Actively selling the chemicals to do so along with an instruction book detailing how to make meth and advertising yourself as the place to go for all your meth making needs is another.
While we are addressing details, I'd correct that to:
Actively giving and address to a shop that sells the chemicals (selling the chemicals) to do so along with a name and a phone number for a guy who will give you and instruction book (an instruction book) detailing how to make meth and advertising yourself as the place to go for all your meth making needs is another.
(originals in parenthesis).
I repeat myself, but: piratebay DOES NOT (nor did ever) host the actual "material", just a means to get it. It's not exactly like "links on Google" (because -torrent files contain much more than just a hyperlink), but it IS far less than actually hosting the material.
I don't say he didn't advocate piracy (he probably did), but he did not, in fact, actually host any of the actual data.
Mod parent up! This is something people (also here) seem to overlook/forget. Like someone compared an "anonymous posting" on Slashdot to a "piece of art" on Piratebay as data, it does NOT hold water. Piratebay does NOT and NEVER did host the actual "data", just a "link" to it. Slashdot actually holds MORE "copyrightable data" (yeah, I know) than piratebay ever did. Like the parent said, torrent files ONLY contain metadata, NOT the actual "data" that is being downloaded.
It's now exactly the same, but Piratebay is WAY closer to Google than Slashdot when compared to what data it hosts.
A *long* time ago (BBS-time, before the 'net), I went by the name 'Nightwing' (and I still like that song) that came from an old D&D (pen & paper) monster's translation. As soon as "online" became more common and I frequented things like IRC, that very, VERY shortly became "night" on "nw". Therefore I shortened it to "Nite", which seemed to go ok and was very rarely shortened to anything. Once or twice with "N". I use that occasionally even today, but mostly after sometime I hit 20s I somehow figured nicknames are not THAT great. I thought that, well I do have a "real" name, why not just use that...
And yes, even that gets shortened usually. Even in real life.
This is generally true (probably, I haven't done any scientific testing) and because of that any analysts and/or analytic program assume as much - which is why almost 95% of the time those instances define me as a female based on social behaviour in games/chats and texts that I write (stories, etc).
So while it is fairly simple to do it that way, it is also assuming too much as people are rarely, if ever, so one-sided that any clinical analysis could determine their age or sex short of looking into their pants. (which doesn't always work either, so what the heck:)
That's all fine and well and I don't have any problems with that... provided that system is ONLY activated for multi-player games. If I - or anyone else - wants to cheat in a single-player game (even if the game itself has multi-player, but the cheating happens in a single-player campaign) that's my - or their - own business and nobody SHOULD be able to prevent anyone from doing that, let alone BAN based on that.
I hate, hate, HATE cheating in multi-player games. I don't usually do it in a single-player game either, but there have been occasions when I've played a particular game n+1 times through and I just want to have some fun and see what is possible with cheats. This SHOULD BE allowed in all instances, as it does NOT, in any way, shape or form harm - or indeed affect - anyone else's gameplay.
I sincerely hope that system does not flag anyone based on cheats used while playing single-player. At MOST what a system like that should do, is disable on-line functionality while the cheat is in use. Nothing else. At LEAST not BAN anyone based on that, that just insane.
Amen to that. The funny (or sad) thing is, this is too common, even in this age. One of the largest ISPs/Carrier Networks here in Finland has a hilariously stupid password rule set. Note: As much as I'd like it to be, this is not a joke.
1) 8-16 characters. 2) a-z, A-Z, 0-9 ONLY (Note: Although this is a Nordic country, this still excludes our normal day-to-day use letters ä, ö and å. 3) No three same characters in the entire password. NOT sequential or one after the other. In the *whole* password. (So "2rv8b23r09vnbn2" would not do, because "2" is there three times).
4) NO rule for sequential numbers/characters.
What this all comes to, is that the system gladly accepts "12345678" and "abcdefg" as perfectly viable and good passwords, but doesn't allow "j243508vubj234gj", "#a&%B3bv#sdf#" or "correct horse battery staple" to be used.
The parent was just wondering WHY it is still "difficult to understand and difficult to use", if done so as the parent described, the user wouldn't even have to KNOW it was encrypted. If the email software did it automatically, it would not be any more difficult to use than "send a carbon copy", probably even easier because it would only require one checkbox.
There was, once, a program that did exactly that. It integrated PGP encryption/key-exchange very well, so the user was only required to initially input her public key. Probably. I don't remember that much, it was years and years ago. (the app in question was PMMail for OS/2, if anyone was interested.)
Why is parent not modded up? This is exactly what I was thinking when I read the summary. They do say exactly that. Saying that you don't have "ownership" of something means *nothing* if you simultaneously claim perpetual and unlimited rights to said something.
Why? How does that magically alter the device? Assuming by "PC" you mean "desktop", because tablet's literally ARE PCs (personal computers) already...
If you connect a Bluetooth keyboard and a mouse to a Galaxy Tab, why is it suddenly a desktop? Is a laptop computer a desktop if you attach a wireless mouse to it? Where is the line?
