Let's be specific about it. The place for Windows RT is to occupy the void formerly filled by Windows CE, with similar success. A Windows that isn't really Windows. Just the thing to irritate the same sheeple who once raised Microsoft up to the dizzying heights of world's most valuable company.
Just a historical note apropo to nothing in particular: when Alaric I marched into Rome to sack it in 410 AD, much of the city had already reverted to swampland. The aquaducts had long since silted up and the sewers weren't working. What Romans remained were living in squalor. So much for former glory.
I don't love KDE for failures like akonadi or nepomuk.
Akonadi is kinda working now, though its performance is embarrassing and it still has lots of racy bugs. Like an idiot, I migrated my Kmail 1 files and suffered through the whole craziness of months of marginal email functionality. Like an idiot, I never pulled the plug and switched to Thunderbird. But today, I'm still operating those same folders, I never did wipe them, I never lost the read/not read state, spam filters are finally working again, it's running faster, it's almost back to where it was before the braindamage. If KDE devs manage to get the performance up to a semblance of what the 3.5 pim apps used to provide I'll maybe forgive them for the pain they caused me with a premature roll out and no fallback plan. Running on top of a real relational database (Postgres for me) is kind of cool, this is where Microsoft wanted to go with Longhorn and failed utterly, but a small KDE team has sorta kinda managed to make it work. Now, please show me what the benefit is. I already know what the pain was.
Despite Canonical and Red Hat having some kind of inexplicable anti-KDE agenda, KDE remains widely popular because it is a first class product of a strong, independent community of skilled developers with taste.
It's nearly beyond belief that Gnome or Unity devs would mandate such a heavyweight, and lets admit it, fragile dependency as OpenGL. I hope the article just got the details wrong. Mind you, I love OpenGL, but requiring all those moving parts just to boot to a desktop would be sheer stupidity. Not that sheer stupidity hasn't been the main active ingredient in Gnome development since the day the project was founded (a foot for a logo? Come on.)
There's a simple solution - install Windows Server 2003/2008. It doesn't need fancy graphics card to operate.
Hahaha funny Windows munchkin. Linux admins do not run GUIs on their servers unless they are idiots. I know this is hard to comprehend, but please try to wrap your mind around it.
It means you could get an incorrect replay after a crash and end up needing to do a fsck. Good thing Ext2/3/4 fsck is awesome. Of course, having no replay bug will be much better. Note: the bug was introduced this October 8th. You are not running this kernel on your server or workstation unless you are a dev, it hasn't filtered through to distros yet.
Spoken well and truly like somebody who has no kids. So is your two year old going to speed dial you, or have they got your number memorized? You sure they won't drop the phone in a duck pond? Try to eat it?
Office. Good enough reason for some, I would say. And as the ecosystem build apps that can run on both your PC and your phone.
Google will be forced to respond by throwing money at (most probably) Apache foundation to bring up OpenOffce on Android faster and eliminate that one advantage. Of course Google would be a lot smarter to throw money at LibreOffice, but Google has some Apache bigots on staff that sometimes get in the way of doing the smartest thing. But... throw enough money and OpenOffice will get there quickly enough. LibreOffice will soon follow of course, because the nice thing about the Apache license is, you can pull that code into a GPL project.
Google should obviously have taken steps to accelerate Open/LibreOffice development a long time ago, but they are fixated on that stupid ChromeOS project nobody care about, and that makes them think that client-side functionality is a bad thing, i.e., uncloudy. Larry probably better think about getting off those drugs, Burning Man is over.
Apple may not have a majority of sales in the smartphone market. However, they have a majority of PROFIT in the smartphone market.
Apple cultists seem to lack a firm grasp of the concept of "eroding margins". Which is what happens in response to eroding market share. Here's how it works: faced with low price competition, if you immediately drop your price to defend your market share then the ending situation is: lower margins, decent market share. If on the other hand, out of fear you decide to accept lower market share in the name of holding margins high, you will surely be forced to lower your margins later to prevent share from going to zero, and at that point you have low market share and low margins. Bummer.
