Apple has millions of iPhones available in select markets on launch date (for example, 4 million iPhone 4S sales first weekend), and rolls out later to other markets to soften the first-day hit. And still there are lines around the block. Samsung has to practically give away phones to get a short line in front of one store.
And the reason they do that might be because they actually make the hardware themselves, as opposed to Apple, who are dependant on... guess who... Samsung to make some really important components for their iPhones. (most notably the screens).
LG makes most of the iPhone screens, plus some other smaller players. Samsung mainly provides the SoC, and is one of the NAND and RAM suppliers. Samsung doesn't make all the parts in a Galaxy either.
More times than I care to remember. An MRE is about half carbohydrates, a mix of complex (the starches and breads common in MREs) and simple (sugar). It's there because it is the fuel for a soldier's physical exertions during the day.
Freeze-dried pork patties, four fingers of death ("frankfurters"), freeze-dried fruit cocktail brick, brown packet of coffee powder, no Tobasco, no candy but two pseudo-Chicklets. The only thing really edible was the applesauce, but you had to get the dreaded pork patty meal to get it.
Meal, Ready to Eat. Truly three lies for the price of one.
An individual, maybe, but not a contractor who works for one of the bigger companies.
I am talking about individual contractors, as opposed to individual government employees. They can rid themselves of a contractor employee of Lockheed Martin as easily as an employee of a 100-person small company.
As far as the contracting company goes, that's why contracts are often for limited terms. In fact, they're often for X years (like 3), and have to be reapproved for subsequent followup years to the end of the contract period (like 10).
Some are just so huge and screwed up that I really don't what could be done, like NMCI.
He wouldn't have set foot on that government installation again. It is insanely easy for government to get an under-performing contractor kicked off the job.
Now if the guy was actually good and he got kicked off only because an irrational government employee was having a bad day, then a good contracting company will find him work elsewhere or roll him onto a different contract and keep him on the payroll until that can be done. Bad employees are just dropped, not worth the trouble.
This ability to provide a cushion is one reason for the company overhead in many cases. IIRC, EDS was very good at taking care of its people. Other companies, however, drop employees the second they can't bill their hours directly to a contract.
Maybe look for a cause instead of picking the left-wing popular one and bending all evidence towards that result.
You sound like a new fellow at the Institution for Creation Research, where they have to accept that the biblical story of creation is scientifically true, and that it trumps any scientific evidence.
Non-academic administration, especially senior administration, has been expanding much faster than faculty.
Over half of University of California salaries go to administrators, whose salaries have increased over the years while faculty salaries have flatlined relative to inflation.
UC Davis now has more administrators than professors.
UNC Wilmington is further combining already combined science departments to save $80,000 while expanding its "diversity" portfolio's five separate departments plus a six-figure salary head over it all.
This also shows why education is becoming less valuable. They'll actually cut hard education funding to expand politically favorable administration programs and give jobs to their friends.
Solar has government subsidies behind its manufacture and tax breaks to the company utilizing it. It's possible that solar isn't profitable without our tax dollars supporting it.
Solar also has fewer regulatory hurdles to overcome than traditional sources of energy, lowering its relative cost for power companies to implement.
Leasing a new high-end Mercedes every six months cost him far more than the taxes ever would have, and maybe even more on taxes. I don't know how leases are taxed in CA, but given CA's love for taxes I'd bet they tax new leases in some way.
I dunno, why did Maxine Waters arrange TARP money for a (by all accounts undeserving and too risky) bank, a bank she had close ties with since 2002, a bank her husband is heavily invested in, a bank whose directors were major contributors to her compaign?
You're talking about where he gets his money from. I'm talking about them giving OUR MONEY to their buddies.
You should actually read into Solyndra, its another spin machine scandal with nothing to it.
I did, that's how I know it's a legitimate scandal. In this I am not addressing the issue of whether the government should be involved in venture capital, only the Solyndra scandal. The law authorizing this was signed by Bush, so the program itself is not Obama's blame/credit depending on your view. Only the improper handling of this one case is completely his.
You have the basic facts.
