Apple should provide anti-piracy protection to its developers. It could--it is a walled garden and each device has a unique ID... but chooses not to.. Most developers don't make a penny selling iOS software... Apple should take as many steps as possible to encourage a healthy marketplace for quality developers. Ideas such as waiving the $99/year fee for apps that good but not yet profitable would be a start.. And re-vamping the app store to make it easier to find software would be another good first step.
Same way Apple should brick stolen phones.. But AFAIK, doesn't.
And Apple does. Unlike Android (pre-4.1 versions, anyhow), all IPAs contain encrypted blocks that cause the app to crash if they're installed without the proper unlock key (your Apple ID). And the OS doesn't allow unsigned binaries to run. The OS loader decrypts the encrypted portions on application loading (at no time is it unencrypted in nonvolatile storage).
And developers were abusing the unique ID for other things that led to Apple cracking down for privacy purposes. Though UUID is a poor way to do it as the license is I think 5 iOS devices the user owns (iPhones, iPod Touches, iPads). Not per device - so multiple installations and executions are possible.
As for developers - well, they still need to market their apps. It's not a case of put-it-up-and-they-will-buy-it. Never has, never will be. And there is no instance where that happens in real life - even open-source has to have some marketing. Linus' post on Linux 0.1 is an obvious example of marketing. Because how else are users supposed to know about apps? They can search, but then you're relying on need to drive sales (a very poor marketing model because users don't know what they need and may search for something completely tangential to your app).
As for the $99 - there are many developers who make money outside of the App Store. Should Amazon get the $99 waived because the Kindle app made $0? And really - is price of entry that huge a factor? After all, you need a Mac, and the cheapest starts at $600. If $99 is too much, perhaps it's time to rethink priorities. Plus, not all apps are worthy of the price charged - there's enough crap in the App Store. (Just like everywhere else - indie music, indie movies, indie games, etc., there's huge pile of crap out there, with very few "making it").
As for finding apps - well, guess what. Apple bought Chomp, an app search engine (which has promptly killed their Android side - funny how Chomp's search engine was considered better than Google's for searching apps). It's an inherently hard problem because searching is need-based - you need an app to do X, but users have ill-defined needs.
It didn't seem like we were having any real problems due to inexperienced pilots before. If this is really a problem, let's just roll this back.
This was in response to a Colgan Air crash in 2009 which found pilot inexperience to be a major cause of the accident. In 2010, the Air Safety Act was updated to include a 1500 hour minimum in order to get the Airline Transport Pilot's License (ATP License - required to carry I think 25+ or 50+ passengers. Lesser amounts you can get by with a commercial pilot's license).
Of course, a HUGE problem is "hours" isn't necessarily a good way to measure experience (think of those requirements that say stuff like "10 years Java required"). After all, it doesn't specify how those 1500 hours were obtained - it could bet 1500 1-hour local flights, or combinations of longer flights that give better experience.
The other problem is well, pay. A low-time commercial pilot really earns crap - it's really done more for the love of flying than anything. We're talking about $30k annual salary or less. And now before said pilot is hired, they have to accumulate 1500 hours, usually by giving flight instruction (which pays even LESS), so said student probably ends up in debt.
Of course, the flip side is, the captain of that regional flight might be a new graduate (remember about shit pay? The instant regional pilots get offers by the big guys with better pay, they jump ship), and still fairly green. So as a passenger, you also want some assurance that the guy in front has the necessary skills and experience to make it through whatever emergency might happen, whether it's pilot-caused or other.
What did Google expect? That government wouldn't see that social networking sites and Google's press for personal information would be an attractive target?
After all, what once required actually boots hitting the ground, gathering of data, and correllating it together can be fulfilled with a simple, easy and no-fuss request to Google and the like, why wouldn't the government do that? It's cheaper, easier, and faster. And Google keeps demanding more information from you, making it even MORE tempting for government.
Of course, it's not like Google can do anything about it - they depend on knowing lots about you to begin with in order to pay the bills.
Intel Corp... suggested by Wall Street analysts as potential suitors
I realize it says "Wall Street analysts", but what utter moron even among that crowd of utter morons could possibly think having effectively all desktop CPU production controlled by a single company would be a good idea?
I'm sure Intel would also decline the offer, even if AMD paid them and charged everyone else. Only because Intel knows they got in trouble for having monopoly power before, that acquiring AMD would be equally stupid and that would be very much against Intel's interests to be somewhat free of government oversight.
But to answer your question - people who want money think intel acquiring it is a brilliant move - remember monopoly isn't just a game, it's the ultimate winning move (if it wasn't for pesky governments getting in the way)
Hypothetically, in a free market libertarian style world where Intel acquired it all, they would literally be rolling in cash - every processor maker would be paying htem to license patents and other deals (I'm sure ARM, MIPS, POWER, SPARC, they all have something that would violate one of Intel's patents).
Of course, in a realistic world, what would happen is Intel would be forced to FRAND all the patents it holds as a condition of sale.
Unique != Secure. If the two are in any way related (Key = base 16 encoded SHA1 of SSID + salt, for example) then the key can be broken trivially.
Usually the default SSID is based on the WiFi MAC address, while the default password is based on the serial number of the device (which isn't broadcasted over the air, but which the ISP knows since they have to activate it). The serial number is typically the unique ID assigned to the WAN side port...
or they can just download any of the thousands of free classic ebooks that are in the public domain and even available on the amazon store?
Provided that they don't mistakenly download the same public domain books that people are selling and appear earlier in the list over the free ones.
