Sakura Pigma Micron 005 Marker Pen - 0.2 mm - Black
It's not a pencil, it's crazy thin, and (being a marker pen) should have none of the problems listed. The comments suggest that it's not good for people who write with "a heavy hand" which suggests that you won't need to press down very hard.
I remember walking home one night with 32mb of RAM in my pocket (4 8mb SIMMs). It was more RAM than I ever thought a computer would ever need. Heck, you couldn't buy a computer with 32mb of RAM -- 16 was a pretty high-end, iirc, with 8 being average.
2gb wasn't even an amount of drive space -- it was science fiction. I had quite the monster: 512mb -- no way I could ever fill that.
What did I use it for? Hitting the local BBSs, word-processing, spreadsheets, software development, and games. Replace "BBS" with "Internet" and I'm not really doing much that's new or different now than I was then.
Maybe we need to start thinking about performance again. Doing more with less.
Developing software for a large number of cores is non-trivial, and is often inefficient or unstable...
If only there was a mobile OS that's absurdly stable, efficient, and thrives in a multi-processor and/or mutli-core enviroment...
While we're making wishes, why not make it POSIX compliant, and a hard real-time OS suitable for mission critical applications where failure can result in injury and death?
I don't get it either. 100k Apps seems adequate to me -- especially for a new platform.
I don't know where the 100k figure comes from though. According to Business Insider they had close to 10k apps at launch, though the store was growing by about 500 apps per day. (They've got about 180 days to go at that rate to make the 100k mark)
Of course, most of the apps are still garbage -- on every platform. It would be nice to see multiple, competing, app stores on various platforms to help weed out the crap.
I can't believe that people like you can honestly get bored with something (even though it might work perfectly), and demand change simply for the sake of change. Because that sort of mentality is exactly why a good portion of the tech world is as fucked up as it is right now.
I don't believe it either. If they were genuinely (completely) satisfied, they wouldn't be demanding change.
In the case of Apple, the meme is that their products are flawless -- I don't know that anyone truly believes that. There are plenty of faults, and while the zealots will vigorously defend those faults, they clearly show that Apple has lots of room for improvement.
People loved their BlackBerry because it had an excellent physical keyboard – but it’s not much of a moat.
You wouldn't think so, but it's amazing how poor keyboards are/were on other phones. The keyboard on the Droid Pro, for example, is astonishingly poor -- it somehow managed to be worse than the Palm Pre!
Why they don't just follow RIM's designs is beyond me.
On sliding keyboards, well, even RIM never really nailed that down. You need shorter keys, and losing that extra little bit of horizontal space makes a big difference. (The 9900 keyboard, for example, is unquestionably the best mobile phone keyboard ever. The extra width over previous Bold and Curve models I'm certain was a major contribution factor.)
oh, wait. BGR - I understand now. Weekly World News of the tech world.
Now that's not fair. Weekly World News is at least entertaining -- and no one actually takes them seriously.
They're more like the World Net Daily or Drudge Report of the tech world. It doesn't take much to figure out that they're a bunch of kooks, but they still get a lot of attention.
do you understand that without government interference the way to grow your company is by satisfying customers?
Don't be obtuse. That is just ONE way to grow a company. It also ignores the power than a company has over a market once it's grown to a certain size. It can crush competitors that would otherwise out-compete them -- that anti-competitive behavior is WHY unregulated "free" markets ultimately fail. A properly regulated market helps to ensure healthy competition.
In an unregulated market, monopolies naturally form. Competition is stifled. Prices rise to the maximum that the market will bear, and quality and service ultimate fall.
The only true regulations exist in the free market, where companies have to compete with each other for the customers
Until they merge or form trusts to consolidate their power in the market. Or until they engage in price fixing or any of the MANY anti-competitive practices that maximize profits and stifle competition or abuse their power in one market to gain an unfair advantage in another -- ultimately monopolizing more and more markets.
That should be everybody's goal - to have the best product and service
That's never the goal. The goal is the only to make the most profit. Companies do not have the best interest of the public or their employees in mind. They're out to make a profit. They are not ethical entities -- that would run directly counter to their only goal: profit.
