Publishers do typesetting, proof reading, layout, cover design, marketing and a tonne of other things.
Self-publishing, while a good thing in the main, does not replace everything a publisher does - and in quite a lot of self-published books, it can show.
Having developed for both (well, all three - BB, Android and iPhone), I would never voluntarily do Blackberry development again - it was a horrifically bad experience, not one I ever wish to repeat.
It was one of their main fundraising abilities - and to be quite honest, they never stopped other people putting together slightly different ISO layouts and going with those. Plus it was trivial to do an install from the tgz themselves.
I would guess that *Android* is a major reason for Apples mapping acquisitions - this has been going on for a while. I highly doubt when Google and Apple matched up for their collaboration, Google merely said "sure, sign up for a mapping API key and knock yourself out"...
How is it aimed at Apple, precisely? The Google integration in IOS is an official collaboration with Google, I hardly think Apple is subject to the public limits of usage.
You say that when one of the main architectures we use in the west (x86) was created by one company, and reverse engineered by its main rival to compete with it...
Oh, and the whole Compaq reverse engineering the IBM PC Bios to compete with IBM...
I've got no issues at all with China doing the same.
Really? I'm not a rockstar (never have been, never will be) and yet none of the positions I have held over the past 15 years (and thats going from my first real employment as a 17 year old in the grocery sales business, to my latest position as CTO) have involved zero negotiation compensation packages - when I was a butchery assistant with a national chain, I still had the opportunity to reject the company standard 3% raise, and on several occasions my boss agreed with me and gave me an extra raise. Every position since then has been the same - the company makes an offer, I can counter - and on more occasions than not my counter offer has been accepted in some form or other.
Do people really have that much of an issue with their own negotiation? I've worked in some very big companies, I've never been part of a collective bargaining group - and I've also never had problems negotiating my own compensation (and I hate talking money with anyone). Its not that hard to do, and its not hard for the company to accommodate individual bargaining either.
Is US employment culture that different to British employment culture?
Go google for the Qantas 747 that ran off the end of a runway and had to have it's entire nose replaced by Boeing (so Qantas could continue to say the had never lost an aircraft due to a crash). That little incident cost Qantas more than a replacement aircraft would have.
Joyce had his pay upped as per his contract, the labour groups want non-contracted increases. And it would cost hundreds of millions of dollars to fulfil those demands per year.
Not sure what category license you hold, but on jets the engines have quite a high thrust setting selected during approach, with speed controlled by air brakes and the natural drag of the flaps - because jet engines take time to spool back up from low power settings, so all you do to access that excess thrust is retract the speed brakes and clean the aircraft up and you instantly have thrust to climb after aborting.
Oh, and I'm asking you for the link first because you are the one making the original outrageous claim - back your own claims up. Your first attempt at a link does not back your claim up.
How about you post a link that proves anything you have said, starting with that comment. Oh, and that comment looks suspiciously different from the first claim you made...
ANA didn't save anything, stop with the bullshit. Boeing has no problems financing its supply chain if it so needs, it has no need to fall back on ANA for anything.
Uh, pretty sure you are the one doing the flame baiting here - ANA most certainly did nothing of what you are claiming. If pointing out that your comments are utter bullshit is flame bait, then sure. But it doesn't make your comments any less bullshit.
ANA did no engineering on the 787.
ANA have no engineering links to any of the companies listed on that page. They are other Japanese companies - ANA is showcasing how "Japanese" the aircraft is.
Boeing handed out work parcels to several countries, including Italy and China, from the start - just the same as Japan. ANA did not "step in" at any point to secure those work parcels.
As posted (again) further up the page, that link doesn't support your assertion about ANA - all they are doing there is showing off Japans involvement (all of which was in Boeings plan from day one). ANA did nothing more than purchase the aircraft, they never "stepped in" at all - ANA is none of those companies listed.
I suggest that you start looking at your "facts" before embarrassing yourself in the manner that you just did.
Congratulations, you discovered that Boeing gave work parcels to Japan - which was in the plan from day one. As the other poster says, this doesn't support your comment about ANA however. How about *you* look up the facts - I've been following the 787 from before it was publicly announced.
Slashdot Mirror
Terminal World, by Alastair Reynolds, has a similar premise, but is based on Mars.
Publishers do typesetting, proof reading, layout, cover design, marketing and a tonne of other things.
Self-publishing, while a good thing in the main, does not replace everything a publisher does - and in quite a lot of self-published books, it can show.
Having developed for both (well, all three - BB, Android and iPhone), I would never voluntarily do Blackberry development again - it was a horrifically bad experience, not one I ever wish to repeat.
