When I formatted a USB drive and did a clean install, the default was the "everything" option. Maybe this will be changed later, but it's not the default now.
Considering that NOTHING is signed with Verified Developer, "App Store Only" wouldn't give you much.
Right now, if it was "App Store Only", you couldn't run Microsoft Office, Adobe Photoshop (CS something or other), or a bunch of other freeware utilities you have right now not obtained through the Mac App Store.
The default will change once Mountain Lion is released. Developer Previews are nowhere near final and are used to get developers to start tweaking their apps. I'd estimate closer to release that the default will change so developers can ensure their apps are signed.
Go find a book. I'll wait a minute while you do this since they seem to be getting a bit rare these days. Now, tell me, is that book shaped like an envelope? No, it's not. There's a reason most books are taller than they are wide.
It's because eye-tracking reveals that too-wide columns means the eye can't track lines properly anymore.
It's why on larger sheets or smaller fonts, text in columnar format tends to be much easier to read - the eye can follow the line to the end easily, and when it's time to go to the next line, there's less to scan backwards so you start at the right line.
Even on portrait screens, having too long lines makes for difficult reading if it's not broken up into columns.
it's one reason why webpages that use too-small a font get hard to read. And if you waste space by making it one long column of text, people complain. (The solution is to use a larger font, increase line spacing (double-space isn't just a school thing - the blank space helps the eye's "horizontal retrace" and increase use of paragraphs including spacing between. Wall 'o text is especially bad).
In the (no so distant) future, will free software like VLC be available for (what is now "Mac", but will just be "OS")?
I have heard plans that everything will have to go thru the app store... will freeware projects be able to afford the "Tax"?
Incorrect.
Mountain Lion has 3 security modes. There's "App Store Signed" (Signed by Apple and vetted). The default I believe is "App Store and Verified Developer" (Apple vets App Store, but anyone with a credit card can purchase a Verified Developer certificate that Apple will not vet your apps for). The final mode is "All Apps" which is the way things are now - allowing apps that aren't signed in as well.
And yes, "App Store and Verified Developer" IS the default. Microsoft, Adobe and others have not shown interest in the Mac App Store. Other companies like AutoDesk want to use the Mac App Store (AutoCAD LE is up there) but the problem is the $1000 limit - they even mentioned Mac App Store is cheaper. So major commercial apps mean the default cannot be App Store only.
No word on how expensive the code-signing certificates are (I know Windows ones are $250), but all they do is say "For now, all apps signed with this certificate are trusted". They can be revoked if a malware developer signs malware with it. All Apple cares about is getting a real billing address they can point to and say "WTF are you doing?". Basically it de-anonymizes developers. Apple will NOT vet apps in this program (they can't - they give you the certificate, and you can sign anything and everything you want).
For other open-source apps, I presume it's on a case-by-case basis. The big ones that people use probably will buy a cert and keep it carefully guarded. The little ones just mean you have to disable it completely if you want to use them.
RAM speeds have not been a significant issue for some time now. Go and read some of the performance tests done recently on various speed RAM, even jumping from 1333 to something like 2133 DR3 RAM has such an insigificant performance change on the rig that it is clear memory is not the bottleneck nowadays. The Bus, HDD etc are the bottlenecks that hurt more than anything else.
False.
RAM speed does have a significant impact. It's just that cache hides a LOT of the impact. If you ever disable the cache on your CPU, your computer would feel like it was 15 years old - it's that slow.
Now, one thing about RAM - RAM hasn't actually gotten significantly faster - the clock speeds may have gone up, but the latencies have gone up as well. The faster RAM may have true access times (measured in nanoseconds) close to that of the slower one, especially the cheaper RAM.
But a modern CPU is very cache dependent. Hell, even the little ARM in your smartphone suffers tremendously when cache is off. (I should know - I've had to do actual timing tests of the ARM caches.).
Eleven years ago you could buy a 24" monitor that could do this resolution, and 21" monitors that did 1600x1200 were commonplace. Inch for inch a 4:3 monitor will have more usable space than an equivalent widescreen display, they got popular because companies figured out they were cheaper to make and gave more panels for a given investment.
I hated CRT monitors - they always got blurry when you ran them at super-high resolutions. Of course, I never bought the $2000 high end ones... (and having to run at 85Hz meant the monitor really only did 800x600).
The real reason cheap screens are 720p or 1080p is because the processing electronics is trivially cheap. It's basically the same as a regular HDTV. And that gives you a VGA and DVI/HDMI input "for free". To do 1920x1200 requires a different video processing chip for the monitor, which costs a lot more money because of the limited market (one reason why a 24" 1080p is available for under $200, while a 24" 1920x1200 is $500+).
Apple can do this because they're making these things by the millions, so they can buy in such huge quantities that high res stuff is cheap for them.
The Vickileaks site (rumoured to be from a Parliament Hill staffer) has been publishing the (public) records of his ugly divorce. What Toews is missing here is that information, once collected, takes on a life of its own. The parallel between his public divorce file and the impact of his proposed snooping legislation is a delicious irony, especially considering that the remarkably fertile prick is himself basically a child molester with better PR.
The whole reason Vickileaks was created was in response to the legislation. It wasn't a well-timed thing, it was a response. Basically saying that since the government wants the information, perhaps their information should be made public as well.
In another twist, a Liberal MP has asked for the surfing histories of all politicians and staffers, saying if it's good on the Canadian public, it's good on Government as well.
If I were the seller I'd make a huge deal out of the fact that, by playing these games, you can get me to round the price down.
Hell, I'll round down to the nearest *quarter* if you'll pay cash -- it's still cheaper than the 47 cent debit card fee.