If you have a desktop computer, use it to connect and control (via WiFi) the tablet, does the tablet become a desktop? Because at that moment, you are using the tablet with keyboard, mouse and an external monitor? (You can setup this so that the tablet need not be in the same room, or - heck - even same country at all.)
Is it the monitor? If you connect your phone to a TV via HDMI, does the phone become a desktop? Is a laptop computer connected to a secondary monitor a desktop? Where do we draw the line?
What is the iMac? It's only "a monitor" that you use via two wireless (probably) devices.
Personally, I draw the line in that point where you can or can not pick up the actual computer (and use it on the go). (iMac is a desktop because you can't use it anywhere you want.)
For many, many people a tablet that connects to an external monitor (via any means) and has a wireless mouse and a wireless keyboard is enough of a computer that they can use it as their daily driver. They read emails and surf facebook. Perfectly doable with a tablet. If you need to be somewhere else, you just pick up the small slate and go. Does it change from desktop to tablet when you pick it up from the table?
If a Tablet with a keyboard, mouse and monitor is a desktop computer, where is the line between these devices? At which point does the tablet become a desktop?
While I'm in general agreeing with you, I must say your numbers/specs are still *way* off. X3/X4 Phenoms with 4Gb RAM and 500Gb was not *nearly* "low-end" five years ago. Vista was released five years ago. Requirements for that was 1GHz 32bit CPU, 1Gb RAM, 40Gb HDD and a 128Mb video card. "Low-end" was machines that did NOT meet those requirements (I was selling systems at that point. Sold many that didn't meet those). 4Gb RAM isn't "low-end" even NOW. (Or then we have entirely different meaning for "low-end".)
Also, "even the gamers will be looking at only swapping every 6 or 7 years" will probably never be true. 6 or 7 years is forever in computer terms and gamers (no matter how casual you are, if you classify yourself as a "gamer") WILL replace their systems far, FAR more frequently. Even I - that myself consider not being a high-end gamer and only replace my graphics card only once per 4-5 generations - replace my system far more frequently. Remember that last "4 generations" of graphics card was about 2-3 years (about). I just replaced my GTX285 few weeks ago and it was only a tad older than 2 years. My Q9650 CPU is pushing four years and it probably has less than a year life in it in my use. (I play quite a lot, but I don't necessarily play the newest games and play only for fun.) I have yet to meet a person that consider himself a "gamer" that DOESN'T replace their desktops once in 5 years. (At least parts of it.)
I'd agree that if one buys a top-end machine NOW, it will only "need" replacement in, perhaps, five years. But after 6-7? It won't be in "gamer-hands" anymore. Perhaps as a "backup" machine, or a machine that is capable of running most games/reduced settings that you've setup somewhere else (other room, summer house, neighbor's, etc..)
Now, "normal users".. THAT I agree 100%. Those girl-next-door, grannies and uncles, cousins and co-workers who do not play. They don't need to replace their machines until those literally don't start up anymore. I know people who use (daily) computers that came with XP (10 years ago) or even Win98. Heck, a friend of mine used a Mac LC II (that's about 20 years ago) up until 2011 (when the PSU died) as her work-computer (she writes).
I don't think "desktop" is going away anytime soon. Augmented, perhaps. Changed, probably. But gone? No. I'd believe the death of laptops sooner than desktops (tablets/other mobile devices are replacing laptops more than desktops).
It's quite simple, really, when you think about it. "The Desktop" will live exactly as long as companies are producing games for it. After that, it'll take a few declining years for it to fade out, but that's basically it. It is (and always have been) games - and thus companies who create games and gamers who play them - that make or break a success of any computing product.
That's partly quite lousy comparison, because Huawei's smartphones are actually quite good. Their other 3G products are also good. In fact their 3G/4G gateways are amongst the best.
If you factor in value, Huawei's smartphones are essentially there at the top. They are not the best there are, but certainly not the worst. I actually wouldn't mind having a Huawei phone as my primary smartphone. I have used (for awhile, haven't owned) several of their products and they are very, VERY good for their price.
Well, "Elvish" in general maybe, but specifically "Tolkien's Elvish"? No. It is quite correct to say that the books exist because of the language, not the other way around. (Heck, "The Hobbit" started from the need to have a world where "Elen sila lumenn omentielmo", would be a-ok:) For Tolkien, language always came first. Most of "Qenya" (Primitive Quenya) predate all Hobbit/LotR/Silmarillion/etc. books that he wrote.
But, this is kind of Offtopic, so I'll just stop here...
That is probably wildly different from location to location. For example, here in Finland, any store is required by the law to handle any returns/warranty. The store you bought the product from is required and responsible for all exchanges and repairs the product in question needs while under warranty, to the extent that it shall not cost anything to the customer.
It is, however, and always will be shady to still claim something is unlimited if it is inherently not. No amount of rationalization of "expected" or "obvious" limitations will ever change that. If you're offering a finite resource, do not claim it's unlimited with an asterisk explaining the limitations. Offer the service with a proper name. We should not be tolerating this sort of false advertising.
