Well, the screen resolution is barely adequate, the CPU struggles on many web pages, the battery life could definitely do with improvement, the operating system is a bit clumsy, the software support very poor relative to other mobile OS and the upgrade path non-existent.
On those problems: CPU: Overclocking can fix that. Battery: Double-size batteries do exist for the N900, extending the lifetime to a more friendly 8 hours. Software Support: CSSU, since it does a lot better than the N770/N8x0 days where neither had it. Upgrade path: The N9, or thank Elop for removing the possibility for future Meego models.
Unlike the phones of its time (2009), it was not a mass-market phone. It is a multitool for communications, as pre-Elop Nokia engineered & built them.
It was more open than Android, it was too unfriendly towards carriers, had features that were ahead of others(hardware keyboard, 32GB flash + SD slot), had integrated communications frameworks for various network types.
The case where I'd recommend an N900 is if one already has one - for there is no replacement that matches it in openness, form-factor, or network availability.
Carry the broken USB port model, and all's well unless the collection device uses a debug port(which requires the battery to be removed to access, also deactivating the SD slot on opening battery cover). In addition, the software stack allows for a lot to be altered, which can discourage people from poking at the data easily.
Maemo/Meego might be considered dead, but it puts the end user in enough control to be ahead of most of this stuff.
That said: Could the N9's Aegis be used to consider these device probes as things that introduce the reset/malfunction condition? It seems to
I've bought mine twice over since there isn't a good enough replacement (the N950 came close aside from not being retail available).
Let me know when an Android-based phone has:
* Root-out of the box * Hardware QWERTY * Removable SD storage * Large internal storage * Works with T-Mobile 3G/4G bands (if not just the latter) * FM+RDS Transmitter * USB Host * Onboard Wifi that can be repurposed for carrier-hostile tether * Debian-based userland * Relatively curve-free body (unlike most everything HTC).
In short, a phone platform that's a multitool in its own right and isnt beholden to a carrier.
I'm not sure about all those forks you're talking about, but there aren't more than three major ones. That should be easy enough to not have Firefox be de-supported.
Sonne, the judge said, felt “very strongly” about his wife.
“I do not believe he would have done anything to risk injury to her or worse,” Ms. Spies said.
The couple has since split up, something Mr. Sonne noted poignantly after the verdict.
“It would be nice to walk out of the courthouse into her arms, but that’s just not going to happen.”
Consider that they've already done enough destruction to the person's family - the law enforcement have done enough to not need to go for the coup de grace and "convict" him.
"She is charged with conspiring with her 49-year-old husband, personal assistant Cheryl Carter, chauffeur Paul Edwards, security man Daryl Jorsling, and News International head of security Mr Hanna to "conceal material" from police between 6 and 19 July. In a second charge Mrs Brooks and Ms Carter are accused of conspiring to remove seven boxes of material from the News International archive between 6 and 9 July. In a third charge, Mr and Mrs Brooks, Mr Hanna, Mr Edwards and Mr Jorsling are accused of conspiring to conceal documents, computers and other electronic equipment from police officers between 15 and 19 July."
For all the people that are being charged, the Murdochs seem quite absent, but anyone without their surname seems to be fair game.
Hopefully someone turns on the Murdochs instead of taking the sword for the family.
Now maybe they'll release a patch some day that will override this, or maybe they won't. But you can bet that the one group that will *definitely* have a patch are the pirates.
However, anyone that advocates for such patch will be demonized, the project sued into oblivion, and Blizzard steals any domain names associated with the project.
according to the Terry Gou, CEO of Apple's main hardware supplier Foxconn, in a brief interview with the newspaper China Daily.
The same executive that is proud to treat his workers like animals? Sounds like it.
The newspaper reports that the device will feature 'aluminum construction, Siri, and FaceTime video calling' and will be manufactured by a 50-50 joint venture between Foxconn and the Japanese manufacturer Sharp;
This means that it'll have the Sharp name, but the shoddiness that is the hallmark of Chinese hardware (but not of Japanese hardware). It'll be OK since Apple throws the label on it and thus makes it immune from criticism. Any hardware failures will be excused while evidence of it will be considered modbomb worthy.