Depends on what you were selling. Consumers always assume that "cash is cheap to handle", which it may not be. For a small business whose average takings may be under $1000, cash is cheaper than debit/credit - they just make a run to the bank every few hours to deposit the takings, and they only risk losing that takings should you get robbed midway.
But once you get bigger, or start having bigger ticket goods, cash is definitely not king. It costs money to handle cash - if you have to hire help, handling the cash register requires real bookkeeping ability. Basically, if you work the register, you must count how much is in your drawer before you start, then enter it in the register at the beginning. As the transactions go on, the register keeps track of drawer amounts. It's why if you see a cashier making change with another register, they often do a trade - e.g., trade a $10 bill for $10 worth of quarters because the entire amount is tracked. At the end of the shift, the contents of the drawer are counted and the results should agree (within a sloppiness factor - sometimes the cashier gives too much change, sometimes too little). It's why when the registers go down, the store often prefers to stop sales than manual transactions as those are a lot messier and there's often no way to update the registers when they come back up with the manual transactions.
Checking out with credit/debit is far easier - the register just totals those and everyone's on their way - no drawer to keep track of.
Now, what to do with the piles of cash? It has to be put int he bank. If it's significant (say, $10,000 or more), then an armored car might be hired, which costs money. If a lot of people use cash, then it may be a regular thing. If it's a night deposit, then someone needs to go to the bank and make the deposit (risking robbery or elaborate scams). Or if the bank is open, having to line up to make the deposit (and it can take a while, costing time).
All this is part of the cost of accepting cash - it's why many businesses don't mind credit and debit fees because if it saves them having to run to the bank every few hours or to worry about robbery, the cost of an armored car service if necessary, or even the added training required to handle cash.
I suppose the ones that have the problem are the computer stores that do the cash discount thing and they can easily have $20,000 in daily takings... having to make those deposits (and a robbery can easily sink the company). The margin isn't high enough to hire an armored car, either.
Very few people can actually use LaTeX. It's an exceptionally user-hostile approach to writing text. Yes, I know some people still use vi, but that doesn't make vi a good word processor. Similarly, LaTeX has exceptional strengths for creating particular sorts of highly technical documents, but for the sorts of documents most people write it is overcomplicated and just gets in the way.
It's not that hard. LaTeX compared to say, Word (which is what many authors use) is akin to comparing Vi with Notepad. You can do the same in each, but with a little effort, you can learn and be very productive.
At its most basic level, it's really just an older form of markup language. Sure Word lacks "Export to LaTeX" (and I'm sure more than enough authors use "Export to HTML").
Now, if you really wanted to get deep down inside LaTeX to tweak things so it comes out *just* right, it can get hairy. Then again, doing the same in Word is equally hairy and there's enough misfeatures that if you do it wrong, something can get horrendously screwed up. Like bolding some text in a table can bold the entire table. Ctrl-Z usually works (and leaves the text you intended to bold bolded), but sometimes, it undoes bolding elsewhere. If it's a huge table, it's a pain.
And hell, it's easy in LaTeX to use regular straight quotes instead of having smart quotes that somehow don't pass through and you end up with oddball characters where the quote marks were.
It goes a lot deeper than just the components. It goes down to the minerals and metals that make up those components:
The hard part though for raw materials like coltan is that stuff is recycled a LOT. A lot is mined, but these days, a lot is recycled.
There's only like 11 smelters worldwide that handle coltan, and various industry groups have actually talked to those smelters to buy "conflict-free" minerals, which all have actually agreed too.
That's good, as no new conflict minerals are entering the system (at least without someone going rogue or conflict minerals with forged paperwork). However, a complete ban isn't possible because an increasing amount comes from recycling, and there's no paperwork anymore. If you want to ban conflict minerals, basically the entire recycling chain must be thrown away because it's impossible to differentiate and the only way is to assume the entire chain is contaminated.
I consider myself an Apple hater and even i know this is not solely an Apple problem it is a mostly a Foxconn problem. (Apple is just one of very many of their clients)
Considering Hon Hai Precision Electronics (parent company of Foxconn) is the world's largest electronics company in the world, practically *everything* you touch has probably been the hands of Foxconn somewhere down the line. If it wasn't built by a Foxconn factory, it probably had a subassembly done there.
Yeah, Apple's one of the big customers, so we can blame Apple for all of their woes and that Apple should fix it up for everyone. Or do we? I mean, if Apple makes it so working conditions are great, would that happen to also give Apple leverage to march into say, the part of Foxconn building Samsung phones, declare it as "unsafe for work - not up to Apple standards" and shut down production? Or HTC? LG? Motorola/Google?
Or if Apple fixes up just the "Apple factories" part of Foxconn, where does the onus fall on fixing everything else? And what about the poor workers who aren't building Apple products - should they suffer because Samsung/Dell/Sony/HTC/LG/Microsoft/Motorola/etc didn't care enough to do audits? Or should Apple have the sole power to audit all of Foxconn?
And a bigger question is - why aren't any of the big guys doing the same, at least publicly? I mean, why is Apple "going it alone"? Can't it be Apple/Dell/Microsoft/etc working together publicly to do this? You'd think they'd all want a piece of the glory. Or is it to slink away hiding and hoping that spotlight only stays focused on Apple and ignores everyone else?
China right now is at the brink of industrialization. I'd say they're at where the US was 100-150 years ago, prior to unionization, people still wanted slaves, etc. Right now, they're still in the labour intensive part of development. The best way to bring them up to Western standards is, ironically, to keep building stuff there so the people can work and get richer and eventually demand much better factory conditions. When millions line up outside a new Foxconn factory wanting a job, forcing them to be unemployed because Foxconn is evil and no one should build stuff there doesn't really encourage upward development.
The hospital management is being treated well by the tablet manufacturer....
