Linus didn't upgrade the Linux kernel to GPLv3. If you want to know why, see here.
In the Tivo case, it was a DRM issue, and possible an issue here with Samba and Apple. If Apple wants to take their OS X software toward iOS and start locking down the computer, they're going to need to
1.) Change the definition of computer or call their computers something else, like they did successfully with the iPad not being a tablet PC or Macs not being called PCs, even though the definition of PC is simply "personal computer" (side note: why aren't business computers called BCs?)
and
2.) Lock it up so people can't tamper with it.
They can't do number 2 as most developers that choose GPLv3 specifically, do it to keep DRM away, which is what signed binaries are. Why go iOS route is understandable too. Most computer users in the US and other developed countries can't use a computer beyond the applications they use every day. Installing software is too complicated, even on Macs where it's literally drag and drop (for most apps, not all). Drivers? Don't bother. Software: Why is it soft? Those that peruse Slashdot aren't part of this crowd, but computers have always been made to fit us because we've been the consistent buyers. Now, computers are so cheap that anyone can afford them, even if they don't know how to use them. Our software will have to change to fit those people whom technology is a black art, especially since processor speeds have really stagnated in the past couple of years.
Side note. Read these post of what processors should have been now, discussed back in early 2006. It's sad that their expectations have been crushed by today's standards of PCs.
Ironic, yes, but a necessity nonetheless, if only to prevent Tivo-ization again. The idea behind the GPL and even FLOSS is the freedom to use the software how you please at any level. If one can restrict the other's use at any time in that level, then the entire idea has been thrown out the window. The only person who should be able to restrict the usage of the work is the original copyright owner, not those creating derivative binaries. FLOSS isn't an idea to commercialize on software, that's what proprietary licenses are for. If one must place a restriction at the highest level on restricting at lower levels to maintain the idea of free software, then it's a sacrifice that must be done, even if the restriction itself is hypocritical.
The binary is a result of your original copyright, making it a derivative work and still under the copyright of the original owner. You may own the physical 1s and 0s of the binary, but you don't own the right to redistribute it without the permission of the copyright owner.
Contribution isn't the problem. The problem is redistribution. By redistributing the original or any derivative works, you're stomping on the copyright owner's right to COPY. If you want to zip the resulting binary, burn it to a disc, defecate on that disc, then run over it with a truck, that's your right as owning the media. When you give that damaged smelly disc to someone else, then you've become a distributer and you must provide the source and that ZIP's password to the derivative work that you COPIED. How you packaged a derivative work is a concern to the copyright holder only if you intend on distributing the derivative work you packaged. By redistributing my work or any derivative there of without my consent, you are violating my right to copy (that's why they call it copy-RIGHT).
GPLv3 was a response to corporate abuse of FLOSS released under the GPLv1&2. Furthermore, "good faith" contributors weren't contributing to be nice, they were doing so to comply with the license. Look at derivative projects that have been commercialized under more loos licensing. It's damn hard to find the sources for these changes since the derivative author isn't required to give you the changes. Also, "good faith" contributors keep their contributions until well after they've released their derivative work to the public. Sometimes, the original copyright owner has to take these "good faith" abusers to court to get them to comply. Lynksys anyone? Look at the problems KDE had with Apple and their KHTML fork we call webkit. Apple would take almost a year to contribute their changes back up the pipe. Their was no real desire for joint development, it was Apple's way of means to an end. It's nothing personal against the developers, it's just business.
Excellent point. What a few nerds (because nerds and lawyers are the only ones who care) forget is that the GPLv3 came as a result of companies like Apple and, more specifically, Tivo abusing the GPLv2 by providing the code but forcing signed applications to prevent people from making changes on the devices utilizing the binaries. Furthermore, Apple has NEVER been a friend to FLOSS, just a large cooperator. It was just a means to an end; they're just as bad as Microsoft.
You show me three applications that Apple created and distributed as FLOSS without it being a FLOSS fork or FLOSS to begin with, and I'll change my opinion. Otherwise, FLOSS devs, you might want to switch from that Mac soon, as it may not work the same in the near future.
I already did this when I heard the news Sunday night, well before I posted here. But let's be realistic here, neither of these governmental bodies care, they just want their political contributions so they can spend it at the most luxurious hotels, dinning, and travel, and bail out to the same contributors' businesses for a "consulting" job that pays $5 million a year to come in and stare at the lights. Understand one thing about politics: you can always rely on a politician to lie. Republicans don't believe in a completive market but trump "capitalism," "free markets," and "invisible hand-jobs," while back-dealing to the largest corporations, providing them no-bid contracts, subsidies, and passes on everything from taxes to environment raping to murder. Democrats are no better. They generate a slew of social bills, raise taxes, and lose their spine when stopping any of the antics Republicans left the country in, while trumping "fairness," "free society," and "evil corporations."