Seems like nearly every post that supports the GPL/gcc position is modbombed into oblivion - with consistency - while the BSD/clang position (or any anti-"GPL") has yet to see the same fate.
Seems like nearly every post that supports the GPL/gcc position is modbombed into oblivion - with consistency - while the BSD/clang position (or any anti-"GPL"). One can forget any premise of the BSD folks being reasonable when modpoints suggest anything but reasonable.
Either way, hopefully clang won't be required for the base system in the future, where those that want the GPLv3 compiler can have it work without a lot of WONTFIX/CANTFIX/NOTABUG responses sent back.
"Then again, you probably would rather throw some ad hominem at me regarding a certain GPL advocate." -- Score: 50% Flamebait 40% Insightful 10% Informative
Instead of arguing on how the BSD model allows for dirty pool in code licensing or the non-requirement for patch contribution, you'd rather have my post disappear.
While the BSD licensing model allows various hijinks to go around without the requirement of disclosure.
Complaining about the GPL is like complaining that you can't play dirty pool with code licensing(see Tivoization). Then again, you probably would rather throw some ad hominem at me regarding a certain GPL advocate.
Not only is the entire country easily offed in one shot from various weapons, he picked a country that does quite well at extraordinary rendition.
While I'm not exactly in favor of the tax code, I'm not in favor of arrogant allocation of assets outside the country. I am in favor of the US Government using the DoD to nullify any jurisdictional concealment.
In addition, I'd like to see something in the citizenship/residency/etc. documents stating that you will not engage in any jurisdictional tax avoidance, even if it is otherwise legal to do so; the penalty being forfeiture of all assets anywhere.
There's evidence of this in the US by the government propping up companies like Solyndra - while blocking oil, coal, and nuclear from having any chance to be usable.
If you want green energy, fine. Just be prepared for when it fails to deliver as promised.
While nuclear can be done safely, there seems to be no effort to do so - as it would deny environmentalists a chance to remake the power grid in their own way.
Environmentalism - as practiced today - has been about control versus the original intent of cleanliness and efficiency.
No there isn't, employers will lay you off in a heartbeat if it's in their interest. They'll provide no raises and pay new hires 20% more. They'll do everything they can to pay you as little as possible.
That's only due to the social contract being broken in the 1970's of voluntarily recognizing each other as peers and not as enemies. When other workers in less-free countries could be used to counteract the effects of US labor, the cost of being a jerk towards dropped like a stone. In addition, this was reinforced in 1981 through the PATCO strikebreaking, in 1983 through GE's switch to an anti-worker executive, in the 90's through NAFTA, and finally in 2003 with the offshoring of the professions of last refuge.
The possibility of you leaving is what keep them inline, if they know you won't leave then they'll fuck you up the ass till you need wear an adult diaper. It's called capitalism and supply and demand. Look it up sometime.
Only true if there isn't a large surplus of labor. When replacement costs are maintained to be low by employers, departure won't matter to them. This is done through jurisdictional arbitrage, where workers are played against each other.
Short-termers actually work against other workers, as they enable business to give less respect towards their workers save for a infinitesimally small portion that succeed anytime. They make it harder for workers that do very well when the long-term arrangements are covered with reciprocating loyalty. A solution to this would be to enact a Right To Direct Work, where short-term work cannot be a condition of work.
I've been treated rather well by my employers and that's because they knew I could leave and find a new job within a week for probably more pay. I also know many people who don't have that luxury and they did not get the same treatment as me.
I've been well-treated at prior employers who thought to give a damn about the people that work for them. Yes, this was with IT and with a large employer.
With employment there is an implied understanding that there is a long-term relationship,
If someone says anything to the contrary, they are a consultant and thus in the minority of people who have that choice. A long-term relationship provides the necessary security of being able to plan in the long-term and to mitigate risks that exist outside of long-term employment. Short-term workers are ones that are desperate and negotiating from a position where the company has only contempt for the worker.
