If only there were some kind of global system that would tell you your position.
Snarky, sure, but realistically, that's not always practical. Or maybe you've never driven with GPS and had to quickly decide which of several turns is the correct one? Or used a map on a phone while riding a bike, where you can only glance at it? Or tried to locate a coffee shop on a block in a city on a grid. I certainly appreciate a map with more landmarks over the game of walking up and down a block until the blue-dot matches the red-pin any day..
I think Apple's chosen to optimzie for the use-case "Show me some landmarks so I know where I am" over âoeI need to quickly identifiy all state and federal parks in this area".
"iPhones are as fast as Macs are" makes a good headline, but the iPhone benchmarks are measuring burst performance. iPhones throttle down the cpu speed for thermal reasons VERY quickly, and canâ(TM)t really match a Mac for long. It would be interesting to see what would happen with those cpus in a Mac chassis though.
The T2 chip does exactly what they say it does *as of today.* If you want to speculate about the future, it makes more sense that since Apple designs so much hardware for iOS devices, the T2 is being developed and used as an integration point to bring blocks from their iOS SoC to Macs. Eventually they'll bring their custom GPU designs over, and the amount of money they save would make the money saved from "lost repair fees" look like a rounding error.
Not saying it's impossible but it's going to be very challenging and such a project is already years behind what Google, Apple, and others are already doing.
You do realize that Apple was years behind Google when they started their mapping project, and Apple used OpenStreetMaps as their base map to catch up.
If Apple doesn't offer Google by default, it will end up losing way more than $9 billion in sales from customer defections. Go ahead Google, you can easily afford the downside risk. Let Apple learn by doing.
I know a lot of people in tech who use DuckDuckGo. (Which is powered by Bing.) So if smart, tech-savvy people are fine with not using Google, I'm not sure there would be as much of an outcry as you'd think. The real danger to Google is that Apple demonstrates another search engine could be a viable alternative. They would also single-handedly force major advertisers to allocate a chunk of their ad budget to Google's search competition, and that would cement Facebook as the go-to place for internet ads.
The question isn't really "Does a strongly typed language reduce bugs?", because the obvious answer is: Yes, it does. If you went to the logical extreme and created a language that only had 3 commands, you could eliminate whole classes of bugs. The more strict the rules, the harder it is to do the wrong thing.
But the question is really: Would developers spend more time fighting against the type system in a strongly typed language or against type related bugs in a dynamic one?
The answer to that question seems much murkier, and I don't think a study looking at the types of bugs checked in on GitHub can answer it.
Publishing basic facts like: "Mark Hamill was born 25 September 1951 in Oakland, California, USA" shouldn't fall under anti-discrimination laws. In fact, while looking up Mark's birthday for this comment, I noticed that IMDB doesn't actually post the actor's age. Sure, you can subtract 1951 from 2016 to get his age, but IMDB only gives you his date of birth. This is a fact, not a judgement call.
The problem that many people outside the industry are not aware of, is that IMDB doesn't post facts: they post anything that people submit. So actors routinely submit fake (older) ages for the competition, and IMDB's policy is to leave the "fact" up until it's proven false. This requires the victim to send IMDB a copy of their driver's license or other proof, at which point IMDB updates their page to their actual age. So basically actors are being forced into revealing personal information they don't want to reveal, and IMDB is playing a fairly large part. This is what I believe the original lawsuit that was the inspiration for this law was about.
No, you certainly are not a graphics expert. I am not either, but at least I know that scenes are not composed and rendered for each pixel. So, when you go from 1080p to 720p which has 2.25 times less pixels, you never get 2.25 times more frame rate. It depends heavily on the game of course but at best you get something less than 2x, while at worse something like a 25% frame rate benefit.
Actually you can get a much higher frame-rate from a small performance boost depending on the game. Generally you have a fixed amount of time to draw a picture, so if you miss the mark by only a little bit, you only need a little bit of extra power to not miss the mark. This is why many modern engines slightly decrease the resolution when they know their drawing is going to come in slightly late.
A console that's twice as powerful, really should be able to have twice the frame rate at the same resolution. BUT, I doubt that's what most developers will choose. The public cares less about 60fps than hardcore gamers think. By increasing the resolution to something above 1080p, the picture will clearly look better on 4K TVs. (Remember: The picture doesn't have to be the full 4K to look better on a 4K TV.) A much sharper, clearer picture at a solid 30 fps is more marketable than the same 1080p picture at 60 fps.
Do you really think that Sony will be able to keep it at console price points? I'll believe it when I see it. I'm willing to bet that we will also see an increase in console pricing.