This would seem to describe Tim Cook's current strategy. Judging from the 3% hit Apple stock took today, I would say that Wall street shares this view.
Remember also that the Intel Ivy/Sandy Bridge die size and transistor counts include an integrated GPU. AMD's FX series CPUs don't have an integrated GPU (only their "APU" chips do).
The HD 2500 on the Ivy Bridge desktop chips is a joke, it might as well not be there at all. Any $50 fanless Radeon will blow it right out of the water.
Not dead, but if they're having to sell a chip with twice as many transistors as an i7 for two thirds of the price, they must be spraying blood all over the room.
Not if they're booking a profit on the chip. Comparing AMD's income to Intel's monpoly-boosted margins used to make sense when you knew Intel would be turning a lot of that windfall profit into dirty tricks aimed at choking off AMD's air supply. A couple things changed: Intel has antitrust watchdogs in its hallways now; and Intel has to fight a war on another front, ARM.
Consider this: AMD is able to produce competitive chips with an uncompetitive process. What if Intel actually had to compete on a level playing field, as might well come to pass with multiple competitors banding together in the push to bring up 20nm and 14nm nodes.
I'm interested in this cpu because I'm a dev. It looks like a pretty respectable game workhorse too. I'm glad I didn't waste my money on an i7 last time around, though I did go Intel with a 4 core i5. AMD just got me back. I just don't like feeding money to the cynical old monopolist.
Apple is already losing significant ground to Android in the 7 inch tablet space, so I don't know what you're foaming about. See, Google was really smart here, if they'd introduced a full size tablet at cost they'd be competing with partners. Bad news. In the 7 inch space they're competing with Amazon, not a partner. And Amazon can take care of themselves, with their own content and ability to loss-lead as you say.
Apple's strategy is the opposite of smart: they're failing to challenge Google and Amazon at the low end, where the volume is. All they're accomplishing really is giving those customers who just have to buy Apple a way to save money on an Apple tablet. And hopefully not feel too bummed out when they compare their Christmas present to Android owners with much slicker hardware that cost less money.
I'd assumed that Apple had been streaming their product launches for years. They weren't?
And now they only stream to the Apple faithful, reminding everybody about that walled garden thing. The message they seem to send is "we have no hope of converting new customers, we'll just keep preaching to the converted" and hope to stem defections. Now the consensus is coming in from around the web: the price is problematic and the specs are considerably weaker than Nexus 7.
I sense a great disturbance in the Force, as if millions of voices suddenly cried out "I want one now"
That's amazing, in spite of the fact the this new product has lower screen resolution than a product that costs $130 less, sports an obsolete dual core processor, and still has no built in USB port.
you seem to think that Apple entering that space with a competing product right before the holiday season will actually drive customers away from Apple?
Yup I do. Apple priced it too high, pure and simple, and that is just because of fear of cannibalizing their own full size tablet sales. Mistake. This way, Apple gets to cannibalize its higher margin tablets *and* lose ground to lower priced Android tablets. Not that I disapprove of Apple making mistakes. On the contrary, I think Apple should make as many mistakes as possible. I just love that fixed screen resolution thing.
Since when has any Apple customer cared about a price difference of $100?
You're right, Apple customers obviously don't care about saving $100 since they are still customers, but Apple ex-customers do. That is precisely how Apple lost the lead in the smartphone market.
Slashdot Mirror
Let's be specific about it. The place for Windows RT is to occupy the void formerly filled by Windows CE, with similar success. A Windows that isn't really Windows. Just the thing to irritate the same sheeple who once raised Microsoft up to the dizzying heights of world's most valuable company.
Just a historical note apropo to nothing in particular: when Alaric I marched into Rome to sack it in 410 AD, much of the city had already reverted to swampland. The aquaducts had long since silted up and the sewers weren't working. What Romans remained were living in squalor. So much for former glory.