Hmm. Since that narrows the universe of possibilities down to a single vendor, you should probably tell us what OS the vendor uses on the tablet, otherwise people will waste their time giving you advice you can't use.
If you don't want to identify the vendor, and you can't tell us the OS without doing that, just say so. We'll pretend we don't know who you're talking about (although we will).
Using utterly reasonable powers of deduction, we know the tablets are NOT iPads. First Apple hasn't really tried to court companies, and don't really have any sort of enterprise management system in place, according to everyone who's asked about iPhones, iPads and such in the workplace.
Which means the OS in question is either Windows or Android. Since Windows would be utterly trivial to put into a kiosk mode (you don't even need a tablet to demo this) and there'll be a half-dozen ways to do it (probably writing a custom app hosting the IE COM control, for example), it's unlikely the question is about Windows.
It's ridiculous that there's no exemption for SSL usage on US export controls. It's just a pain in the ass for everyone in the process and you can't honestly claim that it prevents awfully dangerous tech from getting into the enemy's hands.
I thought the whole export thing went away a long time ago - I mean, back in the days when you had to either pick the "US High Encryption" versus "Export" version of a web browser (back when it was 128bit RSA vs. 40bit RSA). Given that I don't think Safari, Chrome (not Chromium), IE and Opera have "export friendly" versions of their browsers, I thought everyone could use HTTPS and be done with it?
Especially now that everyone's practically upgraded to 256bit AES.
Actually, having U.S. satellite dishes in Canada was made illegal (what was it? 10 years ago? I can't remember) because U.S. broadcasting corporations were accusing Canadians of stealing content. In order to comply with their complaints, and to make sure that U.S. corporations that sell these services in Canada follow Canadian law, they made it illegal.
It wasn't US broadcast corps. Sure Dish and DirecTV were angry about people stealing content and thus made things like leased boxes (you must return the box), as well as various smartcard tricks that change the authentication and encryption systems. But those applied more to the US subscribers.
The reason why US satellite dishes are illegal in Canada is because Bell went to sue all the Canadian US dish providers. These companies were providing services that allowed Canadians to purchase US satellite dishes and receivers, and providing the necessary services to activate them legitimately. These grey-market dishes were what Bell was suing about - seeing all those subscribers that didn't want their service.
Once Bell obtained their injunction (happened around 2007-2008), Dish and DirecTV then began proceedings against these grey-market providers to discontinue service (yes, they wanted people who were paying for the service to not receive it anymore).. This happened in early 2009.
As for legality - it's questionable. Should someone be able to purchase a service from another country if there's a method to get that service? I mean, we moan and groan when some internet TV or radio station becomes "country only" and refuses to sell service outside that country. But if using a VPN service lets you get access to that service - should it be legal? It's the same for grey-market satellite TV, and also applied to other US-only services like TiVo, satellite radio (until Canada approved it), and still does to US Netflix, Hulu, etc.
- Here's a dialog that has to validate text - what are all the possible errors it could encounter, and are the error dialogs properly implemented for each? (check all error condition handling possibilities)
Don't forget in this case to try Unicode text and make sure it comes out or errors out appropriately.
This is especially important if one of the tasks is to adapt the information for another system which may be Unicode-unaware - how does the output come out on the other end, and does it still work? Or does the illegal Unicode input make it through (even if you use proper validation frameworks, they may guarantee the output is valid Unicode and not say, ASCII).
Especially try the bidi override characters to see if your output suddenly goes weird.
Do all file systems necessarily include a volume name? If the filename, what should the system do if the user mounts two different images with the same file name in different folders
Most filesystems do encode a volume name inside them, and this dates back to the DOS days where the volume name is just a special file in the FAT root directory. I'm sure ext* does the same as well.If not, the mounter uses the filename.
As for what happens if the directory used already exists for another filesystem already mounted, a suffix is added. E.g., USBDISK, USBDISK1, USBDISK2, etc.
It happens on Linux, on OS X, etc. And it's a more common problem than you may think especially with dead fileservers and such.
Why in the world would it take an entire year to plan hoisting a 800kg screen? That weighs less than my car. A few winches could get it in place without putting even the most fragile screen at risk. I wonder what they did with the other 9 months of that year?
The actual hoisting takes a few hours. There's a how it's made or something episode that shows how it was done on another IMAX screen. They basically have the hours between the last film of the day (past midnight), and before the first screening of the day.
But there's a lot of logistics involved so it could be simply ordering the screen (custom made), and getting put on a waitlist. Then from that waitlist comes the actual delivery date to which you can use to plan the whole teardown and hoist.
There's a lot to plan - you need ironworkers and the like to scurry around the frame of the screen and tie it off. You then need technicians to recalibrate the equipment to the new screen (IMAX has exacting standards - so focus must be redone, color calibration, and sound (sound levels have to be requalized to compensate for the new screen - the sound reflectivity (audience-side speakers) and transparency (behind screen speakers))
And most likely, you need to coordinate with IMAX to do it so they can send technicians and everything.
And no, it's not completely unusual - planning for events can often take a whole year. People who do conferences basically start planning the next year's conference just as the current year's conference ends.
On the old 2D sensors, maybe. But modern fingerprint sensors are 1D - they contain a sensor that scans as the user swipes the finger over the sensor. It makes it much harder to lift a fingerprint from (the fingerprint is wiped as it's read), as well as making the sensor MUCH smaller - something that can fit on a smartphone without consuming too much space.
Modern fingerprint sensors you find on computers are already the swipe kind. You'd have better luck lifting a print from the screen or other surface of the phone than the sensor these days.
It also seems that 75% cut is still a lot for copying an mp3 file and drawing up some paperwork. Even if the label also provided the recording studio, etc, it seems like the artist is still getting the short end of the stick. Why is it that the artist always seems to be the last one to realize the label is screwing him even harder than its screwing the consumer?
