But at least you had ONE version of the OS and the user could upgrade whenever he/she wanted.
If your Android phone came with v1.6 and you want to install Android OS v2.2, you have to wiat for the manufacture of your Android phone to publish *its* version of Android OS v2.2.
Oh, your phone is 2+ years old, too bad. The manufacturer doesn't see $$ in helping you.
It's too late. I wanted an Android phone but with Motorola's iPhone-like ambitions and HTC's If-rooted-Reload-default-OS feature, I'd rather go for a poorly guarded jail (iPhone) than a WW2 concentration camp.
I tell people that Android is a failed experiment that proves that Carriers' and Manufacturers' greed will kill any open source advantages that Android could have brought.
RE: If Blockbuster video wants technology to better enforce its late fees--it's not evil--it's just speeding along the inevitable demise of an out of date business model.
And Blockbuster should pay for it just like:
-Warner Music Group -EMI -Sony Music Entertainment -Universal Music Group -EMI
Payed for useless copy protection that got thwarted by Sharpy markers.
So true. The hypocrisy that politician perpetual is really sick. But what can you do? The media and politicians are now liking each other's large intestines, not just their butt holes.
And... oh boy, a story about one of those Palin kids (Politics) on *Entertainment Tonight* (Media)...
Knowledgeable people in QA are very hard to get. They probably just make sure: 1-they got their $ 2-the forms are filled out OK 3-it installs OK (no errors or breaks iOS) 4-that they can remotely remove it.
It doesn't take a "Genius" to do this. (Pun intended)
My point was exactly NOT to have a "lightbulb police". Just like you can't sell a house without running water, you make sure that the house has one CFL or equivalent. You don't sell your house => who cares. It's your $. (BTW: rich people move more than poor people)
The goal is for people to use less power lighting their homes. Solutions to date are: -Ban the bulb altogether and FORCE you to buy new light fixtures. (UK) -Raise power rates to un-affordable levels (Ont, Canada) -ban sales of cheap bulb that give off little light (Not done anywhere!)
The problem is not the people "Creating" the stuff. Its the people making money from it for money's sake.
-They get laws written to extension a monopoly beyond reasonable terms. (Copyright extension act) -They use "Hollywood accounting" to defraud people who helped to create the "work" -They kill 1st-sale-doctrine (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First-sale_doctrine)with DRM and time limited ownership. -They get the "work" broadcasted and expect everybody to drop everything to listen/watch the broadcast. We could record TV and radio 30+ years ago. Today we can even find someone else to do it for us for free and the MiddleMen freak out. **If they would offer free DLs *WITH COMMERCIALS* I would rather DL that then PB versions.** Instead I must: -PAY for iTune$/Netflick$/etc -WAIT and PAY for DVDs with DRM and root kits. -WAIT and HOPE it plays again
Remember, they already broadcasted it for *FREE* so why should I pay to watch/listen to it, especially if I missed it? If it's good: -I will want a REAL stamped copy of a CD/DVD. -I will want to see their concert (Oops, middlemen don't do concerts!)
It is hard to compete with a 50 cent Incandescent bulb in any country. Raising prices or banning the cheap bulb will just make poor people poorer. With LED or CFL bulbs costing between $5-$50, GE, Phillips and friends will be the ONLY winners with those laws. (Note: CFL under $5 tend to give headaches, make colours look awful and last about as long as regular bulbs)
Solution: Make every household own and use at least one "good" non-Incandescent bulb per house and more if the house is worth lots of $$. As the price of non-Incandescent bulbs go down, up the quota and/or limit access to Incandescent bulbs. You don't police it like the US does drugs. Instead you make it a requirement to pass a house inspection, permit inspections, etc.
You cannot ban ALL Incandescent bulbs because you cannot get substitutes for all socket types and sizes. Also what happens if they develop a much better Incandescent bulb that is almost on-par with substitutes? If they should ban any Incandescent bulbs it should be the ones that give off little light compared to others. There has been talk about labelling light bulbs with the about of light (in lumens/candle power/etc.) they give off. They should have done that years ago before thinking about banning bulbs.
Slashdot Mirror
I think it was a HTC Droid 2 that had the If-rooted-Reload-default-OS feature.
You must be an early adopter. All the new phones out there are all crippled.
But at least you had ONE version of the OS and the user could upgrade whenever he/she wanted.
If your Android phone came with v1.6 and you want to install Android OS v2.2, you have to wiat for the manufacture of your Android phone to publish *its* version of Android OS v2.2.
Oh, your phone is 2+ years old, too bad. The manufacturer doesn't see $$ in helping you.
It's too late.
I wanted an Android phone but with Motorola's iPhone-like ambitions and HTC's If-rooted-Reload-default-OS feature, I'd rather go for a poorly guarded jail (iPhone) than a WW2 concentration camp.
I tell people that Android is a failed experiment that proves that Carriers' and Manufacturers' greed will kill any open source advantages that Android could have brought.
RE: If Blockbuster video wants technology to better enforce its late fees--it's not evil--it's just speeding along the inevitable demise of an out of date business model.
