I trust Google to safeguard my data better than myself because I am not an IT security expert. I don't want to waste money and time coming up with my own redundant servers and managing them when I can easily put it in the cloud, which would likely be more secure and reliable than anything I come up with.
The consequences of these tests affect people's careers so cheating is a really big deal.
Licensing organizations take great efforts in maintaining the integrity of their exams because they can get sued if individuals get an unfair advantage/disadvantage. The consequences result in people wrongfully losing their jobs or companies hiring someone unqualified for the position.
Those apps aren't running in the background shouldn't be eating up battery. Android preloads many apps into memory for faster launching, but they are not using CPU cycles. If you deleted those apps, Android will choose other apps to preload instead.
The only way these apps should affect performance is that it prevents more relevant apps to be preloaded into memory on startup. Once you start using other apps, Android will delete the crapware out of memory to make room.
If rooting your phone causes an increase in battery life, it is likely caused by something else.
It is rare for people to drop out of college and start a successful business. If students at least wait to get a degree, they will have something to fall back on in the likely event that their companies fail.
It would be better use of the money if they pay off student loans of the top students so that they can pursue entrepreneurship instead of relying on getting corporate jobs to pay back their loans.
Restricting permissions will block ads and break programs. It will take away a source of income from Google and its developers and make the Android OS more buggy.
In properly designed apps, the permissions are there for good reason. Taking away a permission will most likely cause the program to lose functionality, cause force closes or eat up battery life.
There could be some cases where you could block a permission setting and get away with it, but 90% of the population won't be able to figure it out correctly and will instead complain about why their phone is so buggy. In these cases, a good app would have an option in the settings menu to limit things like network access.
Limiting Skype to Windows Phone would just give an opportunity for a competitor to take over especially since they doesn't have a dominant share of the smartphone market.
People using Skype on other platforms will benefit Microsoft indirectly through its network effects. The more people using Skype, the more valuable it is to users and the harder it is for a competitor to take over.
Microsoft's is probably using Skype's network as a platform to make it easier to integrate into Windows Live services. There might be some features that limited Microsoft's devices, but there is little incentive for them to lock out whole platforms. They need as many people as possible using Skype if they want success
The most obvious reason that a wallpaper app needs permissions to access networks and SD card access is because it will download images off the internet to store on the SD card. It is basic functionality that improves the user experience so it doesn't necessarily make it malicious.
Any app that uses the Internet and saves information on your phone will need permissions for network access and to modify the contents of your SD Card. It is not surprising that many apps require those permissions and there is little way around this if you want to get the most functionality out of your phone.
Applications on Windows, Linux and OS X also save data and can access information on the Internet at the same time too.
He was the only one qualified because he prevented any other person from learning the system and kept the keys to himself. The only thing that he is securing is his own job.
When you are fired from your job and threatened with jail time, you give up the password. All this mess could have easily prevented right there.
It is no longer your responsibility after that point. If your supervisor messes up the network, it is would be their ass that gets in trouble.
The article states that Microsoft is trying to correct most of the problems you are complaining about with IE9.
The design is to stop giving out warnings from applications from reputable companies, something that smart computer users learn to filter on their own. If it works correctly, the result will be significantly less false positives and more meaningful security warnings.
The whole issue could be resolved by him giving the password to someone who he thought was qualified to run the system.
The issue wasn't about denying one supervisor admin rights, it is about holding the IT infrastructure hostage which is a far greater security risk. Terry Childs was apparently the one who was unqualified to administrator the network.
No one thinks its a bad for a start up company with limited resources to put all its eggs in the Microsoft Windows basket.
Apple has the 80%+ market share with tablets. They have no choice but to rely on Apple for them to remain profitable. Other platforms aren't bringing in enough revenue at the moment to justify the investment.
The HP-12C is superior to Excel when it comes to performing quick financial calculations. The RPN allows you to enter in formulas without worrying about matching parenthesis and formatting the cells, while it contains all the essential formulas you need with none of the bloat.
You can't hack numbers together as fast and efficient with any other calculator or computer program out there, which is why the HP-12C is still popular after all these years.
For example, there is an aftermarket car air conditioning company called Factory Air, an electric utility called National Grid, and a bedding company called The Company Store.
