Are there enough people who need a more powerful machine to justify them? Iget that you need an upgrade, but who else does?
I am in the middle of replacing my 2009-era desktop (Core 2 Duo 2.9ghz, Geforce GT 240, 4 GB RAM), with an entry level Surface Pro 4 (Core M3 dual core 2.0ghz, integrated graphics, 4GB RAM.)
It seems my computing needs have not increased in almost a decade.
The USB C type port should provide more than enough bandwidth for an external drive. I don't see it as an issue for that specifically, unless the device can't charge and power an external drive simultaneously. Perhaps the lack of ports is a downgrade, but I wouldn't consider it a showstopper. Apple switching to a single USB-C is an interesting differentiation from Microsoft's Surface Connect port with a USB-A port. I do value the magnectic mechanism for power chargers.
I think Outlook might be the "killer app" which keeps many Windows users from switching to Linux. Aside from the availability of free tech support.
Those who don't use Outlook have probably already switched to an iOS or Android device for most of their computing needs. Other than Outlook, there is iTunes for iPhones, but that isn't necessary per se.
Otherwise for gamers it is the support for games on Windows. Those who are most likely to support the Outlook users have more familiarity with Windows because of its game support.
A good LTS Linux desktop is great for home use. No having to upgrade your computer every year. I've quite enjoyed my forays into Linuxdom. Outside of KDE 4, anyway. KDE 3.5, and 5.x are functional DEs, KDE 4 was about as bad as Mac OS X. Got an old 10.2 Jaguar disc, wonder how it was ever considered a usuable OS.
Currently Fox and CW offer free online streaming. Walking Dead is on Netflix along with the entire Star Trek franchise save for Discovery, and most Marvel and DC shows. So more like 99% with Netflix, and then CBS for Discovery. (Yes, I'm one of the idiots who literally subscribes to "All Access" for one show).
Is there anything they can do? You're proposing investing money in a dying platform and business strategy.
The customers that can operate an "On-Demand" box, or would be interested in on demand functionality have likely already switched to lower cost options. Why pay extra for functionality when free will suffice?
Increasingly those who are left are those who would have a hard time replacing the old cable box channel tuner with something more modern that requires the skills to program a VCR clock.
Side note RE 0 functionality: First thing I noticed broken with Edge was intranet sites over a VPN tunnel. So literally 0 functionaloty for remote workers. Forced me to actually look for Internet Explorer classic.
Add-ons are going away. What made Firefox great, is going away. Pretty much went away when Mozilla started using the major number as a minor number, breaking add-ons with each release.
Movie theaters are a way to spread the cost of a superior entertainment experience across multiple individuals.
When a single man or teenager cannot enjoy such niceties due to the high cost of a personal entertainment system, plus the lack of friends to share in said experience within one's own home or a friend's home, it will be a sad day. It would be a loss of an opportunity for a shared experience to build camaraderie, one which due to its neutral venue is a safe place to consider new friendships without risking more serious consequences of theft, etc.
There is more to that "not yet" regarding the experience and usefulness of a theater for watchig movies.
Streaming "locally" may not be a cost effective solution.
Besides, are you paying for less, in that being a local 24 hour stream? Or paying for "Hulu" merged with local programming for a higher price than Hulu? Does the price of Internet+Hulu compare to traditional cable subscriptions?
My local networks have small scale streaming options for locally created content, ones which usually get overloaded during unscheduled major events like Tornadoes or Hurricanes. Occasionally even during scheduled ones like elections or New Year's eve, etc. Many local non-station affiliated content providers also have their own streaming options (churches on YouTube for the main example.)
Another problem is consumer traffic. Is it simpler to order cable service from a different time zone, and have to drive miles to exchange a cable box? Or is it better to do business with a service in the local area? -- Switching to the internet, is it easier to do business with a large mainstream site, or with some "huffingtoncountytelcosteaming.net" service provider with a smaller selection of content? Local cable companies are going to be reduced to internet providers, the future of which appears to be LTE at 10mbps. Which means cable companies will primarily exist to support cellular infrastructure, in more remote areas.
I like being able to watch TV on my own schedule. Not having to miss out on my preferred shows due to conflicting schedules regarding things more important or time sensitive than relaxing.
I've had a Mac, a PowerPC 7200/75 running System 7, and then OS 8.0. I've also had a graphite G4 tower running OSX. Every smart phone I've ever had has been an iPhone, currently on the 7.
