As the CNN megapixel graphic showed, the Trump crowd was larger than reported. This seems a silly thing to fight over, since Trump's supporters are less likely to attend an inauguration than a rally anyway.
You do know that according to the alt-right everything the mainstream media publishes is lies, lies and more lies, a stack of lies all the way down! So if CNN, a load bearing pillar of the main stream media, published a megapixel picture that seems to prove Trump's inauguration crowd was much larger than reported, by alt-right logic, that claim must be a baldfaced bloody lie. That picture must be a Photoshop manipulation and positive proof that Trump's inauguration crowd must indeed have been tiny.
But all sarcasm aside crowd size is indeed a silly thing to fight over, especially after listening to Sean Spicer step onto a podium and tell a room full of reporters:
"Photographs of the inaugural proceedings were intentionally framed in a way, in one particular tweet, to minimise the enormous support that had gathered on the national Mall. Inaccurate numbers involving crowd size were also tweeted. No one had numbers, because the national park service, which controls the national mall, does not put any out. This was the largest audience to ever witness an inauguration period!
How is it possible to claim Trump's inauguration crowd was the largest in history if nobody had any numbers? The real irony here is that we would not be talking about this if Trump hadn't made such a big deal about it and if the entire right wing spin machine hadn't jumped on board to help him. Somebody should acquaint the White House press secretary and his team with the Streisand effect: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Ok Zippy. If you read the article it had to do with IMPORT TARIFFS WILL RISE. So they are claiming their costs to build data centers in the UK MIGHT increase.
Try reading sometime moron.
Woosh! Ok Nimrod, I was trying to explain how Brexiteers think, not necessarily why Microsoft is scrapping it's plans to build that datacenter. If it makes you feel better that probably has more to do with a combination of red tape, legal issues such as data protection and a whole host of intangible issues than it has to do with tariffs. Either way the result is the same, the UK leaving the EU is causing businesses to at least contemplate leaving the UK and that apparently includes Microsoft and it's datacenter. What lies ahead of the UK is two (probably more) years of negotiating how to leave the EU. If the UK is lucky those negotiations will also settle what access the UK has to the EU common market which not looking good at the moment given the declarations of UK politicians who seem to be nursing a boner for hard-Brexit and reverting to WTO rules. Even then the UK still has to re-negotiate the whole portfolio of free trade agreements it currently has had access to through the EU with countries all over the world. That is a process that can easily take a decade to complete assuming the UK has completed common market negotiations by the time it starts tackling this stack of negotiations. All of this translates into risk and if I was Microsoft and I still could move that datacenter into the common market I would do that without delay. Staying in the UK represents risk, moving into the EU common market represents less risk, it's a no-brainer.
Yes but demand from where? Right now the MS datacenters in UK also serve data to EU users outside UK. Do you think they will build the next datacenter to server EU users in UK, if it will be more expensive
When that is said: No I don't think that importing computer hardware will be more expensive after Brexit. The British government can't be that stupid.
The minute the UK leaves the EU that datacenter is outside of EU jurisdiction. There are certain advantages to storing your stuff on a datacenter inside EU jurisdiction, for some customers that may even be a requirement.
Not really, it may have been meant to service Western Europe and once you aren't part of the EU some businesses may not be able to store data there. Typical head in the sand brexiter, it's ok to think the UK will be better off outside the EU but you shouldn't pretend there won't be negative aspects.
If you had spent any time engaging with Brexiteers you would know that the way to think of this is pretty simple: Brexit always right, EU always wrong. If the UK does what it thinks is best for the UK and crawls out from under the iron boot heel of EU tyranny that's laudable. If however the EU decides that it is going to do what is best for the EU and does not give the UK everything the UK wants that's the EU unfairly punishing the UK. If a company leaves the UK for the EU that's tantamount to treason even if said company is not a UK business and set up shop in the UK in the first place because the UK was part of the EU common market. However, now that the UK will be leaving the EU said company either has to move operations into the EU common market or stay in the UK and have a hard time competing with competitors that are inside the common market and do not have to wade through red tape and pay import tariffs after hard Brexit where the UK looks set to revert to WTO rules.
