Why would having $200 worth of apps be a problem? Just a really good dictionary app (with great etymologies) can cost $30. I have a great personal wiki app that cost $6. I use anki, and while I can't recall the cost it was somewhere in the $30 range. I have tons of boardgame apps and each of those costs around $5. Getting up to the $200 range after nearly 10 years of having a smartphone is very easy.
I've been using iPhones since 2008 since my work pays for them. At this point I have tons of apps that I've purchased (and that I use) that I would not want to repurchase if I moved to Android. If google was to say "if you purchase a Pixel, and if the iOS apps you own also exist in the play store, we will pay for the apps, this is a one time deal between this date and this date" then I'd jump on over.
I'm sorry about your photos. Just yesterday I finished gathering up the last of our paper photos and negatives to ship off to be digitized. This is the third, and last, digitizing set I am sending off. It was a relief to be almost finished and to know that soon all of our photos will have been digitized. Now the only thing I have to worry about is something happening to the digital copies. That is why I keep everything automatically backed up to five different drives in four different locations in three different states.
This is true. We take more pictures in a month that we used to take in a year. For instance we took 417 photos in all of1998, in August of 1995 we took 3,145 photos. However, what I do is I first organize the photos by year and by month in one place. Then within each month I create folders such as "yellowstone", "dogs", "dance recital", or whatever makes sense and put the related photos into those folders. Once a year is complete (i.e., it is now January of 2017 and I know that we will not be creating anymore 2016 photos) I copy that years worth of photos to another location. Then I go through each folder and delete all the crap photos (or alternately, only keep the photos that I'd be willing to print out). Each photo directory (the all photos directory and the curated photos directory) is automatically backed up each day to five different drives in four different location, three of which are not in the same state.
Just last night I was gathering up the last of our paper photos and negatives to ship off to be digitized. There was a number of photographs where I had no idea who was in the picture, but when I flipped them over someone had written on the back the who, where, and when of the pictures. That led me to wonder how I should capture that information with the digital pictures? I don't trust image metadata as far as I can throw it (I've seen far too many image programs that overwrite and delete image metadata to ever trust it). I thought about putting the information into a text file stored in the same folder as the images, but what if someone changes the image names or moves the images somewhere else without realizing that the text file should go along with it. Basically I'm not satisfied with the text file idea either. Frankly I haven't come up with a third option. I think the ideal solution would be image metadata, but there would have to be some way of locking the data so that it is impossible for anyone or anything to alter it or delete it. Perhaps what I need is a Git repository for images.
I don't even expect the New York Times or the editors/journalists that work for it to be ethical, why in the world would I be expected to be outraged that a website I've never heard of has unethical editors/journalists working for it? Is anyone seriously surprised by this? What is the news story?
"really a surprise to anyone not affiliated with the **AAs." I disagree. I don't think it is really a surprise to anyone not affiliated with the **AAs.
Wait, who is asking for thinner? The thing is already so thin that I could snap it in half with my bare hands. How about going thicker and doubling the batter life?
This is google we are talking about. I'm sure they have tons of data about what people were actually watching while monopolizing the devices. My guess is there data shows that it was not pussycat videos that were being watched.
I'm the opposite. I watched some episodes from each of the Star Trek TV series and I think I saw most of the movies, but it never really caught my fancy. But I've _really_ enjoyed the rebooted Star Trek movies. Speaking to other I've found that most Trekkies really don't like the Star Trek reboot, while those who were not Trekkies before like the rebooted movies. Maybe that indicates the rebooted movies aren't "real" Star Trek. I don't really know since I've never been a Trekkie;-)
I agree in principle, but my work pays for my phone and lets me upgrade every 12 months so I take advantage of it even when my "old" phone is perfectly serviceable. However if I was having to pay out of my own pocket I'd probably never have a smartphone to begin with;-) People are shocked to learn that my wife does not have a phone, but we simply aren't willing to pay the exorbitant prices (either for the phones or for the data plans). Shockingly it turns out to be perfectly possible to survive in this world without a cell phone.
I'm interested in this. The main reason I haven't looked at installing solar panels (other than the fact that it is cloudy 9 months out of the year where I live) is that my roof is about 5 years from needing to be replaced.
I've heard of AWS and Azure, but to be honest I didn't even know Google had a cloud platform. I still don't even know what it is called. I could probably google that.
The only time I have ever actually seen the threat level posted in public was on the front window of a gas station just off the I-84 in Eastern Oregon. I thought it was amusing.
Slashdot Mirror
Why would having $200 worth of apps be a problem? Just a really good dictionary app (with great etymologies) can cost $30. I have a great personal wiki app that cost $6. I use anki, and while I can't recall the cost it was somewhere in the $30 range. I have tons of boardgame apps and each of those costs around $5. Getting up to the $200 range after nearly 10 years of having a smartphone is very easy.
