Given that there are so many Android phones out there, how hard was it to check in advance that the phone didn't include unwanted apps, like Facebook? I have had a number of Android phones over time - a Mot X, an HTC, and on the tablet front, 3 Verizon Ellipsis tablets. None of them ever had Facebook, and the one that did, HTC, I had no problems deleting the app
Depends on the phone/tablet. I have an HTC phone and a Verizon Ellipsis tablet, and neither of them has Facebook on it
Besides, even if Facebook is there, unless one logs in, or has in the Account settings the same email address as the one used in the Facebook account, why would that matter in the first place?
The reason people buy Apple is the same reason they buy a Prada, a Gucci, a Ray Bans or a Michael Kors. Apple has, through a combination of sleek appearance of their products and a thorough UX design, created a brand name that rivals those 2 companies. If they could sell iPhones 8 & X for the money they do, I doubt that their adapting spying features would do anything to their revenue.
Microsoft could have done the same, except that they got it wrong so many times that their product just didn't have the same draw as Apple's
Microsoft was a better company when they were in the OS and software business, as opposed to the data collection business that they adapted under Nadella. As a former Silicon Valley worker, I am embarrassed at the industry's evolution from products - be it chips, routers, workstations and other devices - to advertizing driven services. Yeah, I know that it's the public's craving for 'free' that brought about this, but it's embarrassing all the same
I agree w/ Fahrbot above: Apple makes real money selling products that have developed a brand image for themselves - both in terms of usability and sleekness. It doesn't cost too much money to manufacture an iPhone, but their ability to sell those despite their prices is awe inspiring. I didn't expect either the iPhone 8 or X to take off, but they did. Given the money they have, they have absolutely no reason to trade in data, and can actually position themselves quite positively against the likes of Google or Microsoft. I'm unsure how FaceBook is an Apple competitor, however, but if Apple disapproves of their practice, are they gonna disable the spying features of FaceBook under iOS?
Unlike on PCs, phones did not upgrade to Windows 10 Mobile from Windows Phone 8. I had their entry level Lumia 520s, and that was one of those that couldn't be upgraded, despite having the same 8GB of storage. I had to get a phone that had W10M preinstalled, which I did w/ the Lumia 550.
But I'm actually tempted to try a windows phone. Android vendors don't patch their shit, instead they recommend you buy a new phone. iPhones are way too locked down for me. The only real question I have is will a windows phone do the few simple tasks I need the phone to do? I'm sure it will but I'll have to learn the tools available in their system. Lucky for me, all I need is a windows PC to see. I trust Microsoft more to keep their phone OS patched then I do Android vendors.
What are the tasks you need to do? For me, the minimum that a phone has to do is VOIP/video calling in addition to the normal, and from what I know, WhatsApp hasn't dropped support for it. But most banking apps ain't there or ain't fully functional as Android or iOS: try depositing a check, for example, on a Lumia, if you have a bank that has no nearby offices.
The last phone that I bought recently after my Moto X died was an HTC 530. It came w/ Marshmallow, and got upgraded to Nuggat. May not have Oreo, but it has the main thing I needed: the ability to format the SD card as internal memory.
But I'm still trying to think of examples of quality apps for Windows 10.
Quantity of apps wasn't really the issue, but the lack of some essential apps definitely was. Like the lack of any popular video or VOIP app for the phone until WhatsApp added it. Also there was no Uber Partner or Lyft Driver app in this, for anyone who might want to use the phone to pick up passengers. It was just okay for some barebones utility: if you were an employer who didn't want the employees to use the phone for personal fetishes that they might do w/ an iPhone or a Galaxy, this certainly was the one to buy. The best app I had for this phone was OneNote, although it exists on the other 2 phone platforms as well
If Microsoft is bringing back the phone, make Microsoft Launch a part of it as well
Windows Phone 10 is still alive and well. It's still a better phone OS than the other two.
Posted via a Windows Phone 10 Alcatel Idol 4S.
