Which is why I now have a Nexus 7, because I know Google will try to release for that as long as possible, and it would cost FAR less to replace than the iPad 1 I had which got abandoned by them.
But if Apple thinks I'd spend the money on another iPad, they're sorely mistaken.
LOL, my brother bought something in that family... when you turned it off, the clock stopped, so it never had the slightest idea of what the time was unless you set it every time you turned it on.
And, as you said, it had horrible battery life, was seriously underperforming, flaky wifi, and was generally not very good.
Granted, that was a few years ago, but one does worry about these low-end devices and just how useful they'll actually be.
Which will of course be FAR more expensive than the textbooks were.
I don't get the impression that e-textbooks ever actually save anybody money as the publishers just jack up the prices.
I knew someone who worked in a library, and they got all excited about e-books, only to realize they spent about 50% or more of the annual book buying budget to get it set up and get just a half a dozen e-books. They ended up with far far less than if they'd bought traditional books, because they'd have been able to buy hundreds of books for what they spent.
At the end of the day, it makes more money for the publisher, but a small community library got absolutely burned in the process, and only ended up with a handful of books, and limited benefit
I can't imagine school boards would fare any better.
Then I will consider my sizaable CD and DVD collection to be complete, and never 'buy' any more of it.
Either tell me I'm only renting it and charge a fraction of what you charge to 'buy', or understand that once the consumers figure out that they're not really buying anything, and paying an inflated price for it... hopefully some of them will just stop giving you the revenue stream.
It's gotten to the point that I categorically will NOT buy and Blu Rays with the Ultraviolet crap -- I'm not signing up with 3 different places to have a piece of digital media which needs to call home every time I want to play to confirm they've not revoked my license. Because sometimes I want to watch the movie when I do not have network access (like on an airplane).
I bought exactly one DVD with Ultraviolet, and it was the last.
Apparently this reverse-Santa ability is a feature Amazon provides all publishers, and customers have little recourse but to go cap-in-hand to a Disney outlet and pay for the shows again.
Then why do these companies continue to act like we will keep "buying" stuff from them if they can do this whenever they want?
If I paid you for something, I either expect a refund, or something clearly up front which says "you're only kind of buying this, but we can take it away any time we like". Not finding out after the fact that they can.
And this is the problem with the corporations view of digital media -- we have no rights, and only get what we 'bought' as long as they feel like giving it to us.
In general, it's easier for the consumer to just pirate the stuff than to try to do it the way they want; because we just keep getting burned.
That it was Di$ney doing this is no surprise. They seem to be the world leaders in this kind of thing, and are mostly greedy bastards. Pity they've bought Marvel.
Um, I hear those sound waves just fine (high frequency sensitive). My dentist had to give up using it on me.
You may not actually be hearing the sound waves themselves, but the harmonics they create inside of your skull/jawbone/ear.
I can hear them too, but I've more or less concluded that, like everything else in a dentist office, it's temporary and the benefits outweigh the nuisance.
I hate the sound, but it seems less problematic than the medieval tools they use otherwise.
Facebook has become difficult to even type in the status box, because they're trying so hard to fill in suggestions and the like that the cursor jumps around. Half the time it jumbles up characters, likely because there's a crap-ton on javascript running with every keystroke.
So everybody should periodically type "Mark Zuckerberg is a douchebag" and delete it.;-)
Empirically, when I disable 3rd party cookies and visit a web site with Safari, I see a large amount of 3rd party cookies. Try something juice like the LA Times which has crap tons of advertising sites.
So, assuming my instance isn't singularly broken, I conclude Safari does a piss-poor job of blocking 3rd party cookies.
Google and others figured a way around it, and in my experience, it's essentially useless. Hell, Google paid a fine for having done so.
You pay them for the privilege of being crammed into them, but they most assuredly are not 'public' in the sense you mean.
Why not let people use their time as productively as they wish.
Why not have your conference call somewhere else? You don't need to sit on a 4 hour flight telling everybody about the TPS reports, and none of the rest of us give a damn about your productivity unless you can do it quietly.
Some features are included in one, but not the other. Some thing are add-ons. Some things aren't even available.
Trying to get a "compare like to like" is damned near impossible, because they've carefully set them up so it's impossible to do that.
