Google isn't an "altruistic and idealistic organization that truly cares only about making life better for everyone." They're a multi-billion-dollar megacorp whose business is based on a closed-source search-and-advertising platform dependent on selling your personal data to advertising partners. They make sleazy non-neutral internet deals with vendors just to push Android. They withhold Android source from non-privileged partners and ship closed technology like Flash, AAC, and MP3 support in Chrome, even as they preach about openness. Android is a free product pumped into a new market to maintain the dominance of the core business and kill off competitors who can't afford to compete with an artificial price, the same way Internet Explorer was pumped into the browser market to kill off Netscape and keep the Windows platform relevant.
The benevolent little tech company from ten years ago is long gone. In its place is a gigantic advertising conglomerate under investigation around the world for antitrust violations and privacy breaches. Google is another Microsoft and is no better.
Microsoft still elicits a predictable reaction on Slashdot, repetition of the term "FUD" as if it automatically counters all arguments. And, as always, there will be mysterious Underrated moderations to such comments because Overrated/Underrated moderations aren't subject to meta-moderation, a loophole that Slashdot has left unclosed for years. I think what has happened to this community is that Reddit and Hacker News drew most of the more objective posters away, leaving the hardcore ideologues behind who automatically stand behind Google and automatically hate Microsoft, Apple, Sun, and anything else that competes with Google. Slashdot's overall position was always skewed by default, but there was actually a degree of objectivity that used to shine through in the comment sections. That very rarely occurs today.
It's really quite fascinating that there isn't more outcry over the fact that a closed-source product from a corporation has become the gatekeeper for the web, but apparently, if you use Linux for your business, all is forgiven, and you are a pack of angels trying to make the world a better place rather than another scum-sucking corporation leveraging their monopoly to make a dollar.
Microsoft is referring to the fact that Google withholds Android source from non-privileged partners. You don't hear about it much on Slashdot because this is vehemently pro-Google territory.
Most Android smartphones are cheap "smartphones" that can barely powerful enough to do the things you'd expect a smartphone to do. Android has the market cornered on junk phones. Also keep in mind that, with iPads and iPod touches counted, iOS greatly surpasses Android in total market share, and the iPhone is the top-selling smartphone as well as the most profitable.
Antitrust regulators must be chomping at the bit. This is old-school Microsoft behavior. Imagine how other Android smartphone vendors are feeling right now.
The very first line of the article starts with "Over the last two years, the number of U.S. data centers has quadrupled." Obama took office more than two years ago. Just because the data centers were initiated under Bush, their quadrupling happened under Obama. You even acknowledge that Obama approved the continuation of the policy.
So really, your post is meaningless because Obama approved the continuation of the policy, and the data centers quadrupled as a result. What does Bush have to do with that?
Yeah, just like they were being purely defensive when they bid on mobile patents all for themselves while refusing an offer to jointly bid with others across the industry.
I think Slashdot has drilled the idea of "patents = bad" into its readers for so long that the idea of one of the presumed good guys being just as bad as the rest has blown their minds. The comments here are awash with a sea of "They're just doing it to make a point" posts--never mind that they didn't announce this themselves or publicly proclaim their intent, which they would have done if it was to prove some kind of point.
So this is like the twentieth "They're just making a point!" post from Google fans. Ignoring the fact that every other company could claim that too, did you know Sergey Brin filed a patent for Google Doodles--a.k.a., the changing of their logo for special events and holidays?
The patent describes their revolutionary method of simply uploading a new logo:
"A non-transitory computer-readable medium that stores instructions executable by one or more processors to perform a method for attracting users to a web page, comprising: instructions for creating a special event logo by modifying a standard company logo for a special event, where the instructions for creating the special event logo includes instructions for modifying the standard company logo with one or more animated images; instructions for associating a link or search results with the special event logo, the link identifying a document relating to the special event, the search results relating to the special event; instructions for uploading the special event logo to the web page; instructions for receiving a user selection of the special event logo; and instructions for providing the document relating to the special event or the search results relating to the special event based on the user selection."