I've been using iPhones since 2008 since my work pays for them. At this point I have tons of apps that I've purchased (and that I use) that I would not want to repurchase if I moved to Android. If google was to say "if you purchase a Pixel, and if the iOS apps you own also exist in the play store, we will pay for the apps, this is a one time deal between this date and this date" then I'd jump on over.
I'm sorry about your photos. Just yesterday I finished gathering up the last of our paper photos and negatives to ship off to be digitized. This is the third, and last, digitizing set I am sending off. It was a relief to be almost finished and to know that soon all of our photos will have been digitized. Now the only thing I have to worry about is something happening to the digital copies. That is why I keep everything automatically backed up to five different drives in four different locations in three different states.
This is true. We take more pictures in a month that we used to take in a year. For instance we took 417 photos in all of1998, in August of 1995 we took 3,145 photos. However, what I do is I first organize the photos by year and by month in one place. Then within each month I create folders such as "yellowstone", "dogs", "dance recital", or whatever makes sense and put the related photos into those folders. Once a year is complete (i.e., it is now January of 2017 and I know that we will not be creating anymore 2016 photos) I copy that years worth of photos to another location. Then I go through each folder and delete all the crap photos (or alternately, only keep the photos that I'd be willing to print out). Each photo directory (the all photos directory and the curated photos directory) is automatically backed up each day to five different drives in four different location, three of which are not in the same state.
Just last night I was gathering up the last of our paper photos and negatives to ship off to be digitized. There was a number of photographs where I had no idea who was in the picture, but when I flipped them over someone had written on the back the who, where, and when of the pictures. That led me to wonder how I should capture that information with the digital pictures? I don't trust image metadata as far as I can throw it (I've seen far too many image programs that overwrite and delete image metadata to ever trust it). I thought about putting the information into a text file stored in the same folder as the images, but what if someone changes the image names or moves the images somewhere else without realizing that the text file should go along with it. Basically I'm not satisfied with the text file idea either. Frankly I haven't come up with a third option. I think the ideal solution would be image metadata, but there would have to be some way of locking the data so that it is impossible for anyone or anything to alter it or delete it. Perhaps what I need is a Git repository for images.
I don't even expect the New York Times or the editors/journalists that work for it to be ethical, why in the world would I be expected to be outraged that a website I've never heard of has unethical editors/journalists working for it? Is anyone seriously surprised by this? What is the news story?
I feel the same way about my Google Nexus phone.
"really a surprise to anyone not affiliated with the **AAs." I disagree. I don't think it is really a surprise to anyone not affiliated with the **AAs.
Wait, I thought that was Facebook's tagline.
Wait, who is asking for thinner? The thing is already so thin that I could snap it in half with my bare hands. How about going thicker and doubling the batter life?
Try wife or honey.
I would have expected it to be much much higher.
I think he misspelled coma, as in what you will be in after using this system ;-)
This is google we are talking about. I'm sure they have tons of data about what people were actually watching while monopolizing the devices. My guess is there data shows that it was not pussycat videos that were being watched.
Well, they do like to work with Nike. Do you want an Apple Air phone to go with your Nike Air shoes?
[Raises hand] Me?
I'm the opposite. I watched some episodes from each of the Star Trek TV series and I think I saw most of the movies, but it never really caught my fancy. But I've _really_ enjoyed the rebooted Star Trek movies. Speaking to other I've found that most Trekkies really don't like the Star Trek reboot, while those who were not Trekkies before like the rebooted movies. Maybe that indicates the rebooted movies aren't "real" Star Trek. I don't really know since I've never been a Trekkie ;-)
Any clue what the naming convention will be after Zany Zebra?
Isn't helium that same stuff needed for MRI machines that I keep hearing is in short supply?
I agree in principle, but my work pays for my phone and lets me upgrade every 12 months so I take advantage of it even when my "old" phone is perfectly serviceable. However if I was having to pay out of my own pocket I'd probably never have a smartphone to begin with ;-) People are shocked to learn that my wife does not have a phone, but we simply aren't willing to pay the exorbitant prices (either for the phones or for the data plans). Shockingly it turns out to be perfectly possible to survive in this world without a cell phone.
I'm interested in this. The main reason I haven't looked at installing solar panels (other than the fact that it is cloudy 9 months out of the year where I live) is that my roof is about 5 years from needing to be replaced.
Same thing with the iPhone. I would like an iPhone that is thicker because it has a bigger battery that lasts twice as long.
I've heard of AWS and Azure, but to be honest I didn't even know Google had a cloud platform. I still don't even know what it is called. I could probably google that.
What about someone like Nike? I don't think they are an Olympic sponsor, but I bet their pockets are deep enough to fight this.
The only time I have ever actually seen the threat level posted in public was on the front window of a gas station just off the I-84 in Eastern Oregon. I thought it was amusing.