I think THE issue with the iPhone comes down to the silly high price for the phone.
If price is the key issue in your purchase decision of something you use everyday, many times per day, then you're doing it wrong. Price is not irrelevant, but it should be a secondary consideration.
I own two Samsung Galaxy S phones, the S3 and the S5, which both have OLED screens, and neither of them have any burn-in. A recent report noted iPhone X burn-in within 16 hours.
Face ID kicks ass. It feels as if the phone is not even locked. Sure, it's not as secure as a passcode, but for everyday use it's fantastic. If I ever get in a situation where I'm really concerned about complete security I'll disable it. But the convenience is really nice.
Not never, but less often. And he actually explains his thinking. You might disagree, and you might be right, but at least he's making his case instead of just bashing. Do you do that? And off-topic, but just a handy mnemonic: There's only a finite number of ways to spell definite.
Dispute, not refute. Refute means to prove wrong. When used properly it's is an extremely useful word with a specific meaning. Please don't dilute it when there's the word "dispute", which already says *exactly* what you want to say. It's as if people had never heard "refute" before and thought "Oh, that's a fancy way of saying dispute, so I'm going to use it to sound more elevated."
Dilbert's artist is hell bent on promoting and pushing pointy and orange hair incompentant bosses onto the rest of us.
And he's very good at it. Much better than say, Fox News. He speaks rationally and calmly, and when he doesn't know something he says he doesn't know instead of BS. But still, it seems that no matter what Trump does he takes a positive view of it.
He posts a short video several times a week. Even if you're 100% anti-Trump these are worth watching, if only to give your position a little more perspective and perhaps help fine-tune your own arguments.
You're exaggerating so many points. Do you really thing "minimal usability" wan't preserved? Do you really think it was akin to slowing it down to 10 Mph? And they aren't slowed down to conserve energy. The phones still function completely normally except in cases where a surge of power is needed that the battery is no longer capable of delivering. In those moments the OS would instead throttle the CPU, making the task take a little longer rather than having the phone shut down.
When activity is not above that processor-intensity threshold the phone behaves completely normally and unthrottled.
Legitimate (non-troll) question: How does the iPhone not have a low battery warning?
It's not that the charge is low, which of course there's a warning for, it's that the battery no longer has the ability to handle a surge. What was happening before was that the phone would shut down when a processor-intensive task would be invoked. So Apple made a change in the OS that would instead throttle the CPU in those circumstances, avoiding the shutdown in return for the activity taking a bit longer to execute.
Seems like a reasonable response. Apple's mistake was what it so often it is - they didn't communicate.
That's pretty funny. I hope he has both phones, and maybe his Nexus 6P can't handle the "heavy load" of posting to slashdot, but that is funny. Or it's a clever troll, but I doubt it.
So Apple might have specced it, but probably only Samsung could make it.
Apple did more than merely spec it, they designed it. Samsung is only doing the manufacturing. It's not an off-the-shelf screen, nor is it the same as Samsung's own offerings. You're right though, only Samsung is currently capable of building them. Samsung is a superb manufacturer, but that's rather different from "they just buy them from Samsung."
Samsung also manufactures the Apple-designed CPU, but they had no input at all in the design. No one would say that's a Samsung CPU.
You are extolling the creation of fabricated financial instruments, that outstrip the available supply (according to you) of a completely made up thing
I'm not actually extolling anything. I'm just saying that's what will happen. Do you know that there's only somewhere around $42B worth of gold in the world and yet trillions of dollars of gold gets traded in these "paper" instruments every year?
The skinny jeans purchases would come after the (hoped-for) success in that speculation you mentioned. A lot of people, a whole lot, are in bitcoin simply in the hope that it's worth more later. They're treating futures contracts the same way.
No Bitcoin is a failure, with a bottlenecked architecture that prevents liquidity
Liquidity and high transaction fees gets solved by creating a proxy, in much the same way that a dollar was once a proxy for gold. You can already see it starting. Exchanges have begun to offer bitcoin futures. Dealing in those involves no bitcoin transactions - it's simply an agreement. and there can be as many of those as you like.
Gold is traded the same way. The size of gold futures contracts far exceeds the actual amount of gold in the world. It's not even close.
Slashdot Mirror
Why would the scare quotes? People do need salt.