I have to disagree on this, to a point. Namely, I'm willing to let my current subscription to be called unlimited, with asterisk explaining limitations. No, don't yell at me yet, let me explain.
My current plan let's me download unlimited amount of data each month, no throttling, no caps. This truly is unlimited, but with an asterisk. See later.
My plan also doesn't cap my bandwith, at all, ever, but allow unlimited downloading each month, for the whole month. That, also, is truly unlimited, but with the aforementioned asterisk.
Okay, see here. The asterisk: Please note that these are limited with the current technology. The network available here is limited by the hardware and infrastructure to about 15-20Mbps, theoretical. It usually sits anywhere between four and twelve. So the amount of data, while unlimited in the meaning that no company limits your downloads, is still limited to a finite amount by limits in the hardware of the network and the device you are using. You cannot download 34579823475 TB of data each month, since the devices you own and the network provided are physically incapable of such speed that would be required for that amount of data.
If the company who sells the product/service to me does not intentionally limit the use in any way, I'm fine for them to call it "unlimited", even if it comes with an asterisk explaining the limitations of the underlying system.
Actually, not. Compare pirated games
* need to have the crack, if game is updated you always need to wait for the newest crack for the new update before updating.
* Looking for cracks can (and probably will) lead you to viruses and malware
* After cracking, most games STILL only allow you to play offline only, no multiplayer functionality (or sometimes local-mp only, but that's rare).
* Sometimes cracks do not work, or work only partially, so need to search for another, working crack (see point two).
* you need to keep the installer around in case you re-install windows. Also remember that the crack sometimes doesn't work with the new system (32bit vs 64bit, for example.)
to, for example, Steam games, particularly the ones on sale
* no need for any cracks, game always stays updated
* everything perfectly legal
* full experience: multiplayer, local and internet, singleplayer, everything.
* Even if you reinstall, just log in to your Steam account and hit "install", wait and hit "play".
Now, if you ask me, 5 to 20 euros for that simplicity, reliability and easiness isn't that bad. I'd much rather just shell out a few bucks than spend my evening searching for and trying different cracks and installing/re-installing the game in question and afterwards waiting for that new crack for the upcoming patch...
No, they don't probably have programs running that add *no* features to the phone. BUT, the most probably do have programs running in the background that add *non-essential* features to the phone, and thus can be removed safely. And their features added back via Market/SamsungApps, if so desired.
But that "Apparently it doesnt fit though." part.. Yes, apparently that is what they say. Heck, it can even be true, but in that case, I wouldn't be caught confessing I'd be a Samsung programmer. Let's take a step back and take another (yes. bare with me) look at the RAM amounts.
HTC G1, with 192Mb RAM has a GB port and is capable of running it. Search Youtube for dozens of videos. Thus, GB can take a MAXIMUM amount of 192Mb RAM to run on (actual less, because it needs to leave ram for user applications.) HTC Hero, with 288Mb RAM had ICS running on it, available from xda. Thus ICS can take a MAXIMUM amount of 288Mb RAM to run, etc.
Actually, I just discovered, the HTC G1, the very first Android phone, has an ICS port available with almost full functionality (rotation is quoted to not work). Thus, ICS can really only need 192Mb of RAM to work.
Do you actually, honestly believe that a multi-million company producing some of the best Android hardware and software customizations is incapable of getting ICS and TW working with a phone that has 512Mb or RAM? That TW, on top of ICS requires MORE THAN TWICE the amount of RAM it requires when running on top of GB? TW (with ICS) has a potential amount of 320Mb of RAM to play with in the SGS/Tab/W. We know that 256Mb is enough for whole of Gingerbread AND TW it becomes quite unbelievable to accept that with ICS base TW would take 1.5x the amount the former OS and TW need together.
I realize those are the max amounts of ram in the devices and that free RAM is essential to run any programs, but do the math.
I call BS on the explanation. If it is a ROM issue, the flash can be repartitioned quite easily and the devices in question have more than ample space (2Gb) for everything needed. It may be, that "it doesn't fit", but in that case TW is the most un-optimized, bloated pile of loosely-coded crap out there and everyone at Samsung should be deeply ashamed of ever admitting that. Taking a RAM dump of SGS/Tab running CM9 or the other Alpha3 ICS rom and noting down how much ram it uses is the only relatively real way to see how much ICS requires, but I don't believe for a second that the real reason why Samsung is not updating them to ICS has nothing whatsoever to do with SGS/Tab hardware, other than it being old and not netting Sammy any money from sales anymore.
No, I would prefer what HTC did with Desire. They admitted the device had too little space to fit GB and Sense fully with still space available for the customer's own programs. So they did a GB build with Sense, but removed all applications that can be downloaded via Market and a couple of Sense ones that had similar counterparts available from Market. Then, they released via their website with the tag "experimental" and had a disclaimer for users to know what that was and what it wasn't. It was only released as a RUU (Rom Update Utility) and not via OTA. So customers could choose whether to stay with Froyo and all functionality that had, or to start from a clean plate (RUU mandates a factory reset) and have GB with Sense in the knowledge that some features would be lost, but most of it could be downloaded via Market (but would take space from the rest of the apps you'd like).
