon_(processor)
Take the bank example. The corporation doesn't want to claim they were as a corporate function accessing a bank account they aren't legally entitled to access. That the sort of thing that gets corporations hundreds of millions of dollar fines.
Did they declare it to the bank or to google?
Well yes, but what's wrong with Apple essentially taking the lead for a decade on a major open source project under the GPL?
There are lots of wiretapping laws that apply to both parties. Google when they have SSL traffic has an expectation of privacy. They haven't been notified that the person logging in is using a wiretapped / compromised machine.
I'm not sure how the courts will rule on this one but the first time this setup is used to do something like have IT clean out someone's brokerage account by snooping their SSL traffic I suspect the company will be found liable.
I saw the list about creating an CA on the client. I hadn't thought of that. I stand corrected. That's the of thing that would be really hard to train users against.
I hadn't thought of that. Yep that would work. I stand corrected.
Macports is hosted out of http://www.macosforge.org./ But yeah they pay about 10 people to clean up open source distribution and get them working on a BSD style system.
No by going with hardware based rendering and increased resolution the rMBP is amazing for multimedia. You can do pixel perfect video in 1/3rd of the screen. Of course for photo's the video memory is fine. Also don't forget you have 450 mb / sec hard drives. The problem with their setup is that it doesn't work well for creating in advance a large number of frames / textures and storing them on the video card but that's fine for anything but gaming.
What year? Sure they had stuff that was good for video but the beefy x86 systems were generally faster because games didn't take advantage of PPC.
http://www.pagepluscellular.com/ they use the Verizon network. No Sim cards (since they are CDMA ) but the same idea.
Very good reviews for going 3rd party (same price) for pageplus via: http://www.kittywireless.com/
We're now having to look into decryption which brings its own issues pertaining to certificate management.
What do you even mean there? You aren't going to be able to pull off a man in the middle attack. You either block https or game over.
Yes, I may be a niche user. It used to be Apple hardware was the choice of this niche.
When? When did Apple ever cater to gamers? I'm thinking the Apple 2 days was the last time they tried to compete for gamer's dollars.
Apple's belief is they have lost the gaming market. They don't make a gaming laptop. Interestingly enough when you get to laptops over $1k a nice sized percentage of the non Apple laptops that do sell are gaming. So gamers willing to drop $1k or more represent about 1/18th of Apple's sales in laptops. There just not setup for gamers.
Actually it is. I don't understand how they pull this off. It doesn't make sense I'm sure there is some serious trickery going on, but yes they look sharp.
BS I use one everyday. The benefit you get is exactly what's claimed. Resolution quality photos and graphic resolutions are amazing. Working with video can be pixel perfect while you manipulate it.
I find it impossible to go back to a low res monitor anymore.
Seems to me a company that publishes source to their kernel is being rather helpful: http://svn.macosforge.org/repository/darwinbuild/trunk/
OK that makes sense. But using the discrete graphics should allow for excellent video and worse battery life (about an hour). Were that the only problem the impact would be battery life only not all the other issues.
Well yeah, they dumped GCC a long time ago. That being said they wrote a huge percentage of the GCC for PPC. And Apple moved to LLVM a while back.
Or to put it another way, investors look for growth, not success.
Depends. Investors like success too. High profitable companies do quite well. Growth gets you a high P/E. Success gets you a high E.