Kindle revolutionized book buying and reading - there were earlier e-readers,but the process of buying and reading books on them was very complex. Kindle made it simple - a PC was optional - you could buy books and read them without needing anything more than a power connection to charge it up.
Most of the kindle/nook/etc using population probably already only uses their store.
No, this Ford selling you a car with industry standard locks, and offering reinforced locks as an option. What company are you thinking of that gives you a free 2FA dongle on signup?
Except to use the radio, you MUST buy the reinforced locks. Otherwise you can use the car just as you bought it, except the radio won't work. Your car works perfectly fine, the sound system is completely optional, but the ad did say it came with one. It didn't mention you have to buy an OPTION to use it.
Basically if it's required to use a feature on the box, it should've been in the box from the get-go.
Unless Chevron is running centrifuges in Iran, Stuxnet probably wouldnÃ(TM)t have been much of an issue as the Stuxnet code was pretty specific. But of course the real issue for Chevron it *how* they allowed Stuxnet to infect at all? What was the vector, and why was it either Interwebs connected or techs were using infected thumb drives?
Probably infected thumb drives. Or hooking the infected PC to the airgapped network to update the software.
These networks are airgapped for security as well as keeping miscreants off (they often have to run very specific OS revisions including patches and sometimes they need updating, or the controllers are being updated or changed or additional controllers being added).
Problem is, how do you get the updated configuration data, software patch, etc. to the other side? Regardless of how you do it, it's a possible infection vector.
If you piece the parts from another phone, then the you are using chips that have already had it's "fee" paid.
That may not necessarily cover you. After all, Apple is being sued and their defense is just that (patent exhaustion - they bought the chips, the patents cover the stuff and software in the chips, and the fee is part of the purchase price of the chips).
Never blame malice for what can easily be blamed for stupidity.
Telstra's consumer level staff are notoriously incompetent. Their linesmen are generally OK (thanks to the union pushing for training) but their helpdesk/home support is an insult to trained monkeys everywhere.
Actually, in this case, it's probably the manufacturer of the router. Basically the ISP says "I want a modem+router for CPE (customer premises equipment), and I'll pay you $20 per unit". Yes, CPE is built down to a price because the ISP doesn't want to pay much for it. So shortcuts are always taken to meet the requirement - cheap processors barely able to keep up, low features, barely the minimum amount of RAM, etc. Which is why these routers will flop if you try to push any traffic more demanding that websurfing through them. No ISP cares about what it does - as long as it lets traffic through.
The only way to get things properly done is get a modem only if you can, get it set to bridge mode if you can't (or supply your own if it's an option - this isn't necessarily the case). Use your own router, because the router they give you will be crap, and there's a reason why routers sell for $20 and $200.
I block flash and I block javascript. I only whitelist js for certain sites but mostly, its all blocked.
Which is why a browser-based method is better than a plugin-based method for stuff that Flash does. After all, if you allow Flash for one site, who knows what sorts of Javascript and resources it pulls from other sites?
But a browser based version or HTML5 means site-specific restrictions are honored - a Flash video that wants to pull in javascript from ad trackers can do it via the Flash plugin, but if it was in HTML5 or a browser implementation, will still remain blocked.
Now, with the supply of bigger suckers on which to unload your worthless stock in some 'disruptive' Web2.0/mobile/social/bullshit apparently drying up a bit, non-idiots are staying away.
Or more like the market's matured enough that there's less money to be made.
Why invest in silicon valley companies who can make only 5x what you put in, when you can invest in a half-dozen mobile app developers and get 10x the money?
The market's simply moved on.
Hell, VCs are probably trolling Kickstarter and all that looking for something that'll bit big. Probably walk up to the ones that are wildly successful at funding, and "helping out".
Each broadcast or cable channel publishes its schedule and program info to a central database at the FCC.
That's a big problem, though it would create a few jobs.
Stations have about a few million different ways of publishing the data - it's something that companies like TV Guide and Tribune end up having to fix up. You won't believe how the TV guide data comes in - sometimes it's a handwritten sheet with the upcoming shows. Maybe it's a printed grid they fax over daily. some of them have it electronically, of course in various formats (spreadsheets, word doc, XML, etc). Oh, and the typos, the typos...
The value-add here is figuring out context - when your DVR can figure out if a show is new or not, or a rerun, or other channels the show is on, that's stuff that Tribune does when they key in the data into their show database which they sell to their subscribers.
Of course, being able to pull this data from the FCC still means they will exist - they FCC data probably has very little information that Tribune etc. have to re-link (which stations are showing the same episode, new episodes, etc), so they'll still be around as basic guide data's fairly useless by itself (you want to catch the new episode? Oh, there are 3 stationns! I'll record all of them! Or your show has 194,293 showings this week. I'll record them all since I can't tell which is which).
Except the Chinese don't refer to it as Foxconn. It's known has Hon Hai Precision Electronics. That's the real name it does business as. Foxconn is its English branding name it uses for the western world because "Hon Hai" may get distorted when translated. Plus it's also way easier to spell over the phone with someone whose only language is English.
If you ever get anything assembled at Foxconn, your assemblies come back on boxes marked with Hon Hai on them.
One of the most basic principles of signal processing is the impulse response - how a system reacts to a unit pulse of zero time.
An interesting aspect is that sound, when digitized using PCM is just a series of impulses of varying heights. If you convolve the impulse response with the input signal, you get a signal that "sounds like" you sent it through the original system.