Solyndra backers were major Obama donators and lobbied extensively (over $1 million), and met with Obama administration officials, while other loan applicants were under the impression that there was a ban on lobbying
Solyndra was a major political point for the Obama administration's green programs and approval was being rushed
The loan approval was granted before all of the legally required evaluations were finished
Two days before final approval, OMB is quoted saying "We would prefer to have sufficient time to do our due diligence reviews" in response to timing pressure from the White House (IOW, due diligence was not completed)
Before and early in the Obama administration, even the DoE said there were too many outstanding questions to let the deal go foward, then it was awarded
Solyndra was receiving taxpayer money even after the default
Despite being told it could be illegal, the DoE restructured the loan to put the creditors (including the DNC) ahead of taxpayers in a default
Law enforcement is trying to find out if the company misrepresented its finances to get the loan, but that's a deflection. Before the deal, while attempting to do that due diligence, the OMB figured Solyndra would run out of money in -- you guessed it -- September 2011. So the Obama administration had the disastrous numbers, yet went ahead with the deal anyway.
If that's not a legitimate scandal, I don't know what is. Political pressure from the White House pushed through a deal that shouldn't have happened, likely breaking laws and regulations in the process, resulting in a massive loss of money to the taxpayer.
I claimed, truthfully, that they were a big part. Two companies, 1/4 of the subprimes, leveraged for more than the five top investment banks combined.
The subprimes wouldn't have even been there if not for government interference from the likes of Frank. In fact, he resisted regulation specifically because he wanted more subprimes issued ("affordable housing").
The change in regulation brought it to a head, but it only brought to a head a situation that had been building for years.
Thus I am missing, according to Wikipedia, these things:
System: Speed, memory, and performance optimizations
Additional application speed improvements courtesy of JIT implementation
Integration of Chrome's V8 JavaScript engine into the Browser application
Improved Microsoft Exchange support (security policies, auto-discovery, GAL look-up, calendar synchronization, remote wipe)
Improved application launcher with shortcuts to Phone and Browser applications
USB tethering and Wi-Fi hotspot functionality
Added an option to disable data access over mobile network
Updated Market application with batch and automatic update features
Quick switching between multiple keyboard languages and their dictionaries
Voice dialing and contact sharing over Bluetooth
Support for numeric and alphanumeric passwords
Support for file upload fields in the Browser application
Support for installing applications to the expandable memory
Adobe Flash support
My phone's pretty slow, so all of the speed and memory optimizations, and JIT, would be extremely useful to me. It also has little onboard memory, constantly running out despite relatively few apps on it, so installing apps to the SD card would be very useful.
Basically, all of this seriously extends the useful life of the phone, which the carrier and manufacturer obviously don't want. They want me to buy a new one.
For a regular consumer a question is what will support be like if he buys an Android phone? What is this like vs. buying a phone with the competition's operating system, iOS?
These are rational questions for a regular customer, and they are answered quite well. It even helps answer a third question: If I buy an Android phone, which brands have the best history of support?
So the list only needs to go back to phones introduced within that period to do a study of Android.
For comparison it includes iPhones going back even further than that. But if you want to include the original iPhone, let's build the chart line for it.
It was on the current phone version of the OS for almost exactly three years (released June 2007, incompatible iOS 4 released June 2010), which would make it green through the chart just like the rest of the iPhones. The last update for it was Februrary 2010 with 3.1.3, so the squiggly line goes a touch over halfway through year 3. IIRC, Apple stopped sales of the original iPhone when the 3G was released, so the square only goes up to the first year.
Still looks very good compared to any Android phone on the list.
Now let's reconstruct the Galaxy S, which was launched in the US right around the author's cutoff date for his survey. The problem here is different US carriers had releases and updates at different times, but I'll go with the most favorable.
Launch June 2010 with Android 2.1. Android 2.2 was also released at this time, which made the Galaxy behind from the beginning. The first evidence of US Galaxy customers getting 2.2 was in January 2011. Android 2.3 showed up on US phones in December 2010 with the Nexus S. The first US release of 2.3 for the Galaxy is this month. Android 4.0 was released this month.
So, the Galaxy S gets released yellow, then:
Yellow for five months
Orange for one month (Dec 2010)
Yellow for ten months (would have gone green this month, but 4.0 was released)
The squiggly goes to the end with the latest update
Don't know how far the square goes (and it differs for each carrier)
I don't think its inclusion would have helped Android's case. The Galaxy S2 was released far too late for the survey.
This looks MUCH worse if you go with the Verizon Continuum. It was released in November 2010 with 2.1, so it started yellow, then went orange the next month. That lasted until April 2011 with the 2.2 update, when it went yellow. Then this month it turned orange again. The squiggly went through April 2011, only six months of support, and it's still being sold. It's not likely to get Gingerbread.