>> I wouldn't trust anything coming from Trumps office for shit...
Would you have honestly trusted data coming from Hillary's office had she become president?
I would trust that Hillary would not have sent people into the NOAA, NASA, to either 'adjust data' to suit the alt-right world view or intimidate scientist into doing it. Trump on the other hand has openly declared his intention to crack down on scientists that come to conclusions which are incompatible with his world view and inconvenient for the fossil fuel industry.
Typically, no. What targeted subsidies do fossil fuels receive? There are many that are strictly reserved only for solar and wind, but none that I know of that are reserved only for coal, oil, or natgas.
The damage done by the sequestered carbon that gets released into the atmosphere when fossil fuels are released is not factored into the price of fossil fuels. The cost of that damage is born by the tax payer which makes it a form of subsidy. If the cost of damages caused by sequestered carbon release due to fossil fuel use was factored into the price of fossil fuels, renewable energy sources would make considerably more business sense than they already do.
"money can't move in or out of the country without a lot of trouble" - Really? Then why does Vancouver have a housing price bubble due to Chinese investors?
Just because select groups of wealthy people that have sucked up to the Chinese communist party can move their capital freely does not mean everybody can.
I don't know that it's fair to attribute this to Trump (and I voted for him). However, even if it was, why would this make anyone sad? Are you so partisan that you would actually lament the fact that 50,000 people in Pennsylvania are going to have new jobs? Have you become so cold and heartless that you would have people suffer just to advance your own political agenda?
I'm old enough to remember a time when the Democratic Party stood up for the working class; when they were the party of compassion; when they stood up for civil liberties like free speech. Sadly, the party has long since left all that (and me) behind. And if the last election was any indication, a lot of people in formerly blue states think the party has left them behind too, states like Pennsylvania.
Republicans have been so partisan that they blocked infrastructure improvements for 8 years and allowed their country to rot so their guy could shine by making infrastructure improvements one of his big campaign issues. You also blocked a posting to the supreme court so that you could fill it after the election. Not exactly an example of non-partisansship is it? While I don't see Democrats as being flawless by any stretch of the imagination you Trump voting Republicans aren't exactly angels of honesty virtue and selflessness either. You would do well to look in a mirror once in a while.
Let's please not. The reason his last name means "sugar mountain" in German is because in the late 18th Century the various Germanic empires forced all Jews to have surnames, instead of being known as (e.g.) Yeshua ben Youssef -- a patronym, not a surname. If your family was on bad terms with the local magistrate then you might have had a surname that was actually insulting rather than merely ridiculous. So unless you're interested in reviving a particularly vile brand of antisemitism, please let's not give this man an insulting surname, even if you think he deserves shame and ridicule.
There was nothing specifically antisemitic about these name changes. Efforts like these were a general trend during the enlightenment. All kinds of minorities and even entire nations were forced to change their age old naming conventions. This happened in large parts of Scandinavia for example where people were forced to abandon a traditional naming convention so old that it predated written history and replace them with the continental first/last name tradition. Various governments also tried to systematically exterminate minority languages and cultures such as Slavic languages in Germany, and Celtic languages in France, the UK and Ireland. The same happened to Native Americans in the US where the government even resorted to forcibly removing native children from their families, raising them in boarding schools and subjecting them to brutal discipline if they spoke their own language.
exactly for a decade apple was at or near the top with annual updates and feature changes.
since 2012 and the broadwell/skylake fiasco apple basically stopped trying to keep up with laptops and desktops.
I want a new macbook (currently a 2009 macbook)but i want a modern cpu and a sd card slot. things i can't get in current line up. So many macbook owners have been waiting 5-6 years screaming for new tech and apple is failing to deliver.
