Yes, but you're reasons seem more consumer oriented ("reduction in quality and an increase in prices"). One thing Steve Jobs set out in Apple when he took it over is to only make things that turn a profit (that's why he cut a ton of lines).
The Japanese had a mentality of a "market share uber alles", and that was fine for taking over the American steel industry when they didn't care about the low margin rebar market or the subcompact cars in the 60s/70s. And it worked there as they worked themselves up the margin ladder.
Of course, it doesn't work so great when they go against other Japanese companies in their home market.
So, is there a roadmap that makes financial sense for HP, especially as their building a me too! product or should they invest their resources elsewhere?
There's one way to bring competition back: allow polygamy.
Let the best, brightest, fittest mate with as many as possible and have their spouses/kids be under the same legal protection monogamous marriages are right now.
I have a kindle, and it's a fantastic device. I'm certainly not an "Amazon hipster" (I didn't even know there was such a thing) I don't buy anything from the amazon store, my kindle is rooted and I do with it as I please...
**** fuck*** shit, I wish I could bitch**** you with a -6, pretentious bullshit.
Back in the 1980s and 90s, I bought the latest greatest gear, not to impress other people, but as a geek I JUST LOVED playing with it. That's what geeks and nerds do. That's why they are geeks! To play and learn to manipulate this stuff.
I don't know when, maybe when Apple or some other company showed that computer electronics didn't have to be housed in boxy beige metal boxes, but some morons got it in their head that unless you got your electronics from the cheapest source possible, you didn't qualify as a geek or some bullshit. (It has nothing to do with what you own, but what you do with it.) But, of course, the cockwagging about owning the "right" electronics in one form or another is just another form of the hipster mentality, which should be completely eradicated from the geek world. Geeks were never about the cheapest or caring what other people thought, electronics from the beginning were expensive.
I can't even go into the Apple/Android stories because of these ePenis measuring contests anymore from all sides.
I'm sure there are people out there that buy them just so they can sit in starbucks and look cool,
Please, STOP, JUST STOP!!! No one buys a kindle to look cool. No one. That's like buying coveralls to look stylish. They buy it to play with and it has use to them. You're not special and alone in this. Stop this pretentious, hipster "I didn't buy into it because it was cool" garbage. Just stop.
One thing I despise on regular windows laptops is all the crap they add on. Apple does this aspect correctly (and for the price one pays, it should).
And no, I don't want BB touching my laptop. The recovery disk is nice (but should be there from the manufacturer anyway, cheap bastards), but I wonder what other bloatware they installed?
The average buyer will probably see this as the same as the car prep done when buying a new car... but I want no part of it. In that case, it should work out just fine, geeks generally don't buy at BB unless they need a part fast.
My GPS takes longer, side roads rather than the shorter/faster routes without me even asking for it. In this one area, it even gets off the main road and backs up into a side road and takes 3 extra turns, just to get where the main road would have taken me in 1/3 of the time and straight ahead. Another "helpful" routing was that rather go 1 more exit on the highway and be at that destination, it cuts it short and takes me through town's main street with a light every 50 feet. A five minute trip turned into a 45 minute one.
Of course, it's a crappy 5 y/o Garmin rather than Google Maps.
"How can we discover 'the new' in an age when
on
How Does GPS Change Us?
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
thing around us is mapped?"
How is this a GPS problem? Maps existed before GPS...
Also, isn't it like asking "How can I discover new restaurants (or products) when everything is already reviewed?"
If you want to pioneer, go to the bottom of the ocean or into space. You know, the edges of human knowledge. Don't stay safely within the confines of society and then complain that your "exploration" is already known.
While that didn't help, our 2 biggest headaches are Medicare (Bush didn't help with Medicare Part D) and Social Security. That trust fund has been raided to use in the general fund since the Johnson Administration. The military in general comes after and is out 3rd biggest problem.
The two wars and occupations were stupid, but that and the Bush Tax Cuts, are not the main cause of this. This problem was built into the system decades ago by both parties.
