While I will concede the point they sold the sizzle and not the steak (brilliant phrasing BTW), I don't necessarily agree with the point that the iPhone is the fillet. In light of the fact that their hardware has always been near the middle of the pack in the market but their price points have always been near the top I think they are selling flank and calling it fillet.
So how do you key things in at only 20 wpm and type at 80 wpm? I kind of think you are taking this a little too personal, plus you sound like you're full of shit.
So are trying to say that tablets will never have an input method for complex equations? The point I'm trying to make is that nearly any input method can be adapted to. I wasn't trying to say that my daughter can text complex functions, but I bet she could have texted your response on her phone faster than you typed it with your keyboard. Once an efficient method of tablet input for those functions is created then your point of "I have a button" will be moot.
Input speed can always be adapted to. I would put money on the fact that my 15 year old daughter can T9 text on her phone faster than you can type. Once you adapt to a new technology, input speeds are negligible.
It's a terrible state of affairs when this is more true than not. Unfortunately, the only part of American law that is internationalized are the parts that benefit the corporations...
The advertising/business influence are the parts of big pharma that are so corrupt. Those are the wings that claim they need so much money for R&D but then consistently have advertising budgets and executive compensation that is 2-3x their R&D Budgets. They are also the wings that fight so hard to keep a profitable drugs like viagra or prilosec out of the hands of generic manufacturers so they can be affordable when people really need them. They are also the wings that fight to have their congress critters go after foreign manufacturers for trying to make affordable AIDS drugs for the people that really need it and really can't pay for it. Yes, big pharma does do some good, but it's not like their altruistic in their motives. The scientists that actually do the research might be, but not the parts of the company that make it big pharma to begin with.
I see the point you are trying to make, but I don't necessarily agree. Someone might feel that you are harassing them by throwing bottles at a building they happen to be in or if they happen to like the building you are throwing the bottles at.
I guess really you're defining the difference between being obnoxious and assaulting some one. Throwing bottles does actual harm where most online activity is really just obnoxious regardless of how pointed the language may get.
That's why the became psychologists in the first place. They hope to fix the world because they identify so closely with the defects they see in everyone else.
I kind of disagree in a certain regard. In the state I live, the majority party in the legislature does most of its business behind closed doors. There is pretty steady coverage about how this is kind of BS and violates their own rules, but as the reps all have an R behind their name and most of their voters are inbred farmers, religious zealots, and hillbillies they just blame it on the "liberal news media" and vote them back in the perpetuate the corruption.
Slashdot Mirror
They are obviously not buying Dells then.
Mod Parent up +1 insighful
I don't know, not all lip reading is so clear cut
It's really kind of easy to see who really has the agenda here with the ad hominem attack.
No shit. It was a great use of the phrase.
That's just another feature.
Angry birds is a touchscreen phone's biggest selling point. What will the world do now?
While I will concede the point they sold the sizzle and not the steak (brilliant phrasing BTW), I don't necessarily agree with the point that the iPhone is the fillet. In light of the fact that their hardware has always been near the middle of the pack in the market but their price points have always been near the top I think they are selling flank and calling it fillet.
So how do you key things in at only 20 wpm and type at 80 wpm? I kind of think you are taking this a little too personal, plus you sound like you're full of shit.
So are trying to say that tablets will never have an input method for complex equations? The point I'm trying to make is that nearly any input method can be adapted to. I wasn't trying to say that my daughter can text complex functions, but I bet she could have texted your response on her phone faster than you typed it with your keyboard. Once an efficient method of tablet input for those functions is created then your point of "I have a button" will be moot.
A lot of that money is predicated on some pretty bad terms that benefit his buddies.
I'd like to see some citation on that one. It seems like you just don't like the man and are making excuses for it.
Input speed can always be adapted to. I would put money on the fact that my 15 year old daughter can T9 text on her phone faster than you can type. Once you adapt to a new technology, input speeds are negligible.
It's a terrible state of affairs when this is more true than not. Unfortunately, the only part of American law that is internationalized are the parts that benefit the corporations...
That is when you settle, regardless of whether you are right or wrong.
Ok viagra was a bad example, even though it is often used to treat heart problems.
The advertising/business influence are the parts of big pharma that are so corrupt. Those are the wings that claim they need so much money for R&D but then consistently have advertising budgets and executive compensation that is 2-3x their R&D Budgets. They are also the wings that fight so hard to keep a profitable drugs like viagra or prilosec out of the hands of generic manufacturers so they can be affordable when people really need them. They are also the wings that fight to have their congress critters go after foreign manufacturers for trying to make affordable AIDS drugs for the people that really need it and really can't pay for it. Yes, big pharma does do some good, but it's not like their altruistic in their motives. The scientists that actually do the research might be, but not the parts of the company that make it big pharma to begin with.
I see the point you are trying to make, but I don't necessarily agree. Someone might feel that you are harassing them by throwing bottles at a building they happen to be in or if they happen to like the building you are throwing the bottles at.
I guess really you're defining the difference between being obnoxious and assaulting some one. Throwing bottles does actual harm where most online activity is really just obnoxious regardless of how pointed the language may get.
doing god's work, or supporting terrorism.
I don't see how those are actually 2 different things.
So what is the difference between harassing and being obnoxious?
It would bother me if my sole purpose wasn't be just look pretty and be an object of desire.
Wow, talk about hyperbole.
Based on the tacking cookies in your browser!
This. Someone mod parent up please.
That's why the became psychologists in the first place. They hope to fix the world because they identify so closely with the defects they see in everyone else.
I kind of disagree in a certain regard. In the state I live, the majority party in the legislature does most of its business behind closed doors. There is pretty steady coverage about how this is kind of BS and violates their own rules, but as the reps all have an R behind their name and most of their voters are inbred farmers, religious zealots, and hillbillies they just blame it on the "liberal news media" and vote them back in the perpetuate the corruption.