This is a great defense fans have invented here for Google. Every company should use it. "It's okay when we do it! We're just trying to show how bad the patent system is!"
Google patents something absurd: "They're just poking fun at the patent office. Hell, I bet they have hundreds of these just to see how stupid they can get with them. Go Google!"
Anyone else patents something absurd: "This is an abomination. It's proof that the patent system is completely broken! Viva la revolución!"
Oh, I see, so when Google patents absurd things, it's a protest against the patent system. Like when they patented changing their logo for special events and holidays back in 2001. Thank goodness Google is rebelling against the patent system by patenting the invention of "periodically changing story line and/or special event company logo to entice users to access a web page."
It's the closed-source gatekeeper of the internet, and Google places its services above others on the search results page regardless of their actual algorithmic placement.
You come off like an angry Nintendo fan. Nintendo has publicly stated that Apple is their biggest competitor, so they know all too well the threat of mobile gaming. You even refuse to classify app store games as video games, which is bizarre. A system that sells and plays games is a gaming system--if Apple is hurting Nintendo's sales, what other game could it possibly be beating Nintendo at?
That's like saying mainframes will never go away as long as there are people who use mainframes. Sure, they're still around, but they are very marginalized and exist for historical reasons in many cases.
The angry reaction in these comments was expected; nerds hate the idea of losing a nerd playground, and that's what the PC is. They don't seem to realize that the fact it's a nerd playground is the very reason that it no longer meets the needs of customers. Appliance computing is now a reality. People shouldn't be forced to maintain operating systems, drivers, hardware parts, and so on.
Is this 1998 or something? How can you claim Microsoft is "screwed" when their sales go up every year? Let me guess, next year is the year of Linux on the desktop.
The reason no commercial desktop software exists for Linux is because Linux is a support nightmare with no standardized desktop API.
The majority of the public doesn't need what you listed. For them, the mobility and easy of use of a tablet justifies it as a replacement for the big box sitting on your desk. Nobody wants to install operating systems or work on computer parts anymore. Your problem is that you don't realize how tiny a niche you are in and that you can't let go of the PC because of the time you invested learning it, which gives you a feeling of control. Emotional reasons aren't a very good reason to cling to aging technology.
PCs aren't going anywhere and the idiot who made the original comment about this is some moron who has his head in the cloud a bit too much.
I really have to question the mentality of someone who claims PCs aren't going anywhere when sales figures prove that they are. Gamers left PCs years ago, and now general users are leaving them too.
Your angry reaction is illustrative of a mentality that wants PCs to remain a nerd playground, giving you a sense of power because you invested the time to figure out how to use and maintain it. Technology has advanced, and the PC model is obsolete and no longer fits the needs of consumers.
Your post is illustrative of a segment of users who refuse to let go of their PCs. Guys like you want PCs to remain a playground by nerds for nerds, so you invent some crazy conspiracy about wanting to take power away from users when the reality is much simpler. You actually believe that people want to change anything or do anything, but people really just want to carry a web browser in their pocket and not worry about the enormous amount of maintenance bullshit that comes with owning a PC.
PCs are going away because they don't meet the needs of the customers anymore. The only people still using them will be power users, enterprises, and such. Most people will be using tablets and mobile phones. It's completely obvious to anyone with a bit of common sense.
You're flat-out ignoring sales statistics. Just because you see PCs in an office doesn't mean anything; PCs will probably always have a place in enterprise. Also, a gaming PC is a very niche thing these days. Gaming long ago established itself on consoles. Like I said, just look at the sales statistics for PC games versus console games.
Some people just can't let go of their PC, for some reason.
Slashdot Mirror
What a bunch of fanboy nonsense.