I don't love KDE for failures like akonadi or nepomuk.
Akonadi is kinda working now, though its performance is embarrassing and it still has lots of racy bugs. Like an idiot, I migrated my Kmail 1 files and suffered through the whole craziness of months of marginal email functionality. Like an idiot, I never pulled the plug and switched to Thunderbird. But today, I'm still operating those same folders, I never did wipe them, I never lost the read/not read state, spam filters are finally working again, it's running faster, it's almost back to where it was before the braindamage. If KDE devs manage to get the performance up to a semblance of what the 3.5 pim apps used to provide I'll maybe forgive them for the pain they caused me with a premature roll out and no fallback plan. Running on top of a real relational database (Postgres for me) is kind of cool, this is where Microsoft wanted to go with Longhorn and failed utterly, but a small KDE team has sorta kinda managed to make it work. Now, please show me what the benefit is. I already know what the pain was.
Despite Canonical and Red Hat having some kind of inexplicable anti-KDE agenda, KDE remains widely popular because it is a first class product of a strong, independent community of skilled developers with taste.
It's nearly beyond belief that Gnome or Unity devs would mandate such a heavyweight, and lets admit it, fragile dependency as OpenGL. I hope the article just got the details wrong. Mind you, I love OpenGL, but requiring all those moving parts just to boot to a desktop would be sheer stupidity. Not that sheer stupidity hasn't been the main active ingredient in Gnome development since the day the project was founded (a foot for a logo? Come on.)
Nice to hear Microsofties boasting about the quality of their OpenGL implementation. Never thought I'd see the day.
There's a simple solution - install Windows Server 2003/2008. It doesn't need fancy graphics card to operate.
Hahaha funny Windows munchkin. Linux admins do not run GUIs on their servers unless they are idiots. I know this is hard to comprehend, but please try to wrap your mind around it.
It means you could get an incorrect replay after a crash and end up needing to do a fsck. Good thing Ext2/3/4 fsck is awesome. Of course, having no replay bug will be much better. Note: the bug was introduced this October 8th. You are not running this kernel on your server or workstation unless you are a dev, it hasn't filtered through to distros yet.
The summary should say "bisected and found" not "found and bisected". Bisecting is a way of finding bugs.
My three year old knows how to use a standard mobile phone...
Does your three year old know how to not lose the phone, or what to do if it is stolen?
Spoken well and truly like somebody who has no kids. So is your two year old going to speed dial you, or have they got your number memorized? You sure they won't drop the phone in a duck pond? Try to eat it?
Oh, and nobody cares about building apps that run both on a PC and a Windows phone. Not even a little bit.
Office. Good enough reason for some, I would say. And as the ecosystem build apps that can run on both your PC and your phone.
Google will be forced to respond by throwing money at (most probably) Apache foundation to bring up OpenOffce on Android faster and eliminate that one advantage. Of course Google would be a lot smarter to throw money at LibreOffice, but Google has some Apache bigots on staff that sometimes get in the way of doing the smartest thing. But... throw enough money and OpenOffice will get there quickly enough. LibreOffice will soon follow of course, because the nice thing about the Apache license is, you can pull that code into a GPL project.
Google should obviously have taken steps to accelerate Open/LibreOffice development a long time ago, but they are fixated on that stupid ChromeOS project nobody care about, and that makes them think that client-side functionality is a bad thing, i.e., uncloudy. Larry probably better think about getting off those drugs, Burning Man is over.
For most desktop users the HD 2500 is more than enough.
Not really. Even screensavers suck on this little thing.
Apple may not have a majority of sales in the smartphone market. However, they have a majority of PROFIT in the smartphone market.