There is nothing wrong with 'trusts'
Nonsense. See below.
Monopolies are only created by governments, free market does not create monopolies in the true sense of the word: as in businesses that are protected from competition by anything rather than market forces.
Again, total nonsense. An unregulated free market will naturally form monopolies as larger players crush new and smaller players and large players consolidate power. That even greater power in the market severely limits and ultimately eliminates competition. Without real competition (when the market is essentially controlled by one player or a few players who are in collusion) there are no "free market forces" to magically drive prices down. Quality of the product goes down to increase profit at the same time the price goes up. Their strong position in one market can be abused to enter and compete unfairly in other markets.
Want to see what companies do once they've grown to absurd sizes? See the East India Company -- they had their own private army and took control over a good bit of India.
The unregulated free market is anything but free. ONLY through proper regulation can a free market function.
Slashdot Mirror
A quick google search turns up this:
Sakura Pigma Micron 005 Marker Pen - 0.2 mm - Black
It's not a pencil, it's crazy thin, and (being a marker pen) should have none of the problems listed. The comments suggest that it's not good for people who write with "a heavy hand" which suggests that you won't need to press down very hard.
Apparently 0.7mm is too thick for Mr. Writes-Really-Small.
I'd recommend a 0.2mm mechanical drafting pencil, but there's an even simpler solution: don't write so damn small.
As a bonus, your notes won't look like they were written by a serial killer.
You know that regedit is just a registry editor, right?
Or do you mean you need to modify regedit.exe to make excel display more than one window? That doesn't make much sense.
Whatever, turn in your geek card at the door.
But does it have rounded corners?
That's innovation.
I've been making that same prediction for more than a decade. So has half of Slashdot.
What was once a dream is now a nightmare as this trend toward closed and proprietary systems overtakes the trend toward interoperability and openness.
I blame Apple and the manufactures copying the bits that are bad for consumers because, hey, Apple can get away with it!
There's the lesson: Open always wins over closed.
The more you tighten your grip, the more users will slip through your fingers...
Sorry, it just never occurred to me to look to an electronic device to fulfill either a sexual or a deep emotional need.
Your assumption is correct. My ancient '86 Saab 900 has no turbo.
I remember walking home one night with 32mb of RAM in my pocket (4 8mb SIMMs). It was more RAM than I ever thought a computer would ever need. Heck, you couldn't buy a computer with 32mb of RAM -- 16 was a pretty high-end, iirc, with 8 being average.
2gb wasn't even an amount of drive space -- it was science fiction. I had quite the monster: 512mb -- no way I could ever fill that.
What did I use it for? Hitting the local BBSs, word-processing, spreadsheets, software development, and games. Replace "BBS" with "Internet" and I'm not really doing much that's new or different now than I was then.
Maybe we need to start thinking about performance again. Doing more with less.
Developing software for a large number of cores is non-trivial, and is often inefficient or unstable...
If only there was a mobile OS that's absurdly stable, efficient, and thrives in a multi-processor and/or mutli-core enviroment...
While we're making wishes, why not make it POSIX compliant, and a hard real-time OS suitable for mission critical applications where failure can result in injury and death?
We could call it QNX. Yeah, that would be cool.
None of these things has ever happened to me, my wife, or (to my knowledge) anyone we know.
We're either lucky, or we're just not as irresponsible as ... you?
I don't get it either. 100k Apps seems adequate to me -- especially for a new platform.
I don't know where the 100k figure comes from though. According to Business Insider they had close to 10k apps at launch, though the store was growing by about 500 apps per day. (They've got about 180 days to go at that rate to make the 100k mark)
Of course, most of the apps are still garbage -- on every platform. It would be nice to see multiple, competing, app stores on various platforms to help weed out the crap.
Maybe going the ad-supported route was the wrong way to monetize.
But go ahead and blame Microsoft for your mistakes.