Corporate monogamy isn't dead, just that the minority of consultants wants to kill it for the rest of us who don't have their luxury of choice. The bulk of people that work, do well in the arrangement where there is a long-term relationship where there is some defined, if tenuous, loyalty. The only thing that these consultants and short-termers do is enable companies to destroy loyalty. If you were to remove the ability for a company to use the short-term arrangement of distrust, loyalty would return.
Actually, wouldn't Samsung need to be the one to be punished? In order for there to be an antitrust concern re Apple, it would have to involve a competitor to Apple. It's Samsung's competitors that are being blocked, not Apple's. After all, Apple doesn't care where it gets the parts they need; they only care about price (and quality of course).
Apple's competitors are being blocked from Samsung product for a long enough time to cause harm - not the other way around. What I am suggesting is to expand the criteria to include Apple or its practices - with the result of them being legislatively incentivized to stop.
Volume pricing is a cornerstone of business; what you're describing is essentially government mandated price fixing, something which is illegal.
Buying out the first year to exclude competitors isn't a cornerstone of business. Nor is my solution price fixing - it is guaranteeing same-day availability to more than just Apple and favored clients of Apple.
c) Apple has volume contracts for screens with its great friend Samsung.
Start bringing the penalties for monopoly powers to Apple (which would kill this practice PDQ), expand the monopoly definition to include Apple's characteristics (no, successful is not one of them), or otherwise make blocking competitors by volume a non-starter(perhaps by stating that such products must be equally available to all at a given price - which would also apply to Apple).
Slashdot Mirror
Well, the screen resolution is barely adequate, the CPU struggles on many web pages, the battery life could definitely do with improvement, the operating system is a bit clumsy, the software support very poor relative to other mobile OS and the upgrade path non-existent.
On those problems:
CPU: Overclocking can fix that.
Battery: Double-size batteries do exist for the N900, extending the lifetime to a more friendly 8 hours.
Software Support: CSSU, since it does a lot better than the N770/N8x0 days where neither had it.
Upgrade path: The N9, or thank Elop for removing the possibility for future Meego models.
Unlike the phones of its time (2009), it was not a mass-market phone. It is a multitool for communications, as pre-Elop Nokia engineered & built them.
It was more open than Android, it was too unfriendly towards carriers, had features that were ahead of others(hardware keyboard, 32GB flash + SD slot), had integrated communications frameworks for various network types.
The case where I'd recommend an N900 is if one already has one - for there is no replacement that matches it in openness, form-factor, or network availability.
Carry the broken USB port model, and all's well unless the collection device uses a debug port(which requires the battery to be removed to access, also deactivating the SD slot on opening battery cover). In addition, the software stack allows for a lot to be altered, which can discourage people from poking at the data easily.
Maemo/Meego might be considered dead, but it puts the end user in enough control to be ahead of most of this stuff.
That said:
Could the N9's Aegis be used to consider these device probes as things that introduce the reset/malfunction condition? It seems to
It would be nice if Firefox for Android supported all the desktop add-ons
That would heavily depend on the addons being architecture independent.
I've bought mine twice over since there isn't a good enough replacement (the N950 came close aside from not being retail available).
Let me know when an Android-based phone has:
* Root-out of the box
* Hardware QWERTY
* Removable SD storage
* Large internal storage
* Works with T-Mobile 3G/4G bands (if not just the latter)
* FM+RDS Transmitter
* USB Host
* Onboard Wifi that can be repurposed for carrier-hostile tether
* Debian-based userland
* Relatively curve-free body (unlike most everything HTC).
In short, a phone platform that's a multitool in its own right and isnt beholden to a carrier.
I'm not sure about all those forks you're talking about, but there aren't more than three major ones. That should be easy enough to not have Firefox be de-supported.
Sonne, the judge said, felt “very strongly” about his wife.
“I do not believe he would have done anything to risk injury to her or worse,” Ms. Spies said.