I won't own a windows 10 machine and linux might be possible if all the hardware worked.
Seriously? You are passing up on an upgrade of an 8 year old MacBook because the new ones do not have a built in SD card slot? I do a lot of Photoshop work and I build Raspberry PI based cameras which involves a lot of programming and SD card use and I would not dream of passing up on a computer upgrade because of a missing built in SD card slot on my 2016 MacBook. I solved that problem in about 5 minutes: https://www.amazon.com/s/ref=n....
As for your second concern.
Even the new MacBook with its 2-core mobile processor handily beats an early 2009 model while the latest i5/16gb model literally buries a 2009 MacBook in the benchmarks. A used 2-core 2015 model MacBook pro, which still had an SD card slot, would also bury a 2009 MacBook in terms of performance. You can also get a MacBook pro with a more modern Core i7 CPU (since you seem to care about Intel's meaningless marketing garble), you just can't get one with 32 MB of RAM as well until later this year. One can find a PC in the same price bracket that can beat the snot out of the latest MacBook Pro by virtue of the PC having a 4-core CPU like like this guy did. However, since you (just like myself) are unwilling to leave the Apple ecosystem you can still get a very capable new MacBook Pro to replace your 2009 model, you'll just have to wait a while for 32 Gb.
they could have chosen the 32 gb option and used a bigger battery, but it "has to be thin" so they went with the lpddr3.
this is indeed what happened...it's designing with marketing first instead of the user...
I'm fine with Apple having cheesey, trendy marketing, but they need to put the user first in their design decisions.
Marketing can figure out something...they pay them enough ffs...but they really need to change how they make design decisions.
One day, maybe far, far in the future, but some day Microsoft might figure out that if they avoid their garbage spyware/adware software they can ruin Apple due to their market penetration from government contracts....if Apple is still letting ad slogans guide design at that point, on that day Microsoft will kill Apple.
Apple and Microsoft released some laptops/devices with an i5 CPU and 16Gb of RAM and people on Slashdot who would not buy a MacBook or Microsoft device to save their lives screamed bloody murder. Apple and Microsoft then explained they'd done this for battery life reasons and because Intel dragged it's feet with the i7 CPUs. This had no effect other than to cause those same people to keep screaming bloody murder even louder. While it is nice to have an option for a i7 CPU and 32Gb of RAM for the minority of users that actually need that processing power, most people do not need that kind of performance any more than they need a car that is designed with the 24 hours of Le Mans in mind. While I can understand the frustration of people who need an i7 and 32 Gb of RAM I can also understand the decision to release the less powerful version of the MacBook first since it covers the needs of abut 80-90% of their users and follow it up with an i7/32Gb version later.
He's not storing mountains of classified emails on his server.
Well, not anymore.
What makes you two think that that screaming gargoyle Rudy Giuliani even knows how to operate an e-mail client? They might as well assign Sarah Palin to oversee the quality inspection of nuclear weapons production.
Seriously? "Man dives through plate glass window" "In other news, band-aid sales have skyrocketed recently..."
Nobody forced these people to buy wireless headphones, there is an adaptor that allows you to plug analogue headphones into the lightning connector. The real news here is that people don't seem to give a rats ass about the demise 3.5mm headphone jack and didn't think twice about getting a Bluetooth headset despite predictions of doom from the naysayers on Slashdot and that around half of them went for a non-Apple product..
Wrong. Wired headphones were still possible with a dongle, but this shows that the slight added expense of a dongle and the need for a separate piece of equipment was enough to drive consumers to wireless audio. It shows that consumers really do prefer wireless audio, and even a slight increase in the difficulty of using wired headphones was enough to drive them to switch. As usual, Apple will be vindicated for their decision.
The 3.5mm adaptor is included with the phone but even if it wasn't the prospect of forking over 10 bucks would not drive people to buy Bluetooth headsets headsets which start at $50 or more if you want reasonable sound quality. I do agree that this shows that people's reluctance to switch to wireless headphones is wildly exaggerated.