Dude, the DS web browser is pathetic. Maybe because the whole system has 4MB ram... still, it's not usable for the greater population in any meaningful sense.
The spending Obama did was in the present, and it most certainly created jobs, and the money to do so came from China and from the Federal Reserve. At some time in the future it might hurt, but right now it certainly did not.
How can that be said when days ago we just had a downgrade in credit and the market is bleeding?
The stimulus may have cost $278k per job, some of that analysis though is handwaving and ignoring the value of the few infrastructure investments themselves (hardly hoover dam projects though, bunch of little meaningless crap), but there is some ugly truth to that. Maybe, as a nation, we should be asking "Did we gain productivity" or something.
We always use the wrong metrics to measure the health of the economy. In the mid-00s, it was all about rising home values. That was kinda ignoring the downside to that besides the craziness of the values themselves. Namely expensive homes = expensive housing. This hearken back to the 1920-30s where Government started tax benefits to make everyone a home owner and setting off the 1950s suburban craze... which is a f-ing inefficient model for an entire nation's use of various resources but I digress....
Or maybe forgo stimulus packages altogether. I think Japan had at least a dozen since it's slump in the early 90s, and all it got for its efforts is a massive debt. IIRC, Bush did 5 of them, 3 of them in his last two years, and it didn't do squat as far as warding off the economic slump near the end of his term.
Corrections have to happen. I would almost rather give welfare to out of work people for a year or two to tide them over until the bottom passes rather than make stimulus packages where some of that money goes to "jobs"/"wages" and the rest to Corps building worthless shit. From what I have seen, wages of the middle classe and lower have stagnated since the 1970s, and CEOs/VPs and the like certainly don't need the taxpayer's help.
Say, anyone want to chip in for some t-shirts to give away at the next Tea Party convention?
I met a lot of ignorant Tea Partiers, but they seem to be at the bottom level. But many of the upper level people have a grasp.
The thing is, on the Democratic side, I have seen much of the same thing. The average voter is pretty ignorant, period.
Now, I know it went from a Ron Paul/Libertarian founded group to a Fox News/GOP overtaken "organization", but honestly, I find the heaps of scorn it recieves a bit ironic, as most Democrats (and the mainstream Democratic, and Republican Party) are just as bad.
But it's not a hard and fast rule. But 3-second soundbites rule the day. But not all jobs are good either. Toll booths collectors are jobs. But they add nothing to anybody's standard of living (decrease it actually, except their own, and those above in the bureacratic structure they support) nor make anything of benefit to anybody.
So wait, just because you disagree with Apple means that their product should be stolen?
Do you seriously think a Chinese firm would have pushed out anything like an iPhone before Apple produced theirs?
There can be a lot of progress in the world through open standards and the like which Apple should be pressured into doing by their customers, but theft of a design is not it. You can produce a spectacular smart or cellphone without ripping off a company. The way this is done rips off consumers and Apple and is just sheer laziness mixed with greed. This product will not work well if you're expecting an actual iPhone.
(I have no problem with the name though, what's the first thing you usually say to someone on the phone?)
Especially a 3GS, which many people will undoubtedly trade in this year for a 5. Perfectly fast and good, if it weren't locked down....
Worse than gillette trying to kill off double edged razors (the open standard of the shaving world) in exchange for closed down proprietary razors since the 60s.
It seems a case of 5,000 sheets can be readily had for around $45 or less. That means at leas 222 sheets for $2.
As this can only be reused 260 times, that gives a rather small windows of savings. Seeing all the common things that can reduce/eliminate the suitability of paper for a second use (staples, holes for binders, crinkling, tears, etc) as well as sheer laziness and apathy of people...
Office managers probably are better striving for a more paperless office to save $$$ and environment.
No you don't, but you can't say what Shakespeare thought, you can only say what you think Shakespeare might have thought. That's valid interpretation, and if you can back it up with the work of other critics then you're heading towards a supported academic position. If you claim to know what Shakespeare thought then everybody knows you are bullshitting because nobody does.
