Believe it. At 00:00 01/01, in Europe everyone texts everyone and the resulting 2 hour mobile outage is a right pain in the arse. As many others have said, SMS uses the control channel which has much less bandwidth and chokes very easily, and also affects voice call functions, even if there's plently of bandwidth free on the voice channel.
SMS wasn't designed for the daily usage that we're seeing today - it was more of a 'hmmm, we'll add this function in as an after thought, but no one's really gonna use it much, are they?'
The fact that Gmail scans mail to serve targeted adverts (anonymously, as they claim) has no bearing whatsoever on the possibilty of either provider taking information from you. Is this hard to grasp for people? Why the knee-jerk anti-Gmail FUD over this?
Any third party email sevice provider has the capability of scanning your email, for what ever reason they want. Just because Gmail openly scans to serve targeted ads, doesn't mean Microsoft doesn't do it secretly to steal information from you.
At last, somebody who actually seems to have used the iphone before slagging it off! I think a replacable battery would arrive over Job's dead body. It's a shame and wasteful unfortunately.
Whatever you say dude... List a few models of phone that can do what the iphone does (must be more than 18 months old obviously - as you did say 'iPhone can do the same thing my phone has been able to do for years').
This ongoing infatuation with hating everything apple is just getting old.
It's not perfect: the lack of an open SDK is annoying (and rather crippling, frankly) and it is over priced. But, it actually does 'just work' and it is very usable. I'm sorry if that annoys you but that's not really my problem:-p
What about take it to the toilet and not have to worry? So, how many times have you dropped a book down the bog (=british slang for toilet) then?! And more importantly, did it flush okay?:-p
Well, it's quite plainly more than 'just a phone'. It may well be priced out of the market for a lot of people (including me), but saying it's 'just a phone' is either ill-informed or a troll.
By your logic, Scientists "lied" when they asserted the atom was the smallest particle. By the same logic, you're an arsehole. No, that's not an ad hominem because it's sarcastic and has as much relevance to the discussion as the assertion you make.
Scientists make assertions openly with peer reviewed data. Any scientist (by definition) would immediately reverse any previous assertion given the opposing evidence.
Politicians, on the over hand, are defined by their ability to continue an opinion or policy in the face of overwhelming opposing evidence/common sense, without any normal sense of 'shame'.
Of course, that reasoning flies in the face of why we went there in the first fucking place We didn't go there for the safety of the indiginous population, that's for sure. We went there because our leaders are as well sighted as moles (and in the name of national security, oil supply security, etc.) Protection of the Kurds, Iraqi political dissidents, etc is nothing but smokescreen.
"Lotteries are a voluntary tax on innumeracy (mathematical illiteracy)." Or more simply, "A tax on the stupid".
From a selfish point of view I love lotteries - I get all the random benefits of the 'good causes' the lottery money has funded. OTOH, the whole 'tax on the stupid' thing sits awkwardly with my ideological views (the same views which will stop me from ever being rich, no doubt...)
Well, yeah bandwidth isn't free. But if an article is truely 'not notably' then it won't be accessed by users and therefore not affect bandwidth significantly (backup bandwidth notwithstanding). Iit's popular and ends up using bandwidth then by definition it has become 'notable'. Storage isn't free either, but it's only (mostly) a bit of plain text. I don't think that's the deal breaker.
Random editors become disenchanted by power hungry admins and leaving, OTOH, is the deal breaker.
The notability aspect of wikipedia is completely subjective and needs to be removed.
You have a point, but one of OS X's advantage's is that rather than presenting the user with many different configuration options, Apple has simply chosen the best and run with it. Yes this gets them into trouble sometimes (3D dock anyone?) but often a CLI command can change the behaviour if you really want to.
Also the trouble with recent convert's feedback is that it's tainted by Microsoftisms. Such as 'Why doesn't the maximise button work?' and 'Why doesn't the app quit when the last window is closed?'. This kind of feedback simplyn indicates that the user is completely missing the point and needs to get better aquainted with the OS.
It's the recent (windows) convert that got used to the 'awful system' you mention;-) Even converts from KDE and gnome have a similar problem, because a lot of these UIs were copied from microsoft.
Your whole post can be summed up with, "I'm not used to it", or,"I can't change from my Windows habits", which doesn't say much about OS X specifically.