Google isn't an "altruistic and idealistic organization that truly cares only about making life better for everyone." They're a multi-billion-dollar megacorp whose business is based on a closed-source search-and-advertising platform dependent on selling your personal data to advertising partners. They make sleazy non-neutral internet deals with vendors just to push Android. They withhold Android source from non-privileged partners and ship closed technology like Flash, AAC, and MP3 support in Chrome, even as they preach about openness. Android is a free product pumped into a new market to maintain the dominance of the core business and kill off competitors who can't afford to compete with an artificial price, the same way Internet Explorer was pumped into the browser market to kill off Netscape and keep the Windows platform relevant.
The benevolent little tech company from ten years ago is long gone. In its place is a gigantic advertising conglomerate under investigation around the world for antitrust violations and privacy breaches. Google is another Microsoft and is no better.
Microsoft still elicits a predictable reaction on Slashdot, repetition of the term "FUD" as if it automatically counters all arguments. And, as always, there will be mysterious Underrated moderations to such comments because Overrated/Underrated moderations aren't subject to meta-moderation, a loophole that Slashdot has left unclosed for years. I think what has happened to this community is that Reddit and Hacker News drew most of the more objective posters away, leaving the hardcore ideologues behind who automatically stand behind Google and automatically hate Microsoft, Apple, Sun, and anything else that competes with Google. Slashdot's overall position was always skewed by default, but there was actually a degree of objectivity that used to shine through in the comment sections. That very rarely occurs today.
It's really quite fascinating that there isn't more outcry over the fact that a closed-source product from a corporation has become the gatekeeper for the web, but apparently, if you use Linux for your business, all is forgiven, and you are a pack of angels trying to make the world a better place rather than another scum-sucking corporation leveraging their monopoly to make a dollar.
Based on how they've been behaving the last couple of years, I think Google could use the lecture, actually.
Microsoft is referring to the fact that Google withholds Android source from non-privileged partners. You don't hear about it much on Slashdot because this is vehemently pro-Google territory.
Most Android smartphones are cheap "smartphones" that can barely powerful enough to do the things you'd expect a smartphone to do. Android has the market cornered on junk phones. Also keep in mind that, with iPads and iPod touches counted, iOS greatly surpasses Android in total market share, and the iPhone is the top-selling smartphone as well as the most profitable.
You hope that employees of a company rot in hell because you don't like the company's products? What's the matter with you? Who would ever mod you up?
Antitrust regulators must be chomping at the bit. This is old-school Microsoft behavior. Imagine how other Android smartphone vendors are feeling right now.
You criticized Google on Slashdot. Prepare to get modbombed.
The very first line of the article starts with "Over the last two years, the number of U.S. data centers has quadrupled." Obama took office more than two years ago. Just because the data centers were initiated under Bush, their quadrupling happened under Obama. You even acknowledge that Obama approved the continuation of the policy.
So really, your post is meaningless because Obama approved the continuation of the policy, and the data centers quadrupled as a result. What does Bush have to do with that?
Yeah, just like they were being purely defensive when they bid on mobile patents all for themselves while refusing an offer to jointly bid with others across the industry.
I think Slashdot has drilled the idea of "patents = bad" into its readers for so long that the idea of one of the presumed good guys being just as bad as the rest has blown their minds. The comments here are awash with a sea of "They're just doing it to make a point" posts--never mind that they didn't announce this themselves or publicly proclaim their intent, which they would have done if it was to prove some kind of point.
So this is like the twentieth "They're just making a point!" post from Google fans. Ignoring the fact that every other company could claim that too, did you know Sergey Brin filed a patent for Google Doodles--a.k.a., the changing of their logo for special events and holidays?
The patent describes their revolutionary method of simply uploading a new logo:
"A non-transitory computer-readable medium that stores instructions executable by one or more processors to perform a method for attracting users to a web page, comprising: instructions for creating a special event logo by modifying a standard company logo for a special event, where the instructions for creating the special event logo includes instructions for modifying the standard company logo with one or more animated images; instructions for associating a link or search results with the special event logo, the link identifying a document relating to the special event, the search results relating to the special event; instructions for uploading the special event logo to the web page; instructions for receiving a user selection of the special event logo; and instructions for providing the document relating to the special event or the search results relating to the special event based on the user selection."
