They don't have a ton of consumer-facing products, but they are in fact very well-known in the technology industry.
The text -to-speech on my Android is Nuance as well. Also, heard of Dragon Naturally Speaking? That's Nuance now.
Most of the call centers with the annoying speech recognition are running off a Nuance engine, too. On the plus side, I have found that some companies will route you to to an agent quicker if you swear at it.
The new Slashdot. Where truth is modded to troll. This is exactly the kind of thing Microsoft engages in. Anything that is good, and "free" software enrages them to having fits. They can't stand the idea.
Look back on funding SCO to try and cripple Linux. Taking over Nokia to kill off Maemo. And I think they had their filthy hands in this.
What is really sad is that Slashdot is now filled with those that can't see the calculated evil that Microsoft as a company really is.
And being modded down on Slashdot for pointing out even potential Microsoft evil doing shows how things here have changed.
Sad.
I agree the moderation was unfair. I don't agree with you, but you weren't trolling.
Microsoft funded SCO because Linux as a server platform is and remains a credible threat, and SCO did a good job of convincing a lot of people that Linux contained violations of their IP. Not anyone that mattered, in the end, but if that had been true their investment would have been very lucrative.
Microsoft "took over" Nokia because there was no one left to partner or buy in the handheld computing space. HP destroyed Palm, Apple is Apple, and everyone else went Android. You think they were at all concerned about something like Maemo in the face of that?
Microsoft does not perceive X as a credible threat on the desktop, because it isn't.
Look, just take a step back and get some perspective. Microsoft is certainly _capable_ of doing the things you accuse them of here, but that isn't the same thing as _interested_. They certainly can't be bothered with competitors whose market shares can only be measured in tenths or hundreds of a single percent.
The final nail in this tin-foil-hat conspiracy theory of yours is the non-profit in question failed to file their taxes. It does not take lobbyists to get the IRS to take action in that scenario. Try it yourself sometime if you doubt me.
It can be closed and the documentation sealed in a titanium safe stored inside a reinforced container dropped at the bottom of the Mariana Trench for all I care; if the API is active in production models, it's going to get discovered and exploited. Nefarious usage, especially, won't be stopped by "Hey, you're not supposed to use this!"
There really is no excuse for this. It's just sloppy security practices.
I'm not trying to excuse anything, simply pointing out that this exploit can only be executed with the end-user as a willing, active participant. Please, show me a security model that works in that scenario.
Like the fact that Tesla's API is closed and 3rd-party applications are unauthorized and using it without any documentation other than what's been figured out through reverse-engineering. No doubt they need to do some work before publishing an API, but there's no warranty when you use homebrew.
So that says something. Not to say that you know every technology's owner because so many are invisible (or until you infringe on tthem), but when someone says one product everyone knows about infringes on a product no one knows about, the product no one knows about must not be all that hot afterall.
How about Apple's Siri, heard of that? Nuance powers the speech recognition. They don't have a ton of consumer-facing products, but they are in fact very well-known in the technology industry.
Slashdot is open to all types of people, and even Slashdotters are prone to narcissism (which Facebook encourages, hence is so prevalent with).
You're thinking of Twitter. Facebook is for people enamored with their food and the ability to post pictures of it. Which Social Fixer lets you create a tab just for them.
You're thinking of Instagram, which Facebook owns. So I guess you're still right.
Bullshit. NO one buys electric cars because they uniformly suck and this is clearly just the fucking government trying to push them on us. But why am I arguing with dumbass statists on Slashdot AGAIN?
I see them on a near-daily basis. When you say "NO one" what you really mean is only people who can afford to spend $70K on a car. Granted that's not a lot of people, but in order for costs to be driven down we need those early adopters with deep pockets.
While everyone else is making jokes about aliens and the budget, I'm still trying to wrap my head around what it would take to launch a U2 (103-ft wingspan) from a carrier. Besides the width, I didn't think it was optimized for short takesoffs, and it looks like the wings would snap off if you launched it with a catapult.
Considering that downward visibility is so piss-poor that landing it on a regular runway involves another pilot in a car driving along the runway talking the aircraft down, landing on an aircraft carrier must have been an... exhilarating experience.
You Sir, are the next Warren Buffet. Your logic is unassailable.
Share price basically hasn't budged since I unloaded it several years ago.