Obama is an intelligent man, a great speaker, but nothing more than a slight improvement from Bush. Those that voted for him (i'm one of them) fell for his ruse hook, line, and sinker. Unfortunately, he's the lesser of two evils. We're never going to get another Clinton again. We're never going to have a president stand up to Republicans, stand up for the consumer, and stand for science ever again. Primarily because we US Americans have conceded too far. Those with intelligence are far outnumbered by those without, and those that are in-between intelligent and idiot are too busy working our asses off for the top 5% of the social class in hopes that one day we'll be part of that social class. I never thought I'd think this, but those crazy Tea Partiers may be our only hope at waking up the moderately intelligent from their overworked slumber to realize that our country has dwindled to nothing in less than 15 years, and we let pure loons take over for the pure greedy.
...The only thing that might change for you is customer service...
This is the primary reason T-Mobile customers stick with T-Mobile. We're aware that our network is sparse, but the customer service is second to none, regardless of what JD Power and Associates say.
To be frank, it really cannot be much worse that T-Mobile, which has made it its business to lie to its customers and push 3G as the new 4G
This is also incorrect. T-Mobile made its business from affordable pricing and great customer service. I've never heard anyone switch to T-Mobile to receive better service or because they thought their 4G was really awesome. They switched because Verizon and AT&T shaft their customers. When you have 90+ million customers, losing 5% because of overcharging, crappy service, and automated phone system hell isn't a big deal. They'll just raise the price on the remaining suckers who don't look at their bill and just pay whatever they send in the mail.
then I'd be upset by a longterm future without 3G support on your current phone...The only serious phones that I can name on T-Mobile is the myTouch series and the Nexus S, which will eventually make its way to AT&T anyway.
3G for T-Mobile is only available in major cities, for the rest of the country, we're stuck on EDGE. 3G is nice, but it's not the deal breaker. Also, EVERY AT&T Android phone is locked out, worse than any other carrier. Tethering: additional fee. Downloading Apps not in the market: disabled. Wifi hotspot: same additional fee as tethering. Updates: almost non-existent. Android adoption: slowest in the industry. AT&T is the WORST provider for Android phones. You're better off with a feature phone on this crap provider or get an iPhone or a Blackberry. Plus, they're saying that T-Mobile customers are going to have to change phones and get less features, pay more, and lose the only thing that keeps their contracts valid. Make no mistake, AT&T will force T-Mobile smartphone users to upgrade and force a new contract to get rid of their legacy ones in the process, bringing in the fewer features and higher prices with it.
You being an AT&T customer, I can definitely understand why this deal is great for you. You're already used to AT&Ts shaft and it fits more nicely since Verizon's left your hole so loose, but we T-Mobile customers don't want a bigger shaft so you can get better service. You decided to go with AT&T, we decided on T-Mobile. Now we're being forced over to the lubeless shaft without consent. It's like we've been sold to be raped for the rest of our lives, or at least until our contracts expire. But hey, you got better service. I guess someone, other than executives and lawyers, is happier.
I did the calculations on my bill as well for AT&T and Verizon based on current pricing. Assuming the pricing will increase with inflation by next year, both carriers resulted in my bill going up about $75-100/month.
T-Mobile doesn't have the best network, we T-Mobile customers know that, but when I can dial 611, press 0, enter the last 4 of my social, and get someone in less than 60 seconds; that alone is worth putting up with the spotty coverage. What AT&T fails to realize is that a LOT of T-Mobile customers don't care two shits about coverage; we care about how we're treated as customers, and AT&T's idea and record of customer service isn't about the customer, it's about the contribution margin. I should know, I used to be a sales manager for the bastards when we were acquiring Pacific Bell and Ameritech (yes, I worked for the SBC SBU; helped consolidate Ameritech), and I haven't looked back since. They're a decent company to work for, but for customers, if you're not a "Global" account, you're not worth anything to them.
Maybe this is the reason T-Mobile failed. Maybe treating customers like you want to keep them, with dignity and respect, without nickel and diming them to death, isn't a profitable model. Maybe US consumers like to be abused by our corporate overlords like an abused wife that keeps returning home to the life-threatening spouse. Maybe deep inside, we're all masochist who can't get enough abuse. Or maybe, we're too overworked, underpaid, and too stupid to worry how we're being shafted. Just take our money and give us our American Idol so we can vote via text messaging for the next pop model because voting for our next delegate to represent our voice to shape our society is too much of a pain in the ass.
I'm proposing we T-Mobile customers that truly don't want the merger to happen vote with our wallets. Let's agree to a $10 increase to our bills every month. If we can get just 30% of T-Mobile's customer base to agree to a price hike of $10, maybe the extra billion dollars will convince them that we'd rather stick it out than be assimilated into a network and company that lost their only one trick pony to Verizon, and didn't take the time and effort to improve their network or at least improve their customer service. $10 isn't that much to ask for, and I'd still be saving $65-90 per month by not being forced over to AT&T.