I'd prefer Samsung did the same. Do an ICS build, lose as much non-essential apps that can be downloaded via Market as possible. Retain launcher and perhaps some graphical customizations, if need be remove some features that take that much memory. (again, I don't really buy that excuse.) Then release that build as an "experimental and unsupported" and put a disclaimer on it that explains what features you would lose. Don't release it via OTA and perhaps not even KIES, but as an ODIN package. That way only users who know what they are doing would get it and in any case it would be flagged as unsupported so they wouldn't have to do anything in the case of trouble.
But, I'll still continue with the memory requirement, as I think it is a load of BS.
HTC Hero, with the huge RAM amount of 288Mb does currently have a fully-functioning, if slow, build of ICS. It also has only 512Mb or ROM space. So ICS fits that 512Mb, still with space to spare for a few apps. I find it very hard to believe TW + ICS would not run an a device with 512Mb RAM (and 2Gb of ROM).
Almost, keyword 'their'. The "old hardware" (Galaxy W is ~2 months old sporting essentially the same hardware) IS capable of running any Android 4.x build out there. It is just that Samsung hasn't been able (or hasn't bothered) to get TouchWiz running on the hardware (on top of ICS). The hardware is perfectly capable and many devices are currently running some flavor of ICS with either unofficial builds available from xda, or official builds available from Google in case of Nexus S. There just isn't any ICS + TW builds out there (for those devices) and probably never will.
There are phones with lesser hardware getting ICS with their manufacturer's respective customizations and apparently those are perfectly capable of running said versions of the OS + customization.
I just can't fathom how TW, according to Samsung's reasoning, would take sooo much ram if fitted on top of ICS vs. GB.
My reasoning goes as so:
Galaxy Xcover, 256Mb RAM, perfectly capable of running GB + TW (and room for running programs) Nexus S, 512Mb RAM, perfectly capable of running ICS (vanilla) + room for running programs. Galaxy S/Tab, 512Mb RAM, perfectly capable of running GB + TW (room for running programs, at least 256Mb more than Xcover, due to amount) if 256Mb is enough for programs + GB + TW, does TW on ICS really take MORE than 256Mb of ram than on GB? If you ask me, that is some sloppy programming there.
No, I don't think the HW matters that much. It is just that Sammy decided to stop "supporting" said hardware and believes people will just buy new hardware if the older is not updated to whatever the customer wants. I don't think that happens as much as they think, but that's only my opinion. I think that whatever monetary losses Sammy would've gotten from developing real ICS for SGS/Tab (and W?) would be thrice paid back by the word-of-mouth advertising of happy customers. Most specifically customers that would've trusted in Samsung and stayed with them for their next purchase. Now, many people will think twice, probably change manufacturers and the word-of-mouth "advertising power" is used to badmouth Sammy, not spread good things about them. Personally I think 'good reputation' > 'immediate monetary gain' in the long run, but, again, just my opinion.
I'm not a developer, but I think it really might've been easier to have ICS on the SGS, just because the Nexus S has ICS and is in practice the same phone. You could've used 99% of the code from Nexus S and just alter it a bit to get it to work on SGS/Tab. The real deal here is TouchWiz. Apparently Samsung's programmers are not worth their salt. The reason was that SGS/Tab wouldn't be able to run ICS+TW because it has so little RAM (only 512M). So rather than try to optimize TW to run with ICS in that 512Mb space, they decided to add more things on top of the already bloated GB+TW.
Oh, and by the way. SGS/Tab are perfectly capable of running ICS with unofficial roms, also with other launchers than vanilla.
tl:dr: Samsung felt that optimizing TW for ICS to run in less than 1Gb was not worth the money, but worth the negative backlash.
There go the mod points, but what the h*ll, I must reply to this.
"Samsung ping-ponged a bit on ICS for the Galaxy-S, but it looks like they'll be go for it after all."
No, absolutely not. If you have followed the debate enough to know about the ping-ponging, you should have followed it more than enough to read that, no Samsung is NOT bringing ICS to SGS/Tab. The proposed "Value Pack" is *nothing more* than a more bloated version of GB. Android 2.3.6 to be exact, saddled with a couple of ICS-like features (Face Unlock, new lockscreen and video editor, some others) that Sammy thinks will magically make the users happy.
It is not, I repeat, NOT based on Android 4.x in any way, and thus does not bring any sort of compatibility with Android 3.x/4.x apps at all. Which, in my opinion, would have been the primary concern with the update. Perhaps not so much with SGS, but more so with the Tab that is now largely incompatible with almost all tablet-optimized software.
Slashdot Mirror
Actively selling the chemicals to do so along with an instruction book detailing how to make meth and advertising yourself as the place to go for all your meth making needs is another.
While we are addressing details, I'd correct that to:
Actively giving and address to a shop that sells the chemicals (selling the chemicals) to do so along with a name and a phone number for a guy who will give you and instruction book (an instruction book) detailing how to make meth and advertising yourself as the place to go for all your meth making needs is another.