The summary, to me, reads as though Fitbit is the villain. It could just as easily been written something like this:
Smartwatch maker Vector has gone bankrupt. Vector, as a brand, will die off, and while its watches will remain operational, you can kiss any hope for software updates and new hardware goodbye. Fitbit has purchased it and its employees will be joining the fitness wearables firm, who will be hard at work integrating Vector's hardware and software know-how into their new organization.
All those employees will remain employed now, hooray! But positiveness doesn't sell ad impressions.
A shitload of devices are now orphaned because some bean counter at Fitbit ran an Excel model and decided that stiffing all those customers was cost effective business decision. That makes Fitbit the villain in my book... unless you can paint a big yellow smiley on the fact that those customers paid a significant amount of good money for those watches are now stuck with wrist mounted brick. One thing is for sure, this has permanently cured me of any desire to buy a FitBit product.
... it took them 5 years to update the MacBook, and what we got was lackluster...
Do you mean the new 12" MacBook or the MacBook line in it's entirety? People keep comparing the MacBook to much bigger more powerful laptops and putting it down because it doesn't have the horsepower to run insanely resource intensive stuff like BioShock, Titanfall or Doom (mind you I have hooked my MacBook up to a 4K display and played video without getting so much as a stutter) but that kind of misses the point. If I want to play games I'll buy a console and I don't see the MacBook as a drop in replacement for a 15 inch i7 laptop, I see it as something that is as portable and light as a tablet but with a better and more flexible desktop environment. The only beef I have with the MacBook is that it could do with one or two extra USB-C ports and and being a Raspberry Pi programmer I would have liked a micro SD card slot. The new Pro's on the other hand were disappointing, I don't see the that fancy touch bar as something particularly useful and they should have had i7 processors, if only for better battery life.
Counted one way, the US people favored Trump. Counted another way, the US people favored Clinton. Almost without exception, political observers now profess a clear preference for the vote-counting method that would have worked best for their favored candidate: Clinton supporters have discovered a new passion for using the aggregate popular vote, while Trump supporters see great virtue in the Electoral College. Politics as usual.
The last time I checked the person who gets the most votes wins the election. Anything else is not democracy, be it representative or some other form of democracy.
Do you think hurling pejoratives at someone strengthens your position? Look, I'm not a conspiracy nut but when you ask me whether I should believe people whose job it is to lie and deceive or someone who has dedicated his life to exposing lies.. yes I tend to side with the latter person. It strikes me as incredible that we are in a situation where progressives are siding with the covert intelligence agencies and conservatives with freaking wikileaks but here we are. I respect that you disagree with me but before any of this snowballed, back in Aug 2016 Assange was offering a 20k reward for info on Seth's death. Maybe he was seeking publicity for his organization, maybe not but you and me being on the sides we are... feels a bit like we've stumbled into the looking glass.
Yes, intelligence services lie sometimes, that's what intelligence services do but it does not mean that the CIA is always lying all of the time and that Vladimir Putin, the FSB and the GRU are the fountains of eternal truth. The people who work for the CIA are, when push comes to shove, patriots for their nation who care when an enemy tries to sabotage Americans Democracy. Anybody who is so entrenched in their left/right trench warfare that they are prepared to believe Vladimir Putin over their own intelligence services when the GRU and FSB try to undermine American elections needs to take a long hard look at whether political trench warfare is more important than preserving peoples faith in the electoral process which has enough problems without the Russians screwing around with it as well as the Trump and the US political establishment.
Slashdot Mirror
As the CNN megapixel graphic showed, the Trump crowd was larger than reported. This seems a silly thing to fight over, since Trump's supporters are less likely to attend an inauguration than a rally anyway.