A crisis like this doesn't occur in just a year or two. It has to grow for a while.
The prime mover of the collapse was the longer-term buildup of bad debt due to subprime mortgages. Right smack in the middle of the subprime mess were Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, underwriting about a quarter of all subprime mortgages.
Back in 2003, in response to a Bush effort to tighten accountability over Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac, Barney Frank said they "are not facing any kind of financial crisis" and complained that people "exaggerate these problems."
So even Bush knew a problem was looming. If even he could see it, then a lot of people must have been able to see it.
Slashdot Mirror
Apple has millions of iPhones available in select markets on launch date (for example, 4 million iPhone 4S sales first weekend), and rolls out later to other markets to soften the first-day hit. And still there are lines around the block. Samsung has to practically give away phones to get a short line in front of one store.
LG makes most of the iPhone screens, plus some other smaller players. Samsung mainly provides the SoC, and is one of the NAND and RAM suppliers. Samsung doesn't make all the parts in a Galaxy either.
More times than I care to remember. An MRE is about half carbohydrates, a mix of complex (the starches and breads common in MREs) and simple (sugar). It's there because it is the fuel for a soldier's physical exertions during the day.
Freeze-dried pork patties, four fingers of death ("frankfurters"), freeze-dried fruit cocktail brick, brown packet of coffee powder, no Tobasco, no candy but two pseudo-Chicklets. The only thing really edible was the applesauce, but you had to get the dreaded pork patty meal to get it.
Meal, Ready to Eat. Truly three lies for the price of one.
In comparison, the modern MREs are quite good.
I am talking about individual contractors, as opposed to individual government employees. They can rid themselves of a contractor employee of Lockheed Martin as easily as an employee of a 100-person small company.
As far as the contracting company goes, that's why contracts are often for limited terms. In fact, they're often for X years (like 3), and have to be reapproved for subsequent followup years to the end of the contract period (like 10).
Some are just so huge and screwed up that I really don't what could be done, like NMCI.
He wouldn't have set foot on that government installation again. It is insanely easy for government to get an under-performing contractor kicked off the job.
Now if the guy was actually good and he got kicked off only because an irrational government employee was having a bad day, then a good contracting company will find him work elsewhere or roll him onto a different contract and keep him on the payroll until that can be done. Bad employees are just dropped, not worth the trouble.
This ability to provide a cushion is one reason for the company overhead in many cases. IIRC, EDS was very good at taking care of its people. Other companies, however, drop employees the second they can't bill their hours directly to a contract.
Maybe look for a cause instead of picking the left-wing popular one and bending all evidence towards that result.
You sound like a new fellow at the Institution for Creation Research, where they have to accept that the biblical story of creation is scientifically true, and that it trumps any scientific evidence.
His co-author says he's full of it, and the results do not match the headlines.
Non-academic administration, especially senior administration, has been expanding much faster than faculty.
Over half of University of California salaries go to administrators, whose salaries have increased over the years while faculty salaries have flatlined relative to inflation.
UC Davis now has more administrators than professors.
UNC Wilmington is further combining already combined science departments to save $80,000 while expanding its "diversity" portfolio's five separate departments plus a six-figure salary head over it all.
This also shows why education is becoming less valuable. They'll actually cut hard education funding to expand politically favorable administration programs and give jobs to their friends.
Solar has government subsidies behind its manufacture and tax breaks to the company utilizing it. It's possible that solar isn't profitable without our tax dollars supporting it.
Solar also has fewer regulatory hurdles to overcome than traditional sources of energy, lowering its relative cost for power companies to implement.
I consider Perl an inherently ugly language.
Good point, so it stays yellow for ten months, then goes green this month (for, maybe a month or so). Still, not good.
One of these days that may happen to me.
It was about being able to drive without a plate.
Leasing a new high-end Mercedes every six months cost him far more than the taxes ever would have, and maybe even more on taxes. I don't know how leases are taxed in CA, but given CA's love for taxes I'd bet they tax new leases in some way.
I dunno, why did Maxine Waters arrange TARP money for a (by all accounts undeserving and too risky) bank, a bank she had close ties with since 2002, a bank her husband is heavily invested in, a bank whose directors were major contributors to her compaign?
You're talking about where he gets his money from. I'm talking about them giving OUR MONEY to their buddies.
I did, that's how I know it's a legitimate scandal. In this I am not addressing the issue of whether the government should be involved in venture capital, only the Solyndra scandal. The law authorizing this was signed by Bush, so the program itself is not Obama's blame/credit depending on your view. Only the improper handling of this one case is completely his.