(originals in parenthesis).
I repeat myself, but: piratebay DOES NOT (nor did ever) host the actual "material", just a means to get it. It's not exactly like "links on Google" (because -torrent files contain much more than just a hyperlink), but it IS far less than actually hosting the material.
I don't say he didn't advocate piracy (he probably did), but he did not, in fact, actually host any of the actual data.
Mod parent up! This is something people (also here) seem to overlook/forget. Like someone compared an "anonymous posting" on Slashdot to a "piece of art" on Piratebay as data, it does NOT hold water. Piratebay does NOT and NEVER did host the actual "data", just a "link" to it. Slashdot actually holds MORE "copyrightable data" (yeah, I know) than piratebay ever did. Like the parent said, torrent files ONLY contain metadata, NOT the actual "data" that is being downloaded.
It's now exactly the same, but Piratebay is WAY closer to Google than Slashdot when compared to what data it hosts.
Thanks for the daily laugh :D :D
That's exactly that :D
And it will. Trust me on this :)
A *long* time ago (BBS-time, before the 'net), I went by the name 'Nightwing' (and I still like that song) that came from an old D&D (pen & paper) monster's translation. As soon as "online" became more common and I frequented things like IRC, that very, VERY shortly became "night" on "nw". Therefore I shortened it to "Nite", which seemed to go ok and was very rarely shortened to anything. Once or twice with "N". I use that occasionally even today, but mostly after sometime I hit 20s I somehow figured nicknames are not THAT great. I thought that, well I do have a "real" name, why not just use that...
And yes, even that gets shortened usually. Even in real life.
This is generally true (probably, I haven't done any scientific testing) and because of that any analysts and/or analytic program assume as much - which is why almost 95% of the time those instances define me as a female based on social behaviour in games/chats and texts that I write (stories, etc).
So while it is fairly simple to do it that way, it is also assuming too much as people are rarely, if ever, so one-sided that any clinical analysis could determine their age or sex short of looking into their pants. (which doesn't always work either, so what the heck :)
That's all fine and well and I don't have any problems with that... provided that system is ONLY activated for multi-player games. If I - or anyone else - wants to cheat in a single-player game (even if the game itself has multi-player, but the cheating happens in a single-player campaign) that's my - or their - own business and nobody SHOULD be able to prevent anyone from doing that, let alone BAN based on that.
I hate, hate, HATE cheating in multi-player games. I don't usually do it in a single-player game either, but there have been occasions when I've played a particular game n+1 times through and I just want to have some fun and see what is possible with cheats. This SHOULD BE allowed in all instances, as it does NOT, in any way, shape or form harm - or indeed affect - anyone else's gameplay.
I sincerely hope that system does not flag anyone based on cheats used while playing single-player. At MOST what a system like that should do, is disable on-line functionality while the cheat is in use. Nothing else. At LEAST not BAN anyone based on that, that just insane.
Please, can you dispose of all the Nazis living there currently and try to disrupts their plans to work with the Aliens?
Can we please have a "+100 Sarcasm" mod choice? This needs it.
Amen to that. The funny (or sad) thing is, this is too common, even in this age. One of the largest ISPs/Carrier Networks here in Finland has a hilariously stupid password rule set. Note: As much as I'd like it to be, this is not a joke.
1) 8-16 characters.
2) a-z, A-Z, 0-9 ONLY (Note: Although this is a Nordic country, this still excludes our normal day-to-day use letters ä, ö and å.
3) No three same characters in the entire password. NOT sequential or one after the other. In the *whole* password. (So "2rv8b23r09vnbn2" would not do, because "2" is there three times).
4) NO rule for sequential numbers/characters.
What this all comes to, is that the system gladly accepts "12345678" and "abcdefg" as perfectly viable and good passwords, but doesn't allow "j243508vubj234gj", "#a&%B3bv#sdf#" or "correct horse battery staple" to be used.
The parent was just wondering WHY it is still "difficult to understand and difficult to use", if done so as the parent described, the user wouldn't even have to KNOW it was encrypted. If the email software did it automatically, it would not be any more difficult to use than "send a carbon copy", probably even easier because it would only require one checkbox.
There was, once, a program that did exactly that. It integrated PGP encryption/key-exchange very well, so the user was only required to initially input her public key. Probably. I don't remember that much, it was years and years ago. (the app in question was PMMail for OS/2, if anyone was interested.)
Why is parent not modded up? This is exactly what I was thinking when I read the summary. They do say exactly that. Saying that you don't have "ownership" of something means *nothing* if you simultaneously claim perpetual and unlimited rights to said something.
But it would work perfectly for surfing porn, because "wow nice tits" is exactly what you'd want...
Why? How does that magically alter the device? Assuming by "PC" you mean "desktop", because tablet's literally ARE PCs (personal computers) already...
If you connect a Bluetooth keyboard and a mouse to a Galaxy Tab, why is it suddenly a desktop? Is a laptop computer a desktop if you attach a wireless mouse to it? Where is the line?
