I was just stating that the low end android scores are an experience on their own, and should not be compared with the rest. They might have a good quality/price ratio, but still not be able to play Angry Birds:)
In the end people will remember that they couldn't play their game or take quality pictures, not that it actually had a pretty decent feature set for a cheap phone.
I didn't say it was bad that they existed, just that the experience on those phones is "only" good (for the HTC ones, at least, they seem to be ahead of the pack in terms of interface and usability).
And I get your point. I'm just curious about how many of those phones are actually competing against the iPhone and what's their market share (since every piece of news mentions iOS as the main competitor)
A bit more RAM, better screen, better processor... But still a low end device.
And I think people are getting the wrong idea here. These phones are in no way unusable (some of them are actually are quite good for the price), but they aren't in the same league as the top Andoird phones or the iPhone (the one "Android" gets compared to).
Every phone with less than a 800Mzh processor; Every phone with less than 512Mb of RAM Every phone with less than 3.5" Display
A good example are the HTC Wildfire, the Samsung Galaxy Mini, the Acer Liquid Mini, (etc. - Almost every low end Android phone from every manufacturer).
Symbian still is the worldwide market share holder and Nokia is dying (MS was just a small reprise)
You need quality to accompany you growth. And while an HTC Desire, Samsung Galaxy or motorola Droid run Angry Birds in high settings with no problems, most low end phones struggle.
On the other hand, if you have an iPhone, you can play it.
I'm curious about the % of high end Android phones sold actually, because those are the ones that should be compared to an iPhone, not EVERY phone.
If flows better than the Samsung galaxy S phone, but has a worse screen (not by much)
I compared it to a multitude of low end phones (very common in Portugal), the HTC Magic, the Wildfire, one Acer, one low-end Samsung.
Every one of them seemed slugish and missed some important features. The problem is, I read how "Android sucks" all the time, and most people change their mine after using my phone.
Mostly, they love the Sense UI that is missing on their phones.
But keep in mind that if you buy them carrier free a top-of-the line Android phone will still cost around 70-80% of an iPhone, so they are good value.
Like an antennae that is so high tech that it requires you to use a rubber band for optimum performance?
Or phone screens that are prone to develop a yellow tint?
Apple's story is full of mishaps.. Those two were introduced as revolutionary and cutting edge, and on paper they were... But then real world scenarios proved them wrong.
On the other hand, it is possible to have a decent camera in a phone, like the nokia N8 proved, and apple might do it, Just don't paint apple as the tech messiah.
The difference is, Android apps are already made to support multiple resolutions in a multitude of devices (unlike the original iPhone apps that were done for a 320x240 screen). You were streching your 76800px to 786432. That's 10x more pixels. Most High end android phones already do 800x480 (half the number of px). So yes, they stretch, but never as much
So no, it's not the same situation. What Honeycomb specific apps will bring is the ability to have more stuff on the screen at the same time, I think. But it's a new platform, people have to wait and see.
No one's making fun of anyone. Satire can have dark bits, but there has been a honest attempt at exposing the problem in the Simpsons for years, unlike the media that forgets about those things until they are the flavor of the month.
And most of all, it's a cartoon. You need to take it with a grain of salt.
The next time the author will write an article on how every bike should have a sidecar because he has no idea how to ride without one. Never mind the millions of people that ride bikes without it everyday without complaining.
Sorry to burst your bubble, but you're wrong.
90% of the game is the computer testing each move according to an evaluation function. Computers haven been found to have a check-mate play 40 moves ahead.
Looking at databases is only used for openings and some finishing moves, but the basic algorithm goes like this:
Do your move, do his move, do your move, do his move (...), always assuming both players will seek the best possible outcome. In the end you chose the play that has the best score in X moves (where X varies, depending on processing power). This process can be cut simply by ignoring branches that are too good (meaning the opponent is a moron and handed you the game) or too bad (you never play to lose). Other optimizations can be made (alpha beta cuts, for example, but that's hard to explain here)
Now tell me, how does this differs from a human player? Don you evaluate your plays and try to predict your opponent's reactions?
I said eclipse was good because it works consistently crossplatform. I've never had any qualms with Eclipse after that (admittedly) longer boot time...