It's a bit like preceding every sentence with "I think we should go to the park", "I think Gladiator is the best movie", "I think ice cream is the best desert" instead of "We should go to the park", "Gladiator is the best movie", "Ice cream is the best desert."
The "I think" is actually implied in those spoken statements to begin with and is redundant. Essays are persuasive opionions, sometimes using fact to bolster an argument. But most Eng 101s teach one to take the "I think" out of the pieces as it weakens them. Instead, the facts are to be documented in the sources.
Without a source, a paper trail, people should not blindly believe random assertions, a bit like the spurious quotations that pop up in political arguments attributed to a founding father yet without any real source to point to.
This sounds ridiculous to me. Even if the author writes an essay saying "this is what I meant when I wrote this", we're supposed to ignore that and simply focus on the words of the work because this is all that matters in literary criticism?
Although I agree with most of what you wrote, I think there can be enough cases where the author either doesn't admit what he was really thinking (think of Mark Twain's tell all released 100 years after his death) or doesn't even consciously know himself. In those cases, think of a Van Gogh painting, where he was obviously inflicted with some mental illness, although we all have a degree of chaos and contradictions in our minds that can come out in writing.
By and large though, I think analysis often says as much about the reader and their agenda/worldview as it does about the original piece.
This will only cost them money to enforce. Wouldn't they also lose commoncarrier status? I have to ask why ISPs even care to do other people's leg work here and lose some customers in the process.
My ex-mother-in-law rented out her house to complete strangers for six months while she was on the other side of the planet. We all said she was incredibly stupid to do such a thing - not least because in that amount of time you could do ANYTHING, i.e. discover house deeds and sell the house to someone else....Although everything went fine, why on earth would you consider doing such a thing, especially in somewhere that's still housing your clothes, a safe with your personal documents, personal possessions, etc.? You've got to be really stupid or incredibly naive.
Documents should go in a safety deposit box in the bank. It should not be in a flimsy "fire-proof" safe bought at walmart. It should not be in the very same house it pertains to.
I largely agree with you except the premise that it was unavoidable. The thing with machines, unlike humans, is that they can be shipped from one area (country) to the next. Aside shipping, they won't have to think about moving, get compensation for moving, have wives and kids in a school they like.
So while, in the 1970s/1980s, if we fully automated, it may have slowed down the move to China, I'm not sure it would have stopped it. In the past, factories located where the existing resources were close (steel mills in PA/Ohio and the like since it had coal for energy) and as well as the skilled labor lived. If you take the labor portion out of the equation, it makes moving that much easier. But, China having lacked infrastructure at the time, I do see your point as plausible. But it still didn't mean they couldn't move to Canada/Mexico/etcetera.
What I do see is the factory era is largely over. What brings jobs locally will be the "last mile". You still need electricians/painters/contractors to make use of the product pushed out by the factories. While Germany weathered China extremely well (it got taken over only a few years ago by China as world's largest exporter), it still has a magnificient apprenticeship system.
Apprenticeships are usually these last mile jobs. While America is all over the college system, it doesn't recognize that most people simply aren't cut out for academic/engineering jobs nor is that even desirable to pigeonhole them into it.
One thing I should note, I would say because of apprenticeships, you have a lot more skill in skilled labor in Germany. Another plus. Plus, they don't get into their 20s impoverished through "education".
Until humanoid robots that can do housework/contracting come onto the scene, it's one area here we Americans should really consider. Hands on education aka apprenticeships, that the employer provides (there are still certification processes) vs. theoretical training in colleges for 2/3 of the populace.
IMO, the American/western economy is employing more people than ever, even if it is in other countries.
Capitalism isn't dead and won't be at least until humanoid robots that are intelligent enough to do house chores and construction are viable.
Just because the jobs available aren't the highest paying does not mean they don't exist. After all, one of the basic tenets of economics is unlimited wants with limited resources.
