>>And your judgement is that I've over-simplified, and that "it" is not about Samsung. > >Which is correct and you know it. Apple's claims are about a lot more than shapes and colors.
Not the ones I'm arguing about or which have been in the news lately.
>There were no successful smartphones in the market like the iPhone before its introduction,
This is a nice use of the "no true scotsman" falacy. I was using true smartphones over 10 years ago and worked customising the first microsoft smartphone (appeal to authority there).
>and now looking like an iPhone is "standard". What you did was to reduce Apple's claims to >absurdity, which is also a fallacy that does nothing more than to show your fanboyism and is thus foolish.
No but that's what you just did.
>> I make no such appeal. I merely identify my audience to you. Summarising >> to those who agree is a form of social currency and self-identification. > >You did that in an attempt to refute an argument in a debate, which is what makes > it fallacious.
There is no debate, only the one in your head
>As an argument, your audience is pointless, and your denial of this now >only serves to show that you were not thinking rationally when you branched this thread > and are now foolishly attempting to safe face.
I'm not making an argument (except now, about the fact that I'm not) as I said below
>>I have no such burden, it is an opinion based on observation. >> My opinion is that Apple are idiots, who abused their customers >>from the start of the ipod battery debacle, and who assert the dumbest >>non-inventive patents ever, and that it gives me great pleasure to watch >> them wiggle under patents that at least have more technical value than those they asserted.
>In that case I question the logic by which you call others idiots, since > you demonstrate exactly the same kind of fanaticism that you accuse > others of showing. As an Apple customer, I haven't had any battery issues > to complain about since the iPhone 4S' launch, and it is now unofficially known
I was talking about gen1 ipod battery issues
> that those issues are caused by faulty GPS hardware on some phones, so > anyone can take their phone to an Apple Store and complain about that now, > or simply disable Location Services if they don't wish to wait for the phone to > get fixed. As to non-inventive, as I mentioned earlier, you seem to suffer from > hindsight bias, because I don't recall any successful phone in the market similar > to an iPhone before 2007, and now all smart phones look like that. Inventive or not, > Apple deserves credibility, because they came up with a profitable design.
Patent is not about design.
>> My stance is not to obtain the approval of Apple, I've expressed my view to >> the understanding of my audience I don't need to re-think anything. I'm not sure that the depth >> of their pockets is relevant unless you expect them to buy a judge or buy Samsung - >> either of which would count as severe wriggling.
>I really do have to wonder whether you are karma whoring, > because you seem a lot more concerned about the way your "audience" > perceives you than about thinking rationally and having a logical enlightening debate online.
Dude, it was a throw-away comment, summary of my opinion based on over 10 years of experience, 3 spent in the smartphone industry (appeal to authority)
> Again, talk about being an idiot...
Well for someone who wants reasoning this is the first time you showed any! I didn't was reason I just gave summary of position.
>>Your lack of vision is your own problem > >Being 95.2% disabled with a congenital open angle glaucoma, lack of vision is indeed my problem, but it doesn't affect my judgement in this case.;)
And your judgement is that I've over-simplified, and that "it" is not about Samsung.
>>I think you find that many people agree with the rational conclusion I posted here. > >Appeal to popularity is a fallacy.
I make no such appeal. I merely identify my audience to you. Summarising to those who agree is a form of social currency and self-identification.
>>What I have not done is demonstrate the rational reasoning behind it, I suppose that >>most readers are able to draw similar conclusions from their own observations. >>You admit that you cannot see to do this, and I accept your admission. > >But you still have burden of proof.
I have no such burden, it is an opinion based on observation. My opinion is that Apple are idiots, who abused their customers from the start of the ipod battery debacle, and who assert the dumbest non-inventive patents ever, and that it gives me great pleasure to watch them wiggle under patents that at least have more technical value than those they asserted.
>>I am hoping that Apple do refuse to accept to be extorted; I'm looking for a long painful fight to >>dissuade anyone from taking the same path that they have taken. > >They have deep pockets. $100 billion deep to be more precise, and their strategies >have only brought them profit. You need to rethink your stance.
My stance is not to obtain the approval of Apple, I've expressed my view to the understanding of my audience I don't need to re-think anything. I'm not sure that the depth of their pockets is relevant unless you expect them to buy a judge or buy Samsung - either of which would count as severe wriggling.