There are several reasons to avoid Arkansas like any other state, but you have to admit, for a redneck state, we pump out quite a bit: Largest retailer and largest company in the WORLD is here. Largest chicken producer in the USA is here 2nd largest in the World, albeit legally a Delaware Corp. One of the largest medium/up-scale retailers here, the original company that made Verizon the largest wireless carrier in the country, one of the largest oil companies in America and one of the largest companies in the US in general. Not bad for a state with literally backward thinking citizens. May not be as impressive as California, Texas, or New York, but for a state with only 2.5 million people, we hold our own.
As far as Clinton, there is an unspoken 11th commandment in Arkansas: thou shall not speak ill of the nation's favorite President of the 20th century.
This is what puzzles me. How is it that a cop can pose as a child and the person be guilty of assaulting a child? I understand the intent issue, but by your definition, any adult posing as a child and coercing pedophiles, actual and potential, can report the pseudo-crime to the police and the non-posing adult will be charged with sexually assaulting a child.
I'm not advocating pedophiles in any way, I'm more concerned about the actual law. When news sites/broadcast report crimes like these, they never state what statute the criminal is being accused of breaking. I'm sure there is a strong correlation between the number of men/woman that would assault a child online and the number of those with actual content of such behavior (child porn, actual explicit conversations with children, etc.), but it strikes me as odd that a criminal case could actually be held up in court if the law was written as an act between a minor and an adult. Of course these pedophiles could be charged with an actual statute that provides intent as the proof, but since such a statute is never reported, it seems like they're arresting the pervs for crimes they LEGALLY (not morally) didn't commit.
No wonder they drink so much. Every time they go outside and look up, all they see is a depressing cloud blocking all the sunlight. Being sh*t faced is probably the only way to get the gloom out of the day.
Top priority no, but this is a political game. Obama knows that he's not going to get everything he asked for; congress won't allow that to happen. So he's taking a page out of EVERY State regulated utility company: Ask for the sky, get the intended raised ceiling. By asking for much more than you really need, then the getting the stuff you really want isn't so bad looking. For instance, a private electric company may ask their respective State utility regulation body for a 30% increase in fees, they really only wanted 15%, but by asking for a much higher number and being denied they can come back with 15%, claim that this is the lowest they can go without disconnecting some unprofitable areas and threaten to layoff hundreds or thousands of workers, extorting the regulatory body to agree to 15%. In reality, the price of producing electricity may not have increased much at all-- 3% maybe, they just want a higher profit margin. A lot of utilities use this same tactic after hiring a new executive. It's one way to pay for that new salary, relocation, new services, air fair, and all other expenses required when switching top management.
It's a tactic used in selling. You ask the buyer to do something outrageous, then after he/she denies you, you ask for something smaller. If you get the outrageous request granted, great, more for you; however, you're really targeting something much smaller to begin with. Congress won't implement the felony stuff, but don't be surprised if they allow the media cartel the option to find out info on the sharer without going to court. That seems like the real target from a strategic point of view. Law enforcement is a crap shoot. You have to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the person is guilty of a crime; that means all 12 jurors have to agree. Civil cases, however, only require a majority vote, and it's a lot easier to convince 7 jurors over 12.
You obviously don't have a jailbroken iOS device. A lot of those bundled apps on bittorrent have some big name publishers in them. EA almost always has the top 4-6 out of 10 "top game apps" on the app store, and they get added right along with the rest of these apps. While the small developer may not have the cash to go after the seeders, EA definitely does, and they'll go after them for their own self interest while consequently help the smaller guys for a little while.
As far as finding, downloading, and installing any app, check out installous. I won't provide you the link, you can Google it, but it's what pirates too cheap to pay $0.99 for an app will glamor over to get their app fix. Installous thumpers that think the app is facilitating a "try & buy" option for iOS need a reality check. While this may be true to an extent, the app needs an automatic uninstall if they want that to stick; otherwise, they're just full of it.
Still, statistics show that your "friends" will tend to be like you in terms of education, buying habits, hobbies, etc. They're similar to you. Not to be untrue about the jailbreaking though. I have numerous friends who aren't as technical as I am, but still understand the value of jailbreaking their devices, just not enough technical courage to jailbreak it themselves. To illustrate my point, one of my friends got an Android phone and asked me if I could jailbreak it (he didn't know it was called rooting for Android) so he could download apps off of the net. I kindly informed him that Android devices didn't need to be rooted for this purpose, unless he was on an AT&T Android phone, and that most of the apps on the Android Market are free anyway.
You will only make more money if the distribution method doesn't add additional cost to each unit sold. For instance, selling a game on Steam or even the App Store has a fixed cost. Your percentage of your sell doesn't change with the number of units that are pushed through the wire. However, if you were to sell that same game on a physical medium, then your cost vary with your total units at the margin level, especially since you have to pay for the discs, books/instructions, box, cd case, shipping packages, and even freight.