None of those examples are generic descriptors of the stores. It is different than an air conditioning company called Air Conditioning Company, an electric utility called Electric Utility or a bedding company called The Bedding Company.
Most specifications for agricultural equipment are already known to the public. Developing nations don't have strong patent or copyright protections, so if someone wants to copy a machine, they can copy it.
The real challenge is providing the capital and education needed to implement and maintain modern agricultural methods.
Amazon is trying to gain market share, but their main goal is to maximize profits. They just need to have a few loss leaders to bring people into their store, while the majority of the apps are priced the same as Google's.
When Amazon does place an app on sale, they have an incentive to advertise the promotion to attract customers to their stores. From a developers perspective, you are just paying for advertising and the increase sales can easily make up for the lower prices. It is not all that bad.
If Amazon has policies that punish developers, they will miss out on all the best apps, which hurts profits. They have no incentive to do anything stupid like place every app at 75% off.
When Amazon lowers its prices of apps, it lowers the amount of money they can make off selling the app. If consumers were willing to pay for it, Amazon would charge $10 for a $1 dollar apps so they can collect 10x the amount of money.
Why would Amazon want to lower the price of a $1 app to 20 cents when 100% of the revenue goes to the developer?
Amazon believes that it is better at pricing the apps than the average developer which is why it has these policies. When Amazon lowers the price of apps for promotions, they expect that the increase sales would bring in more revenue which benefits themselves and the developers.
Taxing gross revenue would kill most businesses who have low profit margins. The only businesses who will benefit are consulting companies where majority of the costs in wages and salaries. All others will move their business overseas where they aren't punished for investing in capital and raw materials.
Slashdot Mirror
I trust Google to safeguard my data better than myself because I am not an IT security expert. I don't want to waste money and time coming up with my own redundant servers and managing them when I can easily put it in the cloud, which would likely be more secure and reliable than anything I come up with.
The consequences of these tests affect people's careers so cheating is a really big deal.
Licensing organizations take great efforts in maintaining the integrity of their exams because they can get sued if individuals get an unfair advantage/disadvantage. The consequences result in people wrongfully losing their jobs or companies hiring someone unqualified for the position.
Those apps aren't running in the background shouldn't be eating up battery. Android preloads many apps into memory for faster launching, but they are not using CPU cycles. If you deleted those apps, Android will choose other apps to preload instead.
The only way these apps should affect performance is that it prevents more relevant apps to be preloaded into memory on startup. Once you start using other apps, Android will delete the crapware out of memory to make room.
If rooting your phone causes an increase in battery life, it is likely caused by something else.
It is rare for people to drop out of college and start a successful business. If students at least wait to get a degree, they will have something to fall back on in the likely event that their companies fail.
It would be better use of the money if they pay off student loans of the top students so that they can pursue entrepreneurship instead of relying on getting corporate jobs to pay back their loans.
Restricting permissions will block ads and break programs. It will take away a source of income from Google and its developers and make the Android OS more buggy.
In properly designed apps, the permissions are there for good reason. Taking away a permission will most likely cause the program to lose functionality, cause force closes or eat up battery life.
There could be some cases where you could block a permission setting and get away with it, but 90% of the population won't be able to figure it out correctly and will instead complain about why their phone is so buggy. In these cases, a good app would have an option in the settings menu to limit things like network access.
Limiting Skype to Windows Phone would just give an opportunity for a competitor to take over especially since they doesn't have a dominant share of the smartphone market.
People using Skype on other platforms will benefit Microsoft indirectly through its network effects. The more people using Skype, the more valuable it is to users and the harder it is for a competitor to take over.
Microsoft's is probably using Skype's network as a platform to make it easier to integrate into Windows Live services. There might be some features that limited Microsoft's devices, but there is little incentive for them to lock out whole platforms. They need as many people as possible using Skype if they want success
The most obvious reason that a wallpaper app needs permissions to access networks and SD card access is because it will download images off the internet to store on the SD card. It is basic functionality that improves the user experience so it doesn't necessarily make it malicious.
Any app that uses the Internet and saves information on your phone will need permissions for network access and to modify the contents of your SD Card. It is not surprising that many apps require those permissions and there is little way around this if you want to get the most functionality out of your phone.