The real trick is getting the impulse response - where you put the microphones determines where you "hear" it, and where you set off the impulse determines where the "source" is. For a simple reverb box, it's pretty easy (one input, one output). For a complex environment like a theatre, you'd probably want the best acoustic spot to be the "ears" (getting the response), and set of multiple impulses in various locations (e.g., at each instrument spot onstage, so each instrument's recording can be convolved with its specific impulse response).
Oh yeah - most good audio editors will have a "convolution" filter that takes an impulse response and applies it to the input signal, so all you need is the impulse response of this thing and you're set.
After Howard Stringer, the Sony-BGM DRM stooge got replaced, this is another sign that Sony is continuing to move back to nice electronics and away from the walled-garden approaches (DRM, mini-disc/beta-max?) that made Sony products acquire so much grossness brand-wise.
Except the only division making money is Sony's entertainment division. The division that sells walled garden hardware and software, and actively promotes it to be installed on open platforms as well (Playstation for Android).
And nevermind that the Vita is the most closed piece of hardware ever - including proprietary memory cards that make the Sony Memory Stick look open.
Sony's deathly scared of piracy - the mere though that maybe Linux for PS3 could be used for piracy caused them to remove it. Ditto with a bunch of Vita digital download games. Of course, a bunch of people hacking the PS3 cracked it wide open a year later to get their Linux fix, which also resulted in them getting pirated games.
Ouya looks interesting, but it's going to suffer the same problem as other more open platforms (and yes, Apple's iOS is "more open" compared to the consoles) - it'll be filled with crap quickly as anyone and everyone makes apps hoping to get a quick buck. It'll get to the point where it'll just be easier to pirate the apps (the good ones will be posted online for free, and you can sideload them), rather than try to browse and buy them from the store.
Why couldn't you use the test gear to change it back to 4 digits , or once its set to 6 digits is it fixed at that and can't be reverted?
The obvious answer is that the system only accepts 4-digit PINs, so having a 6-digit PIN means you can never enter it as the system only allows 4 digits, which never validate against 6 digit PINs.
"No personal checks in Sweden, so all person-to-person transfers are done in cash"
Did they get rid of cheques or did they never have them? I always thought sweden was an advanced country , but it doesn't sound like it. Personal cheques are damn useful in situations where electronic banking can be a PITA and cash isn't feasible - eg paying a builder.
Well, I'm guessing that the cellular infrastructure is such that electronic banking is possible anywhere. Of course, the main reason the builders love cheques is because it can be a "cash" transaction and thus kept off the books. In Sweden, I guess it's not possible since the transaction will be recorded somewhere and somehow, while cheques can be cashed pretty anonymously and kept off tax records.
I'm guessing the real advance is getting people to use electronic transfers (that are traceable) so that the underground economy is extremely unusual, so builders just get transferred and bill electronically rather than try to do it under the table.
(Case in point - during the darker parts of the recession, our government (Canada) had a home reno tax credit. This resulted in a shrinking of the underground economy because of the required paperwork - homeowners weren't willing to give up the tax credit, so builders etc. had to declare the income as the government would match those tax credits with business income).
Apple moved to LLVM is because it has a better optimizer than GCC
Actually, there's a HUGE movement away from FSF stuff because companies are scared of the GPLv3. The GPLv2 they could handle, but the GPLv3 imposes new terms and restrictions that companies are scared. Some are forcing all open-source software to go through lawyer reviews purely because of it. Some have maintained strict lists of "approved" open-source code that can be used in projects and internally, and that future GPLv3 projects will be disallowed except in exceptional circumstances, and only in tightly controlled ways. (It's much too easy to screw this up - all you need is v3/v3+ code and v2 code (not v2+) - you cannot combine the two at all due to incompatbilities).
Apple gives back to LLVM because well, they created most of the Clang project. They've been heavily investing in Clang+LLVM as a move away from the GPLv3. The last patches Apple gave back to GCC were related to Grand Central Dispatch, after which Apple concentrated fully on Clang+LLVM as the default compiler.
It took several years for this to happen - going all way back to the PowerPC days - I think 10.5 shipped with LLVM as an option over GCC, while 10.6 enabled LLVM but kept GCC as an option, and 10.7 stripped GCC completely.
A lot of companies are investing heavily in LLVM because of it - it means they don't have to worry about the GPLv3 at all. And a lot of companies also find it better to stick with and submit patches to mainline for maintenance rather than try to keep maintaining their own port
i thought the BSD license was a "do what ever you want with it license". So the intent of the author is as is understand it is for you to do what ever you want with it including make it a different flavor of free.
True, except the GPL claims to be even "freer" than free by the advocates who love to point how closed-source projects "steal" BSD source. The irony is that the GPL is doing the exact same thing which is legal, except the GPL forces are claiming it's superior and freer.
So you have one opensource license that basically legally takes code from another opensource license, except the changes can't ever make it back ("tainted"), yet that license is somehow "better" because it can do that.
Take the code - the authors intend for people to do that by choosing the BSD. Just don't claim to be the "best" free license because you can take and not give back.
is freedom and to be let alone, to live without fear. That is what is scary about a government that knows (or can if it wants to) every detail down to what color rash you had when you were in college. But Scott Adams is right, nobody has such a right, but it's something that is worth fighting for nonetheless.
These days, the government does HAVE to collect that data, because there are companies like Google and Facebook that collect it from users (often willingly) and who are willing to sell that data to anyone and everyone, including the government.
At least if the government had it, the worst that happens is you get "disappeared". Now it's everyone else who can get at your information and influence your current and future life - including future job prospects, future significant other prospects, even the ability to just live.
