There's a significant difference between the people needed to do what Google is having done in the US, essentially operating a screwdriver - a job that doesn't require literacy, skill, or really even sight - and other types of manufacturing that resemble skilled labor more closely.
I think this is another example of Google good, Apple bad. They're both doing the same thing, leading consumers to believe that more is happening in the USA than really is, or that some kind of good technical job is created by the manufacture of the device.
The reality is, final assembly is menial work at minimal pay. There really isn't a shortage of menial work at minimal pay in the US right now, it's more a case of a shortage of people who will work at those terms.
In terms of altruism for the American people as a whole, where does this rate? Pretty much a dead heat with where we'd be if they did final assembly at Hon Hai, and instead ran a chain of thousands of retail outlet stores employing people at menial work and paying all kinds of taxes and driving other retail traffic.
I think the problem most people are concerned with is all these Android devices get orphaned by their manufacturers after a release or two, so you're probably going to be stuck at some point and eventually you won't be able to run the newest apps.
I don't think it is an issue of capability. You can watch movies on all these things. You can check email and surf and post on twitter.
The problem is that there is no innovation going on here on the Android side. The Android devices all are trying to be "Well it's no an iWhatever, but it's good enough and it's a bit cheaper". Where is the 10" screen tablet at a similar price point and hardware specs? That's really all it would take, and yet we still have none.
Now a few years later we have moved on from "meh" copies of Apple to trying to copy Amazon? This doesn't make any sense to me.
People want an iPad with Android on it. That's all. It's really just that simple. Why shuffle the deck chairs? Give people what they want.
"Sources close to Microsoft have told us that the software giant built Surface because it was unhappy with the way its traditional partners [such as HP and Dell] weren't innovating around its next-generation operating system."
I wonder why manufacturers might not be "innovating around" windows mobile, or whatever they call it these days. Because there isn't any demand...? Because MS is 5 years too late to the party...?
This is true. I think Microsoft realizes that they need to have a mobile OS that actually has some demand before they erect a manufacturing operation.
Part of their strategy is probably around this half tablet, half laptop supposedly driving demand toward the mobile OS - they think people who are largely using Android or iOS will be floored by the Surface, buy one, and then want to replace their other devices so they all work with Windows...?
Not bloody likely.
"I'm still waiting for my under $50 Macbook."
on
The $45 Windows Laptop
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
"I'm still waiting for my under $50 Macbook."
What is the point of this kind of trolling in article summaries, really?
I don't need salespeople. I know what I'm after when I arrive.
Think about it, the goal of having these salespeople is to get you to buy more than you intended to buy. Otherwise, why would they pay them? They are there to pimp the more expensive model, the extraneous features, the Monster cables, the extended warranties you could never actually redeem.
The biggest thing to hope for here is that Google will now control some hardware like Apple does, so they can make an OS that works just as well - at least on some hardware.
Most of them are isolationists or pro-marijuana legalization voters, or they are just the workaday version of the Occupy people.
Not that there's anything wrong with being any one of those, but none of them really have a place within that party. It's not surprising that they only seem to have a couple of percentage points of support among one half of the electorate.
Jobs created first, a market segment, and that was "A PC for the rest of us". (Not to mention really swallowing up the mp3 player market with their device, and now pretty much owning music distribution.)
I don't think Apple meant to take over the PC/mobile computing industries. It just turned out that most people were ready for something that will get out of their way and "just work". They were more successful than they ever would have imagined, by producing devices that just work and let people use computers/tablets for what they want without having to spend so much time on it.
There's nothing wrong with this. If you don't like Apple's ecosystem, you can go the Windows our Linux route. They just found a niche that didn't turn out to be a niche.
I think the Linux community has developed a mentality that they need to "compete" with the latest big thing in the consumer PC world.
Linux will never be an OS that is widely used by average consumers on their home PCs. There's no need to try to imitate Windows. Most of the goodness of Linux is derived from ways it doesn't try to imitate Windows.
Desktop PCs are on the way out for consumers anyway. The Linux community needs to develop a mobile/tablet OS, which is truly open and truly free (i.e., not Android). Not waste time further diversifying the desktop Linux platform, which has had its day and its moment has now passed.
Re:in other news, Philco has a new audio tube.
on
BlackBerry 10 Unveiled
·
· Score: 4, Funny
I'm thinking of cashing out my bitcoins to buy RIM stock, RIM seems like a good bet.
Slashdot Mirror
There's a significant difference between the people needed to do what Google is having done in the US, essentially operating a screwdriver - a job that doesn't require literacy, skill, or really even sight - and other types of manufacturing that resemble skilled labor more closely.