I'm not trying to bankrupt Apple, just enjoy them getting some of what they've been dishing out.
> I fail to see what that has to do with anything, or why Apple would accept to be extorted for a software patent in the EU.
Your lack of vision is your own problem
> Due to your inability to think rationally, I strongly advise you to at least exert some caution when insulting others.
I think you find that many people agree with the rational conclusion I posted here.
What I have not done is demonstrate the rational reasoning behind it, I suppose that most readers are able to draw similar conclusions from their own observations. You admit that you cannot see to do this, and I accept your admission.
I am hoping that Apple do refuse to accept to be extorted; I'm looking for a long painful fight to dissuade anyone from taking the same path that they have taken.
This is not an isolated story, it is one in a series, and it jolly well is about Samsung as they are the ones who have been long term abused by apple with "not real invention" patents and it's nice to seem then able to wield muscle against apple.
Apple are just new-boy idiots. Apple is claiming against Samsung for round corners, similar size, and a slide lock - that's the degree of apple innovation!
I can at least respect Samsung's patent somewhat as it actually does something and they might have actually been the first ones to do whatever they patented.
When apple lose more than they gained through this, we'll maybe start to see sense.
That's the guy. I wonder if you took the time to read what you just posted? Maybe he beat up a woman; he didn't kill unarmed civilians, but he grassed up those who were. I don't think the fact that he may have beat up a woman erase their crime or means he should have kept quiet about it.
A decent manchild will acknowledge his faults and not "tit-for-tat" be quiet about other peoples abuses.
And maybe he threw tantrums but removal of due process is certainly a bigger tantrum, don't you think?
The *AA and related music publishers are government sponsored pirates. They raid the public domain, the prevent their own work from being in the public domain. They sell music to which they do not have the rights. They rob their own artists with dodgy accounting. They falsely inflate damages by infringers in order to punish them way beyond worse offenders They use other peoples materials without rights because they (like everyone else) can't be bothered to follow the laws they sponsor They issue false take-down notices to material that they do not own (some of which they or their artists use illegally). They interfere with the politics of other nations in order to further their own interest. They attempt to make a criminal out of every man woman and child in the world in order to increase revenue.
These are all behaviours observed over the last few years. Will other slashdot readers please provide citations for each type of behaviour or add new behaviours.
We then ask why elected officials pay more attention to this group of pirates than individuals who have the democratic right to vote.
I learned Z80 machine code by reading other peoples listings and comparing to the mnemonics at the back of the ZX81 manual.
I programmed a cool morse-code decoder, and a music program that played sound out of the TV speaker (along with a load of junk).
I also beat someone elses implementation of read, data & restore.
Then I went on to a CPC6128, then BBC Micro with econet and advanced programmers guide. Then hacking MSDOS with debug and edlin. Then Windows 3.1 and Delphi; win95, then moving to winXP and Linux and sticking with Linux - for the freedom you know.
For a while I had a ZX81 emulator on my android phone, but like the other guy said, you couldn't pay me to go back to it.
It was awful. At the time it was great and helped make me, but I won't go back. You can't make me!
Use enterprise WPA2 with keys. Give each client device a key. Charge $5 to provide a key. Church members who are donating will probably reduce their donation by $5 that month in order to pay for the key.
You can revoke keys individually.
Disclaimer: I don't know what I'm talking about, you might need expensive hotspots to do that, but for large building with more than one hotspot, you probably want special hotspots with decent handover as folk move from one hotspot to another.
Literate programming means that instead of commenting your code (or feeling guilty for not doing so) you code your comments. Or rather you write a book about the problem your program solves, and in the narrative of the book you introduce aspects of code that solve the problem. As you do this you slowly reveal the solution - a well documented solution!
No-one is forced to use it, my replacement (when the day comes) can just edit the generated source if they want.
Also consider Mylyn Intent for Eclipse Java coding if you like that sort of thing.
Sometimes, what's good for the stock-price is not good for the business.
Maybe he had to be "decisive" and "strategic" in order to survive so he went boldly ahead to exit the DVD-by-mail business and preserved investor confidence at the expense of the business, even though he wasn't sure it was a good idea.
Yeah... that was my experience... when WP for windows came out it sucked and crashed and was useless; it's fans tried hard to like it and pretend it was OK, and made excuses for it... but it was not good.