Which means if you're trying to evaluate several of these services to figure out which is the best value for your needs, you need to do extensive fiddling to get them described in the same terms and actually be able to understand what you're seeing.
The airlines are already cramming more seats into the same space.
The day an airline starts charging people to sit in the "no cellphone section" is the day the air marshals and cabin crews will be breaking up a LOT more fights.
since its ok to talk on a cell phone, ok for my kids to vocalize themselves as well
One of my worst flight experiences involved a several hour long flight out of San Francisco.
Some lady had her annoying lap-dog in one of those little carrier bags. The dog barked incessantly the whole flight. At one point, there was a very real risk that dog was not going to survive the flight, because every passenger on the plane had had enough of it. The cabin crew ended up giving out free drinks to a lot of the other passengers, giving out free headphones, and glaring at the lady with the dog -- if they hadn't appeased the rest of us, I believe there is a high probability someone would have wrung it's neck.
Kids, well, people have kids and there's not much we can do about it. But your barking dog in the plane cabin, it might not make it through alive.
And I predict you might find the same thing happening if someone was on the phone for half the flight. Because it's going to have the effect of REALLY pissing people off.
And that's different from talking with the person next to you how, exactly?
Go to the part of your office that has the most suits.
Now, listen to the volume of the monkey in the suit when he speaks on the phone, versus the volume of the monkey in the suit when he speaks to people in the room.
In my experience, the suit monkey speaks a lot louder on the phone, and is correspondingly a lot more annoying.
Are they going to ban them in restaurants next? Movie theaters? What an idiotic premise!
In a restaurant, I can ask my waitress to tell you to STFU. If she fails to, I can (and will) walk out.
You already can't use your phone in a movie theater.
Being stuck on a plane for several hours while some sales wanker is on a conference call -- well, let's just say the cabin crew might have to break up a few fights and deal with the fallout of someone who has had enough. After you've won buzz-word bingo for the 3rd time in 15 minutes, it wears thin, and people have already been stressed out by the process of going through the airport.
Mark my words, I bet it would take less than 2 years before the first in-flight murder of a cell phone user or something silly like that. Because the people who feel they can't avoid using their cell phones often have absolutely no awareness of those around them, because they feel whatever they're doing is so important that the rest of us should have to put up with it.
I'm sorry, I missed the part where you filtered the seven billion people on this earth down to those you choose to investigate without any initial data, but with a fixed budget.
7 billion people on the planet, 315 million or so Americans.
How is this our problem? Are you asserting the wishes of 300 million people trump those of the rest of the world? That you're more important? That we should care more about your security than our rights?
As I said, if another country was doing this to America on this scale, it would be deemed an act of war. And yet somehow Americans seem to think that it's OK when they do it.
So Americans would accept that they don't get a say if, for example, China or Russia tries to do the same thing? Because, you know, it's lawful according to them?
Or are you saying you're special somehow and that the rest of the world should be bowing down and accept your superiority?
So instead of actually doing targeted investigations, you've decided that collecting everything about everybody is the best way to go about it, and if you happen to pick up unrelated stuff for which you had no probable cause, too bad.
Sorry buddy, but just because you can't figure out how to do your job without turning the country (and the entire world) into the worst sort of Big Brother environment is YOUR problem.
And since you've decided that the easiest way to do this is to spy on the whole planet -- fuck you, because the rest of the world hasn't consented to that and doesn't give a shit about the challenges of you doing your job in compliance with the law.
All I'm hearing is "waah, how are we supposed to spy on just some people without effort, warrants, probably cause, and following the law?".
Personally, I think that they're building onto the ideology that 'knowing how to use a computer' makes you smart.
I agree that learning how to use computers gives you an important skillset and more advantages than if you don't.
But saying they "learned CS" is like saying learning how to apply a bandaid means you've "learned medicine", or hammering a nail means you've "learned carpentry" -- it's completely over-stating what you've done, and has no bearing on what you're claiming.
Learning a few computer concepts is NOT "learning CS".
Slashdot Mirror
That about mirrors my experience.
Which is why I now have a Nexus 7, because I know Google will try to release for that as long as possible, and it would cost FAR less to replace than the iPad 1 I had which got abandoned by them.
But if Apple thinks I'd spend the money on another iPad, they're sorely mistaken.