How is it alive? Last year, Microsoft not only yanked the phones from its mall stores, they also stopped all updates to the OS, and disabled WiFi in the OS. I was pretty much forced to switch back to Android, despite hating Google.
If Microsoft wants to be taken seriously in any market, the least they need to do is not sabotage an existing user base of anything for any reason - be it Windows 7, Windows Phone 8, Windows 10 Mobile, Xbox, Windows CE or whatever
Could it? Yes. Will it? No. The other OSes will always be putting something in that makes it break, and playing catchup isn't viable. You also don't want always to be the tail getting wagged by the big dogs.
In terms of Windows, does Linux really need to be compatible to Windows 8 or later? If any Linux distro, or Linux in general, finds a way to fully support Windows 7 applications, it should be fine, since much of the computing population has done their level best to cling on to 7 and resist kicking & screaming the move to 10. Just look at the apps available for the Windows 10 App store, and that'll tell you a story
On the Mac side of things, are they talking about OS X compatibility or iOS compatibility? If it's the former, is there a huge base of applications for OS X, aside from Apple's own applications like Pages or Numbers? And if it's the latter, the argument now shifts to Linux running VMs that support these apps. But why are we trying to run phone/tablet apps on a laptop, instead of the platforms they were designed for?
I have too many tabs open in my browser, so having a separate app makes a lot more sense. Speaking in general of all websites that have apps - be it Yelp!, Fandango, Best Buy, et al, not just Twitter or FaceBook
He's a supporter of Donald Trump, who wants a military parade, like the ones the French have, to celebrate the day when the 99% began cutting off the heads of the 1%.
Sadat was also fond of military parades, until the day, when a couple of the tens of thousands of armed people walking by, shot him dead.
Perhaps Peter can stand beside him during the parade.
He is? I read that he was one of the people potentially backing Steve Bannon after the Mercers withdrew their support to the latter. That would put him at odds w/ the president, not endear him to the White House or for that matter, the mainstream GOP
The above argument is valid in software, where the only assets that a company has is its IP. It's not true for semiconductor companies where their manufacturing capabilities and other advantages do matter.
While theoretically, it's conceivable that a semiconductor company could surface that makes Intel completely irrelevant, it's inconceivable that that company could be AMD. AMD had some opportunities in the early 2000s - the best one when they acquired the DEC Alpha design team and produced the K7 and its derivatives, and also when they produced a 64-bit x86 extension while Intel was still hung up on Itanium. But AMD never had the fab expertise that came even close to Intel, so the fact that Intel was 2-3 generations ahead of AMD ensured that the latter would never catch up.
Now, last year, Samsung did displace Intel in terms of semiconductor revenue, but that was due to memory prices stabilizing, and them being a major source of not just that, but ARM chips as well. But keep in mind that the most modern fabs cost $10 billion to build and set up, and except for Intel, almost every fab maker has either had to get government funding to back it - like TSMC or GSMC, or go out of business or get sold, which is what AMD did to Global Semi. So unless a company has revenues approaching a trillion, it's unlikely to make a successful entry into the semiconductor market. I guess Apple could do that, if it wanted to own all production of its A series CPUs
Or Intel genuinely hates Trump, as he gave them a tough time over their offshoring practices, and the Charlottesville incident last year gave Brian Krzanich the pretext to quit the presidential economic advisor's council. So Intel chose to give Beijing the first heads up before DC
However, as automation eliminates most jobs, it also eliminates most (easy) ways of making money. Given that, automatically creating money for everybody should be the newest project out there, so that loss of jobs due to automation is a non-issue
As a PC-BSD/TrueOS user, I wonder about that. It used to be that the updates were pretty smooth. Since TrueOS succeeded PC-BSD in ver 11 onwards as a rolling update, I've found it next to impossible to upgrade my revs, but can't work in the older revs either. Which is a pity.
