Actually, many local areas prohibit unauthorized access of computer networks. It's also unethical. However, I realize this is Slashdot where Google can do no wrong, even when their CEO comes right out and tells you not to give a shit about your privacy as an individual.
This stupid argument gets brought up every single time by Google fans. Entering someone's home, even if the front door is unlocked, is still an act of trespassing.
Why were they archiving that data in the first place? You really believe that it was just a big, dumb accident? This is Google we're talking about.
This is how low Slashdot has sunk. Years ago, this site was very pro-privacy. We're now at the point where a company can archive your emails and passwords, claim it was an accident, and get off the hook by promising not to do it again next time--and that's "doing nothing wrong whatsoever" according to the posters here.
No penalty because there's no outcry. People give Google a pass because Google gives them free email, a free search engine, and a free browser. It doesn't seem to occur to Google's fans that their search and advertising platforms are as closed source and proprietary as Windows, and that all the free services only exist to get people's personal data indexed.
Prepare to get modbombed by the droves of Google defenders who always turn out for these articles.
If Apple or Microsoft collected people's emails and passwords, and their CEO said that only people who have something to hide care about privacy, there would be rage-filled boycotts and everything.
Microsoft ships a default browser, and they get an antitrust trial. Google sniffs and archive people's emails and passwords, and they're off the hook. Amazing.
I've always thought it was strange that draconian control was considered right-of-center. Modern-day liberalism in America, taken to its extreme, usually entails petitioning a centralized entity, such as the government, to enforce ways of living on everyone else, redistribute their income, censor their government criticism, and so on. It's like the political spectrum isn't a horizontal line but a circle where both sides meet at the bottom in the stinking pit of fascism, as if the ultimate goal of any ideology is ultimately to control how everyone else lives.
Good god. If there was ever an embodiment of the cliche of the arrogant, condescending liberal, you are it. You even ended with a Stephen Colbert quote.
Silly rednecks. Cling to your guns and religion while I listen to Chomsky speak at my university and make dubstep remixes on my MacBook Pro. *sips latte*
I'm really surprised libertarianism, with its ideals of personal freedom, isn't more popular in America. A case of bad marketing or just a lack of funding such candidates?
The author cites being able to beat today's games in a day as a sign that they're getting easier, but I was able to beat NES games in a day, such as Super Mario Bros. Many of them didn't even have save systems or passwords, so they were designed to be beaten in hours.
What really happened is that games started out casual and fun, then the race for hardware specs took over with the 16-bit wars and 3D accelerators in PCs which catered to hardcore gamers. Then graphics became a solved problem, and people got tired of paying for expensive hardware, so gaming went back to simple fun again. No surprise that games like New Super Mario Bros. Wii top the charts.
There are a few modern games that have been too easy because they're more about visuals than gameplay, but those kinds of games have always existed. I don't believe average difficulty has lessened since the start of gaming. It might seem easier because you have faster access to strategies online instead of having to wait for next month's Gamepro issue to thumb through at the local store.
In case you forgot, Apple is a hardware company. You can't compare Apple and Microsoft on the software level because Apple is also making the hardware. iTunes is just the centralized app they use to sync media across those devices and is not a valid comparison to an OS. You don't even have to use iTunes to purchase apps anymore.
The point is that Microsoft wants to put Windows on everything. Apple wants to sell hardware devices. That gives Apple an advantage in product flexibility, from workstations to pocket music players to TV addons. Microsoft doesn't have control over what hardware is popular in the market, so they have to bend Windows to it and try to force the idea that it's all Windows, and Windows is great. Apple isn't trying to sell OS X. It's a technical advantage that iOS is based on OS X's foundations, but that's not the point of the iPhone.
To summarize, the point of a smartphone to Apple is to have an amazing smartphone. The point of a smartphone to Microsoft is to run Windows.
P.S. People who end their posts with "period" are obnoxious.
If you want to understand Apple's mentality, it's this--they're not as interested in being #1 in the market as they are interested in being the best in the market. They believe that entails quality control of the third-party user experience on smartphones. This is no different from what game console manufacturers like Nintendo do.
Windows Phone 7 doesn't even have a sockets API. I'm not kidding. They expect you to use HTTP for everything. It also doesn't have multitasking. It's not a serious answer to the iPhone.
But the truth also is that Microsoft has a huge dominance on computer market and that isn't going anywhere. They are truly dominating it.
This article is about the world beyond PCs. That's where the industry is moving. As Steve Jobs said, PCs will be like pickup trucks--specialized hardware for people who need it but not what the majority uses. IBM also had market dominance. Well, the market changed.
It's interesting how SunSpider was often dismissed by Firefox fans, as were most benchmarks, as not reflecting real-world usage of the web. Now, they're cheering Firefox for being faster at the SunSpider benchmark.
Slashdot Mirror
Actually, many local areas prohibit unauthorized access of computer networks. It's also unethical. However, I realize this is Slashdot where Google can do no wrong, even when their CEO comes right out and tells you not to give a shit about your privacy as an individual.
This stupid argument gets brought up every single time by Google fans. Entering someone's home, even if the front door is unlocked, is still an act of trespassing.