What companies need to realize is that they should lower the price of DIGITAL distribution to combat piracy, not keep the digital copy at the same price as the physical medium. When people pirate a digital copy, they just copy the 0's and 1's but strip out all of the protection stuff, it's theft, but one could argue that the creation of the 0's and 1's could be randomized and re-created without the assistance of the copyright owner. When they take the physical medium from a store, that's unquestionable theft.
...Once this happens, people might go,"Oh, wow, I gotta monitor what comes out of my mouth instead of being a non-stop idiot"
Yeah, because being non-stop idiots with diarrhea of the mouth has stopped soooo many politicians from getting and/or staying elected. You might want to hear/read some of the dribble these politicians are spewing now on Facebook, Fox News, and MSNBC and you "poke" me when one of these politicians lose an election because of a stupid/racist/offensive status update.
World of Goo isn't complex, just frustrating to some. My 4 year old can play the game effortlessly on the Wii, computer, and my iPad. My 55 year old mother, however, finds the game difficult and confusing, yet was able to transition between Office 2000 to 2010 effortlessly. Why? My theory is that my 4 year old has been playing video games, especially puzzle games, his entire short life. My mother on the other hand has went as far as solitaire and not a click further, but has used word processors her entire career. They're bit equally good at doing what they've known for years.
A lot of the iPad crowd are technically incompetent and only want the most simple things. If they can't beat a game by touching the screen just once, then the game is too complex for them. It's one of the reason iOS appeals to them; it's dead simple. iPhones tend to have higher concentrations of technically competent people, and iPods are attached to more teenagers who grew up with technology, and they definitely understand complex gaming. Unfortunately, the opposite is true for real world analysis and problem solving.
World of Goo isn't like Angry Birds nor Cut the Rope. It requires the use of engineering skills (albeit infinitesimally small) and understanding of scarce economic resources, coupled with traditional logic and problem solving. Way too much thought is required for simpletons. Angry Birds just requires that you randomly throw objects to destroy other objects. No building skills required, no real puzzles, not much thought. While the game can become very complex, for the most part it's trial and error. Unfortunately for 2DBoy, they're game got a lot of attention and attracted the wrong target market, so a few reviews turned south when the player discovered they must use their brains to beat the game that gets increasingly difficult as it progresses.
It's not a Moran vs brainiac scenario, it's a "what's familiar and what's not" scenario. That being said, games that are simple, don't require complex thought, and are cheap to make will shift an entire market away from the games that are complex, not simple, nor cheap to make because the market potential is larger. Gaming is a niche; Nintendo, Microsoft, and Apple just did their part to reach a broader market that's more profitable, and the industry is following. What consumers use to play games on will become ambiguous, and what they play will become more important. For us complex gamers, we'll adapt and some smaller players will stick around for us, but the big boys have shareholders who want profits, damn the quality.
As a tablet user of both Motion tablets and the original iPad, the iPad isn't designed to be used in the same manner we use pen based tablets. The styli that do work with the iPad are a crap shoot as to what works the best, and none of them have ways of working with screens that get smudgy with oil from your hands. Accuracy and precision are non-existent on the iPad with styli or your fingers. There are a few good note taking apps that help counter this, but they simply can't compare to a digital stylus and OneNote. The biggest causation that I could find with the iPad (and all iOS devices) is that the screen expects that your touch input come at an angle that corresponds to the direction of the screen. Meaning, if you're in landscape, the device expects your finger/stylus to point to the top of the screen (e.g. toward the time) and input that comes from the side is often ignored (this is a design feature that Apple patented if you're interested). This is problematical for those who write with their paper/tablet at an angle slightly rotated toward 90 degrees away from their bodies.
That being said, the iPad's battery life can't be matched, especially it's power usage when not in use. My Motion tablets won't last more than 4 hours when idle but my iPad can idle all day and still have 90% of the battery remaining. Media consumption is also a better experience on the iPad than pure pen-input tablets. It's just easier to touch your files to play music and movies, read books, and even surf the web.
All in all, if you want a media consumption device (which is what the iPad is classified according to Sir Jobs), then an iPad is a great way to go. If you want to actually work on your device using natural tools and gestures, then stick with Windows based tablets. If you have a little cash to throw around (about $2k), Motion now makes a tablet with digital pen input AND touch input. While the battery life and media consumption patterns won't be the same as the iPad, it's a great way to get the best of both worlds; otherwise, stick with your old tablet for work, and use an iPad for play.
BTW, to stay on topic: Many of the challenges I mentioned above for the iPad will also exist for the Xoom (or any media based tablet), since these devices essentially mimic each other in functionality and capability. Don't try to work with these things are you're just going to be disappointed.
Slashdot Mirror
Linus didn't upgrade the Linux kernel to GPLv3. If you want to know why, see here.
In the Tivo case, it was a DRM issue, and possible an issue here with Samba and Apple. If Apple wants to take their OS X software toward iOS and start locking down the computer, they're going to need to
1.) Change the definition of computer or call their computers something else, like they did successfully with the iPad not being a tablet PC or Macs not being called PCs, even though the definition of PC is simply "personal computer" (side note: why aren't business computers called BCs?)
and
2.) Lock it up so people can't tamper with it.