To me, the problem has never been capitalism, which has lifted more people out of poverty this last generation than any other, but of corporatism and specifically our government not maintaining a clear dividing line.
Slashdot Mirror
But did Xbox ever turn a profit for MS yet?
Just breaking even for HP isn't good enough, when you figure warranty servicing and R&D going forward.
Just having market share in something doesn't mean much if it cannot be leveraged into profit.
Yes, but you're reasons seem more consumer oriented ("reduction in quality and an increase in prices"). One thing Steve Jobs set out in Apple when he took it over is to only make things that turn a profit (that's why he cut a ton of lines).
The Japanese had a mentality of a "market share uber alles", and that was fine for taking over the American steel industry when they didn't care about the low margin rebar market or the subcompact cars in the 60s/70s. And it worked there as they worked themselves up the margin ladder.
Of course, it doesn't work so great when they go against other Japanese companies in their home market.
So, is there a roadmap that makes financial sense for HP, especially as their building a me too! product or should they invest their resources elsewhere?
There's one way to bring competition back: allow polygamy.
Let the best, brightest, fittest mate with as many as possible and have their spouses/kids be under the same legal protection monogamous marriages are right now.
With most mammals, it's what nature does anyway.
**** fuck*** shit, I wish I could bitch**** you with a -6, pretentious bullshit.
Back in the 1980s and 90s, I bought the latest greatest gear, not to impress other people, but as a geek I JUST LOVED playing with it. That's what geeks and nerds do. That's why they are geeks! To play and learn to manipulate this stuff.
I don't know when, maybe when Apple or some other company showed that computer electronics didn't have to be housed in boxy beige metal boxes, but some morons got it in their head that unless you got your electronics from the cheapest source possible, you didn't qualify as a geek or some bullshit. (It has nothing to do with what you own, but what you do with it.) But, of course, the cockwagging about owning the "right" electronics in one form or another is just another form of the hipster mentality, which should be completely eradicated from the geek world. Geeks were never about the cheapest or caring what other people thought, electronics from the beginning were expensive.
I can't even go into the Apple/Android stories because of these ePenis measuring contests anymore from all sides.
Please, STOP, JUST STOP!!! No one buys a kindle to look cool. No one. That's like buying coveralls to look stylish. They buy it to play with and it has use to them. You're not special and alone in this. Stop this pretentious, hipster "I didn't buy into it because it was cool" garbage. Just stop.
One thing I despise on regular windows laptops is all the crap they add on. Apple does this aspect correctly (and for the price one pays, it should).
And no, I don't want BB touching my laptop. The recovery disk is nice (but should be there from the manufacturer anyway, cheap bastards), but I wonder what other bloatware they installed?
The average buyer will probably see this as the same as the car prep done when buying a new car... but I want no part of it. In that case, it should work out just fine, geeks generally don't buy at BB unless they need a part fast.
Tell that to Warren Buffett.
Maybe it's not the devices themselves, but your brain coping with information overload.
And I find myself skimming to get to the freaking point. Many writers are ****ing verbose.
With that, I'll deposit this here:
http://www.cla.wayne.edu/polisci/kdk/general/sources/zinsser.htm
My GPS takes longer, side roads rather than the shorter/faster routes without me even asking for it. In this one area, it even gets off the main road and backs up into a side road and takes 3 extra turns, just to get where the main road would have taken me in 1/3 of the time and straight ahead. Another "helpful" routing was that rather go 1 more exit on the highway and be at that destination, it cuts it short and takes me through town's main street with a light every 50 feet. A five minute trip turned into a 45 minute one.
Of course, it's a crappy 5 y/o Garmin rather than Google Maps.
thing around us is mapped?"
How is this a GPS problem? Maps existed before GPS...
Also, isn't it like asking "How can I discover new restaurants (or products) when everything is already reviewed?"
If you want to pioneer, go to the bottom of the ocean or into space. You know, the edges of human knowledge. Don't stay safely within the confines of society and then complain that your "exploration" is already known.