I've also recently purchased a Surface Pro 4, a line of product notorious for not being repairable due to being glued together.
However, I am also a tinkerer. I've built PCs, and upgraded PCs. I write some primitive code, and modify scripts and source code when necessary. Even with Windows 10 forcing upgrades down the pipe, there are ways to mitigate the damage, or revert changes that break a device as thoroughly as the iPhone issue. System Restore for one, external/alternative input devices for another.
The Apple approach with the iPhone is really anti-American, and anti-Capitalistic. Its not even individualistic, because it is disempowering the individual, to empower the corporation. I can see it being somebody's dream of the only support being first party support. Unfortunately, the economy is neither flat nor linear. The economy is rather dynamic, and fluid, and adaptive. Which means it is best served by having more control at the consumer's end regarding repair options, not the manufacturer's end. Not unless Apple's dominance is superceeded by thousands of smaller more locally tailored operations, which wouldn't be able to compete on price due to the efficiencies of manufacturing in larger scales.
No. The solution is that there should be such backlash and such bad press from advertising on sites for high profit companies centered around highly sensitive information, like Equifax and Transunion, or sites which contain HIPAA protected information, etc., that risking malvertising should result in the immediate firing of a CEO, CIO and CTO.
They should not be forgiven for this. Forgiving them only encourages negligence in the name of profit. What benefit is it to the consumer to have their data and personal computer put at unnecessary risk? What benefit is there to the economy to increase the amount of micromanagement required of every citizen?
Hopefully it is fortunate timing. This malvertising is a matter which needs attention, and companies with information that has been considered sensitive, like Trans Union and Equifax, should not be vulnerable to malvertising. Especially if they are so lucrative.
They're not Google, they don't make money from advertising to visitors to their site, right? How many people used their site and clicked on their ads before this incident? This shouldn't have been a problem to begin with. This isn't Facebook or MSN.com, this vulnerability ahouldn't have existed to begin with.
That Apple broke a third party part doesn't bother me. Such is the norm.
What bothers me is Apple doesn't provide a means of undoing the change which broke the functionality of the phone.
This means that Apple is the only one that can fix the issue, and that if Apple does not fix the issue then a phone or device is rendered unusable unnecessarily, and the cost of ownership of the device is driven through the roof.
Microsoft's market share is vast, diverse, and spread out geographically.
No single Antivirus meets the needs of every user or business. You've got home users who need simplicity, you've got business users who need manageability, you've got gamers who need performance, and developers who need control. You've got different countries with different language needs. You've got your for cost, and your freeware. Finally you've got up starts and Open Source options. Etc. Etc.
What is more surprising is when there are not 65 competitors in a particular market, such as Media Player / Store / Streaming client, or Office Suite, or Credit Bureau, etc.
I suppose the biggest reason why an Antivirus can have 65 competitors is that there is no need to move data from one installation of another, so no need for any uniform standards or compatibility.
No Windows Updates, no Antivirus, means no web browsing.
For such systems I make sure there is no unmonitored and unrestricted access to the internet, IF I allow internet access at all.
Otherwise I would have to implement an option to revert the system to a state prior to exposure to the internet. Such as a wipe and reload from a pre-built image.
1st Question: When would anyone the Queen and her court conducts business with have need of a credit history?
2nd Question: When would the queen have need to buy anything using credit?
3rd Question: Who, when conducting business with the west, would deny the Queen what she requests? When that is a matter or purchasing a desired good or product or service?
Who's going to pay for training so that developers can recognize bad advice on Stack Overflow, or possibly increase the amount of good advice on Stack Overflow?
Who's going to invest? Who's going to spend the money? And on who's time are they going to be researching better security in code?
I've been called upon to restore apps from backup when the latest update doesn't work with the device. OS updates are usually not available for these devices. You just use it until most of your apps stop working and then buy a new one to get a more current OS. Such is a hidden cost which severely limits the life span, and increases the cost of the device.
Slashdot Mirror
Are there enough people who need a more powerful machine to justify them? Iget that you need an upgrade, but who else does?
I am in the middle of replacing my 2009-era desktop (Core 2 Duo 2.9ghz, Geforce GT 240, 4 GB RAM), with an entry level Surface Pro 4 (Core M3 dual core 2.0ghz, integrated graphics, 4GB RAM.)
It seems my computing needs have not increased in almost a decade.