All it would take is some company to buy the data from Google and Facebook, run some proprietary patented algorithms to determine how "something"ism you are and for other companies to make use of that information. Perhaps your profile matches that of a terrorist, no more filling up at gas stations anymore, no more buying books on science, etc. Or that you've got a chance to drink to excess now and again, so now your beer consumption is strictly monitored by bars just in case, etc.
Best of all, none of this requires the government, just free market dealings. Bars often participate in such programs to verify patrons (to great effect - it brings in a "better" crowd and all that), which works, until you're deemed undesirable.
No the war should be against the BUYERS of Apple products, those hipster douches that threw money at Apple, no matter how badly they got screwed on memory, and threw even more money at Apple for locked down apps.
It is because of THEM that we are gonna end up ALL of us trapped in Apple walled gardens, because every other corp is gonna look at Apple's financials and say "Well people seem willing to pay out the ass to make them their masters, if that is what they want then by God we'll take control away from them too! Then they'll love us like they love Apple!"
Except Apple wasn't the first.
The first probably in modern use today is a toss-up between Xbox Live and Steam. Yes, Xbox Live - from the original Xbox. Though the first popular one would be Steam, then followed by Microsoft's reinvented Xbox Live (with the 360) and the PlayStation Network. All these walled gardens existed long before the App Store.
We just don't think of them as walled gardens because they let in a VERY exclusive set of people before, but now they're opening up, but still require pre-approval.
This was followed by carrier app stores (also existing before the App Store) which sold chintzy Java applets for featurephones.
Compared to phone and console app stores, the App Store was one of the most free ones around - allowing anyone who could cough up $99 and a Mac to develop (at the request of said developers).
And the problem is people are demanding app stores with vetted apps. Every time Google removes a wave of bad apps (ones that go infect your phone and all that), everyone calls for "vetted" apps. Or they go Amazon.
The problem is users (note terminology) don't want to screw around with their phones, computers or tablets. Just use 'em and go. Just like they don't want to screw around with cars - they want to get in, twist the key and drive off.
There will always be "admins" though - the fewer who want to screw around, but a much smaller base of users. Just like there's a bunch of mechanics who want to screw around with the workings of their cars.
Hell, these days, installing an aftermarket radio is often a challenge as most of the space used up is by the nav system - there's no DIN slot anymore in most new vehicles. And most users seem happy with the factory radio - enough that the big stores are closing down their car audio departments because fewer and fewer vehicles are coming in for aftermarket radios.
Anyhow, Verizon closing down is just the same as what happened with iTunes Music Store opened - a bunch of people saw how popular iTunes was and created their own music store. Dozens if not hundreds of people created music stores. And now most of them are closed - either due to the rise of popular streaming services, or most likely due to non-use. (Remember Napster? Wal-Mart? Plays-For-Sure?)
When something popular comes out - people jump on the bandwagon and most people fail. Hell, how many tablets were announced after the iPad versus actually released? There were 40-odd at 2011 CES, most of which never saw the light of day.
We had it happen with music stores, it happened for tablets, and now it's happening to app stores. Hell the set-top box market was similar (one of the few where Apple is just a bit-player) and we're left with far fewer ones. Heck, it happened with cars - when the car first came out everyone came out with their own cars, and now it's aggregated down to a few players. Electric cars seem to revive the whole "build your own car" thing.
Because the first submitted version will never make it through the review process. Very FEW apps have made it through the review process without initial rejection.
It also doesn't help that Google's iOS team is hopelessly incompetent - Google's apps aren't exactly super stable and many have been withdrawn so they could be fixed up. It's almost as if Apple rubber-stamps Google's apps just to show off how "bad" they are.
Why? Because when you are dealing with old electronics you frequently have to deal with difficult to diagnose intermittent problems. You are dealing with aging sensors, degraded wiring, lose connections, out-of-spec electronics and there isn't memory dump or line-by-line debug to help you figure out what went wrong. With some of the harder problems you have to manufacture tools or methods to simulate test conditions.
Well, if a modern car is collectible enough to get "classic" status, I'm fairly certain that all the vehicles start exhibiting the exact same problem. If it's a wiring harness that fails due ot a chafing-created short, sooner or later they all start getting it and people notice.
Sure wires in the early failure patterns are intermittent, but eventually they become permanent. Or eventually multiple vehicles will have the exact same failure. Of course, while it's under warranty it's impossible to find, you're looking for a cracked wire in tens of miles of wiring.
Hell, PCs are just as fickle - you get PCs crashing randomly and then people diagnose bad caps.
And all that needs to happen is a car gets documented - its idiosyncracies get put in a wiki so people that have some problem probably can see that others have it and how it was fixed for them.
And these days, a modern car is even simpler than one from the 90s - a modern car basically has a lot less wiring to deal with as everything gets dumped onto a central bus that interconnects all the modules together. In the past, you'd need a wire going everywhere leading to much larger wiring looms. Like cruise control in the past would need to interface to the throttle sensor, the throttle servo, the wheel speed sensors, the brake pedal sensors, the transmission, etc. These days, the main car computer does it as it's all reported on the same bus, eliminating a bunch of wires to the various controllers etc.
So, is this the next MIPS, or other non-Intel architecture flavor of the day, to fade into obscurity in a few years?
Well, given that ARM is probably the #1 shipped architecture out there, probably not. I'm fairly certain for every x86 CPU Intel ships, several ARM SoCs are shipped, probably a few in said PC (WiFi, Bluetooth, drive controllers (optical, SSD, spinning rust), network cards, etc).
Intel rules only on one aspect - high power computing. ARM has pretty much taken over the low end embedded side - the processors and controllers needed for everything else to get that big beefy Intel fed.