It's 75% to do nothing.
Apple does the same 30-70 split for every song. For Apple's part, they take care of storing the files, sending them to the buyer (and storing it for them in iCloud), and handling the payment.
The remaining 70% is given to the record label, and of that, 75% goes to the label? The only thing they did was convert a master tape to a 256kbps AAC file and click "Upload". Just a one-time thing - Apple does the rest.
(And 30% for doing it all isn't too much - it's basically no profit if a user buys one song. Even if you use a gift card - you can find them 20% off easily, and the store selling them are still making a profit, so handling gift card payments are still break even. Apple tries to combine transactions to come out ahead and avoid fraud alerts (if you do multiple low-value transactions ($5 and under) it can trigger a fraud alert).
That doesn't mean that I enjoy some random company having any data of me. Hence I usually give them more data than they want. Poison the cache with random data and let's see how they find out how they match up.
The problem with Google is, being EVERYWHERE (in some form or another), your attempts at poisoning requires active effort, or your real habits will quickly overwhelm the faked data.
And yes, should everything Google disappear overnight, the internet will be quite broken
In Canada, we have "two" tech stores (Best Buy and Future Shop, but both are owned by Best Buy). The retail selection in Canada is far better than the B&M store in the US in my experience, showing that people still shop retail.
Of course, online, the US is way better.
The problem is there really is no reason to buy online in Canada - Amazon.ca barely sells more than books, CDs and DVDs, and at prices you can find retail. Plus you hae to pay shipping or wait a week (no Amazon Prime).
So given shopping online in Canada is really only about getting stuff you can't find in a store, the stores are doing quite well. Especially since the stuff you can find in a store - once you add shipping and such, the price is often higher than the store.
On a related note, the NY Times published an interesting article on why the U.S. lost out on iPhone work. For most big electronics companies, it's simply not economically viable to manufacture here in the States.
I contend otherwise. Your point is 100% correct if every Chinese job there translated to an American job here. But it doesn't.
You see, the average American in a manufacturing job is much more efficient than their Chinese counterpart. I'd contend easily 10-to-1 or more.
The reason? The average American wage for manufacturing is much higher. Thus, a company wanting to build in America must design their product to use as few people as possible. So what happens is they design for manufacturing by automation. I.e., they use manufacturing robots.
So what happens is very few people are involved in direct manufacturing (if you design it right, you can go from parts to packed and sealed product without being touched by human hands). So the few people you do employ at a factory will be those who oversee the robots and assembly line. And a few technicians.
So the good news is we made some very highly skilled high paying jobs, but we also lost many more low skilled Chinese jobs. There's also a trickle down in that you've made a designer get high pay for design for manufacturing, optimizing the design so it can be assembled and packed by robots.
Of course, you lose design flexibility - with a human-intensive method like China, you can change the design on a whim. For a robotic assemblyline, it takes much longer as the robots need to be retrained and often times, new molds and test jigs have to be created for the robots, which can delay production by months.
The other problem is, does the US have a sufficiently trained workforce for this? If Apple were to try, it would be limited to whom it can hire.
I think with the proper design, it wouldn't cost Apple much more to use US labour - if they can get 1 American to oversee the robots assembling the same number of products as 100 Chinese workers, then the costs are a wash. Of course, 3,000 jobs doesn't make a huge drup in the unemployment bucket.
More practically, China's at the same point in their industrialization as the US was 100-150 years ago. Similarity in working conditions, pay, etc, are very similar to way back when.
Ok, I don't understand. On the one hand, Google is forced to implement a comprehensive privacy program. On the other hand, EPIC complains that Google's new privacy rules are.... too comprehensive? Can someone point me to what is actually changing in the privacy terms that is actually so bad? As far as I can tell, everyone's just complaining that the policies are going to be merged. So instead of having 20 separate privacy policies, now each service is governed by the same. How is that bad?
I think the outrage is simple.
Google has a different privacy policy for each of its services, and if it decides it wants to share the data between services, the conflict makes it a legal nightmare.
Unifying the privacy policy - a great idea, because it simplifies life for everyone. However, one of the changes is that Google will also unify your profile data among all services (it could once the new policy was in place, but I believe afterwards, it said it will).
So now everything you've ever done (your youtube, your browsing (double click, google ads, CDN, any site that uses a Google-hosted javascript or something), picasa, your searches) will be available in one, all linked nicely to your details you put on your G+ page. Even what Android or iOS apps you used and how long you used them.
It's like the supermarket cards - all the juicy details of your shopping habits is pure gold to insurance companies.
Basically, you cannot use the Internet without Google - even if you use Bing exclusively, never go to YouTube and other Google projects, there's a ton of other crap hosted by Google that your web experience would suck worse than with NoScript.
If you've put up a carefully written Facebook pages, carefully choose your friends, your real self will be exposed to Google I'm sure employers and marketing ages will be anteing up lots of money to see your real self - what websites you view, what you've searched, what kind of videos you browsed. A veritable gold mine.
I'd have thought even the USAF wouldn't be stupid enough NOT to take mid-air charging into account when they were considering this, although a mil-spec 120VAC/400Hz or 28Vdc to USB plugpack will probably cost $40,000 each when the supply contracts are signed.
Nasty secret - that 28VDC power adapter would just be a repurposed truck one.
We consider a car to have a 12V battery, but the system operates at 14V while the engine is running (to charge the battery). It's why you find a lot of portable gear running at 13.8V - they run just fine at 12V, but are designed for engine-run where the engine is running.
Trucks and planes normally use a 24V battery, and often have their power points marked as 28V because that'll be the voltage when the alternator is running. There's nothing special otherwise.