You have the basic facts.
Law enforcement is trying to find out if the company misrepresented its finances to get the loan, but that's a deflection. Before the deal, while attempting to do that due diligence, the OMB figured Solyndra would run out of money in -- you guessed it -- September 2011. So the Obama administration had the disastrous numbers, yet went ahead with the deal anyway.
If that's not a legitimate scandal, I don't know what is. Political pressure from the White House pushed through a deal that shouldn't have happened, likely breaking laws and regulations in the process, resulting in a massive loss of money to the taxpayer.
I claimed, truthfully, that they were a big part. Two companies, 1/4 of the subprimes, leveraged for more than the five top investment banks combined.
The subprimes wouldn't have even been there if not for government interference from the likes of Frank. In fact, he resisted regulation specifically because he wanted more subprimes issued ("affordable housing").
The change in regulation brought it to a head, but it only brought to a head a situation that had been building for years.
Coming from Europe, Lufthansa was much less expensive than Delta, and the service was wonderful.
UPS should be required to hire quadraplegic delivery people.
Modeling agencies should be required to hire short, ugly women and men.
Health food stores should be required to hire obese people (actually, there's been a case about that one).
The Black Family Channel should have been required to have white and oriental people in management.
Where were all the white Black Entertainment Channel VJs? They're obviously refusing to hire white people.
Thus I am missing, according to Wikipedia, these things:
My phone's pretty slow, so all of the speed and memory optimizations, and JIT, would be extremely useful to me. It also has little onboard memory, constantly running out despite relatively few apps on it, so installing apps to the SD card would be very useful.
Basically, all of this seriously extends the useful life of the phone, which the carrier and manufacturer obviously don't want. They want me to buy a new one.
For a regular consumer a question is what will support be like if he buys an Android phone? What is this like vs. buying a phone with the competition's operating system, iOS?
These are rational questions for a regular customer, and they are answered quite well. It even helps answer a third question: If I buy an Android phone, which brands have the best history of support?
So the list only needs to go back to phones introduced within that period to do a study of Android.
For comparison it includes iPhones going back even further than that. But if you want to include the original iPhone, let's build the chart line for it.
It was on the current phone version of the OS for almost exactly three years (released June 2007, incompatible iOS 4 released June 2010), which would make it green through the chart just like the rest of the iPhones. The last update for it was Februrary 2010 with 3.1.3, so the squiggly line goes a touch over halfway through year 3. IIRC, Apple stopped sales of the original iPhone when the 3G was released, so the square only goes up to the first year.
Still looks very good compared to any Android phone on the list.
Now let's reconstruct the Galaxy S, which was launched in the US right around the author's cutoff date for his survey. The problem here is different US carriers had releases and updates at different times, but I'll go with the most favorable.
Launch June 2010 with Android 2.1. Android 2.2 was also released at this time, which made the Galaxy behind from the beginning. The first evidence of US Galaxy customers getting 2.2 was in January 2011. Android 2.3 showed up on US phones in December 2010 with the Nexus S. The first US release of 2.3 for the Galaxy is this month. Android 4.0 was released this month.
So, the Galaxy S gets released yellow, then:
I don't think its inclusion would have helped Android's case. The Galaxy S2 was released far too late for the survey.
This looks MUCH worse if you go with the Verizon Continuum. It was released in November 2010 with 2.1, so it started yellow, then went orange the next month. That lasted until April 2011 with the 2.2 update, when it went yellow. Then this month it turned orange again. The squiggly went through April 2011, only six months of support, and it's still being sold. It's not likely to get Gingerbread.
It would be pushed by their carrier. Mine was upgraded by the carrier OTA from 1.6 to 2.1 just before 2.2 came out, and then forever abandoned.
A crisis like this doesn't occur in just a year or two. It has to grow for a while.
The prime mover of the collapse was the longer-term buildup of bad debt due to subprime mortgages. Right smack in the middle of the subprime mess were Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, underwriting about a quarter of all subprime mortgages.
Or will Obama be allowed to pull a Solyndra and funnel money to campaign contributors without the mandated oversight?
Back in 2003, in response to a Bush effort to tighten accountability over Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac, Barney Frank said they "are not facing any kind of financial crisis" and complained that people "exaggerate these problems."
So even Bush knew a problem was looming. If even he could see it, then a lot of people must have been able to see it.