They can't do number 2 as most developers that choose GPLv3 specifically, do it to keep DRM away, which is what signed binaries are. Why go iOS route is understandable too. Most computer users in the US and other developed countries can't use a computer beyond the applications they use every day. Installing software is too complicated, even on Macs where it's literally drag and drop (for most apps, not all). Drivers? Don't bother. Software: Why is it soft? Those that peruse Slashdot aren't part of this crowd, but computers have always been made to fit us because we've been the consistent buyers. Now, computers are so cheap that anyone can afford them, even if they don't know how to use them. Our software will have to change to fit those people whom technology is a black art, especially since processor speeds have really stagnated in the past couple of years.
Side note. Read these post of what processors should have been now, discussed back in early 2006. It's sad that their expectations have been crushed by today's standards of PCs.
http://www.knowledgesutra.com/forums/topic/34141-cpus-with-5-ghz-clock-speeds-on-their-way/
OK:
Google Wave Protocol
CERN httpd
WorldWideWeb
Two of which enabled a phenomenon to spread.
Your turn.
Ironic, yes, but a necessity nonetheless, if only to prevent Tivo-ization again. The idea behind the GPL and even FLOSS is the freedom to use the software how you please at any level. If one can restrict the other's use at any time in that level, then the entire idea has been thrown out the window. The only person who should be able to restrict the usage of the work is the original copyright owner, not those creating derivative binaries. FLOSS isn't an idea to commercialize on software, that's what proprietary licenses are for. If one must place a restriction at the highest level on restricting at lower levels to maintain the idea of free software, then it's a sacrifice that must be done, even if the restriction itself is hypocritical.
The binary is a result of your original copyright, making it a derivative work and still under the copyright of the original owner. You may own the physical 1s and 0s of the binary, but you don't own the right to redistribute it without the permission of the copyright owner.
Contribution isn't the problem. The problem is redistribution. By redistributing the original or any derivative works, you're stomping on the copyright owner's right to COPY. If you want to zip the resulting binary, burn it to a disc, defecate on that disc, then run over it with a truck, that's your right as owning the media. When you give that damaged smelly disc to someone else, then you've become a distributer and you must provide the source and that ZIP's password to the derivative work that you COPIED. How you packaged a derivative work is a concern to the copyright holder only if you intend on distributing the derivative work you packaged. By redistributing my work or any derivative there of without my consent, you are violating my right to copy (that's why they call it copy-RIGHT).
GPLv3 was a response to corporate abuse of FLOSS released under the GPLv1&2. Furthermore, "good faith" contributors weren't contributing to be nice, they were doing so to comply with the license. Look at derivative projects that have been commercialized under more loos licensing. It's damn hard to find the sources for these changes since the derivative author isn't required to give you the changes. Also, "good faith" contributors keep their contributions until well after they've released their derivative work to the public. Sometimes, the original copyright owner has to take these "good faith" abusers to court to get them to comply. Lynksys anyone? Look at the problems KDE had with Apple and their KHTML fork we call webkit. Apple would take almost a year to contribute their changes back up the pipe. Their was no real desire for joint development, it was Apple's way of means to an end. It's nothing personal against the developers, it's just business.
Excellent point. What a few nerds (because nerds and lawyers are the only ones who care) forget is that the GPLv3 came as a result of companies like Apple and, more specifically, Tivo abusing the GPLv2 by providing the code but forcing signed applications to prevent people from making changes on the devices utilizing the binaries. Furthermore, Apple has NEVER been a friend to FLOSS, just a large cooperator. It was just a means to an end; they're just as bad as Microsoft.
You show me three applications that Apple created and distributed as FLOSS without it being a FLOSS fork or FLOSS to begin with, and I'll change my opinion. Otherwise, FLOSS devs, you might want to switch from that Mac soon, as it may not work the same in the near future.
I already did this when I heard the news Sunday night, well before I posted here. But let's be realistic here, neither of these governmental bodies care, they just want their political contributions so they can spend it at the most luxurious hotels, dinning, and travel, and bail out to the same contributors' businesses for a "consulting" job that pays $5 million a year to come in and stare at the lights. Understand one thing about politics: you can always rely on a politician to lie. Republicans don't believe in a completive market but trump "capitalism," "free markets," and "invisible hand-jobs," while back-dealing to the largest corporations, providing them no-bid contracts, subsidies, and passes on everything from taxes to environment raping to murder. Democrats are no better. They generate a slew of social bills, raise taxes, and lose their spine when stopping any of the antics Republicans left the country in, while trumping "fairness," "free society," and "evil corporations."