The couple has since split up, something Mr. Sonne noted poignantly after the verdict.
“It would be nice to walk out of the courthouse into her arms, but that’s just not going to happen.”
Consider that they've already done enough destruction to the person's family - the law enforcement have done enough to not need to go for the coup de grace and "convict" him.
With all that was held back when the N900 still was supported, it's a shame that it's left out of the fixes.
"She is charged with conspiring with her 49-year-old husband, personal assistant Cheryl Carter, chauffeur Paul Edwards, security man Daryl Jorsling, and News International head of security Mr Hanna to "conceal material" from police between 6 and 19 July. In a second charge Mrs Brooks and Ms Carter are accused of conspiring to remove seven boxes of material from the News International archive between 6 and 9 July. In a third charge, Mr and Mrs Brooks, Mr Hanna, Mr Edwards and Mr Jorsling are accused of conspiring to conceal documents, computers and other electronic equipment from police officers between 15 and 19 July."
For all the people that are being charged, the Murdochs seem quite absent, but anyone without their surname seems to be fair game.
Hopefully someone turns on the Murdochs instead of taking the sword for the family.
Now maybe they'll release a patch some day that will override this, or maybe they won't. But you can bet that the one group that will *definitely* have a patch are the pirates.
However, anyone that advocates for such patch will be demonized, the project sued into oblivion, and Blizzard steals any domain names associated with the project.
About the only entity that would want the place and equipment would be a PRC-controlled entity.
While the bailout was bad, and I disagree with their funding, anything going out of the country would be worse.
according to the Terry Gou, CEO of Apple's main hardware supplier Foxconn, in a brief interview with the newspaper China Daily.
The same executive that is proud to treat his workers like animals? Sounds like it.
The newspaper reports that the device will feature 'aluminum construction, Siri, and FaceTime video calling' and will be manufactured by a 50-50 joint venture between Foxconn and the Japanese manufacturer Sharp;
This means that it'll have the Sharp name, but the shoddiness that is the hallmark of Chinese hardware (but not of Japanese hardware). It'll be OK since Apple throws the label on it and thus makes it immune from criticism. Any hardware failures will be excused while evidence of it will be considered modbomb worthy.
Seems like nearly every post that supports the GPL/gcc position is modbombed into oblivion - with consistency - while the BSD/clang position (or any anti-"GPL") has yet to see the same fate.
Seems like nearly every post that supports the GPL/gcc position is modbombed into oblivion - with consistency - while the BSD/clang position (or any anti-"GPL"). One can forget any premise of the BSD folks being reasonable when modpoints suggest anything but reasonable.
Either way, hopefully clang won't be required for the base system in the future, where those that want the GPLv3 compiler can have it work without a lot of WONTFIX/CANTFIX/NOTABUG responses sent back.
"Then again, you probably would rather throw some ad hominem at me regarding a certain GPL advocate."
--
Score:
50% Flamebait
40% Insightful
10% Informative
Instead of arguing on how the BSD model allows for dirty pool in code licensing or the non-requirement for patch contribution, you'd rather have my post disappear.
However, FreeBSD will not actively block you from using a newer version of GCC.
Using newer version of GCC and binutils with the FreeBSD Ports Collection
While the BSD licensing model allows various hijinks to go around without the requirement of disclosure.
Complaining about the GPL is like complaining that you can't play dirty pool with code licensing(see Tivoization). Then again, you probably would rather throw some ad hominem at me regarding a certain GPL advocate.
Not only is the entire country easily offed in one shot from various weapons, he picked a country that does quite well at extraordinary rendition.
While I'm not exactly in favor of the tax code, I'm not in favor of arrogant allocation of assets outside the country. I am in favor of the US Government using the DoD to nullify any jurisdictional concealment.
In addition, I'd like to see something in the citizenship/residency/etc. documents stating that you will not engage in any jurisdictional tax avoidance, even if it is otherwise legal to do so; the penalty being forfeiture of all assets anywhere.
There's evidence of this in the US by the government propping up companies like Solyndra - while blocking oil, coal, and nuclear from having any chance to be usable.