The USB C type port should provide more than enough bandwidth for an external drive. I don't see it as an issue for that specifically, unless the device can't charge and power an external drive simultaneously. Perhaps the lack of ports is a downgrade, but I wouldn't consider it a showstopper. Apple switching to a single USB-C is an interesting differentiation from Microsoft's Surface Connect port with a USB-A port. I do value the magnectic mechanism for power chargers.
You know, I've wondered about that. Is that really how it works, or is it just how things appear?
Catch-22: Relationships are the rails upon which the trains of opportunity travel. No man is an island...
I think Outlook might be the "killer app" which keeps many Windows users from switching to Linux. Aside from the availability of free tech support.
Those who don't use Outlook have probably already switched to an iOS or Android device for most of their computing needs. Other than Outlook, there is iTunes for iPhones, but that isn't necessary per se.
Otherwise for gamers it is the support for games on Windows. Those who are most likely to support the Outlook users have more familiarity with Windows because of its game support.
A good LTS Linux desktop is great for home use. No having to upgrade your computer every year. I've quite enjoyed my forays into Linuxdom. Outside of KDE 4, anyway. KDE 3.5, and 5.x are functional DEs, KDE 4 was about as bad as Mac OS X. Got an old 10.2 Jaguar disc, wonder how it was ever considered a usuable OS.
Currently Fox and CW offer free online streaming. Walking Dead is on Netflix along with the entire Star Trek franchise save for Discovery, and most Marvel and DC shows. So more like 99% with Netflix, and then CBS for Discovery. (Yes, I'm one of the idiots who literally subscribes to "All Access" for one show).
Is there anything they can do? You're proposing investing money in a dying platform and business strategy.
The customers that can operate an "On-Demand" box, or would be interested in on demand functionality have likely already switched to lower cost options. Why pay extra for functionality when free will suffice?
Increasingly those who are left are those who would have a hard time replacing the old cable box channel tuner with something more modern that requires the skills to program a VCR clock.
Old web culture fromthe 00's, when the US government put out a warning not to use IE, and Firefox was the internet's Golden boy?
Side note RE 0 functionality: First thing I noticed broken with Edge was intranet sites over a VPN tunnel. So literally 0 functionaloty for remote workers. Forced me to actually look for Internet Explorer classic.
Add-ons are going away. What made Firefox great, is going away. Pretty much went away when Mozilla started using the major number as a minor number, breaking add-ons with each release.
Movie theaters are a way to spread the cost of a superior entertainment experience across multiple individuals.
When a single man or teenager cannot enjoy such niceties due to the high cost of a personal entertainment system, plus the lack of friends to share in said experience within one's own home or a friend's home, it will be a sad day. It would be a loss of an opportunity for a shared experience to build camaraderie, one which due to its neutral venue is a safe place to consider new friendships without risking more serious consequences of theft, etc.
There is more to that "not yet" regarding the experience and usefulness of a theater for watchig movies.
Streaming "locally" may not be a cost effective solution.
Besides, are you paying for less, in that being a local 24 hour stream? Or paying for "Hulu" merged with local programming for a higher price than Hulu? Does the price of Internet+Hulu compare to traditional cable subscriptions?
My local networks have small scale streaming options for locally created content, ones which usually get overloaded during unscheduled major events like Tornadoes or Hurricanes. Occasionally even during scheduled ones like elections or New Year's eve, etc. Many local non-station affiliated content providers also have their own streaming options (churches on YouTube for the main example.)
Another problem is consumer traffic. Is it simpler to order cable service from a different time zone, and have to drive miles to exchange a cable box? Or is it better to do business with a service in the local area? -- Switching to the internet, is it easier to do business with a large mainstream site, or with some "huffingtoncountytelcosteaming.net" service provider with a smaller selection of content? Local cable companies are going to be reduced to internet providers, the future of which appears to be LTE at 10mbps. Which means cable companies will primarily exist to support cellular infrastructure, in more remote areas.
I like being able to watch TV on my own schedule. Not having to miss out on my preferred shows due to conflicting schedules regarding things more important or time sensitive than relaxing.
Thanks.
I'm not anti-Apple, but I'm not a fanboy either.
I've had a Mac, a PowerPC 7200/75 running System 7, and then OS 8.0. I've also had a graphite G4 tower running OSX. Every smart phone I've ever had has been an iPhone, currently on the 7.