Cisco hasn't been a growth stock for quite a while. Acquisitions are only of value to the run-of-the-shareholder if either they raise the stock price or pay out in dividends.
You aren't paying attention. Last year CSCO was $17.35. Today after the layoff announcement it's $24.54. I don't know how you play the market, but in my world that's a kick-ass stock.
Government plans tend to make me wonder if they ever just step back and listen to what they just said before they go and do it.
Given the problem and the technology available at the time, how would you have attempted to solve it? Many at the time thought war with the Soviets inevitable. Satellites were being developed but their feasibility never tested, and the scale we have deployed today was almost unimaginable then. An entire satellite network for people just to watch television? Preposterous! Space-based communication relays were completely and totally non-existent.
Cue the pack of bleating neckbearded Mythbusters-humping assholes screaming "IT WILL NEVER WORK BECAUSE I AM SCIENTIST!" before they go back to their bongs and gripe because there are no jobs and there's no reason to go to college any more.
Now mod it down because you're a butthurt crying bitch.
You forgot the part where some country elsewhere does it first, then we all get to complain around the lack of investments into our own infrastructure. Or, if it succeeds, we get to complain that he's an inventor of nothing and merely stood on the shoulders of others. That's the awesome things about/., we always get to win regardless of the outcome!
DUUUH I will buy wherever it's cheaper DUUUUUH I don't care about brick and mortar stores DUUUUH they are too expensive and if they can't compete they should go out of busines DUUUUUUUH I don't feel sorry for them, they should have found another job. DUUUH i don't care if they had the store for 30 years and are about to retire, it's their fault because they should have adapted DUUUUUUUUUUUUUUURRRRRR.
There's your answer. Look around slashdot and you'll see the average geek is a lot like the average person. They only care about the lowest price TODAY.
Although price is always going to be a factor, I tend to buy from specific online retailers because I like dealing with them (like Newegg, Monoprice, Amazon, etc.). But you're right, I couldn't give two shits that the brick-and-mortar store, that I never had a need to patronize, decides to shuts down.
Wall Street still keeps their stock price up because of rising revenues so Amazon can borrow money with impunity to make up for these losses. This allows them to keep dropping prices even when they are losing money. A small company cannot do this.
Sure they can, though likely they will do it through private equity, not Wall Street. The problem is that few small companies know how to dramatically increase their revenue by creating new industries like cloud computing, and reselling sunk costs like external fulfillment.
It isn't hard to raise revenues when you don't have to care about profitability or cash flow when setting your prices.
Do you really think Amazon doesn't care about profitability or cash flow? Do you believe their business model is, "Fuck it, sell it at a loss, Wall Street will bail us out?"
QFT. If anything, their statement shows a profound misunderstanding of how Wall Street works. Companies that lose money are not rewarded. Hell, often companies that make money aren't rewarded, because it's not enough. The truth is that Amazon has a shitload more buying power and can negotiate more favorable credit terms. But they are not losing money.
It would be very wrong of the White House to give one US corporation carte-blanche to ignore a patent. Although the ITC ban may be too strong a response, there's still the fact that Apple has been ignoring a patent for years. They shouldn't be free to continue indefinitely.
I don't think this is the end of the legal fight. The patent wasn't overturned, just the import ban. I doubt the lawyers on either side are surprised. Samsung can still have their day in court and, if they prevail, receive their royalty payments.
So Google doesn't have enough resources to concurrently test 4.2.2 and 4.3 on the same hardware, so that if issues are discovered in 4.3 they have a backup plan?
It must suck to be so cash strapped that your QA team can't get that done.
I said carrier qualification, meaning Verizon, AT&T, Spring, T-Mobile, and Rogers. If they had all started their QA testing prior to 4.3, they wouldn't start all over again. You do understand that the carriers all have their own test processes to complete prior to selling a new device, right? Frankly, a multi-carrier launch like this is an incredible feat of logistics and project management to execute.
Just over a year later, on August 11, 1984, President Reagan's sound-check could have given her a chance to use the speech if the Russians had itchier trigger fingers: "My fellow Americans, I'm pleased to tell you today that I've signed legislation that will outlaw Russia forever. We begin bombing in five minutes."
So a Google subsidiary can't use Google's latest OS? Lame... I rather get a Nexus instead.