Yeah, and everyone else is "trying to make a point" too. How awesome of Google to be just like everyone else when it comes to patents.
This is a great defense fans have invented here for Google. Every company should use it. "It's okay when we do it! We're just trying to show how bad the patent system is!"
P.S. They also patented the changing of their logo for holidays back in 2001.
Google patents something absurd: "They're just poking fun at the patent office. Hell, I bet they have hundreds of these just to see how stupid they can get with them. Go Google!"
Anyone else patents something absurd: "This is an abomination. It's proof that the patent system is completely broken! Viva la revolución!"
Oh, I see, so when Google patents absurd things, it's a protest against the patent system. Like when they patented changing their logo for special events and holidays back in 2001. Thank goodness Google is rebelling against the patent system by patenting the invention of "periodically changing story line and/or special event company logo to entice users to access a web page."
It's the closed-source gatekeeper of the internet, and Google places its services above others on the search results page regardless of their actual algorithmic placement.
Google even patented the changing of their logo for holiday events, filed by Sergey Brin himself.
You come off like an angry Nintendo fan. Nintendo has publicly stated that Apple is their biggest competitor, so they know all too well the threat of mobile gaming. You even refuse to classify app store games as video games, which is bizarre. A system that sells and plays games is a gaming system--if Apple is hurting Nintendo's sales, what other game could it possibly be beating Nintendo at?
Could it also be because people can buy about 20 iPhone games for the price of one 3DS game?
That's like saying mainframes will never go away as long as there are people who use mainframes. Sure, they're still around, but they are very marginalized and exist for historical reasons in many cases.
The angry reaction in these comments was expected; nerds hate the idea of losing a nerd playground, and that's what the PC is. They don't seem to realize that the fact it's a nerd playground is the very reason that it no longer meets the needs of customers. Appliance computing is now a reality. People shouldn't be forced to maintain operating systems, drivers, hardware parts, and so on.
Is this 1998 or something? How can you claim Microsoft is "screwed" when their sales go up every year? Let me guess, next year is the year of Linux on the desktop.
The reason no commercial desktop software exists for Linux is because Linux is a support nightmare with no standardized desktop API.
The majority of the public doesn't need what you listed. For them, the mobility and easy of use of a tablet justifies it as a replacement for the big box sitting on your desk. Nobody wants to install operating systems or work on computer parts anymore. Your problem is that you don't realize how tiny a niche you are in and that you can't let go of the PC because of the time you invested learning it, which gives you a feeling of control. Emotional reasons aren't a very good reason to cling to aging technology.
I really have to question the mentality of someone who claims PCs aren't going anywhere when sales figures prove that they are. Gamers left PCs years ago, and now general users are leaving them too.
Your angry reaction is illustrative of a mentality that wants PCs to remain a nerd playground, giving you a sense of power because you invested the time to figure out how to use and maintain it. Technology has advanced, and the PC model is obsolete and no longer fits the needs of consumers.
Your post is illustrative of a segment of users who refuse to let go of their PCs. Guys like you want PCs to remain a playground by nerds for nerds, so you invent some crazy conspiracy about wanting to take power away from users when the reality is much simpler. You actually believe that people want to change anything or do anything, but people really just want to carry a web browser in their pocket and not worry about the enormous amount of maintenance bullshit that comes with owning a PC.
PCs are going away because they don't meet the needs of the customers anymore. The only people still using them will be power users, enterprises, and such. Most people will be using tablets and mobile phones. It's completely obvious to anyone with a bit of common sense.
PCs arose because of commodity hardware. The public doesn't want to maintain PCs and their complicated operating systems anymore.
You're flat-out ignoring sales statistics. Just because you see PCs in an office doesn't mean anything; PCs will probably always have a place in enterprise. Also, a gaming PC is a very niche thing these days. Gaming long ago established itself on consoles. Like I said, just look at the sales statistics for PC games versus console games.
Some people just can't let go of their PC, for some reason.