Orange was a Microsoft Gold Partner, and I wrote the Orange custom home screen software complete with easter-egg while working for Orange in Leeds.
Now I learn it was all just a dream... it wasn't a REAL windows phone at all... or maybe Elop is too young and inexperienced to remember recent history... ah well..
I think gnome3 is great. It does have a menu (despite most people saying it doesn't: hint - click on "applications" instead of "windows" when you press the menu button)
However.. I also have a three monitor desktop, using xinerama, one of them is a udlfb usb frame-buffer device. So I guess gnome3 will never work for me. This forces me to mint, which I've been considering after being ignored and/or insulted to death by launchpad.
It's also wrong. The menu hasn't gone. Press the windows button (or mouse-move to the top-left-corner)
You then get to choose from "windows" (running apps) or if you want, click on the word "Applications" and you get the FULL menu with categories to the right. You can either browse the full menu or click on a category and browse that sub-menu of applications.
It's something new and original and much easier to work in principle and not based on windows 95 either.
Slashdot Mirror
>>And your judgement is that I've over-simplified, and that "it" is not about Samsung.
>
>Which is correct and you know it. Apple's claims are about a lot more than shapes and colors.
Not the ones I'm arguing about or which have been in the news lately.
>There were no successful smartphones in the market like the iPhone before its introduction,
This is a nice use of the "no true scotsman" falacy. I was using true smartphones over 10 years ago and worked customising the first microsoft smartphone (appeal to authority there).
>and now looking like an iPhone is "standard". What you did was to reduce Apple's claims to
>absurdity, which is also a fallacy that does nothing more than to show your fanboyism and is thus foolish.
No but that's what you just did.
>> I make no such appeal. I merely identify my audience to you. Summarising
>> to those who agree is a form of social currency and self-identification.
>
>You did that in an attempt to refute an argument in a debate, which is what makes
> it fallacious.
There is no debate, only the one in your head
>As an argument, your audience is pointless, and your denial of this now
>only serves to show that you were not thinking rationally when you branched this thread
> and are now foolishly attempting to safe face.
I'm not making an argument (except now, about the fact that I'm not) as I said below
>>I have no such burden, it is an opinion based on observation.
>> My opinion is that Apple are idiots, who abused their customers
>>from the start of the ipod battery debacle, and who assert the dumbest
>>non-inventive patents ever, and that it gives me great pleasure to watch
>> them wiggle under patents that at least have more technical value than those they asserted.
>In that case I question the logic by which you call others idiots, since
> you demonstrate exactly the same kind of fanaticism that you accuse
> others of showing. As an Apple customer, I haven't had any battery issues
> to complain about since the iPhone 4S' launch, and it is now unofficially known
I was talking about gen1 ipod battery issues
> that those issues are caused by faulty GPS hardware on some phones, so
> anyone can take their phone to an Apple Store and complain about that now,
> or simply disable Location Services if they don't wish to wait for the phone to
> get fixed. As to non-inventive, as I mentioned earlier, you seem to suffer from
> hindsight bias, because I don't recall any successful phone in the market similar
> to an iPhone before 2007, and now all smart phones look like that. Inventive or not,
> Apple deserves credibility, because they came up with a profitable design.
Patent is not about design.
>> My stance is not to obtain the approval of Apple, I've expressed my view to
>> the understanding of my audience I don't need to re-think anything. I'm not sure that the depth
>> of their pockets is relevant unless you expect them to buy a judge or buy Samsung -
>> either of which would count as severe wriggling.
>I really do have to wonder whether you are karma whoring,
> because you seem a lot more concerned about the way your "audience"
> perceives you than about thinking rationally and having a logical enlightening debate online.
Dude, it was a throw-away comment, summary of my opinion based on over 10 years of experience, 3 spent in the smartphone industry (appeal to authority)
> Again, talk about being an idiot...
Well for someone who wants reasoning this is the first time you showed any! I didn't was reason I just gave summary of position.
>>Your lack of vision is your own problem ;)
>
>Being 95.2% disabled with a congenital open angle glaucoma, lack of vision is indeed my problem, but it doesn't affect my judgement in this case.
And your judgement is that I've over-simplified, and that "it" is not about Samsung.
>>I think you find that many people agree with the rational conclusion I posted here.