What's interesting about that is IBM made nearly all the typewriters, and they made those keycaps to last because that was the right thing to do. They didn't do it because of competition- they had almost none. They owned 90% of the market. They didn't do it because anyone demanded it.
They did it because it was the product they wanted to make. Designed to last, to perform better than the market even demanded. Contrast that to how things are designed and made today. Cheaper, obsolescent, designed to fail sooner rather than later. To make you buy a new one. It's sad really.
Yeah, because you paid (today's equivalent) of hundreds of dollars for a typewriter. Which was a significant chunk of change.and often had to be saved up for and budgeted for.
Considering the IBM computer the keyboard came with was over $5000 new in a basic configuratoin (probably close to $10000 these days), they had better be of good quality because buying a computer was a significant expense and probably a good year's worth of saving up for, if not more.
These days, a cheap PC can be had for under $300, maybe a few months of saving if you're of little means, well under a month's pay if you're middle class.
Stuff had to last back then because they cost a LOT of money. A TV could be a year's worth of savings to buy. A computer ditto (imagine you had to save up for a year to two years to buy a PC. Compare it to today when a new bigger faster PC comes out every 6 months or so...). Washer and dryer - if they didn't come with the house, you'd have to save up for a significant period of time.
These days, things are a LOT cheaper. And we don't repair because paying $50/hr to fix a $400 TV doesn't make economic sense. Back then, the repairman may be paid $20-40/hr, but your TV was over $1000 - maybe easily $5000+. ($1000 buys a pretty damn nice HDTV these days. $5000 buys a top of the line model that's 60" or bigger).
Same with computers - few people are paying $5000+ for a basic entry level PC (typical configuration cost $8000-10000 back then, probably close to $15000+ now). A "Good enough" PC these days costs $250, less on sale. A high-end PC may cost $2000.
Oh, and for some stuff like appliances, if you really want the ones that'll last, be prepared to pay. When you can get a washer-dryer bundle for $1000, the top end ones can be had for $5000+ each. They'll last alright, if you're willing ot pony up the extra cash.
End result really is the stuff didn't go down in price, it's that the cost of cutting corners enabled more people to buy them. You can still buy $2000 PCs, but the ones people are going for are $500 or less ones.
Stuff lasted back then because when you invested a significant portion of your earnings (months/years) ot buying that product, breaking down is not an option. When you can buy that same stuff today for days/weeks or a couple month's pay, of course they're going to be cheaper.
Slashdot Mirror
And Apple does. Unlike Android (pre-4.1 versions, anyhow), all IPAs contain encrypted blocks that cause the app to crash if they're installed without the proper unlock key (your Apple ID). And the OS doesn't allow unsigned binaries to run. The OS loader decrypts the encrypted portions on application loading (at no time is it unencrypted in nonvolatile storage).
And developers were abusing the unique ID for other things that led to Apple cracking down for privacy purposes. Though UUID is a poor way to do it as the license is I think 5 iOS devices the user owns (iPhones, iPod Touches, iPads). Not per device - so multiple installations and executions are possible.
As for developers - well, they still need to market their apps. It's not a case of put-it-up-and-they-will-buy-it. Never has, never will be. And there is no instance where that happens in real life - even open-source has to have some marketing. Linus' post on Linux 0.1 is an obvious example of marketing. Because how else are users supposed to know about apps? They can search, but then you're relying on need to drive sales (a very poor marketing model because users don't know what they need and may search for something completely tangential to your app).
As for the $99 - there are many developers who make money outside of the App Store. Should Amazon get the $99 waived because the Kindle app made $0? And really - is price of entry that huge a factor? After all, you need a Mac, and the cheapest starts at $600. If $99 is too much, perhaps it's time to rethink priorities. Plus, not all apps are worthy of the price charged - there's enough crap in the App Store. (Just like everywhere else - indie music, indie movies, indie games, etc., there's huge pile of crap out there, with very few "making it").
As for finding apps - well, guess what. Apple bought Chomp, an app search engine (which has promptly killed their Android side - funny how Chomp's search engine was considered better than Google's for searching apps). It's an inherently hard problem because searching is need-based - you need an app to do X, but users have ill-defined needs.
This was in response to a Colgan Air crash in 2009 which found pilot inexperience to be a major cause of the accident. In 2010, the Air Safety Act was updated to include a 1500 hour minimum in order to get the Airline Transport Pilot's License (ATP License - required to carry I think 25+ or 50+ passengers. Lesser amounts you can get by with a commercial pilot's license).
Of course, a HUGE problem is "hours" isn't necessarily a good way to measure experience (think of those requirements that say stuff like "10 years Java required"). After all, it doesn't specify how those 1500 hours were obtained - it could bet 1500 1-hour local flights, or combinations of longer flights that give better experience.
The other problem is well, pay. A low-time commercial pilot really earns crap - it's really done more for the love of flying than anything. We're talking about $30k annual salary or less. And now before said pilot is hired, they have to accumulate 1500 hours, usually by giving flight instruction (which pays even LESS), so said student probably ends up in debt.
Of course, the flip side is, the captain of that regional flight might be a new graduate (remember about shit pay? The instant regional pilots get offers by the big guys with better pay, they jump ship), and still fairly green. So as a passenger, you also want some assurance that the guy in front has the necessary skills and experience to make it through whatever emergency might happen, whether it's pilot-caused or other.
What did Google expect? That government wouldn't see that social networking sites and Google's press for personal information would be an attractive target?