And Blockbuster should pay for it just like:
-Warner Music Group
-EMI
-Sony Music Entertainment
-Universal Music Group
-EMI
Payed for useless copy protection that got thwarted by Sharpy markers.
That "option" will be offered later once Google creates a quasi-related arm of itself that will do "evil" called Evoogle.
Via Paypal, yet another evil company, will take your money and Evoogle will covertly send your IP to Google for exclusion of the MAFIAA dragnet.
Just wait till you switch between versions of MS Office. It does much better that just modifying your documents; it corrupts them beyond repair!
I gave up on MSO 7 years ago for this one document because of corruption on the fly until it MSO fubar'd it.
Why would they help their competition (OpenOfice)?
Since Oracle effectively plans to kill OpenOfice, MS might see Oracle as an ally in the fight against OpenOfice/LibreOffice.
somewhat related to your Mars Rovers question:
SMS 4x More Expensive Than Data From Hubble
http://science.slashdot.org/science/08/05/12/1419204.shtml
B/C Politicians are cheap whores.
Prove it!
Oh, you can't -> Libel!!!
So true.
The hypocrisy that politician perpetual is really sick.
But what can you do? The media and politicians are now liking each other's large intestines, not just their butt holes.
And... oh boy, a story about one of those Palin kids (Politics) on *Entertainment Tonight* (Media)...
Actually no.
DPIs are now static because they expect us to use them only for movies. 1080 vertical pixels is all that you should need.
It's probably the "need" for paper and in-vivo meetings.
If you didn't need them, standards would fly instead of committee members.
Knowledgeable people in QA are very hard to get.
They probably just make sure:
1-they got their $
2-the forms are filled out OK
3-it installs OK (no errors or breaks iOS)
4-that they can remotely remove it.
It doesn't take a "Genius" to do this. (Pun intended)
What does the app do is an after though
Hulu == USA only!
Meanwhile the voice service is VOIP and is blocked!
Then you (The ISP) will be vilified when the user gets a $400 bill.
He'll tell his friends and neighbours.
Your ISP will then become *INFAMOUS*.
Instead, slow down the guy's connections and try to send the guy notices to tell him that he is "Owned".
Yea but will all look like a cross between Darth Vader and RoboCop. No thanks!
FreeOffice anyone?
Yes they do
RTFA: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/09/28/openoffice_independence_from_oracle/
My point was exactly NOT to have a "lightbulb police".
Just like you can't sell a house without running water, you make sure that the house has one CFL or equivalent. You don't sell your house => who cares. It's your $. (BTW: rich people move more than poor people)
The goal is for people to use less power lighting their homes. Solutions to date are:
-Ban the bulb altogether and FORCE you to buy new light fixtures. (UK)
-Raise power rates to un-affordable levels (Ont, Canada)
-ban sales of cheap bulb that give off little light (Not done anywhere!)
BTW: most of your post is way OT.
The problem is not the people "Creating" the stuff.
Its the people making money from it for money's sake.
-They get laws written to extension a monopoly beyond reasonable terms. (Copyright extension act)
-They use "Hollywood accounting" to defraud people who helped to create the "work"
-They kill 1st-sale-doctrine (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First-sale_doctrine)with DRM and time limited ownership.
-They get the "work" broadcasted and expect everybody to drop everything to listen/watch the broadcast. We could record TV and radio 30+ years ago. Today we can even find someone else to do it for us for free and the MiddleMen freak out.
**If they would offer free DLs *WITH COMMERCIALS* I would rather DL that then PB versions.**
Instead I must:
-PAY for iTune$/Netflick$/etc
-WAIT and PAY for DVDs with DRM and root kits.
-WAIT and HOPE it plays again
Remember, they already broadcasted it for *FREE* so why should I pay to watch/listen to it, especially if I missed it?
If it's good:
-I will want a REAL stamped copy of a CD/DVD.
-I will want to see their concert (Oops, middlemen don't do concerts!)
I wish I could have laws written to guaranty my profits, too.
How dare you have a better product/service than me!
Why should I listen to my customers? They have to buy it from me.
It is hard to compete with a 50 cent Incandescent bulb in any country.
Raising prices or banning the cheap bulb will just make poor people poorer.
With LED or CFL bulbs costing between $5-$50, GE, Phillips and friends will be the ONLY winners with those laws.
(Note: CFL under $5 tend to give headaches, make colours look awful and last about as long as regular bulbs)
Solution: Make every household own and use at least one "good" non-Incandescent bulb per house and more if the house is worth lots of $$.
As the price of non-Incandescent bulbs go down, up the quota and/or limit access to Incandescent bulbs.
You don't police it like the US does drugs. Instead you make it a requirement to pass a house inspection, permit inspections, etc.
You cannot ban ALL Incandescent bulbs because you cannot get substitutes for all socket types and sizes.
Also what happens if they develop a much better Incandescent bulb that is almost on-par with substitutes?
If they should ban any Incandescent bulbs it should be the ones that give off little light compared to others.
There has been talk about labelling light bulbs with the about of light (in lumens/candle power/etc.) they give off.
They should have done that years ago before thinking about banning bulbs.