Obama is an intelligent man, a great speaker, but nothing more than a slight improvement from Bush. Those that voted for him (i'm one of them) fell for his ruse hook, line, and sinker. Unfortunately, he's the lesser of two evils. We're never going to get another Clinton again. We're never going to have a president stand up to Republicans, stand up for the consumer, and stand for science ever again. Primarily because we US Americans have conceded too far. Those with intelligence are far outnumbered by those without, and those that are in-between intelligent and idiot are too busy working our asses off for the top 5% of the social class in hopes that one day we'll be part of that social class. I never thought I'd think this, but those crazy Tea Partiers may be our only hope at waking up the moderately intelligent from their overworked slumber to realize that our country has dwindled to nothing in less than 15 years, and we let pure loons take over for the pure greedy.
...The only thing that might change for you is customer service...
This is the primary reason T-Mobile customers stick with T-Mobile. We're aware that our network is sparse, but the customer service is second to none, regardless of what JD Power and Associates say.
To be frank, it really cannot be much worse that T-Mobile, which has made it its business to lie to its customers and push 3G as the new 4G
This is also incorrect. T-Mobile made its business from affordable pricing and great customer service. I've never heard anyone switch to T-Mobile to receive better service or because they thought their 4G was really awesome. They switched because Verizon and AT&T shaft their customers. When you have 90+ million customers, losing 5% because of overcharging, crappy service, and automated phone system hell isn't a big deal. They'll just raise the price on the remaining suckers who don't look at their bill and just pay whatever they send in the mail.
then I'd be upset by a longterm future without 3G support on your current phone...The only serious phones that I can name on T-Mobile is the myTouch series and the Nexus S, which will eventually make its way to AT&T anyway.
3G for T-Mobile is only available in major cities, for the rest of the country, we're stuck on EDGE. 3G is nice, but it's not the deal breaker. Also, EVERY AT&T Android phone is locked out, worse than any other carrier. Tethering: additional fee. Downloading Apps not in the market: disabled. Wifi hotspot: same additional fee as tethering. Updates: almost non-existent. Android adoption: slowest in the industry. AT&T is the WORST provider for Android phones. You're better off with a feature phone on this crap provider or get an iPhone or a Blackberry. Plus, they're saying that T-Mobile customers are going to have to change phones and get less features, pay more, and lose the only thing that keeps their contracts valid. Make no mistake, AT&T will force T-Mobile smartphone users to upgrade and force a new contract to get rid of their legacy ones in the process, bringing in the fewer features and higher prices with it.
You being an AT&T customer, I can definitely understand why this deal is great for you. You're already used to AT&Ts shaft and it fits more nicely since Verizon's left your hole so loose, but we T-Mobile customers don't want a bigger shaft so you can get better service. You decided to go with AT&T, we decided on T-Mobile. Now we're being forced over to the lubeless shaft without consent. It's like we've been sold to be raped for the rest of our lives, or at least until our contracts expire. But hey, you got better service. I guess someone, other than executives and lawyers, is happier.
I did the calculations on my bill as well for AT&T and Verizon based on current pricing. Assuming the pricing will increase with inflation by next year, both carriers resulted in my bill going up about $75-100/month.
T-Mobile doesn't have the best network, we T-Mobile customers know that, but when I can dial 611, press 0, enter the last 4 of my social, and get someone in less than 60 seconds; that alone is worth putting up with the spotty coverage. What AT&T fails to realize is that a LOT of T-Mobile customers don't care two shits about coverage; we care about how we're treated as customers, and AT&T's idea and record of customer service isn't about the customer, it's about the contribution margin. I should know, I used to be a sales manager for the bastards when we were acquiring Pacific Bell and Ameritech (yes, I worked for the SBC SBU; helped consolidate Ameritech), and I haven't looked back since. They're a decent company to work for, but for customers, if you're not a "Global" account, you're not worth anything to them.
Maybe this is the reason T-Mobile failed. Maybe treating customers like you want to keep them, with dignity and respect, without nickel and diming them to death, isn't a profitable model. Maybe US consumers like to be abused by our corporate overlords like an abused wife that keeps returning home to the life-threatening spouse. Maybe deep inside, we're all masochist who can't get enough abuse. Or maybe, we're too overworked, underpaid, and too stupid to worry how we're being shafted. Just take our money and give us our American Idol so we can vote via text messaging for the next pop model because voting for our next delegate to represent our voice to shape our society is too much of a pain in the ass.
I'm proposing we T-Mobile customers that truly don't want the merger to happen vote with our wallets. Let's agree to a $10 increase to our bills every month. If we can get just 30% of T-Mobile's customer base to agree to a price hike of $10, maybe the extra billion dollars will convince them that we'd rather stick it out than be assimilated into a network and company that lost their only one trick pony to Verizon, and didn't take the time and effort to improve their network or at least improve their customer service. $10 isn't that much to ask for, and I'd still be saving $65-90 per month by not being forced over to AT&T.