You do know that according to the alt-right everything the mainstream media publishes is lies, lies and more lies, a stack of lies all the way down! So if CNN, a load bearing pillar of the main stream media, published a megapixel picture that seems to prove Trump's inauguration crowd was much larger than reported, by alt-right logic, that claim must be a baldfaced bloody lie. That picture must be a Photoshop manipulation and positive proof that Trump's inauguration crowd must indeed have been tiny. But all sarcasm aside crowd size is indeed a silly thing to fight over, especially after listening to Sean Spicer step onto a podium and tell a room full of reporters:
"Photographs of the inaugural proceedings were intentionally framed in a way, in one particular tweet, to minimise the enormous support that had gathered on the national Mall. Inaccurate numbers involving crowd size were also tweeted. No one had numbers, because the national park service, which controls the national mall, does not put any out. This was the largest audience to ever witness an inauguration period!
How is it possible to claim Trump's inauguration crowd was the largest in history if nobody had any numbers? The real irony here is that we would not be talking about this if Trump hadn't made such a big deal about it and if the entire right wing spin machine hadn't jumped on board to help him. Somebody should acquaint the White House press secretary and his team with the Streisand effect: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Ok Zippy. If you read the article it had to do with IMPORT TARIFFS WILL RISE. So they are claiming their costs to build data centers in the UK MIGHT increase. Try reading sometime moron.
Woosh! Ok Nimrod, I was trying to explain how Brexiteers think, not necessarily why Microsoft is scrapping it's plans to build that datacenter. If it makes you feel better that probably has more to do with a combination of red tape, legal issues such as data protection and a whole host of intangible issues than it has to do with tariffs. Either way the result is the same, the UK leaving the EU is causing businesses to at least contemplate leaving the UK and that apparently includes Microsoft and it's datacenter. What lies ahead of the UK is two (probably more) years of negotiating how to leave the EU. If the UK is lucky those negotiations will also settle what access the UK has to the EU common market which not looking good at the moment given the declarations of UK politicians who seem to be nursing a boner for hard-Brexit and reverting to WTO rules. Even then the UK still has to re-negotiate the whole portfolio of free trade agreements it currently has had access to through the EU with countries all over the world. That is a process that can easily take a decade to complete assuming the UK has completed common market negotiations by the time it starts tackling this stack of negotiations. All of this translates into risk and if I was Microsoft and I still could move that datacenter into the common market I would do that without delay. Staying in the UK represents risk, moving into the EU common market represents less risk, it's a no-brainer.
Yes but demand from where? Right now the MS datacenters in UK also serve data to EU users outside UK. Do you think they will build the next datacenter to server EU users in UK, if it will be more expensive
When that is said: No I don't think that importing computer hardware will be more expensive after Brexit. The British government can't be that stupid.
The minute the UK leaves the EU that datacenter is outside of EU jurisdiction. There are certain advantages to storing your stuff on a datacenter inside EU jurisdiction, for some customers that may even be a requirement.
Not really, it may have been meant to service Western Europe and once you aren't part of the EU some businesses may not be able to store data there. Typical head in the sand brexiter, it's ok to think the UK will be better off outside the EU but you shouldn't pretend there won't be negative aspects.
If you had spent any time engaging with Brexiteers you would know that the way to think of this is pretty simple: Brexit always right, EU always wrong. If the UK does what it thinks is best for the UK and crawls out from under the iron boot heel of EU tyranny that's laudable. If however the EU decides that it is going to do what is best for the EU and does not give the UK everything the UK wants that's the EU unfairly punishing the UK. If a company leaves the UK for the EU that's tantamount to treason even if said company is not a UK business and set up shop in the UK in the first place because the UK was part of the EU common market. However, now that the UK will be leaving the EU said company either has to move operations into the EU common market or stay in the UK and have a hard time competing with competitors that are inside the common market and do not have to wade through red tape and pay import tariffs after hard Brexit where the UK looks set to revert to WTO rules.
>> I wouldn't trust anything coming from Trumps office for shit...
Would you have honestly trusted data coming from Hillary's office had she become president?