If you have a desktop computer, use it to connect and control (via WiFi) the tablet, does the tablet become a desktop? Because at that moment, you are using the tablet with keyboard, mouse and an external monitor? (You can setup this so that the tablet need not be in the same room, or - heck - even same country at all.)
Is it the monitor? If you connect your phone to a TV via HDMI, does the phone become a desktop? Is a laptop computer connected to a secondary monitor a desktop? Where do we draw the line?
What is the iMac? It's only "a monitor" that you use via two wireless (probably) devices.
Personally, I draw the line in that point where you can or can not pick up the actual computer (and use it on the go). (iMac is a desktop because you can't use it anywhere you want.)
For many, many people a tablet that connects to an external monitor (via any means) and has a wireless mouse and a wireless keyboard is enough of a computer that they can use it as their daily driver. They read emails and surf facebook. Perfectly doable with a tablet. If you need to be somewhere else, you just pick up the small slate and go. Does it change from desktop to tablet when you pick it up from the table?
If a Tablet with a keyboard, mouse and monitor is a desktop computer, where is the line between these devices? At which point does the tablet become a desktop?
While I'm in general agreeing with you, I must say your numbers/specs are still *way* off. X3/X4 Phenoms with 4Gb RAM and 500Gb was not *nearly* "low-end" five years ago. Vista was released five years ago. Requirements for that was 1GHz 32bit CPU, 1Gb RAM, 40Gb HDD and a 128Mb video card. "Low-end" was machines that did NOT meet those requirements (I was selling systems at that point. Sold many that didn't meet those). 4Gb RAM isn't "low-end" even NOW. (Or then we have entirely different meaning for "low-end".)
Also, "even the gamers will be looking at only swapping every 6 or 7 years" will probably never be true. 6 or 7 years is forever in computer terms and gamers (no matter how casual you are, if you classify yourself as a "gamer") WILL replace their systems far, FAR more frequently. Even I - that myself consider not being a high-end gamer and only replace my graphics card only once per 4-5 generations - replace my system far more frequently. Remember that last "4 generations" of graphics card was about 2-3 years (about). I just replaced my GTX285 few weeks ago and it was only a tad older than 2 years. My Q9650 CPU is pushing four years and it probably has less than a year life in it in my use. (I play quite a lot, but I don't necessarily play the newest games and play only for fun.) I have yet to meet a person that consider himself a "gamer" that DOESN'T replace their desktops once in 5 years. (At least parts of it.)
I'd agree that if one buys a top-end machine NOW, it will only "need" replacement in, perhaps, five years. But after 6-7? It won't be in "gamer-hands" anymore. Perhaps as a "backup" machine, or a machine that is capable of running most games/reduced settings that you've setup somewhere else (other room, summer house, neighbor's, etc..)
Now, "normal users".. THAT I agree 100%. Those girl-next-door, grannies and uncles, cousins and co-workers who do not play. They don't need to replace their machines until those literally don't start up anymore. I know people who use (daily) computers that came with XP (10 years ago) or even Win98. Heck, a friend of mine used a Mac LC II (that's about 20 years ago) up until 2011 (when the PSU died) as her work-computer (she writes).
I don't think "desktop" is going away anytime soon. Augmented, perhaps. Changed, probably. But gone? No. I'd believe the death of laptops sooner than desktops (tablets/other mobile devices are replacing laptops more than desktops).
It's quite simple, really, when you think about it. "The Desktop" will live exactly as long as companies are producing games for it. After that, it'll take a few declining years for it to fade out, but that's basically it. It is (and always have been) games - and thus companies who create games and gamers who play them - that make or break a success of any computing product.
That's partly quite lousy comparison, because Huawei's smartphones are actually quite good. Their other 3G products are also good. In fact their 3G/4G gateways are amongst the best.
If you factor in value, Huawei's smartphones are essentially there at the top. They are not the best there are, but certainly not the worst. I actually wouldn't mind having a Huawei phone as my primary smartphone. I have used (for awhile, haven't owned) several of their products and they are very, VERY good for their price.
Well, "Elvish" in general maybe, but specifically "Tolkien's Elvish"? No. It is quite correct to say that the books exist because of the language, not the other way around. (Heck, "The Hobbit" started from the need to have a world where "Elen sila lumenn omentielmo", would be a-ok :) For Tolkien, language always came first. Most of "Qenya" (Primitive Quenya) predate all Hobbit/LotR/Silmarillion/etc. books that he wrote.
But, this is kind of Offtopic, so I'll just stop here...
That is probably wildly different from location to location. For example, here in Finland, any store is required by the law to handle any returns/warranty. The store you bought the product from is required and responsible for all exchanges and repairs the product in question needs while under warranty, to the extent that it shall not cost anything to the customer.
[clipped]
It is, however, and always will be shady to still claim something is unlimited if it is inherently not. No amount of rationalization of "expected" or "obvious" limitations will ever change that. If you're offering a finite resource, do not claim it's unlimited with an asterisk explaining the limitations. Offer the service with a proper name. We should not be tolerating this sort of false advertising.