Strictly from a business standpoint, it makes sense for there to be two-tiers of PS4s. Having a high-end and a low-end does a better job of capturing money from different segments of the market. By creating a console for 4K TVs (and remember it doesn't have to do 4K to look better on 4K TVs), they've created a product that is targeted at customers who are willing to spend extra money to have the latest and greatest. So the Neo is almost certainly going to cost more than what people expect of consoles.
Over time as the price of 4K TVs and the Neo drops, it will become the low-end console and they'll release a new high-end version. By keeping one aspect of the PS4 eco-system aspirational, they increase the desire for and value of the PS4 overall.
I think the PS4 series of consoles is likely to be Sony's final non-portable gaming system. One of Nvidia, Intel and AMD will probably be the company that pioneers the truly next generation of gaming consoles, which will require truly radical change in how GPU:s are made.
This makes no sense. The PS Vita is not selling well, but the PS4 is. If they give up on a platform, it's going to be mobile. Home consoles aren't going anywhere. People are still going to own TVs and want to play on the couch, and VR, because of it's nature, is not going to mobile in the foreseeable future. VR will require physical space setup for playing and power that's just not available in mobile devices. Sony's already made it clear they're committed to VR, so unless you think VR is destined to be a total flop, the only thing that makes sense is that Sony's going to be making more home consoles.
Google Voice is still great for having a spam-box phone number you can give to places that require a working phone number (car dealers, political organizations, etc.), but you don't really want to hear from. But if that's how it ends up being used, I don't think that's going to convince Google to keep it around. You can tell it's been unloved for some time now... The iPhone app (at least) was updated once all of last year, and the only thing in the update was a warning if you try to txt 911. (So it was probably prompted by a legal issue.)
Maybe now that Google has a mobile phone OS and has to work with all the mobile carriers, there's outside pressure to hold Google Voice back. Well if it goes, so much for my spam-box.
...what will it take for general acceptance to finally take hold?
Wearers will continue to be further alienated from society and thus more dependent on Google being their primary social interaction. Eventually you'll have friends and coworkers that you can only interact with while they sit home alone wearing Google Glass and you'll feel sorry for them and invite them out for a drink. When you do you'll tell your friends, 'OK, now I know she has a computer on her face, but that's all she has and she's not really a bad person, so everybody just be cool with it. OK?" And they will have won.
Aren't most Wikipedia editors employees of somewhere? Maybe only unemployed people edit Wikipedia.
(I'm responding more to the bad summary than the article itself.)
Better yet read the comments on Facebook. I've seen people use 4 letter words when talking to their friend of their friend's grandmother. There's a reason Facebook doesn't have a "dislike" button, even with real names.
I think the longer term strategy is clear: iOS isn't getting more Mac-like, Macs are getting more iOS-like. The article has it backwards... Why would Apple invest in its own chip development only to emulate that on the Mac? If the iPhone doesn't need a 64-bit chip what does? iPads and Macs. We're going to see an ARM-powered OS X. Getting developers on board with the easiest to port apps (iPhone specific ones) is just the beginning. I would kill for a MacBook that had the battery life of an iPad. If only it had the computing power too..
The point is Windows isn't being beaten by Chromebooks, as much as it's being beaten by anything that costs less than $200. Afterall, HP TouchPads were flying off the shelves at $100.
This is a well known negociation strategy to get better deals from Microsoft. Remember when Dell threatened to go AMD-only?
Acer is a big laptop OEM, especially in emerging markets. What are they going to put in them? A browser OS? Really?
This is probably a troll, but I'll play along...
I thought the same thing until I checked Amazon and Best Buy. Search either one for Chromebooks and you'll turn up a bunch of products with thousands of reviews. This one's even listed as a #1 Best-Seller among laptops. Go ahead and do the same for Windows RT. It's okay, I'll wait here.
Now I'm not endorsing Chromebooks. I didn't even realize they were still available because I'm sure as hell not buying one... but that's two major retailers that have tons of models (including ones from Acer) that seems to be doing ok.
So I guess their "negotiation strategy" is going to be really really effective, because it also happens to be true.
The reason why they are focussing on the chromebook is because its selling. In fact its the fastest growing part of an otherwise lackluster PC Market.
Average people aren't buying Chromebooks, they're buying "that $199 email laptop." And the fact that it's the "fastest growing part of the PC market" is a very nice way of saying that customers aren't willing to spend $500 on a laptop anymore.. they're replacing their old computers with the cheapest thing they can find.
One of Microsoft's biggest fears from the late 90s was that the web browser would become more important than Windows and instead of just being an application, it would become the platform. If only Microsoft had been nimble enough to change their strategy in the past 15 to 20 years...
Oh no! The secret cabal of gov't spooks found out I saw Sharknado! And that I ordered a pizza!
The subject has shown an interest in wanton destruction and a potential alliance with the Italians. We request the court grant a search warrant for his home. As this is a matter of national security, the record of this request must be sealed.