Almonds are a great source of potassium and a tasty low-carb snack.
If price is the key issue in your purchase decision of something you use everyday, many times per day, then you're doing it wrong. Price is not irrelevant, but it should be a secondary consideration.
That's contrary to what this report says.
Face ID kicks ass. It feels as if the phone is not even locked. Sure, it's not as secure as a passcode, but for everyday use it's fantastic. If I ever get in a situation where I'm really concerned about complete security I'll disable it. But the convenience is really nice.
That's why I don't trust flavors. Sure, they seem to make food taste good, but is it really getting something for nothing?
What's wrong with salt?
They just need self-driving bicycles that can bring themselves back home.
lol I'd forgotten about that.
Not never, but less often. And he actually explains his thinking. You might disagree, and you might be right, but at least he's making his case instead of just bashing. Do you do that? And off-topic, but just a handy mnemonic: There's only a finite number of ways to spell definite.
If you're not willing to listen to the other side then you're making your own opinion less informed.
Dispute, not refute. Refute means to prove wrong. When used properly it's is an extremely useful word with a specific meaning. Please don't dilute it when there's the word "dispute", which already says *exactly* what you want to say. It's as if people had never heard "refute" before and thought "Oh, that's a fancy way of saying dispute, so I'm going to use it to sound more elevated."
And he's very good at it. Much better than say, Fox News. He speaks rationally and calmly, and when he doesn't know something he says he doesn't know instead of BS. But still, it seems that no matter what Trump does he takes a positive view of it.
He posts a short video several times a week. Even if you're 100% anti-Trump these are worth watching, if only to give your position a little more perspective and perhaps help fine-tune your own arguments.
Which part of your example is either underpromising or overdelivering?
Sure, but just try getting the KFC off your storage buckets.
Not instead of, as well as.
You're exaggerating so many points. Do you really thing "minimal usability" wan't preserved? Do you really think it was akin to slowing it down to 10 Mph? And they aren't slowed down to conserve energy. The phones still function completely normally except in cases where a surge of power is needed that the battery is no longer capable of delivering. In those moments the OS would instead throttle the CPU, making the task take a little longer rather than having the phone shut down.
When activity is not above that processor-intensity threshold the phone behaves completely normally and unthrottled.
It's not that the charge is low, which of course there's a warning for, it's that the battery no longer has the ability to handle a surge. What was happening before was that the phone would shut down when a processor-intensive task would be invoked. So Apple made a change in the OS that would instead throttle the CPU in those circumstances, avoiding the shutdown in return for the activity taking a bit longer to execute.
Seems like a reasonable response. Apple's mistake was what it so often it is - they didn't communicate.
That's pretty funny. I hope he has both phones, and maybe his Nexus 6P can't handle the "heavy load" of posting to slashdot, but that is funny. Or it's a clever troll, but I doubt it.
Never mind. Clearly it's not worth explaining further. Perhaps you could re-read the thread.
Apple did more than merely spec it, they designed it. Samsung is only doing the manufacturing. It's not an off-the-shelf screen, nor is it the same as Samsung's own offerings. You're right though, only Samsung is currently capable of building them. Samsung is a superb manufacturer, but that's rather different from "they just buy them from Samsung."
Samsung also manufactures the Apple-designed CPU, but they had no input at all in the design. No one would say that's a Samsung CPU.
I'm not actually extolling anything. I'm just saying that's what will happen. Do you know that there's only somewhere around $42B worth of gold in the world and yet trillions of dollars of gold gets traded in these "paper" instruments every year?
The skinny jeans purchases would come after the (hoped-for) success in that speculation you mentioned. A lot of people, a whole lot, are in bitcoin simply in the hope that it's worth more later. They're treating futures contracts the same way.
Liquidity and high transaction fees gets solved by creating a proxy, in much the same way that a dollar was once a proxy for gold. You can already see it starting. Exchanges have begun to offer bitcoin futures. Dealing in those involves no bitcoin transactions - it's simply an agreement. and there can be as many of those as you like.
Gold is traded the same way. The size of gold futures contracts far exceeds the actual amount of gold in the world. It's not even close.
Samsung manufactures them, but it's 100% an Apple design. They are not off the shelf screens, but Samsung is very capable manufacturer.