Apple cultists seem to lack a firm grasp of the concept of "eroding margins". Which is what happens in response to eroding market share. Here's how it works: faced with low price competition, if you immediately drop your price to defend your market share then the ending situation is: lower margins, decent market share. If on the other hand, out of fear you decide to accept lower market share in the name of holding margins high, you will surely be forced to lower your margins later to prevent share from going to zero, and at that point you have low market share and low margins. Bummer.
This would seem to describe Tim Cook's current strategy. Judging from the 3% hit Apple stock took today, I would say that Wall street shares this view.
Remember also that the Intel Ivy/Sandy Bridge die size and transistor counts include an integrated GPU. AMD's FX series CPUs don't have an integrated GPU (only their "APU" chips do).
The HD 2500 on the Ivy Bridge desktop chips is a joke, it might as well not be there at all. Any $50 fanless Radeon will blow it right out of the water.
Not dead, but if they're having to sell a chip with twice as many transistors as an i7 for two thirds of the price, they must be spraying blood all over the room.
Not if they're booking a profit on the chip. Comparing AMD's income to Intel's monpoly-boosted margins used to make sense when you knew Intel would be turning a lot of that windfall profit into dirty tricks aimed at choking off AMD's air supply. A couple things changed: Intel has antitrust watchdogs in its hallways now; and Intel has to fight a war on another front, ARM.
Consider this: AMD is able to produce competitive chips with an uncompetitive process. What if Intel actually had to compete on a level playing field, as might well come to pass with multiple competitors banding together in the push to bring up 20nm and 14nm nodes.
I'm interested in this cpu because I'm a dev. It looks like a pretty respectable game workhorse too. I'm glad I didn't waste my money on an i7 last time around, though I did go Intel with a 4 core i5. AMD just got me back. I just don't like feeding money to the cynical old monopolist.
Apple is already losing significant ground to Android in the 7 inch tablet space, so I don't know what you're foaming about. See, Google was really smart here, if they'd introduced a full size tablet at cost they'd be competing with partners. Bad news. In the 7 inch space they're competing with Amazon, not a partner. And Amazon can take care of themselves, with their own content and ability to loss-lead as you say.
Apple's strategy is the opposite of smart: they're failing to challenge Google and Amazon at the low end, where the volume is. All they're accomplishing really is giving those customers who just have to buy Apple a way to save money on an Apple tablet. And hopefully not feel too bummed out when they compare their Christmas present to Android owners with much slicker hardware that cost less money.
No kids much?
I'd assumed that Apple had been streaming their product launches for years. They weren't?
And now they only stream to the Apple faithful, reminding everybody about that walled garden thing. The message they seem to send is "we have no hope of converting new customers, we'll just keep preaching to the converted" and hope to stem defections. Now the consensus is coming in from around the web: the price is problematic and the specs are considerably weaker than Nexus 7.
I sense a great disturbance in the Force, as if millions of voices suddenly cried out "I want one now"
That's amazing, in spite of the fact the this new product has lower screen resolution than a product that costs $130 less, sports an obsolete dual core processor, and still has no built in USB port.
Oh, and the battery is glued in.
"When asked what the most they would pay for a smaller iPad was, our respondents on average said that they would pay $242 for a 7-inch iPad and $268 for an 8-inch iPad," said William Power, Baird Equity Research analyst.
Keep in mind, it would likely be a European judge in this case.
you seem to think that Apple entering that space with a competing product right before the holiday season will actually drive customers away from Apple?
Yup I do. Apple priced it too high, pure and simple, and that is just because of fear of cannibalizing their own full size tablet sales. Mistake. This way, Apple gets to cannibalize its higher margin tablets *and* lose ground to lower priced Android tablets. Not that I disapprove of Apple making mistakes. On the contrary, I think Apple should make as many mistakes as possible. I just love that fixed screen resolution thing.
Since when has any Apple customer cared about a price difference of $100?
You're right, Apple customers obviously don't care about saving $100 since they are still customers, but Apple ex-customers do. That is precisely how Apple lost the lead in the smartphone market.