Why were they archiving that data in the first place? You really believe that it was just a big, dumb accident? This is Google we're talking about.
This is how low Slashdot has sunk. Years ago, this site was very pro-privacy. We're now at the point where a company can archive your emails and passwords, claim it was an accident, and get off the hook by promising not to do it again next time--and that's "doing nothing wrong whatsoever" according to the posters here.
What the fuck?
No penalty because there's no outcry. People give Google a pass because Google gives them free email, a free search engine, and a free browser. It doesn't seem to occur to Google's fans that their search and advertising platforms are as closed source and proprietary as Windows, and that all the free services only exist to get people's personal data indexed.
It only dies if you let it.
Prepare to get modbombed by the droves of Google defenders who always turn out for these articles.
If Apple or Microsoft collected people's emails and passwords, and their CEO said that only people who have something to hide care about privacy, there would be rage-filled boycotts and everything.
Microsoft ships a default browser, and they get an antitrust trial. Google sniffs and archive people's emails and passwords, and they're off the hook. Amazing.
Sure...give the government an internet kill switch. What could possibly go wrong?
I've always thought it was strange that draconian control was considered right-of-center. Modern-day liberalism in America, taken to its extreme, usually entails petitioning a centralized entity, such as the government, to enforce ways of living on everyone else, redistribute their income, censor their government criticism, and so on. It's like the political spectrum isn't a horizontal line but a circle where both sides meet at the bottom in the stinking pit of fascism, as if the ultimate goal of any ideology is ultimately to control how everyone else lives.
Good god. If there was ever an embodiment of the cliche of the arrogant, condescending liberal, you are it. You even ended with a Stephen Colbert quote.
Please...please be a parody.
Silly rednecks. Cling to your guns and religion while I listen to Chomsky speak at my university and make dubstep remixes on my MacBook Pro. *sips latte*
I'm really surprised libertarianism, with its ideals of personal freedom, isn't more popular in America. A case of bad marketing or just a lack of funding such candidates?
The libertarian college student is smoking pot and measuring his dick with a ruler.
The author cites being able to beat today's games in a day as a sign that they're getting easier, but I was able to beat NES games in a day, such as Super Mario Bros. Many of them didn't even have save systems or passwords, so they were designed to be beaten in hours.
What really happened is that games started out casual and fun, then the race for hardware specs took over with the 16-bit wars and 3D accelerators in PCs which catered to hardcore gamers. Then graphics became a solved problem, and people got tired of paying for expensive hardware, so gaming went back to simple fun again. No surprise that games like New Super Mario Bros. Wii top the charts.
There are a few modern games that have been too easy because they're more about visuals than gameplay, but those kinds of games have always existed. I don't believe average difficulty has lessened since the start of gaming. It might seem easier because you have faster access to strategies online instead of having to wait for next month's Gamepro issue to thumb through at the local store.
[citation needed]
You haven't surveyed most game developers to be able to make such a claim.
P.P.S The point of the iPhone isn't iTunes. Apple barely makes any money from the iTunes stores. They are not an iTunes company; they are a hardware company.
In case you forgot, Apple is a hardware company. You can't compare Apple and Microsoft on the software level because Apple is also making the hardware. iTunes is just the centralized app they use to sync media across those devices and is not a valid comparison to an OS. You don't even have to use iTunes to purchase apps anymore.
The point is that Microsoft wants to put Windows on everything. Apple wants to sell hardware devices. That gives Apple an advantage in product flexibility, from workstations to pocket music players to TV addons. Microsoft doesn't have control over what hardware is popular in the market, so they have to bend Windows to it and try to force the idea that it's all Windows, and Windows is great. Apple isn't trying to sell OS X. It's a technical advantage that iOS is based on OS X's foundations, but that's not the point of the iPhone.
To summarize, the point of a smartphone to Apple is to have an amazing smartphone. The point of a smartphone to Microsoft is to run Windows.
P.S. People who end their posts with "period" are obnoxious.
If you want to understand Apple's mentality, it's this--they're not as interested in being #1 in the market as they are interested in being the best in the market. They believe that entails quality control of the third-party user experience on smartphones. This is no different from what game console manufacturers like Nintendo do.
So?
You're right, describing negative usage experiences of the disastrous Windows Phone is a "festering circlejerk."
No wonder you posted anonymously.
Fitness in the context of evolution doesn't refer to physical fitness.
Windows Phone 7 doesn't even have a sockets API. I'm not kidding. They expect you to use HTTP for everything. It also doesn't have multitasking. It's not a serious answer to the iPhone.
This article is about the world beyond PCs. That's where the industry is moving. As Steve Jobs said, PCs will be like pickup trucks--specialized hardware for people who need it but not what the majority uses. IBM also had market dominance. Well, the market changed.
Reddit's comment system blows away anything Slashdot has done. It's so fast and dynamic.
By the way, what happened to the new comment moderation system that used to get regularly promised years ago? We're still dealing with -1 to +5?
It's interesting how SunSpider was often dismissed by Firefox fans, as were most benchmarks, as not reflecting real-world usage of the web. Now, they're cheering Firefox for being faster at the SunSpider benchmark.