After all, what once required actually boots hitting the ground, gathering of data, and correllating it together can be fulfilled with a simple, easy and no-fuss request to Google and the like, why wouldn't the government do that? It's cheaper, easier, and faster. And Google keeps demanding more information from you, making it even MORE tempting for government.
Of course, it's not like Google can do anything about it - they depend on knowing lots about you to begin with in order to pay the bills.
I'm sure Intel would also decline the offer, even if AMD paid them and charged everyone else. Only because Intel knows they got in trouble for having monopoly power before, that acquiring AMD would be equally stupid and that would be very much against Intel's interests to be somewhat free of government oversight.
But to answer your question - people who want money think intel acquiring it is a brilliant move - remember monopoly isn't just a game, it's the ultimate winning move (if it wasn't for pesky governments getting in the way)
Hypothetically, in a free market libertarian style world where Intel acquired it all, they would literally be rolling in cash - every processor maker would be paying htem to license patents and other deals (I'm sure ARM, MIPS, POWER, SPARC, they all have something that would violate one of Intel's patents).
Of course, in a realistic world, what would happen is Intel would be forced to FRAND all the patents it holds as a condition of sale.
Usually the default SSID is based on the WiFi MAC address, while the default password is based on the serial number of the device (which isn't broadcasted over the air, but which the ISP knows since they have to activate it). The serial number is typically the unique ID assigned to the WAN side port...
Provided that they don't mistakenly download the same public domain books that people are selling and appear earlier in the list over the free ones.
Kindle revolutionized book buying and reading - there were earlier e-readers ,but the process of buying and reading books on them was very complex. Kindle made it simple - a PC was optional - you could buy books and read them without needing anything more than a power connection to charge it up.
Most of the kindle/nook/etc using population probably already only uses their store.
Except to use the radio, you MUST buy the reinforced locks. Otherwise you can use the car just as you bought it, except the radio won't work. Your car works perfectly fine, the sound system is completely optional, but the ad did say it came with one. It didn't mention you have to buy an OPTION to use it.
Basically if it's required to use a feature on the box, it should've been in the box from the get-go.
Probably infected thumb drives. Or hooking the infected PC to the airgapped network to update the software.
These networks are airgapped for security as well as keeping miscreants off (they often have to run very specific OS revisions including patches and sometimes they need updating, or the controllers are being updated or changed or additional controllers being added).
Problem is, how do you get the updated configuration data, software patch, etc. to the other side? Regardless of how you do it, it's a possible infection vector.
That may not necessarily cover you. After all, Apple is being sued and their defense is just that (patent exhaustion - they bought the chips, the patents cover the stuff and software in the chips, and the fee is part of the purchase price of the chips).
Actually, in this case, it's probably the manufacturer of the router. Basically the ISP says "I want a modem+router for CPE (customer premises equipment), and I'll pay you $20 per unit". Yes, CPE is built down to a price because the ISP doesn't want to pay much for it. So shortcuts are always taken to meet the requirement - cheap processors barely able to keep up, low features, barely the minimum amount of RAM, etc. Which is why these routers will flop if you try to push any traffic more demanding that websurfing through them. No ISP cares about what it does - as long as it lets traffic through.
The only way to get things properly done is get a modem only if you can, get it set to bridge mode if you can't (or supply your own if it's an option - this isn't necessarily the case). Use your own router, because the router they give you will be crap, and there's a reason why routers sell for $20 and $200.
Which is why a browser-based method is better than a plugin-based method for stuff that Flash does. After all, if you allow Flash for one site, who knows what sorts of Javascript and resources it pulls from other sites?
But a browser based version or HTML5 means site-specific restrictions are honored - a Flash video that wants to pull in javascript from ad trackers can do it via the Flash plugin, but if it was in HTML5 or a browser implementation, will still remain blocked.
Or more like the market's matured enough that there's less money to be made.
Why invest in silicon valley companies who can make only 5x what you put in, when you can invest in a half-dozen mobile app developers and get 10x the money?
The market's simply moved on.
Hell, VCs are probably trolling Kickstarter and all that looking for something that'll bit big. Probably walk up to the ones that are wildly successful at funding, and "helping out".
That's a big problem, though it would create a few jobs.
Stations have about a few million different ways of publishing the data - it's something that companies like TV Guide and Tribune end up having to fix up. You won't believe how the TV guide data comes in - sometimes it's a handwritten sheet with the upcoming shows. Maybe it's a printed grid they fax over daily. some of them have it electronically, of course in various formats (spreadsheets, word doc, XML, etc). Oh, and the typos, the typos...
The value-add here is figuring out context - when your DVR can figure out if a show is new or not, or a rerun, or other channels the show is on, that's stuff that Tribune does when they key in the data into their show database which they sell to their subscribers.
Of course, being able to pull this data from the FCC still means they will exist - they FCC data probably has very little information that Tribune etc. have to re-link (which stations are showing the same episode, new episodes, etc), so they'll still be around as basic guide data's fairly useless by itself (you want to catch the new episode? Oh, there are 3 stationns! I'll record all of them! Or your show has 194,293 showings this week. I'll record them all since I can't tell which is which).
But yeah, the station schedules are a mess
One of the most basic principles of signal processing is the impulse response - how a system reacts to a unit pulse of zero time.
An interesting aspect is that sound, when digitized using PCM is just a series of impulses of varying heights. If you convolve the impulse response with the input signal, you get a signal that "sounds like" you sent it through the original system.
The real trick is getting the impulse response - where you put the microphones determines where you "hear" it, and where you set off the impulse determines where the "source" is. For a simple reverb box, it's pretty easy (one input, one output). For a complex environment like a theatre, you'd probably want the best acoustic spot to be the "ears" (getting the response), and set of multiple impulses in various locations (e.g., at each instrument spot onstage, so each instrument's recording can be convolved with its specific impulse response).