Of course, for cars, there's a lot of talk that since cars have increasing electrical loads, to move the entire system to a 48V system (56V on alternator).
I'm sure the US Air Force can find a lot of truck USB adapters that work for iPad.
So, without Android adopting 4G, Apple would never be able to follow suit, unless they want to receive the same complaints. Not that that would stop them, necessarily. Did you like all those dropped calls with the early iPhone because you were stuck on AT&T?
Two different issues.
First, Apple chose not to go LTE for one very good reason - the current LTE chipsets suck.
Here's the thing. LTE is a data standard. It doesn't define a voice standard, and there's proposals on how to do voice-over-LTE. And people want to do voice calls. So LTE phones right now hop onto the UMTS (or CDMA) network in order to handle a voice call, while doing LTE for data. The problem is that LTE phones now need two chips - one to do LTE, another to do 3G/voice (ever notice how the LTE versions of phones are always larger? It's not just the larger battery). The iPhone doesn't have enough space for another chip. Plus the extra chip takes power.
Now, Qualcomm has announced their roadmap that has a combined LTE/UMTS/GSM/CDMA baseband (listed as LTE+voice) in a single chip, which is anticipated to be in the next iPhone.
As for AT&T's dropped calls - it was because of over-aggressive power management from iPhones causing the control channel to be congested (which leads to dropped calls everwyhere in general). The irony being that the cells on AT&T were very underutilized (30-40%) but the control channel being completely saturated means dropped calls, slow data and other things.
As for who drives things - well, the carriers work with handset manufacturers. The carriers want to deploy the Next Big Thing that can charge customers more money for, and since Apple's basically an untouchable (the carrier bends to Apple's will), they work with HTC and others to stick in new chips to try to get people to pay more for a new network.
LTE deployment is quite interesting. When the (original 2G) iPhone came out, the 3G deployment in North America was quite spotty (the North American carriers chose 2G+ technolgies prior to the proper 3G rollout), but quite solid in Europe and Asia. These days, LTE deployment in North America is far more than Europe and Asia
The beauty of the old Bell Labs was that to a certain extent, basic research was OK and appreciated. I couldn't imagine any corporate lab today producing anything close to the quality and quantity of fantastic work that came out of Bell Labs. Google certainly has the resources to do it, but the big question is would the shareholders appreciate the long-term value of such an asset?
I believe Microsoft Research does a lot of basic research. Ostensibly to put into products, but few have made it into what Microsoft sells, yet Microsoft still funds it.
May not be Bell Labs quality, but a lot of research papers and interesting research stuff comes out of it.
Slashdot Mirror
Considering that NOTHING is signed with Verified Developer, "App Store Only" wouldn't give you much.
Right now, if it was "App Store Only", you couldn't run Microsoft Office, Adobe Photoshop (CS something or other), or a bunch of other freeware utilities you have right now not obtained through the Mac App Store.
The default will change once Mountain Lion is released. Developer Previews are nowhere near final and are used to get developers to start tweaking their apps. I'd estimate closer to release that the default will change so developers can ensure their apps are signed.
It's because eye-tracking reveals that too-wide columns means the eye can't track lines properly anymore.
It's why on larger sheets or smaller fonts, text in columnar format tends to be much easier to read - the eye can follow the line to the end easily, and when it's time to go to the next line, there's less to scan backwards so you start at the right line.
Even on portrait screens, having too long lines makes for difficult reading if it's not broken up into columns.
it's one reason why webpages that use too-small a font get hard to read. And if you waste space by making it one long column of text, people complain. (The solution is to use a larger font, increase line spacing (double-space isn't just a school thing - the blank space helps the eye's "horizontal retrace" and increase use of paragraphs including spacing between. Wall 'o text is especially bad).
Incorrect.
Mountain Lion has 3 security modes. There's "App Store Signed" (Signed by Apple and vetted). The default I believe is "App Store and Verified Developer" (Apple vets App Store, but anyone with a credit card can purchase a Verified Developer certificate that Apple will not vet your apps for). The final mode is "All Apps" which is the way things are now - allowing apps that aren't signed in as well.
And yes, "App Store and Verified Developer" IS the default. Microsoft, Adobe and others have not shown interest in the Mac App Store. Other companies like AutoDesk want to use the Mac App Store (AutoCAD LE is up there) but the problem is the $1000 limit - they even mentioned Mac App Store is cheaper. So major commercial apps mean the default cannot be App Store only.
No word on how expensive the code-signing certificates are (I know Windows ones are $250), but all they do is say "For now, all apps signed with this certificate are trusted". They can be revoked if a malware developer signs malware with it. All Apple cares about is getting a real billing address they can point to and say "WTF are you doing?". Basically it de-anonymizes developers. Apple will NOT vet apps in this program (they can't - they give you the certificate, and you can sign anything and everything you want).
For other open-source apps, I presume it's on a case-by-case basis. The big ones that people use probably will buy a cert and keep it carefully guarded. The little ones just mean you have to disable it completely if you want to use them.
False.
RAM speed does have a significant impact. It's just that cache hides a LOT of the impact. If you ever disable the cache on your CPU, your computer would feel like it was 15 years old - it's that slow.
Now, one thing about RAM - RAM hasn't actually gotten significantly faster - the clock speeds may have gone up, but the latencies have gone up as well. The faster RAM may have true access times (measured in nanoseconds) close to that of the slower one, especially the cheaper RAM.
But a modern CPU is very cache dependent. Hell, even the little ARM in your smartphone suffers tremendously when cache is off. (I should know - I've had to do actual timing tests of the ARM caches.).
I hated CRT monitors - they always got blurry when you ran them at super-high resolutions. Of course, I never bought the $2000 high end ones... (and having to run at 85Hz meant the monitor really only did 800x600).