While that didn't help, our 2 biggest headaches are Medicare (Bush didn't help with Medicare Part D) and Social Security. That trust fund has been raided to use in the general fund since the Johnson Administration. The military in general comes after and is out 3rd biggest problem.
The two wars and occupations were stupid, but that and the Bush Tax Cuts, are not the main cause of this. This problem was built into the system decades ago by both parties.
On top of that, I'm concerned that delegating responsibility solely to the inciters lets the people who did the actual violent acts off the hook.
People have to know that lots of others spout shit, but they should be responsible for their own acts and not just the next scapegoat.
Dude, the DS web browser is pathetic. Maybe because the whole system has 4MB ram... still, it's not usable for the greater population in any meaningful sense.
One with an iota of reading comprehension. Point to where I said *I* was going to trade one in.
I still wouldn't put Android on it. I simply don't like Android. I would just jailbreak it. But I'm not the typical consumer.
How can that be said when days ago we just had a downgrade in credit and the market is bleeding?
The stimulus may have cost $278k per job, some of that analysis though is handwaving and ignoring the value of the few infrastructure investments themselves (hardly hoover dam projects though, bunch of little meaningless crap), but there is some ugly truth to that. Maybe, as a nation, we should be asking "Did we gain productivity" or something.
We always use the wrong metrics to measure the health of the economy. In the mid-00s, it was all about rising home values. That was kinda ignoring the downside to that besides the craziness of the values themselves. Namely expensive homes = expensive housing. This hearken back to the 1920-30s where Government started tax benefits to make everyone a home owner and setting off the 1950s suburban craze... which is a f-ing inefficient model for an entire nation's use of various resources but I digress....
Or maybe forgo stimulus packages altogether. I think Japan had at least a dozen since it's slump in the early 90s, and all it got for its efforts is a massive debt. IIRC, Bush did 5 of them, 3 of them in his last two years, and it didn't do squat as far as warding off the economic slump near the end of his term.
Corrections have to happen. I would almost rather give welfare to out of work people for a year or two to tide them over until the bottom passes rather than make stimulus packages where some of that money goes to "jobs"/"wages" and the rest to Corps building worthless shit. From what I have seen, wages of the middle classe and lower have stagnated since the 1970s, and CEOs/VPs and the like certainly don't need the taxpayer's help.
I met a lot of ignorant Tea Partiers, but they seem to be at the bottom level. But many of the upper level people have a grasp.
The thing is, on the Democratic side, I have seen much of the same thing. The average voter is pretty ignorant, period.
Now, I know it went from a Ron Paul/Libertarian founded group to a Fox News/GOP overtaken "organization", but honestly, I find the heaps of scorn it recieves a bit ironic, as most Democrats (and the mainstream Democratic, and Republican Party) are just as bad.
Voodoo economics all around.
It can. The money has to come from somewhere. It all depends on how much. And it also depends what it is spent on. This all harkens back to the broken window fallacy:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parable_of_the_broken_window
But it's not a hard and fast rule. But 3-second soundbites rule the day. But not all jobs are good either. Toll booths collectors are jobs. But they add nothing to anybody's standard of living (decrease it actually, except their own, and those above in the bureacratic structure they support) nor make anything of benefit to anybody.
So wait, just because you disagree with Apple means that their product should be stolen?
Do you seriously think a Chinese firm would have pushed out anything like an iPhone before Apple produced theirs?
There can be a lot of progress in the world through open standards and the like which Apple should be pressured into doing by their customers, but theft of a design is not it. You can produce a spectacular smart or cellphone without ripping off a company. The way this is done rips off consumers and Apple and is just sheer laziness mixed with greed. This product will not work well if you're expecting an actual iPhone.
(I have no problem with the name though, what's the first thing you usually say to someone on the phone?)
Especially a 3GS, which many people will undoubtedly trade in this year for a 5. Perfectly fast and good, if it weren't locked down....