I can't believe that people like you can honestly get bored with something (even though it might work perfectly), and demand change simply for the sake of change. Because that sort of mentality is exactly why a good portion of the tech world is as fucked up as it is right now.
I don't believe it either. If they were genuinely (completely) satisfied, they wouldn't be demanding change.
In the case of Apple, the meme is that their products are flawless -- I don't know that anyone truly believes that. There are plenty of faults, and while the zealots will vigorously defend those faults, they clearly show that Apple has lots of room for improvement.
"Skeuomorph" has popped up on Slashdot and other sites so often that I'd be surprised if anyone was still unfamiliar with the term.
It's a stupid term, sure, but it shouldn't be unfamiliar.
(I still think that pseudomorph would be better; easy to understand and more accurate.)
The nearly two-month outage or the zillions of regular outages afterward that made their $99/year service completely useless?
They need to hire a Relationship Manager.
"Ich bin ein nerd"
Could it be that he just likes the product?
Would you assume that he was a shill if he ejaculated a post about the iPad instead?
Things must be getting better.
In your scenario, the victim got two chances to speak!
People loved their BlackBerry because it had an excellent physical keyboard – but it’s not much of a moat.
You wouldn't think so, but it's amazing how poor keyboards are/were on other phones. The keyboard on the Droid Pro, for example, is astonishingly poor -- it somehow managed to be worse than the Palm Pre!
Why they don't just follow RIM's designs is beyond me.
On sliding keyboards, well, even RIM never really nailed that down. You need shorter keys, and losing that extra little bit of horizontal space makes a big difference. (The 9900 keyboard, for example, is unquestionably the best mobile phone keyboard ever. The extra width over previous Bold and Curve models I'm certain was a major contribution factor.)
oh, wait. BGR - I understand now. Weekly World News of the tech world.
Now that's not fair. Weekly World News is at least entertaining -- and no one actually takes them seriously.
They're more like the World Net Daily or Drudge Report of the tech world. It doesn't take much to figure out that they're a bunch of kooks, but they still get a lot of attention.
If you understood the purpose of that example, you wouldn't have made such a ridiculous comment.
do you understand that without government interference the way to grow your company is by satisfying customers?
Don't be obtuse. That is just ONE way to grow a company. It also ignores the power than a company has over a market once it's grown to a certain size. It can crush competitors that would otherwise out-compete them -- that anti-competitive behavior is WHY unregulated "free" markets ultimately fail. A properly regulated market helps to ensure healthy competition.
In an unregulated market, monopolies naturally form. Competition is stifled. Prices rise to the maximum that the market will bear, and quality and service ultimate fall.
The only true regulations exist in the free market, where companies have to compete with each other for the customers
Until they merge or form trusts to consolidate their power in the market. Or until they engage in price fixing or any of the MANY anti-competitive practices that maximize profits and stifle competition or abuse their power in one market to gain an unfair advantage in another -- ultimately monopolizing more and more markets.
That should be everybody's goal - to have the best product and service
That's never the goal. The goal is the only to make the most profit. Companies do not have the best interest of the public or their employees in mind. They're out to make a profit. They are not ethical entities -- that would run directly counter to their only goal: profit.
There is nothing wrong with 'trusts'
Nonsense. See below.
Monopolies are only created by governments, free market does not create monopolies in the true sense of the word: as in businesses that are protected from competition by anything rather than market forces.
Again, total nonsense. An unregulated free market will naturally form monopolies as larger players crush new and smaller players and large players consolidate power. That even greater power in the market severely limits and ultimately eliminates competition. Without real competition (when the market is essentially controlled by one player or a few players who are in collusion) there are no "free market forces" to magically drive prices down. Quality of the product goes down to increase profit at the same time the price goes up. Their strong position in one market can be abused to enter and compete unfairly in other markets.
Want to see what companies do once they've grown to absurd sizes? See the East India Company -- they had their own private army and took control over a good bit of India.
The unregulated free market is anything but free. ONLY through proper regulation can a free market function.
Eating yogurt is the same as "intake of a healthy person's fecal matter?"
I've always felt that way -- minus the "healthy" part.