Are there any other subnet sizes in VLAN that are used? Incidentally,/96 makes more sense than/64, and had that been the rule, having automatic routing embedded in the global prefix would have been more achievable
Websites need routable addresses, so address exhaustion is a real problem that NAT cannot resolve. Neither can virtual hosting. In which case, they'd be forced into IPv6, and then they may or may not take advantage of other IPv6 features. Also, virtual hosting would be a thing of the past, as foo.bar.com would map into 2001:db8:dead:beef::1 while foobar.bar.com would map into 2001:db8:dead:beef::2. No more need for the IP address to be shared
IPv4 compatibility w/ IPv6 ain't the same as, say, Windows 10 compatibility w/ Windows 7, or i7 compatibility w/ i3. Think of v4 as being a surface street or a 2 lane highway, and v6 being an 8 lane freeway.
A bit of both. First, back when the Internet Protocol was created, there weren't 4 billion people on Earth let alone 4 billion devices that needed to be connected to a network. Secondly, handling and transmitting 128-bit identifiers would have been a bit much for the computers and networks of that era.
So, as I said, very few (if any) people thought the internet would get as big as it is and systems 30 to 40 years ago wouldn't have been able to handle IPv6 the way systems now can.
Actually, when the Internet Protocol was first created, it was only created for the US Department of Defense and their clients: there was never any intention for this to be used by the entire civilian population of the US, let alone the world. Once it became clear that it was catching on, the IPv6 (then IPng) started.
Also, at the time IPv4 came about, most computers were 8 or 16 bit, much less 32, so having a 128 bit address would have really slowed things down
Slashdot Mirror
McDonalds doesn't sell tables and chairs, but those are one of the main attractions of going there (it's definitely not the food).
Really? How does that explain the people who take-out or use the Drive thru?
Given that there are so many Android phones out there, how hard was it to check in advance that the phone didn't include unwanted apps, like Facebook? I have had a number of Android phones over time - a Mot X, an HTC, and on the tablet front, 3 Verizon Ellipsis tablets. None of them ever had Facebook, and the one that did, HTC, I had no problems deleting the app
Depends on the phone/tablet. I have an HTC phone and a Verizon Ellipsis tablet, and neither of them has Facebook on it
Besides, even if Facebook is there, unless one logs in, or has in the Account settings the same email address as the one used in the Facebook account, why would that matter in the first place?
have retained data sets that were supposed to be destroyed
Can you imagine the SIZE of all of those PST files? (Oh, so it's just me -- nobody's an Exchange/Outlook admin anymore??)
Size of PST files? It's been a while since I last used Outlook, but don't PST files have a limit of 2GB, beyond which they can't grow?
Facebook's made-up "market value" went down. *POTENTIAL* money was lost. No actual money was lost. RIAA math at work again.
Precisely! How does one do the public valuation of what's simply a glorified website?
The reason people buy Apple is the same reason they buy a Prada, a Gucci, a Ray Bans or a Michael Kors. Apple has, through a combination of sleek appearance of their products and a thorough UX design, created a brand name that rivals those 2 companies. If they could sell iPhones 8 & X for the money they do, I doubt that their adapting spying features would do anything to their revenue.
Microsoft could have done the same, except that they got it wrong so many times that their product just didn't have the same draw as Apple's
Microsoft was a better company when they were in the OS and software business, as opposed to the data collection business that they adapted under Nadella. As a former Silicon Valley worker, I am embarrassed at the industry's evolution from products - be it chips, routers, workstations and other devices - to advertizing driven services. Yeah, I know that it's the public's craving for 'free' that brought about this, but it's embarrassing all the same
I agree w/ Fahrbot above: Apple makes real money selling products that have developed a brand image for themselves - both in terms of usability and sleekness. It doesn't cost too much money to manufacture an iPhone, but their ability to sell those despite their prices is awe inspiring. I didn't expect either the iPhone 8 or X to take off, but they did. Given the money they have, they have absolutely no reason to trade in data, and can actually position themselves quite positively against the likes of Google or Microsoft. I'm unsure how FaceBook is an Apple competitor, however, but if Apple disapproves of their practice, are they gonna disable the spying features of FaceBook under iOS?
