but I'll echo everyone else: I think you've got a lifestyle problem. I'm in Boston (not SF but not cheap by any means, either) and living on just over half that salary. In our industries, the days of punching a clock for 30 years then collecting a pension are largely over. If you can find that kind of security, good on you, but I'd never count on it, and certainly not from a lateral (at best) career move. Companies fold, funding dries up, and contracts expire. A cushion isn't just prudent, but absolutely necessary for most of us. If you're earning 50K+ and can't find it, IMO, you're not looking hard enough.
Not without violating Apple licensing terms. You may not give a shit - I don't either with my equipment at my house - but the folks who employ him probably do.
Also - I do agree to an extent and understand not wanting to leave the browser. What I originally pointed out is that at least some of this integration appears to be with products that were already delivered by the browser. Users never had to leave. What seemed inappropriate to me is making product delivery a _function_ of the browser.
Of course not. But I am, at least, a person to consider. My position is that development effort might be better spent on refinement than feature creep. I can't be the only one.
Frankly, extensibility isn't always good. Consider two theoretical browsing conditions: A minimal, lightweight browser with built-in support for $codecswegenerallyneed, then another browser running any number of different add-ons or extensions for media types, third-party website integration, semi-malicious toolbars, etc.
Even if Joe User thinks he wanted the blinking sendmymovementstothensa.com button and the McAfee search redirect feature, which is likely to provide the better general-purpose browsing experience? Which is less likely to fail in some manner as Joe attempts to pay bills, etc.?
I'd point to iPad adoption (in the States, anyway) as an indication that users will happily accept a product with limited customizability, but which almost always Just Works(TM). I'd be one of them, but I live in the *nix (and sometimes Win) world. I happen to feel that, for the moment, nobody's doing it right.
Good point. I guess my concern isn't so much for neutrality, but good design. In general I want a browser to do one thing well, and otherwise get out of the way.
I do understand the technical difference, but looking at it functionally: I expect "apps" to run in the OS. I do not also want a separate set of "apps" to run on the browser, or inside any other application for that matter. For example, in OSX or Windows I can have both a native Evernote binary "app" and a separate Evernote "app" running in Chrome. That's confusing and, to me, messes with the whole paradigm that most of us understand.
You better believe there's a Google tax, though. You pay in a less direct way maybe, but it's there.
No shilling here, I still use Google products where no convenient alternatives exist. But don't allow yourself to believe the services are free.
Given Google's (as perceived by me) direction lately, I'm to the point where I'd much rather pay cash (to some non-evil entity) for a platform than become their product. Seems like a cool box and a good idea but ChromeOS would keep me from even touching one of these.
With you on social media, but I'll go further and say the browser shouldn't really be integrated with anything external to the OS.
The concept of browser-as-platform (looking at you, Chrome) seems wrong and disruptive to me, but it should be especially unnecessary for a browser to integrate with a service that's normally delivered in a browser to begin with.
When I want to integrate with something, I'll let you know by punching in the address, thankyouverymuch.
Let me explain to you how this works: you see, the corporations finance Linux, and then Linux goes out... and the corporations sit there in their... in their corporation buildings, and... and, and see, they're all corporationy... and they make money.
Look, man: no slashdotter worth his salt has any illusion that Steve Jobs was involved in technical design beyond a very abstract level.
But he's a disgusting human being for having clarity of vision and salesmanship? I'll grant that he seemed like a dick for other reasons, but that's another discussion.
I'm writing this from an Ubuntu box that I built myself, and I tend to be an OS pragmatist. I make my living as an engineer. I don't discount my own contribution in my work, but I dare say there is room for more Steve Jobs (Jobses?) in tech. Someone's got to identify opportunity, guide a bunch of engineers to a product, and then sell the fucking thing. If that someone is very highly effective, it's no small contribution and I submit that if one person deserves credit for Mac it's Jobs.
I truly don't get the level of vitriol for this guy... there are posts here that honestly read batshit, foaming at the mouth crazy to me.