There are several reasons to avoid Arkansas like any other state, but you have to admit, for a redneck state, we pump out quite a bit: Largest retailer and largest company in the WORLD is here. Largest chicken producer in the USA is here 2nd largest in the World, albeit legally a Delaware Corp. One of the largest medium/up-scale retailers here, the original company that made Verizon the largest wireless carrier in the country, one of the largest oil companies in America and one of the largest companies in the US in general. Not bad for a state with literally backward thinking citizens. May not be as impressive as California, Texas, or New York, but for a state with only 2.5 million people, we hold our own.
As far as Clinton, there is an unspoken 11th commandment in Arkansas: thou shall not speak ill of the nation's favorite President of the 20th century.
Avoid Arkansas then; nothing but heat, humidity, and tornadoes.
I've got mod points but can't use them to mod this up funny.
This is what puzzles me. How is it that a cop can pose as a child and the person be guilty of assaulting a child? I understand the intent issue, but by your definition, any adult posing as a child and coercing pedophiles, actual and potential, can report the pseudo-crime to the police and the non-posing adult will be charged with sexually assaulting a child.
I'm not advocating pedophiles in any way, I'm more concerned about the actual law. When news sites/broadcast report crimes like these, they never state what statute the criminal is being accused of breaking. I'm sure there is a strong correlation between the number of men/woman that would assault a child online and the number of those with actual content of such behavior (child porn, actual explicit conversations with children, etc.), but it strikes me as odd that a criminal case could actually be held up in court if the law was written as an act between a minor and an adult. Of course these pedophiles could be charged with an actual statute that provides intent as the proof, but since such a statute is never reported, it seems like they're arresting the pervs for crimes they LEGALLY (not morally) didn't commit.
Never been to Ireland nor London, so, at this point, I don't have logic, just random ramblings.
No wonder they drink so much. Every time they go outside and look up, all they see is a depressing cloud blocking all the sunlight. Being sh*t faced is probably the only way to get the gloom out of the day.
(15-32)/32 = -53% reduction
How big is your "junk" that it needs to be zapped while you're in space?
Top priority no, but this is a political game. Obama knows that he's not going to get everything he asked for; congress won't allow that to happen. So he's taking a page out of EVERY State regulated utility company: Ask for the sky, get the intended raised ceiling. By asking for much more than you really need, then the getting the stuff you really want isn't so bad looking. For instance, a private electric company may ask their respective State utility regulation body for a 30% increase in fees, they really only wanted 15%, but by asking for a much higher number and being denied they can come back with 15%, claim that this is the lowest they can go without disconnecting some unprofitable areas and threaten to layoff hundreds or thousands of workers, extorting the regulatory body to agree to 15%. In reality, the price of producing electricity may not have increased much at all-- 3% maybe, they just want a higher profit margin. A lot of utilities use this same tactic after hiring a new executive. It's one way to pay for that new salary, relocation, new services, air fair, and all other expenses required when switching top management.
It's a tactic used in selling. You ask the buyer to do something outrageous, then after he/she denies you, you ask for something smaller. If you get the outrageous request granted, great, more for you; however, you're really targeting something much smaller to begin with. Congress won't implement the felony stuff, but don't be surprised if they allow the media cartel the option to find out info on the sharer without going to court. That seems like the real target from a strategic point of view. Law enforcement is a crap shoot. You have to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the person is guilty of a crime; that means all 12 jurors have to agree. Civil cases, however, only require a majority vote, and it's a lot easier to convince 7 jurors over 12.
You obviously don't have a jailbroken iOS device. A lot of those bundled apps on bittorrent have some big name publishers in them. EA almost always has the top 4-6 out of 10 "top game apps" on the app store, and they get added right along with the rest of these apps. While the small developer may not have the cash to go after the seeders, EA definitely does, and they'll go after them for their own self interest while consequently help the smaller guys for a little while.
As far as finding, downloading, and installing any app, check out installous. I won't provide you the link, you can Google it, but it's what pirates too cheap to pay $0.99 for an app will glamor over to get their app fix. Installous thumpers that think the app is facilitating a "try & buy" option for iOS need a reality check. While this may be true to an extent, the app needs an automatic uninstall if they want that to stick; otherwise, they're just full of it.
Still, statistics show that your "friends" will tend to be like you in terms of education, buying habits, hobbies, etc. They're similar to you. Not to be untrue about the jailbreaking though. I have numerous friends who aren't as technical as I am, but still understand the value of jailbreaking their devices, just not enough technical courage to jailbreak it themselves. To illustrate my point, one of my friends got an Android phone and asked me if I could jailbreak it (he didn't know it was called rooting for Android) so he could download apps off of the net. I kindly informed him that Android devices didn't need to be rooted for this purpose, unless he was on an AT&T Android phone, and that most of the apps on the Android Market are free anyway.
You will only make more money if the distribution method doesn't add additional cost to each unit sold. For instance, selling a game on Steam or even the App Store has a fixed cost. Your percentage of your sell doesn't change with the number of units that are pushed through the wire. However, if you were to sell that same game on a physical medium, then your cost vary with your total units at the margin level, especially since you have to pay for the discs, books/instructions, box, cd case, shipping packages, and even freight.