My guess is they were already well into the carrier qualification/test process with 4.2.2 when 4.3 launched. It seems reasonable that a 4.3 upgrade would be forthcoming. And since the unlocked versions are supposed to have an unlocked bootloader, I imagine CM10 will be available pretty quickly, so you can get your 4.3 goodies that way instead.
What, exactly, does this mean, and how is it different from my current Android phone and widgets to show me these things on the lockscreen?
It uses the screen instead of a notification LED, but only powers the portion of the screen necessary for the alert instead of turning the whole display on. I'm not sure how this works, but that's what they're claiming. It's not at all like a lock screen.
How unlockable (if at all) is the bootloader? Just an OEM unlock (like the Nexus line), sign in and get an unlock key (like HTC and Sony), or a special "dev" edition like previously.
I love the quality of the radios on Moto products, but for a decent Android ROM, unless Motorola opens their devices up, I'll probably pass this round of their offerings.
If you buy an unlocked version of this phone, the bootloader comes unlocked as well. Reportedly.
bullshit, typical geek "server" (domain with email and http server, maybe IRC or somesuch) uses negligible amount of the bandwidth of the home user who streams videos and/or plays multiplayer games.
google can go fuck themselves and die in a fire, I've been running a "server" on my home network since the mid 90s, which accounted for less than 1% of my traffic.
Good luck defining typical geek server usage without an enforceable TOS.
"Servers" are technically difficult to accurately define within the context of a residential broadband connection, but you know what they are when you see them.
The only solution that would satisfy the hordes of/.ers, apparently, involves treating every customer as a business customer. After which I fully expect/. to explode with wild conspiracy theories around the rising cost of broadband.
TFA fails to mention that the ITC ruling provides a 60-day review period, during which Moto posts a bond of $0.33 per device imported. That period expires Monday. So far they've not done anything wrong. They could simply stop importing those models prior to Monday, surrender the bond, and be in full compliance with the ITC order.
Slashdot Mirror
They don't have a ton of consumer-facing products, but they are in fact very well-known in the technology industry.
The text -to-speech on my Android is Nuance as well. Also, heard of Dragon Naturally Speaking? That's Nuance now.
Most of the call centers with the annoying speech recognition are running off a Nuance engine, too. On the plus side, I have found that some companies will route you to to an agent quicker if you swear at it.
The new Slashdot. Where truth is modded to troll. This is exactly the kind of thing Microsoft engages in. Anything that is good, and "free" software enrages them to having fits. They can't stand the idea.
Look back on funding SCO to try and cripple Linux. Taking over Nokia to kill off Maemo. And I think they had their filthy hands in this.
What is really sad is that Slashdot is now filled with those that can't see the calculated evil that Microsoft as a company really is.
And being modded down on Slashdot for pointing out even potential Microsoft evil doing shows how things here have changed.
Sad.
I agree the moderation was unfair. I don't agree with you, but you weren't trolling.
Microsoft funded SCO because Linux as a server platform is and remains a credible threat, and SCO did a good job of convincing a lot of people that Linux contained violations of their IP. Not anyone that mattered, in the end, but if that had been true their investment would have been very lucrative.
Microsoft "took over" Nokia because there was no one left to partner or buy in the handheld computing space. HP destroyed Palm, Apple is Apple, and everyone else went Android. You think they were at all concerned about something like Maemo in the face of that?
Microsoft does not perceive X as a credible threat on the desktop, because it isn't.
Look, just take a step back and get some perspective. Microsoft is certainly _capable_ of doing the things you accuse them of here, but that isn't the same thing as _interested_. They certainly can't be bothered with competitors whose market shares can only be measured in tenths or hundreds of a single percent.
The final nail in this tin-foil-hat conspiracy theory of yours is the non-profit in question failed to file their taxes. It does not take lobbyists to get the IRS to take action in that scenario. Try it yourself sometime if you doubt me.
It can be closed and the documentation sealed in a titanium safe stored inside a reinforced container dropped at the bottom of the Mariana Trench for all I care; if the API is active in production models, it's going to get discovered and exploited. Nefarious usage, especially, won't be stopped by "Hey, you're not supposed to use this!"
There really is no excuse for this. It's just sloppy security practices.