Besides, have you seen what happens when engineers drive product design? There are situations where those products are appropriate but we're talking about mainstream PCs here. Sure, elements were ripped off from Xerox, sure you can probably dig up earlier, better technical implementations of most of this tech. The thing that matters, and the reason we're still talking about it, is that Apple brought it into your grandmother's living room.
No. No it's not. Keep telling yourself that. You're defending that world view because if it's true, it takes the specialness out of that Mac you purchased, plus it makes you look like a fool who paid too much for your Mac. Which you are because it's true.
Wow. That wasn't a pro-Apple statement in any way, just points out that a mass-market computer is more than a box full of parts. Apple's computers are a completely different OS and software ecosystem. An Apple computer and a Windows computer are functionally quite different.
I moved away from ThinkPads after several generations for the same reason. Recent high end Latitudes (keyboard) and EliteBooks (everything else) outshine current ThinkPads for me, and I indeed moved to an EliteBook.
Why, oh why, can't anyone get the pointing stick/buttons right, though? Lenovo had it nailed right through the T61. All they had to do was not dick with it.
Now that we can get very good devices with unmolested Android (Nexus 7) for similar money.
The original Fire made sense, and I considered one, a couple years back when most options in the price range were compromised in some way.
These days I don't get it, though. Even assuming some Amazon lock-in - books, music or whatever - don't they have apps that make those things work on any Android?
*I do realize that NH isn't actually tax-free, and never had that expectation. I did expect not to pay a vehicle excise tax, though, and my experience when I lived there was that my neighbors though of it as the anti-Massachusetts - no sales, income taxes, etc.
Sure. I don't generally agree with libertarian principles, but I don't think the people who do are nuts/wrong/etc. What really got to me in that case, at the RMV in Epping that day, was that NH's method of collecting my money was totally disingenuous. Taxing me is one thing; calling it something else and pretending not to collect taxes is another.
I live here and cringe when I pay the excise too, but I really think ranting against it is generally bogus.
A few years back I bought a house across the border in NH. You know, the place with all the libertarians and no taxes and Live Free Or Die, Motherfucker! I was shocked when it $500 or so to register my car there - the fee (not "tax") is calculated based on the MSRP and age of your car, just like down here. Nice going, guys.
Come to think of it, they did the same thing in Arizona when I lived there.
I'd guess that some states don't do this at all, but certainly more than just ours do. Personally, I feel better about paying a "tax" than "yeah, this $500 is what it costs for two licenses plates and a slip of paper."
I agree completely with the preference for GSM over CDMA, which generally sucks for users. The bonus is that CDMA devices are way cheap on the used market.
With all that said, if someone offered a Ting-like service on a GSM network, I'd buy it. TMO's prepaid plans seem fair, and their new postpaid model seems like a step in the right direction too, but Ting costs me $40/mo for two devices right now and as far as I can see, no other carrier can touch that.
That's a valid requirement but, like you said, also pretty specific.
A discussion about BYOD Sprint devices on the Ting network limits us to users at a specific intersection of cheapitude and geekery: you've got to already know about the unadvertised (I think) program, and at the very least not mind reprogramming some carrier settings to make your Sprint phone work. From there, I don't think it's a stretch to assume that a lot of these users will be comfortable flashing and working on a stable CM release.
Obviously, dealing with any of that stuff is going to be unattractive to some people. For those who don't mind, though, I still think there are good choices. Maybe won't meet everyone's exact requirements (yours, BlackBerry people, and the iPhone as has been mentioned) but I think the situation is considerably better than what we've traditionally seen from MVNOs.
Cyanogenmod is available for the GNex, isn't it? The Galaxy devices are all represented, no? So, yeah, somewhat limited, but it's not as though a bunch of good options don't exist.