The real reason cheap screens are 720p or 1080p is because the processing electronics is trivially cheap. It's basically the same as a regular HDTV. And that gives you a VGA and DVI/HDMI input "for free". To do 1920x1200 requires a different video processing chip for the monitor, which costs a lot more money because of the limited market (one reason why a 24" 1080p is available for under $200, while a 24" 1920x1200 is $500+).
Apple can do this because they're making these things by the millions, so they can buy in such huge quantities that high res stuff is cheap for them.
The whole reason Vickileaks was created was in response to the legislation. It wasn't a well-timed thing, it was a response. Basically saying that since the government wants the information, perhaps their information should be made public as well.
In another twist, a Liberal MP has asked for the surfing histories of all politicians and staffers, saying if it's good on the Canadian public, it's good on Government as well.
Depends on what you were selling. Consumers always assume that "cash is cheap to handle", which it may not be. For a small business whose average takings may be under $1000, cash is cheaper than debit/credit - they just make a run to the bank every few hours to deposit the takings, and they only risk losing that takings should you get robbed midway.
But once you get bigger, or start having bigger ticket goods, cash is definitely not king. It costs money to handle cash - if you have to hire help, handling the cash register requires real bookkeeping ability. Basically, if you work the register, you must count how much is in your drawer before you start, then enter it in the register at the beginning. As the transactions go on, the register keeps track of drawer amounts. It's why if you see a cashier making change with another register, they often do a trade - e.g., trade a $10 bill for $10 worth of quarters because the entire amount is tracked. At the end of the shift, the contents of the drawer are counted and the results should agree (within a sloppiness factor - sometimes the cashier gives too much change, sometimes too little). It's why when the registers go down, the store often prefers to stop sales than manual transactions as those are a lot messier and there's often no way to update the registers when they come back up with the manual transactions.
Checking out with credit/debit is far easier - the register just totals those and everyone's on their way - no drawer to keep track of.
Now, what to do with the piles of cash? It has to be put int he bank. If it's significant (say, $10,000 or more), then an armored car might be hired, which costs money. If a lot of people use cash, then it may be a regular thing. If it's a night deposit, then someone needs to go to the bank and make the deposit (risking robbery or elaborate scams). Or if the bank is open, having to line up to make the deposit (and it can take a while, costing time).
All this is part of the cost of accepting cash - it's why many businesses don't mind credit and debit fees because if it saves them having to run to the bank every few hours or to worry about robbery, the cost of an armored car service if necessary, or even the added training required to handle cash.
I suppose the ones that have the problem are the computer stores that do the cash discount thing and they can easily have $20,000 in daily takings... having to make those deposits (and a robbery can easily sink the company). The margin isn't high enough to hire an armored car, either.
It's not that hard. LaTeX compared to say, Word (which is what many authors use) is akin to comparing Vi with Notepad. You can do the same in each, but with a little effort, you can learn and be very productive.
At its most basic level, it's really just an older form of markup language. Sure Word lacks "Export to LaTeX" (and I'm sure more than enough authors use "Export to HTML").
Now, if you really wanted to get deep down inside LaTeX to tweak things so it comes out *just* right, it can get hairy. Then again, doing the same in Word is equally hairy and there's enough misfeatures that if you do it wrong, something can get horrendously screwed up. Like bolding some text in a table can bold the entire table. Ctrl-Z usually works (and leaves the text you intended to bold bolded), but sometimes, it undoes bolding elsewhere. If it's a huge table, it's a pain.
And hell, it's easy in LaTeX to use regular straight quotes instead of having smart quotes that somehow don't pass through and you end up with oddball characters where the quote marks were.
The hard part though for raw materials like coltan is that stuff is recycled a LOT. A lot is mined, but these days, a lot is recycled.
There's only like 11 smelters worldwide that handle coltan, and various industry groups have actually talked to those smelters to buy "conflict-free" minerals, which all have actually agreed too.
That's good, as no new conflict minerals are entering the system (at least without someone going rogue or conflict minerals with forged paperwork). However, a complete ban isn't possible because an increasing amount comes from recycling, and there's no paperwork anymore. If you want to ban conflict minerals, basically the entire recycling chain must be thrown away because it's impossible to differentiate and the only way is to assume the entire chain is contaminated.
Considering Hon Hai Precision Electronics (parent company of Foxconn) is the world's largest electronics company in the world, practically *everything* you touch has probably been the hands of Foxconn somewhere down the line. If it wasn't built by a Foxconn factory, it probably had a subassembly done there.
Yeah, Apple's one of the big customers, so we can blame Apple for all of their woes and that Apple should fix it up for everyone. Or do we? I mean, if Apple makes it so working conditions are great, would that happen to also give Apple leverage to march into say, the part of Foxconn building Samsung phones, declare it as "unsafe for work - not up to Apple standards" and shut down production? Or HTC? LG? Motorola/Google?
Or if Apple fixes up just the "Apple factories" part of Foxconn, where does the onus fall on fixing everything else? And what about the poor workers who aren't building Apple products - should they suffer because Samsung/Dell/Sony/HTC/LG/Microsoft/Motorola/etc didn't care enough to do audits? Or should Apple have the sole power to audit all of Foxconn?
And a bigger question is - why aren't any of the big guys doing the same, at least publicly? I mean, why is Apple "going it alone"? Can't it be Apple/Dell/Microsoft/etc working together publicly to do this? You'd think they'd all want a piece of the glory. Or is it to slink away hiding and hoping that spotlight only stays focused on Apple and ignores everyone else?
China right now is at the brink of industrialization. I'd say they're at where the US was 100-150 years ago, prior to unionization, people still wanted slaves, etc. Right now, they're still in the labour intensive part of development. The best way to bring them up to Western standards is, ironically, to keep building stuff there so the people can work and get richer and eventually demand much better factory conditions. When millions line up outside a new Foxconn factory wanting a job, forcing them to be unemployed because Foxconn is evil and no one should build stuff there doesn't really encourage upward development.