>
>Appeal to popularity is a fallacy.
I make no such appeal. I merely identify my audience to you. Summarising to those who agree is a form of social currency and self-identification.
>>What I have not done is demonstrate the rational reasoning behind it, I suppose that
>>most readers are able to draw similar conclusions from their own observations.
>>You admit that you cannot see to do this, and I accept your admission.
>
>But you still have burden of proof.
I have no such burden, it is an opinion based on observation. My opinion is that Apple are idiots, who abused their customers from the start of the ipod battery debacle, and who assert the dumbest non-inventive patents ever, and that it gives me great pleasure to watch them wiggle under patents that at least have more technical value than those they asserted.
>>I am hoping that Apple do refuse to accept to be extorted; I'm looking for a long painful fight to
>>dissuade anyone from taking the same path that they have taken.
>
>They have deep pockets. $100 billion deep to be more precise, and their strategies
>have only brought them profit. You need to rethink your stance.
My stance is not to obtain the approval of Apple, I've expressed my view to the understanding of my audience I don't need to re-think anything. I'm not sure that the depth of their pockets is relevant unless you expect them to buy a judge or buy Samsung - either of which would count as severe wriggling.
I'm not trying to bankrupt Apple, just enjoy them getting some of what they've been dishing out.
> I fail to see what that has to do with anything, or why Apple would accept to be extorted for a software patent in the EU.
Your lack of vision is your own problem
> Due to your inability to think rationally, I strongly advise you to at least exert some caution when insulting others.
I think you find that many people agree with the rational conclusion I posted here.
What I have not done is demonstrate the rational reasoning behind it, I suppose that most readers are able to draw similar conclusions from their own observations. You admit that you cannot see to do this, and I accept your admission.
I am hoping that Apple do refuse to accept to be extorted; I'm looking for a long painful fight to dissuade anyone from taking the same path that they have taken.
Iit is a summary judgement based on extended observation, not an oversimplification.
This post (not mine) says it better: http://apple.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2691519&cid=39157081
This is not an isolated story, it is one in a series, and it jolly well is about Samsung as they are the ones who have been long term abused by apple with "not real invention" patents and it's nice to seem then able to wield muscle against apple.
Apple are just new-boy idiots. Apple is claiming against Samsung for round corners, similar size, and a slide lock - that's the degree of apple innovation!
I can at least respect Samsung's patent somewhat as it actually does something and they might have actually been the first ones to do whatever they patented.
When apple lose more than they gained through this, we'll maybe start to see sense.
NO! I've paid for software that does these stupid online serial number checks; and I wish I'd pirated the software instead.
Big fail there, to make a paying customer WISH he had a pirated version.
That's the guy. I wonder if you took the time to read what you just posted? Maybe he beat up a woman; he didn't kill unarmed civilians, but he grassed up those who were. I don't think the fact that he may have beat up a woman erase their crime or means he should have kept quiet about it.
A decent manchild will acknowledge his faults and not "tit-for-tat" be quiet about other peoples abuses.
And maybe he threw tantrums but removal of due process is certainly a bigger tantrum, don't you think?
Perhaps he should be nominated for the not-yet existing Bradley Manning prize for integrity in the face of overwhelming odds.
The *AA and related music publishers are government sponsored pirates.
They raid the public domain, the prevent their own work from being in the public domain.
They sell music to which they do not have the rights.
They rob their own artists with dodgy accounting.
They falsely inflate damages by infringers in order to punish them way beyond worse offenders
They use other peoples materials without rights because they (like everyone else) can't be bothered to follow the laws they sponsor
They issue false take-down notices to material that they do not own (some of which they or their artists use illegally).
They interfere with the politics of other nations in order to further their own interest.
They attempt to make a criminal out of every man woman and child in the world in order to increase revenue.
These are all behaviours observed over the last few years.
Will other slashdot readers please provide citations for each type of behaviour or add new behaviours.
We then ask why elected officials pay more attention to this group of pirates than individuals who have the democratic right to vote.
When you've paid enough 10% for dumbass questions, you'll have paid enough for your free crack
I learned on a ZX81, and I still have one.
I learned Z80 machine code by reading other peoples listings and comparing to the mnemonics at the back of the ZX81 manual.
I programmed a cool morse-code decoder, and a music program that played sound out of the TV speaker (along with a load of junk).