Slashdot Mirror
but I'll echo everyone else: I think you've got a lifestyle problem. I'm in Boston (not SF but not cheap by any means, either) and living on just over half that salary. In our industries, the days of punching a clock for 30 years then collecting a pension are largely over. If you can find that kind of security, good on you, but I'd never count on it, and certainly not from a lateral (at best) career move. Companies fold, funding dries up, and contracts expire. A cushion isn't just prudent, but absolutely necessary for most of us. If you're earning 50K+ and can't find it, IMO, you're not looking hard enough.
"You should set up your browser to keep random web sites from downloading and installing anything they want on your computer."
Yes, we should.
Also: olives and feta.
Not without violating Apple licensing terms. You may not give a shit - I don't either with my equipment at my house - but the folks who employ him probably do.
Also - I do agree to an extent and understand not wanting to leave the browser. What I originally pointed out is that at least some of this integration appears to be with products that were already delivered by the browser. Users never had to leave. What seemed inappropriate to me is making product delivery a _function_ of the browser.
Of course not. But I am, at least, a person to consider. My position is that development effort might be better spent on refinement than feature creep. I can't be the only one.
Frankly, extensibility isn't always good. Consider two theoretical browsing conditions: A minimal, lightweight browser with built-in support for $codecswegenerallyneed, then another browser running any number of different add-ons or extensions for media types, third-party website integration, semi-malicious toolbars, etc.
Even if Joe User thinks he wanted the blinking sendmymovementstothensa.com button and the McAfee search redirect feature, which is likely to provide the better general-purpose browsing experience? Which is less likely to fail in some manner as Joe attempts to pay bills, etc.?
I'd point to iPad adoption (in the States, anyway) as an indication that users will happily accept a product with limited customizability, but which almost always Just Works(TM). I'd be one of them, but I live in the *nix (and sometimes Win) world. I happen to feel that, for the moment, nobody's doing it right.
Good point. I guess my concern isn't so much for neutrality, but good design. In general I want a browser to do one thing well, and otherwise get out of the way.
I do understand the technical difference, but looking at it functionally: I expect "apps" to run in the OS. I do not also want a separate set of "apps" to run on the browser, or inside any other application for that matter. For example, in OSX or Windows I can have both a native Evernote binary "app" and a separate Evernote "app" running in Chrome. That's confusing and, to me, messes with the whole paradigm that most of us understand.
You better believe there's a Google tax, though. You pay in a less direct way maybe, but it's there.
No shilling here, I still use Google products where no convenient alternatives exist. But don't allow yourself to believe the services are free.
Given Google's (as perceived by me) direction lately, I'm to the point where I'd much rather pay cash (to some non-evil entity) for a platform than become their product. Seems like a cool box and a good idea but ChromeOS would keep me from even touching one of these.
With you on social media, but I'll go further and say the browser shouldn't really be integrated with anything external to the OS.
The concept of browser-as-platform (looking at you, Chrome) seems wrong and disruptive to me, but it should be especially unnecessary for a browser to integrate with a service that's normally delivered in a browser to begin with.
When I want to integrate with something, I'll let you know by punching in the address, thankyouverymuch.
I'll give FF another shot when there's a GTK3 port.
But, uh, hey... apparently we got us some Saavn (?) integration.
But... corporations!
Let me explain to you how this works: you see, the corporations finance Linux, and then Linux goes out... and the corporations sit there in their... in their corporation buildings, and... and, and see, they're all corporationy... and they make money.
So, the company is having trouble charging?
One Tesla is having trouble charging?
Look, man: no slashdotter worth his salt has any illusion that Steve Jobs was involved in technical design beyond a very abstract level.
But he's a disgusting human being for having clarity of vision and salesmanship? I'll grant that he seemed like a dick for other reasons, but that's another discussion.
I'm writing this from an Ubuntu box that I built myself, and I tend to be an OS pragmatist. I make my living as an engineer. I don't discount my own contribution in my work, but I dare say there is room for more Steve Jobs (Jobses?) in tech. Someone's got to identify opportunity, guide a bunch of engineers to a product, and then sell the fucking thing. If that someone is very highly effective, it's no small contribution and I submit that if one person deserves credit for Mac it's Jobs.