I would trust that Hillary would not have sent people into the NOAA, NASA, to either 'adjust data' to suit the alt-right world view or intimidate scientist into doing it. Trump on the other hand has openly declared his intention to crack down on scientists that come to conclusions which are incompatible with his world view and inconvenient for the fossil fuel industry.
Typically, no. What targeted subsidies do fossil fuels receive? There are many that are strictly reserved only for solar and wind, but none that I know of that are reserved only for coal, oil, or natgas.
The damage done by the sequestered carbon that gets released into the atmosphere when fossil fuels are released is not factored into the price of fossil fuels. The cost of that damage is born by the tax payer which makes it a form of subsidy. If the cost of damages caused by sequestered carbon release due to fossil fuel use was factored into the price of fossil fuels, renewable energy sources would make considerably more business sense than they already do.
"money can't move in or out of the country without a lot of trouble" - Really? Then why does Vancouver have a housing price bubble due to Chinese investors?
Just because select groups of wealthy people that have sucked up to the Chinese communist party can move their capital freely does not mean everybody can.
I don't know that it's fair to attribute this to Trump (and I voted for him). However, even if it was, why would this make anyone sad? Are you so partisan that you would actually lament the fact that 50,000 people in Pennsylvania are going to have new jobs? Have you become so cold and heartless that you would have people suffer just to advance your own political agenda?
I'm old enough to remember a time when the Democratic Party stood up for the working class; when they were the party of compassion; when they stood up for civil liberties like free speech. Sadly, the party has long since left all that (and me) behind. And if the last election was any indication, a lot of people in formerly blue states think the party has left them behind too, states like Pennsylvania.
Republicans have been so partisan that they blocked infrastructure improvements for 8 years and allowed their country to rot so their guy could shine by making infrastructure improvements one of his big campaign issues. You also blocked a posting to the supreme court so that you could fill it after the election. Not exactly an example of non-partisansship is it? While I don't see Democrats as being flawless by any stretch of the imagination you Trump voting Republicans aren't exactly angels of honesty virtue and selflessness either. You would do well to look in a mirror once in a while.
I don't want an super thin phone, why not make it bit bigger to have an better battery / one you can swap!
Here you go: http://www.androidauthority.co... ...
Now stop complaining.
Let's please not. The reason his last name means "sugar mountain" in German is because in the late 18th Century the various Germanic empires forced all Jews to have surnames, instead of being known as (e.g.) Yeshua ben Youssef -- a patronym, not a surname. If your family was on bad terms with the local magistrate then you might have had a surname that was actually insulting rather than merely ridiculous. So unless you're interested in reviving a particularly vile brand of antisemitism, please let's not give this man an insulting surname, even if you think he deserves shame and ridicule.
There was nothing specifically antisemitic about these name changes. Efforts like these were a general trend during the enlightenment. All kinds of minorities and even entire nations were forced to change their age old naming conventions. This happened in large parts of Scandinavia for example where people were forced to abandon a traditional naming convention so old that it predated written history and replace them with the continental first/last name tradition. Various governments also tried to systematically exterminate minority languages and cultures such as Slavic languages in Germany, and Celtic languages in France, the UK and Ireland. The same happened to Native Americans in the US where the government even resorted to forcibly removing native children from their families, raising them in boarding schools and subjecting them to brutal discipline if they spoke their own language.
... the various Germanic empires ...
During the 18th century there was only one German empire.
What's the point of making it to the 1% if you can't send your kids to schools that others can't.
The joy of using, abusing and generally shitting all over the 99%?
exactly for a decade apple was at or near the top with annual updates and feature changes.
since 2012 and the broadwell/skylake fiasco apple basically stopped trying to keep up with laptops and desktops.
I want a new macbook (currently a 2009 macbook)but i want a modern cpu and a sd card slot. things i can't get in current line up. So many macbook owners have been waiting 5-6 years screaming for new tech and apple is failing to deliver.