I think this is another example of Google good, Apple bad. They're both doing the same thing, leading consumers to believe that more is happening in the USA than really is, or that some kind of good technical job is created by the manufacture of the device.
The reality is, final assembly is menial work at minimal pay. There really isn't a shortage of menial work at minimal pay in the US right now, it's more a case of a shortage of people who will work at those terms.
In terms of altruism for the American people as a whole, where does this rate? Pretty much a dead heat with where we'd be if they did final assembly at Hon Hai, and instead ran a chain of thousands of retail outlet stores employing people at menial work and paying all kinds of taxes and driving other retail traffic.
They should put "Designed by Google in California."
Engaged Emu?
OS/X? Finally, the successor to OS/2 the market has been waiting for!
They can call it WARP 10!
I think the problem most people are concerned with is all these Android devices get orphaned by their manufacturers after a release or two, so you're probably going to be stuck at some point and eventually you won't be able to run the newest apps.
I don't think it is an issue of capability. You can watch movies on all these things. You can check email and surf and post on twitter.
The problem is that there is no innovation going on here on the Android side. The Android devices all are trying to be "Well it's no an iWhatever, but it's good enough and it's a bit cheaper". Where is the 10" screen tablet at a similar price point and hardware specs? That's really all it would take, and yet we still have none.
Now a few years later we have moved on from "meh" copies of Apple to trying to copy Amazon? This doesn't make any sense to me.
People want an iPad with Android on it. That's all. It's really just that simple. Why shuffle the deck chairs? Give people what they want.
"Sources close to Microsoft have told us that the software giant built Surface because it was unhappy with the way its traditional partners [such as HP and Dell] weren't innovating around its next-generation operating system."
I wonder why manufacturers might not be "innovating around" windows mobile, or whatever they call it these days. Because there isn't any demand...? Because MS is 5 years too late to the party...?
This is true. I think Microsoft realizes that they need to have a mobile OS that actually has some demand before they erect a manufacturing operation.
Part of their strategy is probably around this half tablet, half laptop supposedly driving demand toward the mobile OS - they think people who are largely using Android or iOS will be floored by the Surface, buy one, and then want to replace their other devices so they all work with Windows...?
Not bloody likely.
"I'm still waiting for my under $50 Macbook."
What is the point of this kind of trolling in article summaries, really?
Bring back the File Manager
I don't need salespeople. I know what I'm after when I arrive.
Think about it, the goal of having these salespeople is to get you to buy more than you intended to buy. Otherwise, why would they pay them? They are there to pimp the more expensive model, the extraneous features, the Monster cables, the extended warranties you could never actually redeem.
My goal is to avoid all salespeople.
Unconfirmed reports clarify that it was not CryptoCat that was detained, but rather someone carrying a Cue:Cat.
Why not use IE? Honestly, it sucks WAY less than it used to!
That's what sports cars are for.
The biggest thing to hope for here is that Google will now control some hardware like Apple does, so they can make an OS that works just as well - at least on some hardware.
Since RIM (and Best Buy) have removed their CEOs, Ballmer was next on the list.
He was initially dreaming only of 3rd place, much like in the mobile OS space.
Most of them are isolationists or pro-marijuana legalization voters, or they are just the workaday version of the Occupy people.
Not that there's anything wrong with being any one of those, but none of them really have a place within that party. It's not surprising that they only seem to have a couple of percentage points of support among one half of the electorate.
Jobs created first, a market segment, and that was "A PC for the rest of us". (Not to mention really swallowing up the mp3 player market with their device, and now pretty much owning music distribution.)
I don't think Apple meant to take over the PC/mobile computing industries. It just turned out that most people were ready for something that will get out of their way and "just work". They were more successful than they ever would have imagined, by producing devices that just work and let people use computers/tablets for what they want without having to spend so much time on it.
There's nothing wrong with this. If you don't like Apple's ecosystem, you can go the Windows our Linux route. They just found a niche that didn't turn out to be a niche.
Your sister is about to throw away some super cute jeans, better go stop her.
All we need here is a statement about the "viral nature" of the kernel. And that OSX eats old people's medicine for food.
I think the Linux community has developed a mentality that they need to "compete" with the latest big thing in the consumer PC world.
Linux will never be an OS that is widely used by average consumers on their home PCs. There's no need to try to imitate Windows. Most of the goodness of Linux is derived from ways it doesn't try to imitate Windows.
Desktop PCs are on the way out for consumers anyway. The Linux community needs to develop a mobile/tablet OS, which is truly open and truly free (i.e., not Android). Not waste time further diversifying the desktop Linux platform, which has had its day and its moment has now passed.
I'm thinking of cashing out my bitcoins to buy RIM stock, RIM seems like a good bet.
Precisely.
"I'm from the government, and I'm here to help."