On the bright side, there should be a fresh wave of people who can't upgrade because Apple abandoned the devices.
So, the last update I got for my first-gen iPad is the last of these devices I'll own.
They still support my 10 year old iPods, but after 2 years they no longer supported my iPad.
It's scarier, and no longer fiction. :-P
Alice and Bob are actually the same person trying not to be found out by Nelson, Steve, and Adam. ;-)
Do you feel that a lot of what is happening right now is eerily similar to some of the "what ifs" which cyberpunk has been talking about for decades?
Some days, it seems like everything is unfolding right before our eyes straight out of Orwell and Huxley, and people are embracing it as normal.
LOL, my brother bought something in that family ... when you turned it off, the clock stopped, so it never had the slightest idea of what the time was unless you set it every time you turned it on.
And, as you said, it had horrible battery life, was seriously underperforming, flaky wifi, and was generally not very good.
Granted, that was a few years ago, but one does worry about these low-end devices and just how useful they'll actually be.
Which will of course be FAR more expensive than the textbooks were.
I don't get the impression that e-textbooks ever actually save anybody money as the publishers just jack up the prices.
I knew someone who worked in a library, and they got all excited about e-books, only to realize they spent about 50% or more of the annual book buying budget to get it set up and get just a half a dozen e-books. They ended up with far far less than if they'd bought traditional books, because they'd have been able to buy hundreds of books for what they spent.
At the end of the day, it makes more money for the publisher, but a small community library got absolutely burned in the process, and only ended up with a handful of books, and limited benefit
I can't imagine school boards would fare any better.
Then I will consider my sizaable CD and DVD collection to be complete, and never 'buy' any more of it.
Either tell me I'm only renting it and charge a fraction of what you charge to 'buy', or understand that once the consumers figure out that they're not really buying anything, and paying an inflated price for it ... hopefully some of them will just stop giving you the revenue stream.
It's gotten to the point that I categorically will NOT buy and Blu Rays with the Ultraviolet crap -- I'm not signing up with 3 different places to have a piece of digital media which needs to call home every time I want to play to confirm they've not revoked my license. Because sometimes I want to watch the movie when I do not have network access (like on an airplane).
I bought exactly one DVD with Ultraviolet, and it was the last.
Then why do these companies continue to act like we will keep "buying" stuff from them if they can do this whenever they want?
If I paid you for something, I either expect a refund, or something clearly up front which says "you're only kind of buying this, but we can take it away any time we like". Not finding out after the fact that they can.
And this is the problem with the corporations view of digital media -- we have no rights, and only get what we 'bought' as long as they feel like giving it to us.
In general, it's easier for the consumer to just pirate the stuff than to try to do it the way they want; because we just keep getting burned.
That it was Di$ney doing this is no surprise. They seem to be the world leaders in this kind of thing, and are mostly greedy bastards. Pity they've bought Marvel.
This kind of stuff will only get worse.
You may not actually be hearing the sound waves themselves, but the harmonics they create inside of your skull/jawbone/ear.
I can hear them too, but I've more or less concluded that, like everything else in a dentist office, it's temporary and the benefits outweigh the nuisance.
I hate the sound, but it seems less problematic than the medieval tools they use otherwise.
Oh, for just 4 more feet, that would have been awesome. ;-)
Facebook has become difficult to even type in the status box, because they're trying so hard to fill in suggestions and the like that the cursor jumps around. Half the time it jumbles up characters, likely because there's a crap-ton on javascript running with every keystroke.
So everybody should periodically type "Mark Zuckerberg is a douchebag" and delete it. ;-)
Empirically, when I disable 3rd party cookies and visit a web site with Safari, I see a large amount of 3rd party cookies. Try something juice like the LA Times which has crap tons of advertising sites.
So, assuming my instance isn't singularly broken, I conclude Safari does a piss-poor job of blocking 3rd party cookies.
Google and others figured a way around it, and in my experience, it's essentially useless. Hell, Google paid a fine for having done so.
Why do you always switch to the yellow dice when you make that roll? Are you cheating? ;-)
An airplane is private property of the airlines.
You pay them for the privilege of being crammed into them, but they most assuredly are not 'public' in the sense you mean.