Precisely! How does one compare a text editor to a full blown shell emulator? Next they will be comparing Google to Facebook. Oh, wait!
Unlike on PCs, phones did not upgrade to Windows 10 Mobile from Windows Phone 8. I had their entry level Lumia 520s, and that was one of those that couldn't be upgraded, despite having the same 8GB of storage. I had to get a phone that had W10M preinstalled, which I did w/ the Lumia 550.
But I'm actually tempted to try a windows phone. Android vendors don't patch their shit, instead they recommend you buy a new phone. iPhones are way too locked down for me. The only real question I have is will a windows phone do the few simple tasks I need the phone to do? I'm sure it will but I'll have to learn the tools available in their system. Lucky for me, all I need is a windows PC to see. I trust Microsoft more to keep their phone OS patched then I do Android vendors.
What are the tasks you need to do? For me, the minimum that a phone has to do is VOIP/video calling in addition to the normal, and from what I know, WhatsApp hasn't dropped support for it. But most banking apps ain't there or ain't fully functional as Android or iOS: try depositing a check, for example, on a Lumia, if you have a bank that has no nearby offices.
The last phone that I bought recently after my Moto X died was an HTC 530. It came w/ Marshmallow, and got upgraded to Nuggat. May not have Oreo, but it has the main thing I needed: the ability to format the SD card as internal memory.
It should be about quality, not quantity of apps.
But I'm still trying to think of examples of quality apps for Windows 10.
Quantity of apps wasn't really the issue, but the lack of some essential apps definitely was. Like the lack of any popular video or VOIP app for the phone until WhatsApp added it. Also there was no Uber Partner or Lyft Driver app in this, for anyone who might want to use the phone to pick up passengers. It was just okay for some barebones utility: if you were an employer who didn't want the employees to use the phone for personal fetishes that they might do w/ an iPhone or a Galaxy, this certainly was the one to buy. The best app I had for this phone was OneNote, although it exists on the other 2 phone platforms as well
If Microsoft is bringing back the phone, make Microsoft Launch a part of it as well
Windows Phone 10 is still alive and well. It's still a better phone OS than the other two. Posted via a Windows Phone 10 Alcatel Idol 4S.
How is it alive? Last year, Microsoft not only yanked the phones from its mall stores, they also stopped all updates to the OS, and disabled WiFi in the OS. I was pretty much forced to switch back to Android, despite hating Google.
If Microsoft wants to be taken seriously in any market, the least they need to do is not sabotage an existing user base of anything for any reason - be it Windows 7, Windows Phone 8, Windows 10 Mobile, Xbox, Windows CE or whatever
Could it? Yes. Will it? No. The other OSes will always be putting something in that makes it break, and playing catchup isn't viable. You also don't want always to be the tail getting wagged by the big dogs.
In terms of Windows, does Linux really need to be compatible to Windows 8 or later? If any Linux distro, or Linux in general, finds a way to fully support Windows 7 applications, it should be fine, since much of the computing population has done their level best to cling on to 7 and resist kicking & screaming the move to 10. Just look at the apps available for the Windows 10 App store, and that'll tell you a story
On the Mac side of things, are they talking about OS X compatibility or iOS compatibility? If it's the former, is there a huge base of applications for OS X, aside from Apple's own applications like Pages or Numbers? And if it's the latter, the argument now shifts to Linux running VMs that support these apps. But why are we trying to run phone/tablet apps on a laptop, instead of the platforms they were designed for?
I have too many tabs open in my browser, so having a separate app makes a lot more sense. Speaking in general of all websites that have apps - be it Yelp!, Fandango, Best Buy, et al, not just Twitter or FaceBook
He's a supporter of Donald Trump, who wants a military parade, like the ones the French have, to celebrate the day when the 99% began cutting off the heads of the 1%. Sadat was also fond of military parades, until the day, when a couple of the tens of thousands of armed people walking by, shot him dead. Perhaps Peter can stand beside him during the parade.