Only France? The UK has affirmed it's stance that new reactors are needed and will be built...
It was one of their main fundraising abilities - and to be quite honest, they never stopped other people putting together slightly different ISO layouts and going with those. Plus it was trivial to do an install from the tgz themselves.
Not been the case for years, you can download the "install50.iso" image from the mirrors right now.
http://www.openbsd.org/ftp.html
Example:
http://mirror.bytemark.co.uk/pub/OpenBSD/5.0/i386/install50.iso
I would guess that *Android* is a major reason for Apples mapping acquisitions - this has been going on for a while. I highly doubt when Google and Apple matched up for their collaboration, Google merely said "sure, sign up for a mapping API key and knock yourself out"...
How is it aimed at Apple, precisely? The Google integration in IOS is an official collaboration with Google, I hardly think Apple is subject to the public limits of usage.
You say that when one of the main architectures we use in the west (x86) was created by one company, and reverse engineered by its main rival to compete with it...
Oh, and the whole Compaq reverse engineering the IBM PC Bios to compete with IBM...
I've got no issues at all with China doing the same.
Really? I'm not a rockstar (never have been, never will be) and yet none of the positions I have held over the past 15 years (and thats going from my first real employment as a 17 year old in the grocery sales business, to my latest position as CTO) have involved zero negotiation compensation packages - when I was a butchery assistant with a national chain, I still had the opportunity to reject the company standard 3% raise, and on several occasions my boss agreed with me and gave me an extra raise. Every position since then has been the same - the company makes an offer, I can counter - and on more occasions than not my counter offer has been accepted in some form or other.
Its not hard to do, even in the current climate.
Do people really have that much of an issue with their own negotiation? I've worked in some very big companies, I've never been part of a collective bargaining group - and I've also never had problems negotiating my own compensation (and I hate talking money with anyone). Its not that hard to do, and its not hard for the company to accommodate individual bargaining either.
Is US employment culture that different to British employment culture?
Sure.
http://www.avweb.com/news/news/184281-1.html
Go google for the Qantas 747 that ran off the end of a runway and had to have it's entire nose replaced by Boeing (so Qantas could continue to say the had never lost an aircraft due to a crash). That little incident cost Qantas more than a replacement aircraft would have.
Joyce had his pay upped as per his contract, the labour groups want non-contracted increases. And it would cost hundreds of millions of dollars to fulfil those demands per year.
What complete and utter bullshit.
So everyone should be wearing Kevlar vests to combat knife crime, rather than arresting the culprits?
Not sure what category license you hold, but on jets the engines have quite a high thrust setting selected during approach, with speed controlled by air brakes and the natural drag of the flaps - because jet engines take time to spool back up from low power settings, so all you do to access that excess thrust is retract the speed brakes and clean the aircraft up and you instantly have thrust to climb after aborting.
Thanks :) so much broken with slashdot at the moment :(
I guess someone doesnt like people dissing Android...
Its a pity I cant see what I have been modded, as Slashdot isnt putting the comment score in the comment title :(
Oh, and I'm asking you for the link first because you are the one making the original outrageous claim - back your own claims up. Your first attempt at a link does not back your claim up.
How about you post a link that proves anything you have said, starting with that comment. Oh, and that comment looks suspiciously different from the first claim you made...
ANA didn't save anything, stop with the bullshit. Boeing has no problems financing its supply chain if it so needs, it has no need to fall back on ANA for anything.
Uh, pretty sure you are the one doing the flame baiting here - ANA most certainly did nothing of what you are claiming. If pointing out that your comments are utter bullshit is flame bait, then sure. But it doesn't make your comments any less bullshit.
ANA did no engineering on the 787.
ANA have no engineering links to any of the companies listed on that page. They are other Japanese companies - ANA is showcasing how "Japanese" the aircraft is.
Boeing handed out work parcels to several countries, including Italy and China, from the start - just the same as Japan. ANA did not "step in" at any point to secure those work parcels.
ANA never did what you claim.
As posted (again) further up the page, that link doesn't support your assertion about ANA - all they are doing there is showing off Japans involvement (all of which was in Boeings plan from day one). ANA did nothing more than purchase the aircraft, they never "stepped in" at all - ANA is none of those companies listed.
I suggest that you start looking at your "facts" before embarrassing yourself in the manner that you just did.
Congratulations, you discovered that Boeing gave work parcels to Japan - which was in the plan from day one. As the other poster says, this doesn't support your comment about ANA however. How about *you* look up the facts - I've been following the 787 from before it was publicly announced.
What utter rubbish, repeated.