And I ask you to search for Textmate, Ultraedit or even Notepad++. Very little bloat (or none whatsoever) and tons of functionality (and still used in 2011). And we're not talking minimalist interface like vi or something like that. These are full featured IDE's.
Code blocks appears date now, but it was actually... nice a few years ago. No headaches, things just worked and I like that.
Never had any kind of trouble with Eclipse, so I won't comment on that. But when a piece of software requires 2.3GB of HD space for a simple Visual Basic installation (according to http://www.microsoft.com/visualstudio/en-us/products/2010-editions/visual-basic-express ), is there any question about bloat?
The whole point here is "visual studio is the best". It isn't, not in my opinion and many others. Is it good? Maybe, I don't like it, but I can see how some might. But stating that something is "the best" should be more than personal preference or ignorance about alternatives.
Slashdot Mirror
You guys are delusional.
From an international standpoint, your allies actually talk to you now.
From an economic standpoint, your economy is actually almost getting out of the hole republicans led you to
Yes, you're still in two wars. Two wars he did not start and he's been trying to end since he got elected
Did he do everything he said he'd do? No. Far from it. Way too many politics in the way of ideals. Too bad, some of those were actually good.
But can you honestly say he's been bad? I guess you'd prefer the side that says "3 is a better number for pi".
The height of the building can exacerbate the amount of shaking that occurs.
The is exactly the point I was trying to make.
Random guy X tries a cheap android phone. It has a crappy interface, crappy build quality, crappy feature set, etc.
Then he comes to an on-line forum and says "I'm never buying android again"!
In this case, nevermind that the HTC Desire sits at the top of some Top mobile phone lists ( http://www.techradar.com/news/phone-and-communications/mobile-phones/20-best-mobile-phones-in-the-world-today-645440?artc_pg=21 ). It was doing what the iPhone now does, out of the box, 3 months before the iPhone 4 was announced.
Since someone had a bad experience 4 years ago with HTC, they're never buying it again.
true.
I was just stating that the low end android scores are an experience on their own, and should not be compared with the rest. They might have a good quality/price ratio, but still not be able to play Angry Birds :)
In the end people will remember that they couldn't play their game or take quality pictures, not that it actually had a pretty decent feature set for a cheap phone.
I didn't say it was bad that they existed, just that the experience on those phones is "only" good (for the HTC ones, at least, they seem to be ahead of the pack in terms of interface and usability).
And I get your point. I'm just curious about how many of those phones are actually competing against the iPhone and what's their market share (since every piece of news mentions iOS as the main competitor)
Because of the Wildfire S
http://www.gsmarena.com/htc_wildfire_s-3777.php
A bit more RAM, better screen, better processor... But still a low end device.
And I think people are getting the wrong idea here. These phones are in no way unusable (some of them are actually are quite good for the price), but they aren't in the same league as the top Andoird phones or the iPhone (the one "Android" gets compared to).
Every phone with less than a 800Mzh processor;
Every phone with less than 512Mb of RAM
Every phone with less than 3.5" Display
A good example are the HTC Wildfire, the Samsung Galaxy Mini, the Acer Liquid Mini, (etc. - Almost every low end Android phone from every manufacturer).
They usually don't make the news.
Symbian still is the worldwide market share holder and Nokia is dying (MS was just a small reprise)
You need quality to accompany you growth. And while an HTC Desire, Samsung Galaxy or motorola Droid run Angry Birds in high settings with no problems, most low end phones struggle.
On the other hand, if you have an iPhone, you can play it.
I'm curious about the % of high end Android phones sold actually, because those are the ones that should be compared to an iPhone, not EVERY phone.
I compared it to more than one phone actually.
If flows better than the Samsung galaxy S phone, but has a worse screen (not by much)
I compared it to a multitude of low end phones (very common in Portugal), the HTC Magic, the Wildfire, one Acer, one low-end Samsung.
Every one of them seemed slugish and missed some important features. The problem is, I read how "Android sucks" all the time, and most people change their mine after using my phone.
Mostly, they love the Sense UI that is missing on their phones.
But keep in mind that if you buy them carrier free a top-of-the line Android phone will still cost around 70-80% of an iPhone, so they are good value.
What people miss is that most of those 30ish % are from low end devices. Those devices are mostly crap and give out a bad impression about the OS.