I truly don't get the level of vitriol for this guy... there are posts here that honestly read batshit, foaming at the mouth crazy to me.
Besides, have you seen what happens when engineers drive product design? There are situations where those products are appropriate but we're talking about mainstream PCs here. Sure, elements were ripped off from Xerox, sure you can probably dig up earlier, better technical implementations of most of this tech. The thing that matters, and the reason we're still talking about it, is that Apple brought it into your grandmother's living room.
No. No it's not. Keep telling yourself that. You're defending that world view because if it's true, it takes the specialness out of that Mac you purchased, plus it makes you look like a fool who paid too much for your Mac. Which you are because it's true.
Wow. That wasn't a pro-Apple statement in any way, just points out that a mass-market computer is more than a box full of parts. Apple's computers are a completely different OS and software ecosystem. An Apple computer and a Windows computer are functionally quite different.
Primarily a Linux user, BTW.
Jesus Christ, how did that make it into a Slashdot summary?
apt-get install gnome-desktop
I moved away from ThinkPads after several generations for the same reason. Recent high end Latitudes (keyboard) and EliteBooks (everything else) outshine current ThinkPads for me, and I indeed moved to an EliteBook.
Why, oh why, can't anyone get the pointing stick/buttons right, though? Lenovo had it nailed right through the T61. All they had to do was not dick with it.
Now that we can get very good devices with unmolested Android (Nexus 7) for similar money.
The original Fire made sense, and I considered one, a couple years back when most options in the price range were compromised in some way.
These days I don't get it, though. Even assuming some Amazon lock-in - books, music or whatever - don't they have apps that make those things work on any Android?
*I do realize that NH isn't actually tax-free, and never had that expectation. I did expect not to pay a vehicle excise tax, though, and my experience when I lived there was that my neighbors though of it as the anti-Massachusetts - no sales, income taxes, etc.
Sure. I don't generally agree with libertarian principles, but I don't think the people who do are nuts/wrong/etc. What really got to me in that case, at the RMV in Epping that day, was that NH's method of collecting my money was totally disingenuous. Taxing me is one thing; calling it something else and pretending not to collect taxes is another.
A few years back I bought a house across the border in NH. You know, the place with all the libertarians and no taxes and Live Free Or Die, Motherfucker! I was shocked when it $500 or so to register my car there - the fee (not "tax") is calculated based on the MSRP and age of your car, just like down here. Nice going, guys.
Come to think of it, they did the same thing in Arizona when I lived there.
I'd guess that some states don't do this at all, but certainly more than just ours do. Personally, I feel better about paying a "tax" than "yeah, this $500 is what it costs for two licenses plates and a slip of paper."
I agree completely with the preference for GSM over CDMA, which generally sucks for users. The bonus is that CDMA devices are way cheap on the used market.
With all that said, if someone offered a Ting-like service on a GSM network, I'd buy it. TMO's prepaid plans seem fair, and their new postpaid model seems like a step in the right direction too, but Ting costs me $40/mo for two devices right now and as far as I can see, no other carrier can touch that.
A discussion about BYOD Sprint devices on the Ting network limits us to users at a specific intersection of cheapitude and geekery: you've got to already know about the unadvertised (I think) program, and at the very least not mind reprogramming some carrier settings to make your Sprint phone work. From there, I don't think it's a stretch to assume that a lot of these users will be comfortable flashing and working on a stable CM release.
Obviously, dealing with any of that stuff is going to be unattractive to some people. For those who don't mind, though, I still think there are good choices. Maybe won't meet everyone's exact requirements (yours, BlackBerry people, and the iPhone as has been mentioned) but I think the situation is considerably better than what we've traditionally seen from MVNOs.
Cyanogenmod is available for the GNex, isn't it? The Galaxy devices are all represented, no? So, yeah, somewhat limited, but it's not as though a bunch of good options don't exist.