Worse than gillette trying to kill off double edged razors (the open standard of the shaving world) in exchange for closed down proprietary razors since the 60s.
It seems a case of 5,000 sheets can be readily had for around $45 or less. That means at leas 222 sheets for $2.
As this can only be reused 260 times, that gives a rather small windows of savings. Seeing all the common things that can reduce/eliminate the suitability of paper for a second use (staples, holes for binders, crinkling, tears, etc) as well as sheer laziness and apathy of people...
Office managers probably are better striving for a more paperless office to save $$$ and environment.
It's a bit like preceding every sentence with "I think we should go to the park", "I think Gladiator is the best movie", "I think ice cream is the best desert" instead of "We should go to the park", "Gladiator is the best movie", "Ice cream is the best desert."
The "I think" is actually implied in those spoken statements to begin with and is redundant. Essays are persuasive opionions, sometimes using fact to bolster an argument. But most Eng 101s teach one to take the "I think" out of the pieces as it weakens them. Instead, the facts are to be documented in the sources.
Without a source, a paper trail, people should not blindly believe random assertions, a bit like the spurious quotations that pop up in political arguments attributed to a founding father yet without any real source to point to.
Although I agree with most of what you wrote, I think there can be enough cases where the author either doesn't admit what he was really thinking (think of Mark Twain's tell all released 100 years after his death) or doesn't even consciously know himself. In those cases, think of a Van Gogh painting, where he was obviously inflicted with some mental illness, although we all have a degree of chaos and contradictions in our minds that can come out in writing.
By and large though, I think analysis often says as much about the reader and their agenda/worldview as it does about the original piece.
This will only cost them money to enforce. Wouldn't they also lose commoncarrier status? I have to ask why ISPs even care to do other people's leg work here and lose some customers in the process.
Documents should go in a safety deposit box in the bank. It should not be in a flimsy "fire-proof" safe bought at walmart. It should not be in the very same house it pertains to.
I largely agree with you except the premise that it was unavoidable. The thing with machines, unlike humans, is that they can be shipped from one area (country) to the next. Aside shipping, they won't have to think about moving, get compensation for moving, have wives and kids in a school they like.
So while, in the 1970s/1980s, if we fully automated, it may have slowed down the move to China, I'm not sure it would have stopped it. In the past, factories located where the existing resources were close (steel mills in PA/Ohio and the like since it had coal for energy) and as well as the skilled labor lived. If you take the labor portion out of the equation, it makes moving that much easier. But, China having lacked infrastructure at the time, I do see your point as plausible. But it still didn't mean they couldn't move to Canada/Mexico/etcetera.
What I do see is the factory era is largely over. What brings jobs locally will be the "last mile". You still need electricians/painters/contractors to make use of the product pushed out by the factories. While Germany weathered China extremely well (it got taken over only a few years ago by China as world's largest exporter), it still has a magnificient apprenticeship system.
Apprenticeships are usually these last mile jobs. While America is all over the college system, it doesn't recognize that most people simply aren't cut out for academic/engineering jobs nor is that even desirable to pigeonhole them into it.
http://www.economist.com/node/18929361?story_id=18929361&fsrc=rss
One thing I should note, I would say because of apprenticeships, you have a lot more skill in skilled labor in Germany. Another plus. Plus, they don't get into their 20s impoverished through "education".
Until humanoid robots that can do housework/contracting come onto the scene, it's one area here we Americans should really consider. Hands on education aka apprenticeships, that the employer provides (there are still certification processes) vs. theoretical training in colleges for 2/3 of the populace.
IMO, the American/western economy is employing more people than ever, even if it is in other countries.
Capitalism isn't dead and won't be at least until humanoid robots that are intelligent enough to do house chores and construction are viable.
Just because the jobs available aren't the highest paying does not mean they don't exist. After all, one of the basic tenets of economics is unlimited wants with limited resources.
To me, the problem has never been capitalism, which has lifted more people out of poverty this last generation than any other, but of corporatism and specifically our government not maintaining a clear dividing line.