I've never understood what's difficult to grasp about apps not quitting when the last window is closed. Why should I want that? 'apple-W' to close the window, 'apple-Q' to quit.
I'm hating the look and function of the new dock, though. Now that is something to complain about!;-)
All laws will only apply to particular groups of people. 'Criminals and such are fair game [to discriminating laws]' - criminals are defined by law so that argument becomes circular. Vehicle speed limit laws will only affect speeders. Homicide laws only affect murders. 'You must be Christian' laws only affect non-christians etc, smoking laws (as in ireland and the UK) only affect smokers, etc.
Democracy as we know is simply a horribly crude majority rule. Democracy has to have conservative mechanisms to protect the rights of minorities.
I suppose it would entail what's commonly known in the trade as a 'miracle'. Miracles (and religions in general) are allowed to exist outside of science (by proponents), which completely fucks up any scientific argument against the said topics (by opponents). It's really the equivalent of the religious 'nut' putting his/her fingers in his/her ears and going 'na-na-na, I'm not listening', which is commonly a difficult argument to counter.
Well, option (1) as described is what's giving the problem discussed in the article, due to incompatibilities with particular 3rd party software. I'm sure Apple's engineers 'spend a ton of time' trying to make it work, but they can hardly test the upgrade with every single last peice of 3rd party software.
You've 'never had a problem'... a sample of one is hardly definitive of everybody else's experience, is it?!
The radiohead site demands that you enter how much you want to pay before you download it, which I think might be more successful than relying on people coming back to donate after downloading it. It plays on the guilt factor of having to actually type in $0.00, perhaps? I know it's only a small distinction but it might play on human nature to get more money?
I've heard of people writing shareware (or donateware or whatever) software, having plenty of downloads but very very low donations. Music following the same model is likely to suffer the same?
Slashdot Mirror
Believe it. At 00:00 01/01, in Europe everyone texts everyone and the resulting 2 hour mobile outage is a right pain in the arse.
As many others have said, SMS uses the control channel which has much less bandwidth and chokes very easily, and also affects voice call functions, even if there's plently of bandwidth free on the voice channel.
SMS wasn't designed for the daily usage that we're seeing today - it was more of a 'hmmm, we'll add this function in as an after thought, but no one's really gonna use it much, are they?'
Insightful? Where the hell did that moderation come from?
All I'm seeing is a small-pricked rant that has little bearing on the parent's post.
It's not a bad rant. mind. It has most of the classic requirements. Perhaps Slashdot needs a '+1, Rant' mod option, in recognition of good rants?
The fact that Gmail scans mail to serve targeted adverts (anonymously, as they claim) has no bearing whatsoever on the possibilty of either provider taking information from you. Is this hard to grasp for people? Why the knee-jerk anti-Gmail FUD over this?
Huh?!
Any third party email sevice provider has the capability of scanning your email, for what ever reason they want. Just because Gmail openly scans to serve targeted ads, doesn't mean Microsoft doesn't do it secretly to steal information from you.
+1, insightful.
At last, somebody who actually seems to have used the iphone before slagging it off!
I think a replacable battery would arrive over Job's dead body. It's a shame and wasteful unfortunately.
Whatever you say dude... List a few models of phone that can do what the iphone does (must be more than 18 months old obviously - as you did say 'iPhone can do the same thing my phone has been able to do for years').
:-p
This ongoing infatuation with hating everything apple is just getting old.
It's not perfect: the lack of an open SDK is annoying (and rather crippling, frankly) and it is over priced. But, it actually does 'just work' and it is very usable. I'm sorry if that annoys you but that's not really my problem
And more importantly, did it flush okay?
Well, it's quite plainly more than 'just a phone'. It may well be priced out of the market for a lot of people (including me), but saying it's 'just a phone' is either ill-informed or a troll.
Oh, we'd have no problems at all fathoming the units (after all, it's not rocket science...??!! *jab at NASA*). We'd just be a bit stupid to bother.
OMG.
By your logic, Scientists "lied" when they asserted the atom was the smallest particle.
By the same logic, you're an arsehole. No, that's not an ad hominem because it's sarcastic and has as much relevance to the discussion as the assertion you make.
Scientists make assertions openly with peer reviewed data. Any scientist (by definition) would immediately reverse any previous assertion given the opposing evidence.