Applications on Windows, Linux and OS X also save data and can access information on the Internet at the same time too.
The CDC is doing a study on viral marketing
He was the only one qualified because he prevented any other person from learning the system and kept the keys to himself. The only thing that he is securing is his own job.
When you are fired from your job and threatened with jail time, you give up the password. All this mess could have easily prevented right there.
It is no longer your responsibility after that point. If your supervisor messes up the network, it is would be their ass that gets in trouble.
The article states that Microsoft is trying to correct most of the problems you are complaining about with IE9.
The design is to stop giving out warnings from applications from reputable companies, something that smart computer users learn to filter on their own. If it works correctly, the result will be significantly less false positives and more meaningful security warnings.
The whole issue could be resolved by him giving the password to someone who he thought was qualified to run the system.
The issue wasn't about denying one supervisor admin rights, it is about holding the IT infrastructure hostage which is a far greater security risk. Terry Childs was apparently the one who was unqualified to administrator the network.
It is probably an insignificant unrelated license between Apple and Lodsys, if any actually exists.
I was comparing Microsoft's dominance of desktop computing to Apple's dominance of tablet computing.
No one thinks its a bad for a start up company with limited resources to put all its eggs in the Microsoft Windows basket.
Apple has the 80%+ market share with tablets. They have no choice but to rely on Apple for them to remain profitable. Other platforms aren't bringing in enough revenue at the moment to justify the investment.
The HP-12C is superior to Excel when it comes to performing quick financial calculations. The RPN allows you to enter in formulas without worrying about matching parenthesis and formatting the cells, while it contains all the essential formulas you need with none of the bloat.
You can't hack numbers together as fast and efficient with any other calculator or computer program out there, which is why the HP-12C is still popular after all these years.
If the trademark is absurd, then it will easily be challenged in court. The system works.
Amazon used the term Appstore because it knew it could get away with it because Apple doesn't have a strong case.
For example, there is an aftermarket car air conditioning company called Factory Air, an electric utility called National Grid, and a bedding company called The Company Store.
None of those examples are generic descriptors of the stores. It is different than an air conditioning company called Air Conditioning Company, an electric utility called Electric Utility or a bedding company called The Bedding Company.
Apple is a public company. RTFM
For Q2 2011, Apple paid $1.9 billion in taxes on $7.9 billion on profit
Apple is a public company. It is in their financial statements.
iPhone and related products and services (d) 12,298. Total net sales $24,667. Numbers are in millions
Most specifications for agricultural equipment are already known to the public. Developing nations don't have strong patent or copyright protections, so if someone wants to copy a machine, they can copy it.
The real challenge is providing the capital and education needed to implement and maintain modern agricultural methods.
So it's like paying monthly for a Ferrari then after only a few miles the tires are falling off the car ??!!?
No, it's like leasing a Ferrari but having a mileage restriction of 2000 a month.
Amazon is trying to gain market share, but their main goal is to maximize profits. They just need to have a few loss leaders to bring people into their store, while the majority of the apps are priced the same as Google's.
When Amazon does place an app on sale, they have an incentive to advertise the promotion to attract customers to their stores. From a developers perspective, you are just paying for advertising and the increase sales can easily make up for the lower prices. It is not all that bad.
If Amazon has policies that punish developers, they will miss out on all the best apps, which hurts profits. They have no incentive to do anything stupid like place every app at 75% off.
When Amazon lowers its prices of apps, it lowers the amount of money they can make off selling the app. If consumers were willing to pay for it, Amazon would charge $10 for a $1 dollar apps so they can collect 10x the amount of money.
Why would Amazon want to lower the price of a $1 app to 20 cents when 100% of the revenue goes to the developer?
Amazon believes that it is better at pricing the apps than the average developer which is why it has these policies. When Amazon lowers the price of apps for promotions, they expect that the increase sales would bring in more revenue which benefits themselves and the developers.
Taxing gross revenue would kill most businesses who have low profit margins. The only businesses who will benefit are consulting companies where majority of the costs in wages and salaries. All others will move their business overseas where they aren't punished for investing in capital and raw materials.