I'm not trying to excuse anything, simply pointing out that this exploit can only be executed with the end-user as a willing, active participant. Please, show me a security model that works in that scenario.
Like the fact that Tesla's API is closed and 3rd-party applications are unauthorized and using it without any documentation other than what's been figured out through reverse-engineering. No doubt they need to do some work before publishing an API, but there's no warranty when you use homebrew.
So that says something. Not to say that you know every technology's owner because so many are invisible (or until you infringe on tthem), but when someone says one product everyone knows about infringes on a product no one knows about, the product no one knows about must not be all that hot afterall.
How about Apple's Siri, heard of that? Nuance powers the speech recognition. They don't have a ton of consumer-facing products, but they are in fact very well-known in the technology industry.
This is the type of dirty trick their lobbyists would do.
I doubt Microsoft even knows X.org exists or what they do.
I had that feature longer before FB Purity. He may have been inspired by my implementation ;)
I went from FB Purity to FB Fixer. Good software, thanks (I'm a donor... although not a big one).
Slashdot is open to all types of people, and even Slashdotters are prone to narcissism (which Facebook encourages, hence is so prevalent with).
You're thinking of Twitter. Facebook is for people enamored with their food and the ability to post pictures of it. Which Social Fixer lets you create a tab just for them.
You're thinking of Instagram, which Facebook owns. So I guess you're still right.
Bullshit. NO one buys electric cars because they uniformly suck and this is clearly just the fucking government trying to push them on us. But why am I arguing with dumbass statists on Slashdot AGAIN?
I see them on a near-daily basis. When you say "NO one" what you really mean is only people who can afford to spend $70K on a car. Granted that's not a lot of people, but in order for costs to be driven down we need those early adopters with deep pockets.
While everyone else is making jokes about aliens and the budget, I'm still trying to wrap my head around what it would take to launch a U2 (103-ft wingspan) from a carrier. Besides the width, I didn't think it was optimized for short takesoffs, and it looks like the wings would snap off if you launched it with a catapult.
Considering that downward visibility is so piss-poor that landing it on a regular runway involves another pilot in a car driving along the runway talking the aircraft down, landing on an aircraft carrier must have been an... exhilarating experience.
You Sir, are the next Warren Buffet. Your logic is unassailable.
Share price basically hasn't budged since I unloaded it several years ago.
Cisco hasn't been a growth stock for quite a while. Acquisitions are only of value to the run-of-the-shareholder if either they raise the stock price or pay out in dividends.
You aren't paying attention. Last year CSCO was $17.35. Today after the layoff announcement it's $24.54. I don't know how you play the market, but in my world that's a kick-ass stock.
Government plans tend to make me wonder if they ever just step back and listen to what they just said before they go and do it.
Given the problem and the technology available at the time, how would you have attempted to solve it? Many at the time thought war with the Soviets inevitable. Satellites were being developed but their feasibility never tested, and the scale we have deployed today was almost unimaginable then. An entire satellite network for people just to watch television? Preposterous! Space-based communication relays were completely and totally non-existent.
Cue the pack of bleating neckbearded Mythbusters-humping assholes screaming "IT WILL NEVER WORK BECAUSE I AM SCIENTIST!" before they go back to their bongs and gripe because there are no jobs and there's no reason to go to college any more.
Now mod it down because you're a butthurt crying bitch.
You forgot the part where some country elsewhere does it first, then we all get to complain around the lack of investments into our own infrastructure. Or, if it succeeds, we get to complain that he's an inventor of nothing and merely stood on the shoulders of others. That's the awesome things about /., we always get to win regardless of the outcome!
DUUUH I will buy wherever it's cheaper DUUUUUH I don't care about brick and mortar stores DUUUUH they are too expensive and if they can't compete they should go out of busines DUUUUUUUH I don't feel sorry for them, they should have found another job. DUUUH i don't care if they had the store for 30 years and are about to retire, it's their fault because they should have adapted DUUUUUUUUUUUUUUURRRRRR.
There's your answer. Look around slashdot and you'll see the average geek is a lot like the average person. They only care about the lowest price TODAY.
Although price is always going to be a factor, I tend to buy from specific online retailers because I like dealing with them (like Newegg, Monoprice, Amazon, etc.). But you're right, I couldn't give two shits that the brick-and-mortar store, that I never had a need to patronize, decides to shuts down.