I'm not too confident that android growth will be as big in the following years. Google should set up some minimum specs for Android phones!
(I'm the proud owner of an HTC Desire, so I'm not bashing. Just stating something that has been on my mind lately..)
Like an antennae that is so high tech that it requires you to use a rubber band for optimum performance?
Or phone screens that are prone to develop a yellow tint?
Apple's story is full of mishaps.. Those two were introduced as revolutionary and cutting edge, and on paper they were... But then real world scenarios proved them wrong.
On the other hand, it is possible to have a decent camera in a phone, like the nokia N8 proved, and apple might do it, Just don't paint apple as the tech messiah.
Because no other iGadget would require a camera like that
It's either for an iPhone or an iPod touch (or most likely both).
So you're saying that a deformed skull that has human DNA is proof of alien life? :)
Just read it. You're extrapolating the whole thing from a single line...
The point you just mentioned is also covered.
Lots of documentaries say that the big UFO surge was when The X-Files were on. That was 10 years ago +-, so yeah...
The day that happens you'll have everyone saying "it's really good CGI!!!"
I'll rephrase that. The day I see a UFO, that's a day I look forward too. Other than that or a mass invasion, I can't see it happening...
*The Demon-Haunted World: Science as a Candle in the Dark by Carl Sagan, Ann Druyan
That's the complete title
Everyone should read this book: A demon haunted world by Carl Sagan
Every era has had their share of unexplained phenomena. Before UFO's there were demons, beasts, witches, etc. The current myth-of-the day is UFO's.
(And I'm not saying they don't exist, just that there might be a simpler reason for all these sightings) :)
The difference is, Android apps are already made to support multiple resolutions in a multitude of devices (unlike the original iPhone apps that were done for a 320x240 screen). You were streching your 76800px to 786432. That's 10x more pixels. Most High end android phones already do 800x480 (half the number of px). So yes, they stretch, but never as much
So no, it's not the same situation. What Honeycomb specific apps will bring is the ability to have more stuff on the screen at the same time, I think. But it's a new platform, people have to wait and see.
No.Neil Gaiman said that GRRM is not your bitch :)
Kuth's books are awesome, too bad he'll most likely die before we get to read all the brilliant things he has yet to write. :(
No one's making fun of anyone. Satire can have dark bits, but there has been a honest attempt at exposing the problem in the Simpsons for years, unlike the media that forgets about those things until they are the flavor of the month. And most of all, it's a cartoon. You need to take it with a grain of salt.
The next time the author will write an article on how every bike should have a sidecar because he has no idea how to ride without one. Never mind the millions of people that ride bikes without it everyday without complaining.
Sorry to burst your bubble, but you're wrong. 90% of the game is the computer testing each move according to an evaluation function. Computers haven been found to have a check-mate play 40 moves ahead. Looking at databases is only used for openings and some finishing moves, but the basic algorithm goes like this: Do your move, do his move, do your move, do his move (...), always assuming both players will seek the best possible outcome. In the end you chose the play that has the best score in X moves (where X varies, depending on processing power). This process can be cut simply by ignoring branches that are too good (meaning the opponent is a moron and handed you the game) or too bad (you never play to lose). Other optimizations can be made (alpha beta cuts, for example, but that's hard to explain here) Now tell me, how does this differs from a human player? Don you evaluate your plays and try to predict your opponent's reactions?
I said eclipse was good because it works consistently crossplatform. I've never had any qualms with Eclipse after that (admittedly) longer boot time... And I ask you to search for Textmate, Ultraedit or even Notepad++. Very little bloat (or none whatsoever) and tons of functionality (and still used in 2011). And we're not talking minimalist interface like vi or something like that. These are full featured IDE's.
Code blocks appears date now, but it was actually... nice a few years ago. No headaches, things just worked and I like that. Never had any kind of trouble with Eclipse, so I won't comment on that. But when a piece of software requires 2.3GB of HD space for a simple Visual Basic installation (according to http://www.microsoft.com/visualstudio/en-us/products/2010-editions/visual-basic-express ), is there any question about bloat? The whole point here is "visual studio is the best". It isn't, not in my opinion and many others. Is it good? Maybe, I don't like it, but I can see how some might. But stating that something is "the best" should be more than personal preference or ignorance about alternatives.