If you want green energy, fine. Just be prepared for when it fails to deliver as promised.
While nuclear can be done safely, there seems to be no effort to do so - as it would deny environmentalists a chance to remake the power grid in their own way.
Environmentalism - as practiced today - has been about control versus the original intent of cleanliness and efficiency.
...I'm not surprised.
Instead of providing superior service (at various levels) on a flat-rate connection, you get a degraded connection(at any level) that is metered.
No there isn't, employers will lay you off in a heartbeat if it's in their interest. They'll provide no raises and pay new hires 20% more. They'll do everything they can to pay you as little as possible.
That's only due to the social contract being broken in the 1970's of voluntarily recognizing each other as peers and not as enemies. When other workers in less-free countries could be used to counteract the effects of US labor, the cost of being a jerk towards dropped like a stone. In addition, this was reinforced in 1981 through the PATCO strikebreaking, in 1983 through GE's switch to an anti-worker executive, in the 90's through NAFTA, and finally in 2003 with the offshoring of the professions of last refuge.
The possibility of you leaving is what keep them inline, if they know you won't leave then they'll fuck you up the ass till you need wear an adult diaper. It's called capitalism and supply and demand. Look it up sometime.
Only true if there isn't a large surplus of labor. When replacement costs are maintained to be low by employers, departure won't matter to them. This is done through jurisdictional arbitrage, where workers are played against each other.
Short-termers actually work against other workers, as they enable business to give less respect towards their workers save for a infinitesimally small portion that succeed anytime. They make it harder for workers that do very well when the long-term arrangements are covered with reciprocating loyalty. A solution to this would be to enact a Right To Direct Work, where short-term work cannot be a condition of work.
I've been treated rather well by my employers and that's because they knew I could leave and find a new job within a week for probably more pay. I also know many people who don't have that luxury and they did not get the same treatment as me.
I've been well-treated at prior employers who thought to give a damn about the people that work for them. Yes, this was with IT and with a large employer.
Not everyone has come from a country where businesses treat workers like one-night-stands.
Why do you hate job security? It promotes skill development more than anything else.
With employment there is an implied understanding that there is a long-term relationship,
If someone says anything to the contrary, they are a consultant and thus in the minority of people who have that choice. A long-term relationship provides the necessary security of being able to plan in the long-term and to mitigate risks that exist outside of long-term employment. Short-term workers are ones that are desperate and negotiating from a position where the company has only contempt for the worker.
Corporate monogamy isn't dead, just that the minority of consultants wants to kill it for the rest of us who don't have their luxury of choice. The bulk of people that work, do well in the arrangement where there is a long-term relationship where there is some defined, if tenuous, loyalty. The only thing that these consultants and short-termers do is enable companies to destroy loyalty. If you were to remove the ability for a company to use the short-term arrangement of distrust, loyalty would return.
Actually, wouldn't Samsung need to be the one to be punished? In order for there to be an antitrust concern re Apple, it would have to involve a competitor to Apple. It's Samsung's competitors that are being blocked, not Apple's. After all, Apple doesn't care where it gets the parts they need; they only care about price (and quality of course).
Apple's competitors are being blocked from Samsung product for a long enough time to cause harm - not the other way around. What I am suggesting is to expand the criteria to include Apple or its practices - with the result of them being legislatively incentivized to stop.
Volume pricing is a cornerstone of business; what you're describing is essentially government mandated price fixing, something which is illegal.
Buying out the first year to exclude competitors isn't a cornerstone of business. Nor is my solution price fixing - it is guaranteeing same-day availability to more than just Apple and favored clients of Apple.
c) Apple has volume contracts for screens with its great friend Samsung.
Start bringing the penalties for monopoly powers to Apple (which would kill this practice PDQ), expand the monopoly definition to include Apple's characteristics (no, successful is not one of them), or otherwise make blocking competitors by volume a non-starter(perhaps by stating that such products must be equally available to all at a given price - which would also apply to Apple).