I've also recently purchased a Surface Pro 4, a line of product notorious for not being repairable due to being glued together.
However, I am also a tinkerer. I've built PCs, and upgraded PCs. I write some primitive code, and modify scripts and source code when necessary. Even with Windows 10 forcing upgrades down the pipe, there are ways to mitigate the damage, or revert changes that break a device as thoroughly as the iPhone issue. System Restore for one, external/alternative input devices for another.
The Apple approach with the iPhone is really anti-American, and anti-Capitalistic. Its not even individualistic, because it is disempowering the individual, to empower the corporation. I can see it being somebody's dream of the only support being first party support. Unfortunately, the economy is neither flat nor linear. The economy is rather dynamic, and fluid, and adaptive. Which means it is best served by having more control at the consumer's end regarding repair options, not the manufacturer's end. Not unless Apple's dominance is superceeded by thousands of smaller more locally tailored operations, which wouldn't be able to compete on price due to the efficiencies of manufacturing in larger scales.
No. The solution is that there should be such backlash and such bad press from advertising on sites for high profit companies centered around highly sensitive information, like Equifax and Transunion, or sites which contain HIPAA protected information, etc., that risking malvertising should result in the immediate firing of a CEO, CIO and CTO.
They should not be forgiven for this. Forgiving them only encourages negligence in the name of profit. What benefit is it to the consumer to have their data and personal computer put at unnecessary risk? What benefit is there to the economy to increase the amount of micromanagement required of every citizen?
Unfortunate timing?
Hopefully it is fortunate timing. This malvertising is a matter which needs attention, and companies with information that has been considered sensitive, like Trans Union and Equifax, should not be vulnerable to malvertising. Especially if they are so lucrative.
They're not Google, they don't make money from advertising to visitors to their site, right? How many people used their site and clicked on their ads before this incident? This shouldn't have been a problem to begin with. This isn't Facebook or MSN.com, this vulnerability ahouldn't have existed to begin with.
That Apple broke a third party part doesn't bother me. Such is the norm.
What bothers me is Apple doesn't provide a means of undoing the change which broke the functionality of the phone.
This means that Apple is the only one that can fix the issue, and that if Apple does not fix the issue then a phone or device is rendered unusable unnecessarily, and the cost of ownership of the device is driven through the roof.
Microsoft's market share is vast, diverse, and spread out geographically.
No single Antivirus meets the needs of every user or business. You've got home users who need simplicity, you've got business users who need manageability, you've got gamers who need performance, and developers who need control. You've got different countries with different language needs. You've got your for cost, and your freeware. Finally you've got up starts and Open Source options. Etc. Etc.
What is more surprising is when there are not 65 competitors in a particular market, such as Media Player / Store / Streaming client, or Office Suite, or Credit Bureau, etc.
I suppose the biggest reason why an Antivirus can have 65 competitors is that there is no need to move data from one installation of another, so no need for any uniform standards or compatibility.
No Windows Updates, no Antivirus, means no web browsing.
For such systems I make sure there is no unmonitored and unrestricted access to the internet, IF I allow internet access at all.
Otherwise I would have to implement an option to revert the system to a state prior to exposure to the internet. Such as a wipe and reload from a pre-built image.
Maybe.
However, I would surmise that it is unlikely.
You have to ask yourself, what did these companies hire Equifax to do? It wasn't to safeguard the data of their customers.
1st Question: When would anyone the Queen and her court conducts business with have need of a credit history?
2nd Question: When would the queen have need to buy anything using credit?
3rd Question: Who, when conducting business with the west, would deny the Queen what she requests? When that is a matter or purchasing a desired good or product or service?
Frog done been cooked. Now their just prolonging it it out of pure sadistic enjoyment.
Running desktop operating systems in virtual environments. Typically on the "Xeon" platform.
Who's going to pay for training so that developers can recognize bad advice on Stack Overflow, or possibly increase the amount of good advice on Stack Overflow?
Who's going to invest? Who's going to spend the money? And on who's time are they going to be researching better security in code?
Isn't Office 365 available for Android?
More and more printers support wireless printing from mobile devices.
Bigger issue in my experience is the dated OS results in app store updates which break functionality on the device.
I've been called upon to restore apps from backup when the latest update doesn't work with the device. OS updates are usually not available for these devices. You just use it until most of your apps stop working and then buy a new one to get a more current OS. Such is a hidden cost which severely limits the life span, and increases the cost of the device.