I have to disagree on this, to a point. Namely, I'm willing to let my current subscription to be called unlimited, with asterisk explaining limitations. No, don't yell at me yet, let me explain.
My current plan let's me download unlimited amount of data each month, no throttling, no caps. This truly is unlimited, but with an asterisk. See later.
My plan also doesn't cap my bandwith, at all, ever, but allow unlimited downloading each month, for the whole month. That, also, is truly unlimited, but with the aforementioned asterisk.
Okay, see here. The asterisk: Please note that these are limited with the current technology. The network available here is limited by the hardware and infrastructure to about 15-20Mbps, theoretical. It usually sits anywhere between four and twelve. So the amount of data, while unlimited in the meaning that no company limits your downloads, is still limited to a finite amount by limits in the hardware of the network and the device you are using. You cannot download 34579823475 TB of data each month, since the devices you own and the network provided are physically incapable of such speed that would be required for that amount of data.
If the company who sells the product/service to me does not intentionally limit the use in any way, I'm fine for them to call it "unlimited", even if it comes with an asterisk explaining the limitations of the underlying system.
Actually, not. Compare pirated games
* need to have the crack, if game is updated you always need to wait for the newest crack for the new update before updating.
* Looking for cracks can (and probably will) lead you to viruses and malware
* After cracking, most games STILL only allow you to play offline only, no multiplayer functionality (or sometimes local-mp only, but that's rare).
* Sometimes cracks do not work, or work only partially, so need to search for another, working crack (see point two).
* you need to keep the installer around in case you re-install windows. Also remember that the crack sometimes doesn't work with the new system (32bit vs 64bit, for example.)
to, for example, Steam games, particularly the ones on sale
* no need for any cracks, game always stays updated
* everything perfectly legal
* full experience: multiplayer, local and internet, singleplayer, everything.
* Even if you reinstall, just log in to your Steam account and hit "install", wait and hit "play".
Now, if you ask me, 5 to 20 euros for that simplicity, reliability and easiness isn't that bad. I'd much rather just shell out a few bucks than spend my evening searching for and trying different cracks and installing/re-installing the game in question and afterwards waiting for that new crack for the upcoming patch...
No, they don't probably have programs running that add *no* features to the phone. BUT, the most probably do have programs running in the background that add *non-essential* features to the phone, and thus can be removed safely. And their features added back via Market/SamsungApps, if so desired.
But that "Apparently it doesnt fit though." part.. Yes, apparently that is what they say. Heck, it can even be true, but in that case, I wouldn't be caught confessing I'd be a Samsung programmer. Let's take a step back and take another (yes. bare with me) look at the RAM amounts.
HTC G1, with 192Mb RAM has a GB port and is capable of running it. Search Youtube for dozens of videos. Thus, GB can take a MAXIMUM amount of 192Mb RAM to run on (actual less, because it needs to leave ram for user applications.)
HTC Hero, with 288Mb RAM had ICS running on it, available from xda. Thus ICS can take a MAXIMUM amount of 288Mb RAM to run, etc.
Actually, I just discovered, the HTC G1, the very first Android phone, has an ICS port available with almost full functionality (rotation is quoted to not work). Thus, ICS can really only need 192Mb of RAM to work.
Do you actually, honestly believe that a multi-million company producing some of the best Android hardware and software customizations is incapable of getting ICS and TW working with a phone that has 512Mb or RAM? That TW, on top of ICS requires MORE THAN TWICE the amount of RAM it requires when running on top of GB? TW (with ICS) has a potential amount of 320Mb of RAM to play with in the SGS/Tab/W. We know that 256Mb is enough for whole of Gingerbread AND TW it becomes quite unbelievable to accept that with ICS base TW would take 1.5x the amount the former OS and TW need together.
I realize those are the max amounts of ram in the devices and that free RAM is essential to run any programs, but do the math.
I call BS on the explanation. If it is a ROM issue, the flash can be repartitioned quite easily and the devices in question have more than ample space (2Gb) for everything needed. It may be, that "it doesn't fit", but in that case TW is the most un-optimized, bloated pile of loosely-coded crap out there and everyone at Samsung should be deeply ashamed of ever admitting that. Taking a RAM dump of SGS/Tab running CM9 or the other Alpha3 ICS rom and noting down how much ram it uses is the only relatively real way to see how much ICS requires, but I don't believe for a second that the real reason why Samsung is not updating them to ICS has nothing whatsoever to do with SGS/Tab hardware, other than it being old and not netting Sammy any money from sales anymore.
True, all of that. I'm waiting for the day CM9 will be released for the Tab. (And as a bonus, I don't need to see any more of that TW.. ;)
But, barring any miracles, CM9 will still be slower than an official build by Samsung by virtue of not having HW acceleration.
Now, if Samsung went and released the source code for SGS/Tab hardware drivers... (fat chance, but that would be the best now).