Oh yeah - most good audio editors will have a "convolution" filter that takes an impulse response and applies it to the input signal, so all you need is the impulse response of this thing and you're set.
Except the only division making money is Sony's entertainment division. The division that sells walled garden hardware and software, and actively promotes it to be installed on open platforms as well (Playstation for Android).
And nevermind that the Vita is the most closed piece of hardware ever - including proprietary memory cards that make the Sony Memory Stick look open.
Sony's deathly scared of piracy - the mere though that maybe Linux for PS3 could be used for piracy caused them to remove it. Ditto with a bunch of Vita digital download games. Of course, a bunch of people hacking the PS3 cracked it wide open a year later to get their Linux fix, which also resulted in them getting pirated games.
Ouya looks interesting, but it's going to suffer the same problem as other more open platforms (and yes, Apple's iOS is "more open" compared to the consoles) - it'll be filled with crap quickly as anyone and everyone makes apps hoping to get a quick buck. It'll get to the point where it'll just be easier to pirate the apps (the good ones will be posted online for free, and you can sideload them), rather than try to browse and buy them from the store.
The obvious answer is that the system only accepts 4-digit PINs, so having a 6-digit PIN means you can never enter it as the system only allows 4 digits, which never validate against 6 digit PINs.
Well, I'm guessing that the cellular infrastructure is such that electronic banking is possible anywhere. Of course, the main reason the builders love cheques is because it can be a "cash" transaction and thus kept off the books. In Sweden, I guess it's not possible since the transaction will be recorded somewhere and somehow, while cheques can be cashed pretty anonymously and kept off tax records.
I'm guessing the real advance is getting people to use electronic transfers (that are traceable) so that the underground economy is extremely unusual, so builders just get transferred and bill electronically rather than try to do it under the table.
(Case in point - during the darker parts of the recession, our government (Canada) had a home reno tax credit. This resulted in a shrinking of the underground economy because of the required paperwork - homeowners weren't willing to give up the tax credit, so builders etc. had to declare the income as the government would match those tax credits with business income).
Actually, there's a HUGE movement away from FSF stuff because companies are scared of the GPLv3. The GPLv2 they could handle, but the GPLv3 imposes new terms and restrictions that companies are scared. Some are forcing all open-source software to go through lawyer reviews purely because of it. Some have maintained strict lists of "approved" open-source code that can be used in projects and internally, and that future GPLv3 projects will be disallowed except in exceptional circumstances, and only in tightly controlled ways. (It's much too easy to screw this up - all you need is v3/v3+ code and v2 code (not v2+) - you cannot combine the two at all due to incompatbilities).
Apple gives back to LLVM because well, they created most of the Clang project. They've been heavily investing in Clang+LLVM as a move away from the GPLv3. The last patches Apple gave back to GCC were related to Grand Central Dispatch, after which Apple concentrated fully on Clang+LLVM as the default compiler.
It took several years for this to happen - going all way back to the PowerPC days - I think 10.5 shipped with LLVM as an option over GCC, while 10.6 enabled LLVM but kept GCC as an option, and 10.7 stripped GCC completely.
A lot of companies are investing heavily in LLVM because of it - it means they don't have to worry about the GPLv3 at all. And a lot of companies also find it better to stick with and submit patches to mainline for maintenance rather than try to keep maintaining their own port
True, except the GPL claims to be even "freer" than free by the advocates who love to point how closed-source projects "steal" BSD source. The irony is that the GPL is doing the exact same thing which is legal, except the GPL forces are claiming it's superior and freer.
So you have one opensource license that basically legally takes code from another opensource license, except the changes can't ever make it back ("tainted"), yet that license is somehow "better" because it can do that.
Take the code - the authors intend for people to do that by choosing the BSD. Just don't claim to be the "best" free license because you can take and not give back.
These days, the government does HAVE to collect that data, because there are companies like Google and Facebook that collect it from users (often willingly) and who are willing to sell that data to anyone and everyone, including the government.
At least if the government had it, the worst that happens is you get "disappeared". Now it's everyone else who can get at your information and influence your current and future life - including future job prospects, future significant other prospects, even the ability to just live.
All it would take is some company to buy the data from Google and Facebook, run some proprietary patented algorithms to determine how "something"ism you are and for other companies to make use of that information. Perhaps your profile matches that of a terrorist, no more filling up at gas stations anymore, no more buying books on science, etc. Or that you've got a chance to drink to excess now and again, so now your beer consumption is strictly monitored by bars just in case, etc.
Best of all, none of this requires the government, just free market dealings. Bars often participate in such programs to verify patrons (to great effect - it brings in a "better" crowd and all that), which works, until you're deemed undesirable.
Except Apple wasn't the first.
The first probably in modern use today is a toss-up between Xbox Live and Steam. Yes, Xbox Live - from the original Xbox. Though the first popular one would be Steam, then followed by Microsoft's reinvented Xbox Live (with the 360) and the PlayStation Network. All these walled gardens existed long before the App Store.
We just don't think of them as walled gardens because they let in a VERY exclusive set of people before, but now they're opening up, but still require pre-approval.
This was followed by carrier app stores (also existing before the App Store) which sold chintzy Java applets for featurephones.
Compared to phone and console app stores, the App Store was one of the most free ones around - allowing anyone who could cough up $99 and a Mac to develop (at the request of said developers).