Using utterly reasonable powers of deduction, we know the tablets are NOT iPads. First Apple hasn't really tried to court companies, and don't really have any sort of enterprise management system in place, according to everyone who's asked about iPhones, iPads and such in the workplace.
Which means the OS in question is either Windows or Android. Since Windows would be utterly trivial to put into a kiosk mode (you don't even need a tablet to demo this) and there'll be a half-dozen ways to do it (probably writing a custom app hosting the IE COM control, for example), it's unlikely the question is about Windows.
So most likely, it's Android.
I thought the whole export thing went away a long time ago - I mean, back in the days when you had to either pick the "US High Encryption" versus "Export" version of a web browser (back when it was 128bit RSA vs. 40bit RSA). Given that I don't think Safari, Chrome (not Chromium), IE and Opera have "export friendly" versions of their browsers, I thought everyone could use HTTPS and be done with it?
Especially now that everyone's practically upgraded to 256bit AES.
It wasn't US broadcast corps. Sure Dish and DirecTV were angry about people stealing content and thus made things like leased boxes (you must return the box), as well as various smartcard tricks that change the authentication and encryption systems. But those applied more to the US subscribers.
The reason why US satellite dishes are illegal in Canada is because Bell went to sue all the Canadian US dish providers. These companies were providing services that allowed Canadians to purchase US satellite dishes and receivers, and providing the necessary services to activate them legitimately. These grey-market dishes were what Bell was suing about - seeing all those subscribers that didn't want their service.
Once Bell obtained their injunction (happened around 2007-2008), Dish and DirecTV then began proceedings against these grey-market providers to discontinue service (yes, they wanted people who were paying for the service to not receive it anymore).. This happened in early 2009.
As for legality - it's questionable. Should someone be able to purchase a service from another country if there's a method to get that service? I mean, we moan and groan when some internet TV or radio station becomes "country only" and refuses to sell service outside that country. But if using a VPN service lets you get access to that service - should it be legal? It's the same for grey-market satellite TV, and also applied to other US-only services like TiVo, satellite radio (until Canada approved it), and still does to US Netflix, Hulu, etc.
- Here's a dialog that has to validate text - what are all the possible errors it could encounter, and are the error dialogs properly implemented for each? (check all error condition handling possibilities)
Don't forget in this case to try Unicode text and make sure it comes out or errors out appropriately.
This is especially important if one of the tasks is to adapt the information for another system which may be Unicode-unaware - how does the output come out on the other end, and does it still work? Or does the illegal Unicode input make it through (even if you use proper validation frameworks, they may guarantee the output is valid Unicode and not say, ASCII).
Especially try the bidi override characters to see if your output suddenly goes weird.
Most filesystems do encode a volume name inside them, and this dates back to the DOS days where the volume name is just a special file in the FAT root directory. I'm sure ext* does the same as well.If not, the mounter uses the filename.
As for what happens if the directory used already exists for another filesystem already mounted, a suffix is added. E.g., USBDISK, USBDISK1, USBDISK2, etc.
It happens on Linux, on OS X, etc. And it's a more common problem than you may think especially with dead fileservers and such.
The actual hoisting takes a few hours. There's a how it's made or something episode that shows how it was done on another IMAX screen. They basically have the hours between the last film of the day (past midnight), and before the first screening of the day.
But there's a lot of logistics involved so it could be simply ordering the screen (custom made), and getting put on a waitlist. Then from that waitlist comes the actual delivery date to which you can use to plan the whole teardown and hoist.
There's a lot to plan - you need ironworkers and the like to scurry around the frame of the screen and tie it off. You then need technicians to recalibrate the equipment to the new screen (IMAX has exacting standards - so focus must be redone, color calibration, and sound (sound levels have to be requalized to compensate for the new screen - the sound reflectivity (audience-side speakers) and transparency (behind screen speakers))
And most likely, you need to coordinate with IMAX to do it so they can send technicians and everything.
And no, it's not completely unusual - planning for events can often take a whole year. People who do conferences basically start planning the next year's conference just as the current year's conference ends.
On the old 2D sensors, maybe. But modern fingerprint sensors are 1D - they contain a sensor that scans as the user swipes the finger over the sensor. It makes it much harder to lift a fingerprint from (the fingerprint is wiped as it's read), as well as making the sensor MUCH smaller - something that can fit on a smartphone without consuming too much space.
Modern fingerprint sensors you find on computers are already the swipe kind. You'd have better luck lifting a print from the screen or other surface of the phone than the sensor these days.
It's 75% to do nothing.
Apple does the same 30-70 split for every song. For Apple's part, they take care of storing the files, sending them to the buyer (and storing it for them in iCloud), and handling the payment.
The remaining 70% is given to the record label, and of that, 75% goes to the label? The only thing they did was convert a master tape to a 256kbps AAC file and click "Upload". Just a one-time thing - Apple does the rest.
(And 30% for doing it all isn't too much - it's basically no profit if a user buys one song. Even if you use a gift card - you can find them 20% off easily, and the store selling them are still making a profit, so handling gift card payments are still break even. Apple tries to combine transactions to come out ahead and avoid fraud alerts (if you do multiple low-value transactions ($5 and under) it can trigger a fraud alert).
The problem with Google is, being EVERYWHERE (in some form or another), your attempts at poisoning requires active effort, or your real habits will quickly overwhelm the faked data.
And yes, should everything Google disappear overnight, the internet will be quite broken
It's a cultural thing.