I won't own a windows 10 machine and linux might be possible if all the hardware worked.
Seriously? You are passing up on an upgrade of an 8 year old MacBook because the new ones do not have a built in SD card slot? I do a lot of Photoshop work and I build Raspberry PI based cameras which involves a lot of programming and SD card use and I would not dream of passing up on a computer upgrade because of a missing built in SD card slot on my 2016 MacBook. I solved that problem in about 5 minutes: https://www.amazon.com/s/ref=n.... As for your second concern. Even the new MacBook with its 2-core mobile processor handily beats an early 2009 model while the latest i5/16gb model literally buries a 2009 MacBook in the benchmarks. A used 2-core 2015 model MacBook pro, which still had an SD card slot, would also bury a 2009 MacBook in terms of performance. You can also get a MacBook pro with a more modern Core i7 CPU (since you seem to care about Intel's meaningless marketing garble), you just can't get one with 32 MB of RAM as well until later this year. One can find a PC in the same price bracket that can beat the snot out of the latest MacBook Pro by virtue of the PC having a 4-core CPU like like this guy did. However, since you (just like myself) are unwilling to leave the Apple ecosystem you can still get a very capable new MacBook Pro to replace your 2009 model, you'll just have to wait a while for 32 Gb.
this is indeed what happened...it's designing with marketing first instead of the user...
I'm fine with Apple having cheesey, trendy marketing, but they need to put the user first in their design decisions.
Marketing can figure out something...they pay them enough ffs...but they really need to change how they make design decisions.
One day, maybe far, far in the future, but some day Microsoft might figure out that if they avoid their garbage spyware/adware software they can ruin Apple due to their market penetration from government contracts....if Apple is still letting ad slogans guide design at that point, on that day Microsoft will kill Apple.
Apple and Microsoft released some laptops/devices with an i5 CPU and 16Gb of RAM and people on Slashdot who would not buy a MacBook or Microsoft device to save their lives screamed bloody murder. Apple and Microsoft then explained they'd done this for battery life reasons and because Intel dragged it's feet with the i7 CPUs. This had no effect other than to cause those same people to keep screaming bloody murder even louder. While it is nice to have an option for a i7 CPU and 32Gb of RAM for the minority of users that actually need that processing power, most people do not need that kind of performance any more than they need a car that is designed with the 24 hours of Le Mans in mind. While I can understand the frustration of people who need an i7 and 32 Gb of RAM I can also understand the decision to release the less powerful version of the MacBook first since it covers the needs of abut 80-90% of their users and follow it up with an i7/32Gb version later.
He's not storing mountains of classified emails on his server.
Well, not anymore.
What makes you two think that that screaming gargoyle Rudy Giuliani even knows how to operate an e-mail client? They might as well assign Sarah Palin to oversee the quality inspection of nuclear weapons production.
It's anti-trust because Apple can restrict what is allowed to be sold.
So my neghborhood supermarket is anti-trust because it chooses to sell Coca Cola but not RC Cola?
If Microsoft gets their Linux layer working, Apple is toast.
If ...
Seriously? "Man dives through plate glass window" "In other news, band-aid sales have skyrocketed recently..."
Nobody forced these people to buy wireless headphones, there is an adaptor that allows you to plug analogue headphones into the lightning connector. The real news here is that people don't seem to give a rats ass about the demise 3.5mm headphone jack and didn't think twice about getting a Bluetooth headset despite predictions of doom from the naysayers on Slashdot and that around half of them went for a non-Apple product..
Wrong. Wired headphones were still possible with a dongle, but this shows that the slight added expense of a dongle and the need for a separate piece of equipment was enough to drive consumers to wireless audio. It shows that consumers really do prefer wireless audio, and even a slight increase in the difficulty of using wired headphones was enough to drive them to switch. As usual, Apple will be vindicated for their decision.