Why not have your conference call somewhere else? You don't need to sit on a 4 hour flight telling everybody about the TPS reports, and none of the rest of us give a damn about your productivity unless you can do it quietly.
So, as far as I can tell, Safari doesn't actually block 3rd party cookies despite saying it does, and stores your credentials in plain text.
Sounds like Apple have some issues on their hands.
Hell, in my experience with Safari on Windows, deleting a cookie causes WebKit2WebProcess to crash.
I liken it more to comparing cell-phone plans.
Some features are included in one, but not the other. Some thing are add-ons. Some things aren't even available.
Trying to get a "compare like to like" is damned near impossible, because they've carefully set them up so it's impossible to do that.
Which means if you're trying to evaluate several of these services to figure out which is the best value for your needs, you need to do extensive fiddling to get them described in the same terms and actually be able to understand what you're seeing.
The airlines are already cramming more seats into the same space.
The day an airline starts charging people to sit in the "no cellphone section" is the day the air marshals and cabin crews will be breaking up a LOT more fights.
One of my worst flight experiences involved a several hour long flight out of San Francisco.
Some lady had her annoying lap-dog in one of those little carrier bags. The dog barked incessantly the whole flight. At one point, there was a very real risk that dog was not going to survive the flight, because every passenger on the plane had had enough of it. The cabin crew ended up giving out free drinks to a lot of the other passengers, giving out free headphones, and glaring at the lady with the dog -- if they hadn't appeased the rest of us, I believe there is a high probability someone would have wrung it's neck.
Kids, well, people have kids and there's not much we can do about it. But your barking dog in the plane cabin, it might not make it through alive.
And I predict you might find the same thing happening if someone was on the phone for half the flight. Because it's going to have the effect of REALLY pissing people off.
Go to the part of your office that has the most suits.
Now, listen to the volume of the monkey in the suit when he speaks on the phone, versus the volume of the monkey in the suit when he speaks to people in the room.
In my experience, the suit monkey speaks a lot louder on the phone, and is correspondingly a lot more annoying.
In a restaurant, I can ask my waitress to tell you to STFU. If she fails to, I can (and will) walk out.
You already can't use your phone in a movie theater.
Being stuck on a plane for several hours while some sales wanker is on a conference call -- well, let's just say the cabin crew might have to break up a few fights and deal with the fallout of someone who has had enough. After you've won buzz-word bingo for the 3rd time in 15 minutes, it wears thin, and people have already been stressed out by the process of going through the airport.
Mark my words, I bet it would take less than 2 years before the first in-flight murder of a cell phone user or something silly like that. Because the people who feel they can't avoid using their cell phones often have absolutely no awareness of those around them, because they feel whatever they're doing is so important that the rest of us should have to put up with it.
7 billion people on the planet, 315 million or so Americans.
How is this our problem? Are you asserting the wishes of 300 million people trump those of the rest of the world? That you're more important? That we should care more about your security than our rights?
As I said, if another country was doing this to America on this scale, it would be deemed an act of war. And yet somehow Americans seem to think that it's OK when they do it.
So Americans would accept that they don't get a say if, for example, China or Russia tries to do the same thing? Because, you know, it's lawful according to them?
Or are you saying you're special somehow and that the rest of the world should be bowing down and accept your superiority?
Because that's not going to happen.
So instead of actually doing targeted investigations, you've decided that collecting everything about everybody is the best way to go about it, and if you happen to pick up unrelated stuff for which you had no probable cause, too bad.
Sorry buddy, but just because you can't figure out how to do your job without turning the country (and the entire world) into the worst sort of Big Brother environment is YOUR problem.
And since you've decided that the easiest way to do this is to spy on the whole planet -- fuck you, because the rest of the world hasn't consented to that and doesn't give a shit about the challenges of you doing your job in compliance with the law.
All I'm hearing is "waah, how are we supposed to spy on just some people without effort, warrants, probably cause, and following the law?".
I agree that learning how to use computers gives you an important skillset and more advantages than if you don't.
But saying they "learned CS" is like saying learning how to apply a bandaid means you've "learned medicine", or hammering a nail means you've "learned carpentry" -- it's completely over-stating what you've done, and has no bearing on what you're claiming.
Learning a few computer concepts is NOT "learning CS".