Wall Street still keeps their stock price up because of rising revenues so Amazon can borrow money with impunity to make up for these losses. This allows them to keep dropping prices even when they are losing money. A small company cannot do this.
Sure they can, though likely they will do it through private equity, not Wall Street. The problem is that few small companies know how to dramatically increase their revenue by creating new industries like cloud computing, and reselling sunk costs like external fulfillment.
It isn't hard to raise revenues when you don't have to care about profitability or cash flow when setting your prices.
Do you really think Amazon doesn't care about profitability or cash flow? Do you believe their business model is, "Fuck it, sell it at a loss, Wall Street will bail us out?"
QFT. If anything, their statement shows a profound misunderstanding of how Wall Street works. Companies that lose money are not rewarded. Hell, often companies that make money aren't rewarded, because it's not enough. The truth is that Amazon has a shitload more buying power and can negotiate more favorable credit terms. But they are not losing money.
It would be very wrong of the White House to give one US corporation carte-blanche to ignore a patent. Although the ITC ban may be too strong a response, there's still the fact that Apple has been ignoring a patent for years. They shouldn't be free to continue indefinitely.
I don't think this is the end of the legal fight. The patent wasn't overturned, just the import ban. I doubt the lawyers on either side are surprised. Samsung can still have their day in court and, if they prevail, receive their royalty payments.
So Google doesn't have enough resources to concurrently test 4.2.2 and 4.3 on the same hardware, so that if issues are discovered in 4.3 they have a backup plan?
It must suck to be so cash strapped that your QA team can't get that done.
I said carrier qualification, meaning Verizon, AT&T, Spring, T-Mobile, and Rogers. If they had all started their QA testing prior to 4.3, they wouldn't start all over again. You do understand that the carriers all have their own test processes to complete prior to selling a new device, right? Frankly, a multi-carrier launch like this is an incredible feat of logistics and project management to execute.
Just over a year later, on August 11, 1984, President Reagan's sound-check could have given her a chance to use the speech if the Russians had itchier trigger fingers: "My fellow Americans, I'm pleased to tell you today that I've signed legislation that will outlaw Russia forever. We begin bombing in five minutes."
It's not like it was broadcast.
So a Google subsidiary can't use Google's latest OS? Lame... I rather get a Nexus instead.
My guess is they were already well into the carrier qualification/test process with 4.2.2 when 4.3 launched. It seems reasonable that a 4.3 upgrade would be forthcoming. And since the unlocked versions are supposed to have an unlocked bootloader, I imagine CM10 will be available pretty quickly, so you can get your 4.3 goodies that way instead.
What, exactly, does this mean, and how is it different from my current Android phone and widgets to show me these things on the lockscreen?
It uses the screen instead of a notification LED, but only powers the portion of the screen necessary for the alert instead of turning the whole display on. I'm not sure how this works, but that's what they're claiming. It's not at all like a lock screen.
How unlockable (if at all) is the bootloader? Just an OEM unlock (like the Nexus line), sign in and get an unlock key (like HTC and Sony), or a special "dev" edition like previously.
I love the quality of the radios on Moto products, but for a decent Android ROM, unless Motorola opens their devices up, I'll probably pass this round of their offerings.
If you buy an unlocked version of this phone, the bootloader comes unlocked as well. Reportedly.
bullshit, typical geek "server" (domain with email and http server, maybe IRC or somesuch) uses negligible amount of the bandwidth of the home user who streams videos and/or plays multiplayer games.
google can go fuck themselves and die in a fire, I've been running a "server" on my home network since the mid 90s, which accounted for less than 1% of my traffic.
Good luck defining typical geek server usage without an enforceable TOS.
"Servers" are technically difficult to accurately define within the context of a residential broadband connection, but you know what they are when you see them.
The only solution that would satisfy the hordes of /.ers, apparently, involves treating every customer as a business customer. After which I fully expect /. to explode with wild conspiracy theories around the rising cost of broadband.
So the moral of this story is you should have been better than the competition when you committed voter fraud???
TFA fails to mention that the ITC ruling provides a 60-day review period, during which Moto posts a bond of $0.33 per device imported. That period expires Monday. So far they've not done anything wrong. They could simply stop importing those models prior to Monday, surrender the bond, and be in full compliance with the ITC order.