Nearly every person I know who owns a smartphone and/or a tablet also has some sort of PC. I really don't think the portable device boom is the culprit here.
Maybe it's servers? How fast I could search my email used to be limited by my computer's cpu speed, but now it's limited by whatever is in Google's server rack. The computer upgrade cycle is being replaced by server-side-services, where I'm no longer responsible for the maintaining and upgrading.
I'd love to see a graph of the last 5 years of pc shipments vs. the last 5 years of servers.
For some reason, there still remains this weird claddistic requirement that "pc's" (ie desktops, I guess?), laptops, and other devices be all conceptualized in separate boxes.
Maybe it's because even though all of those devices are computers, the companies that are seeing success with them are quite different and so where the power lies has shifted dramatically.
Slashdot Mirror
Snarky, sure, but realistically, that's not always practical. Or maybe you've never driven with GPS and had to quickly decide which of several turns is the correct one? Or used a map on a phone while riding a bike, where you can only glance at it? Or tried to locate a coffee shop on a block in a city on a grid. I certainly appreciate a map with more landmarks over the game of walking up and down a block until the blue-dot matches the red-pin any day..
I think Apple's chosen to optimzie for the use-case "Show me some landmarks so I know where I am" over âoeI need to quickly identifiy all state and federal parks in this area".
"iPhones are as fast as Macs are" makes a good headline, but the iPhone benchmarks are measuring burst performance. iPhones throttle down the cpu speed for thermal reasons VERY quickly, and canâ(TM)t really match a Mac for long. It would be interesting to see what would happen with those cpus in a Mac chassis though.
The T2 chip does exactly what they say it does *as of today.* If you want to speculate about the future, it makes more sense that since Apple designs so much hardware for iOS devices, the T2 is being developed and used as an integration point to bring blocks from their iOS SoC to Macs. Eventually they'll bring their custom GPU designs over, and the amount of money they save would make the money saved from "lost repair fees" look like a rounding error.
You do realize that Apple was years behind Google when they started their mapping project, and Apple used OpenStreetMaps as their base map to catch up.
I know a lot of people in tech who use DuckDuckGo. (Which is powered by Bing.) So if smart, tech-savvy people are fine with not using Google, I'm not sure there would be as much of an outcry as you'd think. The real danger to Google is that Apple demonstrates another search engine could be a viable alternative. They would also single-handedly force major advertisers to allocate a chunk of their ad budget to Google's search competition, and that would cement Facebook as the go-to place for internet ads.
So tablets are using touchscreens to kill off the mouse, trackpad and keyboard, but game consoles are adding mouse and keyboard support.. ?
The question isn't really "Does a strongly typed language reduce bugs?", because the obvious answer is: Yes, it does. If you went to the logical extreme and created a language that only had 3 commands, you could eliminate whole classes of bugs. The more strict the rules, the harder it is to do the wrong thing.
But the question is really: Would developers spend more time fighting against the type system in a strongly typed language or against type related bugs in a dynamic one?
The answer to that question seems much murkier, and I don't think a study looking at the types of bugs checked in on GitHub can answer it.
The problem that many people outside the industry are not aware of, is that IMDB doesn't post facts: they post anything that people submit. So actors routinely submit fake (older) ages for the competition, and IMDB's policy is to leave the "fact" up until it's proven false. This requires the victim to send IMDB a copy of their driver's license or other proof, at which point IMDB updates their page to their actual age. So basically actors are being forced into revealing personal information they don't want to reveal, and IMDB is playing a fairly large part. This is what I believe the original lawsuit that was the inspiration for this law was about.
No, you certainly are not a graphics expert. I am not either, but at least I know that scenes are not composed and rendered for each pixel. So, when you go from 1080p to 720p which has 2.25 times less pixels, you never get 2.25 times more frame rate. It depends heavily on the game of course but at best you get something less than 2x, while at worse something like a 25% frame rate benefit.
Actually you can get a much higher frame-rate from a small performance boost depending on the game. Generally you have a fixed amount of time to draw a picture, so if you miss the mark by only a little bit, you only need a little bit of extra power to not miss the mark. This is why many modern engines slightly decrease the resolution when they know their drawing is going to come in slightly late.
A console that's twice as powerful, really should be able to have twice the frame rate at the same resolution. BUT, I doubt that's what most developers will choose. The public cares less about 60fps than hardcore gamers think. By increasing the resolution to something above 1080p, the picture will clearly look better on 4K TVs. (Remember: The picture doesn't have to be the full 4K to look better on a 4K TV.) A much sharper, clearer picture at a solid 30 fps is more marketable than the same 1080p picture at 60 fps.