And the problem is people are demanding app stores with vetted apps. Every time Google removes a wave of bad apps (ones that go infect your phone and all that), everyone calls for "vetted" apps. Or they go Amazon.
The problem is users (note terminology) don't want to screw around with their phones, computers or tablets. Just use 'em and go. Just like they don't want to screw around with cars - they want to get in, twist the key and drive off.
There will always be "admins" though - the fewer who want to screw around, but a much smaller base of users. Just like there's a bunch of mechanics who want to screw around with the workings of their cars.
Hell, these days, installing an aftermarket radio is often a challenge as most of the space used up is by the nav system - there's no DIN slot anymore in most new vehicles. And most users seem happy with the factory radio - enough that the big stores are closing down their car audio departments because fewer and fewer vehicles are coming in for aftermarket radios.
Anyhow, Verizon closing down is just the same as what happened with iTunes Music Store opened - a bunch of people saw how popular iTunes was and created their own music store. Dozens if not hundreds of people created music stores. And now most of them are closed - either due to the rise of popular streaming services, or most likely due to non-use. (Remember Napster? Wal-Mart? Plays-For-Sure?)
When something popular comes out - people jump on the bandwagon and most people fail. Hell, how many tablets were announced after the iPad versus actually released? There were 40-odd at 2011 CES, most of which never saw the light of day.
We had it happen with music stores, it happened for tablets, and now it's happening to app stores. Hell the set-top box market was similar (one of the few where Apple is just a bit-player) and we're left with far fewer ones. Heck, it happened with cars - when the car first came out everyone came out with their own cars, and now it's aggregated down to a few players. Electric cars seem to revive the whole "build your own car" thing.
Actually, Apple will reject the new maps app.
Because the first submitted version will never make it through the review process. Very FEW apps have made it through the review process without initial rejection.
It also doesn't help that Google's iOS team is hopelessly incompetent - Google's apps aren't exactly super stable and many have been withdrawn so they could be fixed up. It's almost as if Apple rubber-stamps Google's apps just to show off how "bad" they are.
Well, if a modern car is collectible enough to get "classic" status, I'm fairly certain that all the vehicles start exhibiting the exact same problem. If it's a wiring harness that fails due ot a chafing-created short, sooner or later they all start getting it and people notice.
Sure wires in the early failure patterns are intermittent, but eventually they become permanent. Or eventually multiple vehicles will have the exact same failure. Of course, while it's under warranty it's impossible to find, you're looking for a cracked wire in tens of miles of wiring.
Hell, PCs are just as fickle - you get PCs crashing randomly and then people diagnose bad caps.
And all that needs to happen is a car gets documented - its idiosyncracies get put in a wiki so people that have some problem probably can see that others have it and how it was fixed for them.
And these days, a modern car is even simpler than one from the 90s - a modern car basically has a lot less wiring to deal with as everything gets dumped onto a central bus that interconnects all the modules together. In the past, you'd need a wire going everywhere leading to much larger wiring looms. Like cruise control in the past would need to interface to the throttle sensor, the throttle servo, the wheel speed sensors, the brake pedal sensors, the transmission, etc. These days, the main car computer does it as it's all reported on the same bus, eliminating a bunch of wires to the various controllers etc.
Well, given that ARM is probably the #1 shipped architecture out there, probably not. I'm fairly certain for every x86 CPU Intel ships, several ARM SoCs are shipped, probably a few in said PC (WiFi, Bluetooth, drive controllers (optical, SSD, spinning rust), network cards, etc).
Intel rules only on one aspect - high power computing. ARM has pretty much taken over the low end embedded side - the processors and controllers needed for everything else to get that big beefy Intel fed.
Yeah, because you paid (today's equivalent) of hundreds of dollars for a typewriter. Which was a significant chunk of change.and often had to be saved up for and budgeted for.
Considering the IBM computer the keyboard came with was over $5000 new in a basic configuratoin (probably close to $10000 these days), they had better be of good quality because buying a computer was a significant expense and probably a good year's worth of saving up for, if not more.
These days, a cheap PC can be had for under $300, maybe a few months of saving if you're of little means, well under a month's pay if you're middle class.
Stuff had to last back then because they cost a LOT of money. A TV could be a year's worth of savings to buy. A computer ditto (imagine you had to save up for a year to two years to buy a PC. Compare it to today when a new bigger faster PC comes out every 6 months or so...). Washer and dryer - if they didn't come with the house, you'd have to save up for a significant period of time.
These days, things are a LOT cheaper. And we don't repair because paying $50/hr to fix a $400 TV doesn't make economic sense. Back then, the repairman may be paid $20-40/hr, but your TV was over $1000 - maybe easily $5000+. ($1000 buys a pretty damn nice HDTV these days. $5000 buys a top of the line model that's 60" or bigger).
Same with computers - few people are paying $5000+ for a basic entry level PC (typical configuration cost $8000-10000 back then, probably close to $15000+ now). A "Good enough" PC these days costs $250, less on sale. A high-end PC may cost $2000.
Oh, and for some stuff like appliances, if you really want the ones that'll last, be prepared to pay. When you can get a washer-dryer bundle for $1000, the top end ones can be had for $5000+ each. They'll last alright, if you're willing ot pony up the extra cash.
End result really is the stuff didn't go down in price, it's that the cost of cutting corners enabled more people to buy them. You can still buy $2000 PCs, but the ones people are going for are $500 or less ones.
Stuff lasted back then because when you invested a significant portion of your earnings (months/years) ot buying that product, breaking down is not an option. When you can buy that same stuff today for days/weeks or a couple month's pay, of course they're going to be cheaper.