In Canada, we have "two" tech stores (Best Buy and Future Shop, but both are owned by Best Buy). The retail selection in Canada is far better than the B&M store in the US in my experience, showing that people still shop retail.
Of course, online, the US is way better.
The problem is there really is no reason to buy online in Canada - Amazon.ca barely sells more than books, CDs and DVDs, and at prices you can find retail. Plus you hae to pay shipping or wait a week (no Amazon Prime).
So given shopping online in Canada is really only about getting stuff you can't find in a store, the stores are doing quite well. Especially since the stuff you can find in a store - once you add shipping and such, the price is often higher than the store.
I contend otherwise. Your point is 100% correct if every Chinese job there translated to an American job here. But it doesn't.
You see, the average American in a manufacturing job is much more efficient than their Chinese counterpart. I'd contend easily 10-to-1 or more.
The reason? The average American wage for manufacturing is much higher. Thus, a company wanting to build in America must design their product to use as few people as possible. So what happens is they design for manufacturing by automation. I.e., they use manufacturing robots.
So what happens is very few people are involved in direct manufacturing (if you design it right, you can go from parts to packed and sealed product without being touched by human hands). So the few people you do employ at a factory will be those who oversee the robots and assembly line. And a few technicians.
So the good news is we made some very highly skilled high paying jobs, but we also lost many more low skilled Chinese jobs. There's also a trickle down in that you've made a designer get high pay for design for manufacturing, optimizing the design so it can be assembled and packed by robots.
Of course, you lose design flexibility - with a human-intensive method like China, you can change the design on a whim. For a robotic assemblyline, it takes much longer as the robots need to be retrained and often times, new molds and test jigs have to be created for the robots, which can delay production by months.
The other problem is, does the US have a sufficiently trained workforce for this? If Apple were to try, it would be limited to whom it can hire.
I think with the proper design, it wouldn't cost Apple much more to use US labour - if they can get 1 American to oversee the robots assembling the same number of products as 100 Chinese workers, then the costs are a wash. Of course, 3,000 jobs doesn't make a huge drup in the unemployment bucket.
More practically, China's at the same point in their industrialization as the US was 100-150 years ago. Similarity in working conditions, pay, etc, are very similar to way back when.
I think the outrage is simple.
Google has a different privacy policy for each of its services, and if it decides it wants to share the data between services, the conflict makes it a legal nightmare.
Unifying the privacy policy - a great idea, because it simplifies life for everyone. However, one of the changes is that Google will also unify your profile data among all services (it could once the new policy was in place, but I believe afterwards, it said it will).
So now everything you've ever done (your youtube, your browsing (double click, google ads, CDN, any site that uses a Google-hosted javascript or something), picasa, your searches) will be available in one, all linked nicely to your details you put on your G+ page. Even what Android or iOS apps you used and how long you used them.
It's like the supermarket cards - all the juicy details of your shopping habits is pure gold to insurance companies.
Basically, you cannot use the Internet without Google - even if you use Bing exclusively, never go to YouTube and other Google projects, there's a ton of other crap hosted by Google that your web experience would suck worse than with NoScript.
If you've put up a carefully written Facebook pages, carefully choose your friends, your real self will be exposed to Google I'm sure employers and marketing ages will be anteing up lots of money to see your real self - what websites you view, what you've searched, what kind of videos you browsed. A veritable gold mine.
Nasty secret - that 28VDC power adapter would just be a repurposed truck one.
We consider a car to have a 12V battery, but the system operates at 14V while the engine is running (to charge the battery). It's why you find a lot of portable gear running at 13.8V - they run just fine at 12V, but are designed for engine-run where the engine is running.
Trucks and planes normally use a 24V battery, and often have their power points marked as 28V because that'll be the voltage when the alternator is running. There's nothing special otherwise.
Of course, for cars, there's a lot of talk that since cars have increasing electrical loads, to move the entire system to a 48V system (56V on alternator).
I'm sure the US Air Force can find a lot of truck USB adapters that work for iPad.
Two different issues.
First, Apple chose not to go LTE for one very good reason - the current LTE chipsets suck.
Here's the thing. LTE is a data standard. It doesn't define a voice standard, and there's proposals on how to do voice-over-LTE. And people want to do voice calls. So LTE phones right now hop onto the UMTS (or CDMA) network in order to handle a voice call, while doing LTE for data. The problem is that LTE phones now need two chips - one to do LTE, another to do 3G/voice (ever notice how the LTE versions of phones are always larger? It's not just the larger battery). The iPhone doesn't have enough space for another chip. Plus the extra chip takes power.
Now, Qualcomm has announced their roadmap that has a combined LTE/UMTS/GSM/CDMA baseband (listed as LTE+voice) in a single chip, which is anticipated to be in the next iPhone.
As for AT&T's dropped calls - it was because of over-aggressive power management from iPhones causing the control channel to be congested (which leads to dropped calls everwyhere in general). The irony being that the cells on AT&T were very underutilized (30-40%) but the control channel being completely saturated means dropped calls, slow data and other things.
As for who drives things - well, the carriers work with handset manufacturers. The carriers want to deploy the Next Big Thing that can charge customers more money for, and since Apple's basically an untouchable (the carrier bends to Apple's will), they work with HTC and others to stick in new chips to try to get people to pay more for a new network.
LTE deployment is quite interesting. When the (original 2G) iPhone came out, the 3G deployment in North America was quite spotty (the North American carriers chose 2G+ technolgies prior to the proper 3G rollout), but quite solid in Europe and Asia. These days, LTE deployment in North America is far more than Europe and Asia
I believe Microsoft Research does a lot of basic research. Ostensibly to put into products, but few have made it into what Microsoft sells, yet Microsoft still funds it.
May not be Bell Labs quality, but a lot of research papers and interesting research stuff comes out of it.