Strictly from a business standpoint, it makes sense for there to be two-tiers of PS4s. Having a high-end and a low-end does a better job of capturing money from different segments of the market. By creating a console for 4K TVs (and remember it doesn't have to do 4K to look better on 4K TVs), they've created a product that is targeted at customers who are willing to spend extra money to have the latest and greatest. So the Neo is almost certainly going to cost more than what people expect of consoles.
Over time as the price of 4K TVs and the Neo drops, it will become the low-end console and they'll release a new high-end version. By keeping one aspect of the PS4 eco-system aspirational, they increase the desire for and value of the PS4 overall.
This makes no sense. The PS Vita is not selling well, but the PS4 is. If they give up on a platform, it's going to be mobile. Home consoles aren't going anywhere. People are still going to own TVs and want to play on the couch, and VR, because of it's nature, is not going to mobile in the foreseeable future. VR will require physical space setup for playing and power that's just not available in mobile devices. Sony's already made it clear they're committed to VR, so unless you think VR is destined to be a total flop, the only thing that makes sense is that Sony's going to be making more home consoles.
Google Voice is still great for having a spam-box phone number you can give to places that require a working phone number (car dealers, political organizations, etc.), but you don't really want to hear from. But if that's how it ends up being used, I don't think that's going to convince Google to keep it around. You can tell it's been unloved for some time now... The iPhone app (at least) was updated once all of last year, and the only thing in the update was a warning if you try to txt 911. (So it was probably prompted by a legal issue.)
Maybe now that Google has a mobile phone OS and has to work with all the mobile carriers, there's outside pressure to hold Google Voice back. Well if it goes, so much for my spam-box.
Wearers will continue to be further alienated from society and thus more dependent on Google being their primary social interaction. Eventually you'll have friends and coworkers that you can only interact with while they sit home alone wearing Google Glass and you'll feel sorry for them and invite them out for a drink. When you do you'll tell your friends, 'OK, now I know she has a computer on her face, but that's all she has and she's not really a bad person, so everybody just be cool with it. OK?" And they will have won.
Aren't most Wikipedia editors employees of somewhere? Maybe only unemployed people edit Wikipedia. (I'm responding more to the bad summary than the article itself.)
Better yet read the comments on Facebook. I've seen people use 4 letter words when talking to their friend of their friend's grandmother. There's a reason Facebook doesn't have a "dislike" button, even with real names.
Why do I have a feeling I'm still going to have to "Go Gold" to use the Netflix or Hulu apps...
I think the longer term strategy is clear: iOS isn't getting more Mac-like, Macs are getting more iOS-like. The article has it backwards... Why would Apple invest in its own chip development only to emulate that on the Mac? If the iPhone doesn't need a 64-bit chip what does? iPads and Macs. We're going to see an ARM-powered OS X. Getting developers on board with the easiest to port apps (iPhone specific ones) is just the beginning. I would kill for a MacBook that had the battery life of an iPad. If only it had the computing power too..
The point is Windows isn't being beaten by Chromebooks, as much as it's being beaten by anything that costs less than $200. Afterall, HP TouchPads were flying off the shelves at $100.
This is probably a troll, but I'll play along...
I thought the same thing until I checked Amazon and Best Buy. Search either one for Chromebooks and you'll turn up a bunch of products with thousands of reviews. This one's even listed as a #1 Best-Seller among laptops. Go ahead and do the same for Windows RT. It's okay, I'll wait here.
Now I'm not endorsing Chromebooks. I didn't even realize they were still available because I'm sure as hell not buying one... but that's two major retailers that have tons of models (including ones from Acer) that seems to be doing ok.
So I guess their "negotiation strategy" is going to be really really effective, because it also happens to be true.
Average people aren't buying Chromebooks, they're buying "that $199 email laptop." And the fact that it's the "fastest growing part of the PC market" is a very nice way of saying that customers aren't willing to spend $500 on a laptop anymore.. they're replacing their old computers with the cheapest thing they can find.
One of Microsoft's biggest fears from the late 90s was that the web browser would become more important than Windows and instead of just being an application, it would become the platform. If only Microsoft had been nimble enough to change their strategy in the past 15 to 20 years...
The subject has shown an interest in wanton destruction and a potential alliance with the Italians. We request the court grant a search warrant for his home. As this is a matter of national security, the record of this request must be sealed.
Maybe it's servers? How fast I could search my email used to be limited by my computer's cpu speed, but now it's limited by whatever is in Google's server rack. The computer upgrade cycle is being replaced by server-side-services, where I'm no longer responsible for the maintaining and upgrading.
I'd love to see a graph of the last 5 years of pc shipments vs. the last 5 years of servers.
Maybe it's because even though all of those devices are computers, the companies that are seeing success with them are quite different and so where the power lies has shifted dramatically.