No, I would prefer what HTC did with Desire. They admitted the device had too little space to fit GB and Sense fully with still space available for the customer's own programs. So they did a GB build with Sense, but removed all applications that can be downloaded via Market and a couple of Sense ones that had similar counterparts available from Market. Then, they released via their website with the tag "experimental" and had a disclaimer for users to know what that was and what it wasn't. It was only released as a RUU (Rom Update Utility) and not via OTA. So customers could choose whether to stay with Froyo and all functionality that had, or to start from a clean plate (RUU mandates a factory reset) and have GB with Sense in the knowledge that some features would be lost, but most of it could be downloaded via Market (but would take space from the rest of the apps you'd like).
I'd prefer Samsung did the same. Do an ICS build, lose as much non-essential apps that can be downloaded via Market as possible. Retain launcher and perhaps some graphical customizations, if need be remove some features that take that much memory. (again, I don't really buy that excuse.) Then release that build as an "experimental and unsupported" and put a disclaimer on it that explains what features you would lose. Don't release it via OTA and perhaps not even KIES, but as an ODIN package. That way only users who know what they are doing would get it and in any case it would be flagged as unsupported so they wouldn't have to do anything in the case of trouble.
But, I'll still continue with the memory requirement, as I think it is a load of BS.
HTC Hero, with the huge RAM amount of 288Mb does currently have a fully-functioning, if slow, build of ICS. It also has only 512Mb or ROM space. So ICS fits that 512Mb, still with space to spare for a few apps. I find it very hard to believe TW + ICS would not run an a device with 512Mb RAM (and 2Gb of ROM).
Almost, keyword 'their'. The "old hardware" (Galaxy W is ~2 months old sporting essentially the same hardware) IS capable of running any Android 4.x build out there. It is just that Samsung hasn't been able (or hasn't bothered) to get TouchWiz running on the hardware (on top of ICS). The hardware is perfectly capable and many devices are currently running some flavor of ICS with either unofficial builds available from xda, or official builds available from Google in case of Nexus S. There just isn't any ICS + TW builds out there (for those devices) and probably never will.
There are phones with lesser hardware getting ICS with their manufacturer's respective customizations and apparently those are perfectly capable of running said versions of the OS + customization.
I just can't fathom how TW, according to Samsung's reasoning, would take sooo much ram if fitted on top of ICS vs. GB.
My reasoning goes as so:
Galaxy Xcover, 256Mb RAM, perfectly capable of running GB + TW (and room for running programs)
Nexus S, 512Mb RAM, perfectly capable of running ICS (vanilla) + room for running programs.
Galaxy S/Tab, 512Mb RAM, perfectly capable of running GB + TW (room for running programs, at least 256Mb more than Xcover, due to amount)
if 256Mb is enough for programs + GB + TW, does TW on ICS really take MORE than 256Mb of ram than on GB? If you ask me, that is some sloppy programming there.
No, I don't think the HW matters that much. It is just that Sammy decided to stop "supporting" said hardware and believes people will just buy new hardware if the older is not updated to whatever the customer wants. I don't think that happens as much as they think, but that's only my opinion. I think that whatever monetary losses Sammy would've gotten from developing real ICS for SGS/Tab (and W?) would be thrice paid back by the word-of-mouth advertising of happy customers. Most specifically customers that would've trusted in Samsung and stayed with them for their next purchase. Now, many people will think twice, probably change manufacturers and the word-of-mouth "advertising power" is used to badmouth Sammy, not spread good things about them. Personally I think 'good reputation' > 'immediate monetary gain' in the long run, but, again, just my opinion.
I'm not a developer, but I think it really might've been easier to have ICS on the SGS, just because the Nexus S has ICS and is in practice the same phone. You could've used 99% of the code from Nexus S and just alter it a bit to get it to work on SGS/Tab. The real deal here is TouchWiz. Apparently Samsung's programmers are not worth their salt. The reason was that SGS/Tab wouldn't be able to run ICS+TW because it has so little RAM (only 512M). So rather than try to optimize TW to run with ICS in that 512Mb space, they decided to add more things on top of the already bloated GB+TW.
Oh, and by the way. SGS/Tab are perfectly capable of running ICS with unofficial roms, also with other launchers than vanilla.
tl:dr: Samsung felt that optimizing TW for ICS to run in less than 1Gb was not worth the money, but worth the negative backlash.
Not a wise choice, if you ask me.
There go the mod points, but what the h*ll, I must reply to this.
"Samsung ping-ponged a bit on ICS for the Galaxy-S, but it looks like they'll be go for it after all."
No, absolutely not. If you have followed the debate enough to know about the ping-ponging, you should have followed it more than enough to read that, no Samsung is NOT bringing ICS to SGS/Tab. The proposed "Value Pack" is *nothing more* than a more bloated version of GB. Android 2.3.6 to be exact, saddled with a couple of ICS-like features (Face Unlock, new lockscreen and video editor, some others) that Sammy thinks will magically make the users happy.
It is not, I repeat, NOT based on Android 4.x in any way, and thus does not bring any sort of compatibility with Android 3.x/4.x apps at all. Which, in my opinion, would have been the primary concern with the update. Perhaps not so much with SGS, but more so with the Tab that is now largely incompatible with almost all tablet-optimized software.