The 3.5mm adaptor is included with the phone but even if it wasn't the prospect of forking over 10 bucks would not drive people to buy Bluetooth headsets headsets which start at $50 or more if you want reasonable sound quality. I do agree that this shows that people's reluctance to switch to wireless headphones is wildly exaggerated.
The summary, to me, reads as though Fitbit is the villain. It could just as easily been written something like this:
Smartwatch maker Vector has gone bankrupt. Vector, as a brand, will die off, and while its watches will remain operational, you can kiss any hope for software updates and new hardware goodbye. Fitbit has purchased it and its employees will be joining the fitness wearables firm, who will be hard at work integrating Vector's hardware and software know-how into their new organization.
All those employees will remain employed now, hooray! But positiveness doesn't sell ad impressions.
A shitload of devices are now orphaned because some bean counter at Fitbit ran an Excel model and decided that stiffing all those customers was cost effective business decision. That makes Fitbit the villain in my book ... unless you can paint a big yellow smiley on the fact that those customers paid a significant amount of good money for those watches are now stuck with wrist mounted brick. One thing is for sure, this has permanently cured me of any desire to buy a FitBit product.
... it took them 5 years to update the MacBook, and what we got was lackluster ...
Do you mean the new 12" MacBook or the MacBook line in it's entirety? People keep comparing the MacBook to much bigger more powerful laptops and putting it down because it doesn't have the horsepower to run insanely resource intensive stuff like BioShock, Titanfall or Doom (mind you I have hooked my MacBook up to a 4K display and played video without getting so much as a stutter) but that kind of misses the point. If I want to play games I'll buy a console and I don't see the MacBook as a drop in replacement for a 15 inch i7 laptop, I see it as something that is as portable and light as a tablet but with a better and more flexible desktop environment. The only beef I have with the MacBook is that it could do with one or two extra USB-C ports and and being a Raspberry Pi programmer I would have liked a micro SD card slot. The new Pro's on the other hand were disappointing, I don't see the that fancy touch bar as something particularly useful and they should have had i7 processors, if only for better battery life.
What happens then?
Cthulhu awakens.
I'm pretty sure Cthulhu has already awakened and he has an orange comb-over.
Counted one way, the US people favored Trump. Counted another way, the US people favored Clinton. Almost without exception, political observers now profess a clear preference for the vote-counting method that would have worked best for their favored candidate: Clinton supporters have discovered a new passion for using the aggregate popular vote, while Trump supporters see great virtue in the Electoral College. Politics as usual.
The last time I checked the person who gets the most votes wins the election. Anything else is not democracy, be it representative or some other form of democracy.
Do you think hurling pejoratives at someone strengthens your position? Look, I'm not a conspiracy nut but when you ask me whether I should believe people whose job it is to lie and deceive or someone who has dedicated his life to exposing lies.. yes I tend to side with the latter person. It strikes me as incredible that we are in a situation where progressives are siding with the covert intelligence agencies and conservatives with freaking wikileaks but here we are. I respect that you disagree with me but before any of this snowballed, back in Aug 2016 Assange was offering a 20k reward for info on Seth's death. Maybe he was seeking publicity for his organization, maybe not but you and me being on the sides we are... feels a bit like we've stumbled into the looking glass.
Yes, intelligence services lie sometimes, that's what intelligence services do but it does not mean that the CIA is always lying all of the time and that Vladimir Putin, the FSB and the GRU are the fountains of eternal truth. The people who work for the CIA are, when push comes to shove, patriots for their nation who care when an enemy tries to sabotage Americans Democracy. Anybody who is so entrenched in their left/right trench warfare that they are prepared to believe Vladimir Putin over their own intelligence services when the GRU and FSB try to undermine American elections needs to take a long hard look at whether political trench warfare is more important than preserving peoples faith in the electoral process which has enough problems without the Russians screwing around with it as well as the Trump and the US political establishment.
Probably written by a staffer.
I pity the guy who had to chew that sentence into Trumps ears for hours on end until the Orange Menace finally learned it by heart.