He is? I read that he was one of the people potentially backing Steve Bannon after the Mercers withdrew their support to the latter. That would put him at odds w/ the president, not endear him to the White House or for that matter, the mainstream GOP
The above argument is valid in software, where the only assets that a company has is its IP. It's not true for semiconductor companies where their manufacturing capabilities and other advantages do matter.
While theoretically, it's conceivable that a semiconductor company could surface that makes Intel completely irrelevant, it's inconceivable that that company could be AMD. AMD had some opportunities in the early 2000s - the best one when they acquired the DEC Alpha design team and produced the K7 and its derivatives, and also when they produced a 64-bit x86 extension while Intel was still hung up on Itanium. But AMD never had the fab expertise that came even close to Intel, so the fact that Intel was 2-3 generations ahead of AMD ensured that the latter would never catch up.
Now, last year, Samsung did displace Intel in terms of semiconductor revenue, but that was due to memory prices stabilizing, and them being a major source of not just that, but ARM chips as well. But keep in mind that the most modern fabs cost $10 billion to build and set up, and except for Intel, almost every fab maker has either had to get government funding to back it - like TSMC or GSMC, or go out of business or get sold, which is what AMD did to Global Semi. So unless a company has revenues approaching a trillion, it's unlikely to make a successful entry into the semiconductor market. I guess Apple could do that, if it wanted to own all production of its A series CPUs
Or Intel genuinely hates Trump, as he gave them a tough time over their offshoring practices, and the Charlottesville incident last year gave Brian Krzanich the pretext to quit the presidential economic advisor's council. So Intel chose to give Beijing the first heads up before DC
However, as automation eliminates most jobs, it also eliminates most (easy) ways of making money. Given that, automatically creating money for everybody should be the newest project out there, so that loss of jobs due to automation is a non-issue
Maybe something akin to bitcoin mining?
As a PC-BSD/TrueOS user, I wonder about that. It used to be that the updates were pretty smooth. Since TrueOS succeeded PC-BSD in ver 11 onwards as a rolling update, I've found it next to impossible to upgrade my revs, but can't work in the older revs either. Which is a pity.
Are there any other subnet sizes in VLAN that are used? Incidentally, /96 makes more sense than /64, and had that been the rule, having automatic routing embedded in the global prefix would have been more achievable
Websites need routable addresses, so address exhaustion is a real problem that NAT cannot resolve. Neither can virtual hosting. In which case, they'd be forced into IPv6, and then they may or may not take advantage of other IPv6 features. Also, virtual hosting would be a thing of the past, as foo.bar.com would map into 2001:db8:dead:beef::1 while foobar.bar.com would map into 2001:db8:dead:beef::2. No more need for the IP address to be shared
IPv4 compatibility w/ IPv6 ain't the same as, say, Windows 10 compatibility w/ Windows 7, or i7 compatibility w/ i3. Think of v4 as being a surface street or a 2 lane highway, and v6 being an 8 lane freeway.
A bit of both. First, back when the Internet Protocol was created, there weren't 4 billion people on Earth let alone 4 billion devices that needed to be connected to a network. Secondly, handling and transmitting 128-bit identifiers would have been a bit much for the computers and networks of that era.
So, as I said, very few (if any) people thought the internet would get as big as it is and systems 30 to 40 years ago wouldn't have been able to handle IPv6 the way systems now can.
Actually, when the Internet Protocol was first created, it was only created for the US Department of Defense and their clients: there was never any intention for this to be used by the entire civilian population of the US, let alone the world. Once it became clear that it was catching on, the IPv6 (then IPng) started.
Also, at the time IPv4 came about, most computers were 8 or 16 bit, much less 32, so having a 128 bit address would have really slowed things down
I thought that all the mobile providers are now forced to do IPv6 simply b'cos of address exhaustion