Politicians, on the over hand, are defined by their ability to continue an opinion or policy in the face of overwhelming opposing evidence/common sense, without any normal sense of 'shame'.
Of course, that reasoning flies in the face of why we went there in the first fucking place
We didn't go there for the safety of the indiginous population, that's for sure. We went there because our leaders are as well sighted as moles (and in the name of national security, oil supply security, etc.) Protection of the Kurds, Iraqi political dissidents, etc is nothing but smokescreen.
Well it's probably as reliable as citing the US president.
From a selfish point of view I love lotteries - I get all the random benefits of the 'good causes' the lottery money has funded. OTOH, the whole 'tax on the stupid' thing sits awkwardly with my ideological views (the same views which will stop me from ever being rich, no doubt...)
Well, yeah bandwidth isn't free. But if an article is truely 'not notably' then it won't be accessed by users and therefore not affect bandwidth significantly (backup bandwidth notwithstanding). Iit's popular and ends up using bandwidth then by definition it has become 'notable'. Storage isn't free either, but it's only (mostly) a bit of plain text. I don't think that's the deal breaker.
Random editors become disenchanted by power hungry admins and leaving, OTOH, is the deal breaker.
The notability aspect of wikipedia is completely subjective and needs to be removed.
You have a point, but one of OS X's advantage's is that rather than presenting the user with many different configuration options, Apple has simply chosen the best and run with it. Yes this gets them into trouble sometimes (3D dock anyone?) but often a CLI command can change the behaviour if you really want to.
;-)
Also the trouble with recent convert's feedback is that it's tainted by Microsoftisms. Such as 'Why doesn't the maximise button work?' and 'Why doesn't the app quit when the last window is closed?'. This kind of feedback simplyn indicates that the user is completely missing the point and needs to get better aquainted with the OS.
It's the recent (windows) convert that got used to the 'awful system' you mention
Even converts from KDE and gnome have a similar problem, because a lot of these UIs were copied from microsoft.
Your whole post can be summed up with, "I'm not used to it", or ,"I can't change from my Windows habits", which doesn't say much about OS X specifically.
;-)
I've never understood what's difficult to grasp about apps not quitting when the last window is closed. Why should I want that? 'apple-W' to close the window, 'apple-Q' to quit.
I'm hating the look and function of the new dock, though. Now that is something to complain about!
"I could do half again the work in 3/4 the time"
;-)
You know, you could've just said something like 'I could do twice the work'
All the more reason for car cd players to use post processing to compress the dynamic range. There's no need to fuck the recording for everyone.
All laws will only apply to particular groups of people. 'Criminals and such are fair game [to discriminating laws]' - criminals are defined by law so that argument becomes circular. Vehicle speed limit laws will only affect speeders. Homicide laws only affect murders. 'You must be Christian' laws only affect non-christians etc, smoking laws (as in ireland and the UK) only affect smokers, etc.
Democracy as we know is simply a horribly crude majority rule. Democracy has to have conservative mechanisms to protect the rights of minorities.
I suppose it would entail what's commonly known in the trade as a 'miracle'. Miracles (and religions in general) are allowed to exist outside of science (by proponents), which completely fucks up any scientific argument against the said topics (by opponents). It's really the equivalent of the religious 'nut' putting his/her fingers in his/her ears and going 'na-na-na, I'm not listening', which is commonly a difficult argument to counter.
Well, option (1) as described is what's giving the problem discussed in the article, due to incompatibilities with particular 3rd party software. I'm sure Apple's engineers 'spend a ton of time' trying to make it work, but they can hardly test the upgrade with every single last peice of 3rd party software.
... a sample of one is hardly definitive of everybody else's experience, is it?!
You've 'never had a problem'
I'd guess that a 20kHz triangle wave would sound the same as a sine wave, to a human ear.
The radiohead site demands that you enter how much you want to pay before you download it, which I think might be more successful than relying on people coming back to donate after downloading it. It plays on the guilt factor of having to actually type in $0.00, perhaps? I know it's only a small distinction but it might play on human nature to get more money?
I've heard of people writing shareware (or donateware or whatever) software, having plenty of downloads but very very low donations. Music following the same model is likely to suffer the same?
No, no, it really is overblown hype ;-)
the game that the players created?