What companies need to realize is that they should lower the price of DIGITAL distribution to combat piracy, not keep the digital copy at the same price as the physical medium. When people pirate a digital copy, they just copy the 0's and 1's but strip out all of the protection stuff, it's theft, but one could argue that the creation of the 0's and 1's could be randomized and re-created without the assistance of the copyright owner. When they take the physical medium from a store, that's unquestionable theft.
That's at least a better explanation instead of just throwing Comcast out there with no way to infer what the AC is talking about.
Thank You.
...Once this happens, people might go,"Oh, wow, I gotta monitor what comes out of my mouth instead of being a non-stop idiot"
Yeah, because being non-stop idiots with diarrhea of the mouth has stopped soooo many politicians from getting and/or staying elected. You might want to hear/read some of the dribble these politicians are spewing now on Facebook, Fox News, and MSNBC and you "poke" me when one of these politicians lose an election because of a stupid/racist/offensive status update.
Where in the article or the summary is Comcast mentioned?
World of Goo isn't complex, just frustrating to some. My 4 year old can play the game effortlessly on the Wii, computer, and my iPad. My 55 year old mother, however, finds the game difficult and confusing, yet was able to transition between Office 2000 to 2010 effortlessly. Why? My theory is that my 4 year old has been playing video games, especially puzzle games, his entire short life. My mother on the other hand has went as far as solitaire and not a click further, but has used word processors her entire career. They're bit equally good at doing what they've known for years.
A lot of the iPad crowd are technically incompetent and only want the most simple things. If they can't beat a game by touching the screen just once, then the game is too complex for them. It's one of the reason iOS appeals to them; it's dead simple. iPhones tend to have higher concentrations of technically competent people, and iPods are attached to more teenagers who grew up with technology, and they definitely understand complex gaming. Unfortunately, the opposite is true for real world analysis and problem solving.
World of Goo isn't like Angry Birds nor Cut the Rope. It requires the use of engineering skills (albeit infinitesimally small) and understanding of scarce economic resources, coupled with traditional logic and problem solving. Way too much thought is required for simpletons. Angry Birds just requires that you randomly throw objects to destroy other objects. No building skills required, no real puzzles, not much thought. While the game can become very complex, for the most part it's trial and error. Unfortunately for 2DBoy, they're game got a lot of attention and attracted the wrong target market, so a few reviews turned south when the player discovered they must use their brains to beat the game that gets increasingly difficult as it progresses.
It's not a Moran vs brainiac scenario, it's a "what's familiar and what's not" scenario. That being said, games that are simple, don't require complex thought, and are cheap to make will shift an entire market away from the games that are complex, not simple, nor cheap to make because the market potential is larger. Gaming is a niche; Nintendo, Microsoft, and Apple just did their part to reach a broader market that's more profitable, and the industry is following. What consumers use to play games on will become ambiguous, and what they play will become more important. For us complex gamers, we'll adapt and some smaller players will stick around for us, but the big boys have shareholders who want profits, damn the quality.
As a tablet user of both Motion tablets and the original iPad, the iPad isn't designed to be used in the same manner we use pen based tablets. The styli that do work with the iPad are a crap shoot as to what works the best, and none of them have ways of working with screens that get smudgy with oil from your hands. Accuracy and precision are non-existent on the iPad with styli or your fingers. There are a few good note taking apps that help counter this, but they simply can't compare to a digital stylus and OneNote. The biggest causation that I could find with the iPad (and all iOS devices) is that the screen expects that your touch input come at an angle that corresponds to the direction of the screen. Meaning, if you're in landscape, the device expects your finger/stylus to point to the top of the screen (e.g. toward the time) and input that comes from the side is often ignored (this is a design feature that Apple patented if you're interested). This is problematical for those who write with their paper/tablet at an angle slightly rotated toward 90 degrees away from their bodies.
That being said, the iPad's battery life can't be matched, especially it's power usage when not in use. My Motion tablets won't last more than 4 hours when idle but my iPad can idle all day and still have 90% of the battery remaining. Media consumption is also a better experience on the iPad than pure pen-input tablets. It's just easier to touch your files to play music and movies, read books, and even surf the web.
All in all, if you want a media consumption device (which is what the iPad is classified according to Sir Jobs), then an iPad is a great way to go. If you want to actually work on your device using natural tools and gestures, then stick with Windows based tablets. If you have a little cash to throw around (about $2k), Motion now makes a tablet with digital pen input AND touch input. While the battery life and media consumption patterns won't be the same as the iPad, it's a great way to get the best of both worlds; otherwise, stick with your old tablet for work, and use an iPad for play.
BTW, to stay on topic: Many of the challenges I mentioned above for the iPad will also exist for the Xoom (or any media based tablet), since these devices essentially mimic each other in functionality and capability. Don't try to work with these things are you're just going to be disappointed.