I also beat someone elses implementation of read, data & restore.
Then I went on to a CPC6128, then BBC Micro with econet and advanced programmers guide. Then hacking MSDOS with debug and edlin. Then Windows 3.1 and Delphi; win95, then moving to winXP and Linux and sticking with Linux - for the freedom you know.
For a while I had a ZX81 emulator on my android phone, but like the other guy said, you couldn't pay me to go back to it.
It was awful. At the time it was great and helped make me, but I won't go back. You can't make me!
Use enterprise WPA2 with keys. Give each client device a key. Charge $5 to provide a key. Church members who are donating will probably reduce their donation by $5 that month in order to pay for the key.
You can revoke keys individually.
Disclaimer: I don't know what I'm talking about, you might need expensive hotspots to do that, but for large building with more than one hotspot, you probably want special hotspots with decent handover as folk move from one hotspot to another.
Yup; literate programming is the way. I wrote fangle, a literate untanger for texmac, and for lyx.
http://www.nongnu.org/fangle/
I use it for my daily job.
Literate programming means that instead of commenting your code (or feeling guilty for not doing so) you code your comments. Or rather you write a book about the problem your program solves, and in the narrative of the book you introduce aspects of code that solve the problem. As you do this you slowly reveal the solution - a well documented solution!
No-one is forced to use it, my replacement (when the day comes) can just edit the generated source if they want.
Also consider Mylyn Intent for Eclipse Java coding if you like that sort of thing.
I think cuiterm does that.
http://linux.pte.hu/~pipas/CUI/screenshots/scr-4.png
http://linux.pte.hu/~pipas/CUI/screenshots.html
Sadly, when it came out it crashed every now and then and these days it won't even launch.
It's a great concept though
People can't even take short-cuts properly!
I guess the kind of person who takes shortcuts can't be bothered to do it properly - short-cutting the short-cut.
But I suppose that those who can take short-cuts properly don't get spotted....
Sometimes, what's good for the stock-price is not good for the business.
Maybe he had to be "decisive" and "strategic" in order to survive so he went boldly ahead to exit the DVD-by-mail business and preserved investor confidence at the expense of the business, even though he wasn't sure it was a good idea.
Yeah... that was my experience... when WP for windows came out it sucked and crashed and was useless; it's fans tried hard to like it and pretend it was OK, and made excuses for it... but it was not good.
You don't have a kernel security bug in the word processor, you have it in the kernel.
The word processor makes kernel calls all the time; usually wrapped in crt.dll and cpp.dll calls but it's kernel calls in the end.
Opening a file and locking a file requires a kernel call.
I absolutely block all ads.
I even blocked your post, so I'm replying blind, and I hope the context fits!
On a serious note, you have just made the same point I was making; it's nice that we agree.
So... Stephen Elop calls it 'the first real Windows Phone'
I thought this was the first windows phone: http://www.dcviews.com/press/Orange_SPV.htm
Orange was a Microsoft Gold Partner, and I wrote the Orange custom home screen software complete with easter-egg while working for Orange in Leeds.
Now I learn it was all just a dream... it wasn't a REAL windows phone at all... or maybe Elop is too young and inexperienced to remember recent history... ah well..
You must learn the difference between "everyone will" and "anyone can"
DNA doesn't lie, but you can't always tell what it's "saying"
And those doing DNS tests might lie, and those collecting it might collect extra DNA (it's too small to see) or tamper with it on purpose.
I think gnome3 is great. It does have a menu (despite most people saying it doesn't: hint - click on "applications" instead of "windows" when you press the menu button)
However.. I also have a three monitor desktop, using xinerama, one of them is a udlfb usb frame-buffer device. So I guess gnome3 will never work for me. This forces me to mint, which I've been considering after being ignored and/or insulted to death by launchpad.
It's also wrong. The menu hasn't gone.
Press the windows button (or mouse-move to the top-left-corner)
You then get to choose from "windows" (running apps) or if you want, click on the word "Applications" and you get the FULL menu with categories to the right. You can either browse the full menu or click on a category and browse that sub-menu of applications.
It's something new and original and much easier to work in principle and not based on windows 95 either.
I think it's great.
gnome 3 still has a categorised menus - it's now full screen.
You don't HAVE to type the name of the app, you can either browse the full list of select from categories on the right.