No, Microsoft dictates all of the hardware. They basically hand them a reference design and have them build around it. This is why every WP7 device uses a single core Qualcomm SoC.
The Lumina 800 is not merely "the N9 running WP7" but an entirely different device. Don't forget that Microsoft still dictates the internals of these devices, making them all identical internally with small external gimmicks and case the only differentiation vendors are allowed.
This is why they have an age limit on the vaccine. The goal is to get boys and girls vaccinated before they become sexually active and are exposed to the virus. The assumption being that after a certain age, the likelihood of exposure approaches one and by then it's too late (combined with the difficulty in testing for the virus.)
Well, if it concerns you the module can be removed from the system completely. I would also expect the driver to not be built as part of RHEL or SLES distributions, seeing as how it probably has little to no use on a server platform.
Let him trim the federal government - you can always build it back up in a few years.
Burning down things like the USGS and NOAA only to try and rebuild them four years later would be a ridiculous waste of money, let alone the drop in efficiency and knowledge.
Ron's suggestions would be of limited usefulness, since they omit obviously malignant sectors (ATF, DEA) and refuse to look at the enormous elephants in the room in need of reform and cuts (DoD, Social Security.) Get back to me when he gets on about those, and maybe we'll talk if he hasn't come up with some other asinine suggestion.
The problem seems limited to the Android version, which misbehaves on my Nook Color. However, on my N900 the only limiting factor seems to be the lack of RAM and if not for that it would probably replace the built in browser completely.
If Microsoft had any faith in their ability to make great products, they would have been one of the first to jump on Android and made a must-have Android phone that kicks the iPhones arse.
Microsoft never could have done this, as they have set themselves up as an insular platform vendor that not use outside technologies unless forced to. They absolutely would not release something with their name on it that ran something developed by Google, much less Linux.
They invented their own and are trying to win by making deals with other companies to spread fear and doubt about patents and lawsuits.
Rather, they have placed a new UI on the Windows CE core and added all the proprietary goop you asked for. MS is doing exactly what you suggested, but doubling down on the FUD to try and drive other vendors off the platform of a competitor and on to theirs.
There are plenty of.Net binaries that run cross platform... Mainly those designed with portability in mind.
And to achieve this cross platform capability, how much did they have to give up in the Microsoft.NET libraries? Mono will forever be chasing.NET.
And in Java dependencies on on native libraries
Which, obviously, defeats the purpose of Java.
I don't trust MS to keep supporting their phone platform infrastructure yet.
Something tells me they're going to do with this that they did with the xbox: burn money until it takes hold. MS absolutely doesn't want to be pushed completely out of the smartphone space, which is a primary driver for them attacking Android.
Except for being effectively exclusive to Microsoft platforms. Mono is barely compatible with.NET, definitely not enough that you can take a binary targeting.NET 3.5 and run it on Linux (which is exactly how Microsoft wanted Java.)
It is at times an urban myth that FOSS contributors are a bunch of individual volunteer.
You are far too nice. That is actually deliberately spread FUD and lies used by people who hate FOSS (like Microsoft) to basically carry out ad-hominem attacks on the developers, users, and software itself.
Active cables probably won't ever be as cheap as passive cables. While I expect Monoprice to be cheaper, I don't foresee a Thunderbolt cable ever being as cheap, nor would I expect it, considering what's being routed over it.
Everyone who knows about them should discourage purchase of those shitty Chinese tablets anyway. Virtually all of them violate the GPL and don't distribute the kernel sources.
Just because it's possible doesn't mean the zealots actually care about even trying. It's so much cooler to play the blame game, rather than focus on what's actually important: making things work!
I like how you come out of the gate with an insult, and expect people to fix things for you.
PROTIP: Kernel devs would rather play it safe than risk causing data loss.
That someone else is often Redhat or Ubuntu, which means the fixes don't travel back upstream.
No, it's unlikely they will either. I doubt they want to start randomly crashing people's machines.
Even though it's the BIOS makers' fault, as an end user, I don't care.
You should. You're aware of what's going on, so you should blame the people responsible.
His definition of "Free" and mine differ, obviously, so my making such a statement would be to deliberately confuse the issue.
I consider an operating system whose users are granted certain rights to be free, regardless of whether someone can make their own proprietary version. Should the latter happen, it's the proprietary fork that's non-free, not the original version.
And I consider software that can end up in users hands in a closed state with restrictions piled on top non-Free. Again, it depends on what you consider to be "free" and, as we can see, that is pretty diverse.
Slashdot Mirror
A "proper" OS or simply a more functionally limited one? Don't forget that your OS has to share RAM with any applications you load.
No, Microsoft dictates all of the hardware. They basically hand them a reference design and have them build around it. This is why every WP7 device uses a single core Qualcomm SoC.
The Lumina 800 is not merely "the N9 running WP7" but an entirely different device. Don't forget that Microsoft still dictates the internals of these devices, making them all identical internally with small external gimmicks and case the only differentiation vendors are allowed.
I'd still rather buy an N9.
This is why they have an age limit on the vaccine. The goal is to get boys and girls vaccinated before they become sexually active and are exposed to the virus. The assumption being that after a certain age, the likelihood of exposure approaches one and by then it's too late (combined with the difficulty in testing for the virus.)
Well, if it concerns you the module can be removed from the system completely. I would also expect the driver to not be built as part of RHEL or SLES distributions, seeing as how it probably has little to no use on a server platform.
Last I read it was being phased out in favor of other preservatives that lacked mercury.
Burning down things like the USGS and NOAA only to try and rebuild them four years later would be a ridiculous waste of money, let alone the drop in efficiency and knowledge.
Ron's suggestions would be of limited usefulness, since they omit obviously malignant sectors (ATF, DEA) and refuse to look at the enormous elephants in the room in need of reform and cuts (DoD, Social Security.) Get back to me when he gets on about those, and maybe we'll talk if he hasn't come up with some other asinine suggestion.
No it isn't. You could trim the military's budget and reform Social Security instead, saving enough to pay for these services several times over.
The problem seems limited to the Android version, which misbehaves on my Nook Color. However, on my N900 the only limiting factor seems to be the lack of RAM and if not for that it would probably replace the built in browser completely.
Sad, I think you might have touched an Android fanboy's nerve :/
A technological tragedy if there ever was one.
No, you tool. I was countering the point about .NET and Java. Things locked to one vendors platforms are hardly "superior."
Microsoft never could have done this, as they have set themselves up as an insular platform vendor that not use outside technologies unless forced to. They absolutely would not release something with their name on it that ran something developed by Google, much less Linux.
Rather, they have placed a new UI on the Windows CE core and added all the proprietary goop you asked for. MS is doing exactly what you suggested, but doubling down on the FUD to try and drive other vendors off the platform of a competitor and on to theirs.
And to achieve this cross platform capability, how much did they have to give up in the Microsoft .NET libraries? Mono will forever be chasing .NET.
Which, obviously, defeats the purpose of Java.
Something tells me they're going to do with this that they did with the xbox: burn money until it takes hold. MS absolutely doesn't want to be pushed completely out of the smartphone space, which is a primary driver for them attacking Android.
Explain how it is different from Apple's walled garden?
Oh I know about Chevron WP7, it just legitimizes the jail.
Except for being effectively exclusive to Microsoft platforms. Mono is barely compatible with .NET, definitely not enough that you can take a binary targeting .NET 3.5 and run it on Linux (which is exactly how Microsoft wanted Java.)
I wasn't aware there was an "official" anything with these protests.
Someone set up a website related to the event and posted something on it. That does not make it the "official" website.
No, no we don't. You can see it in the broken partisanship and the pro-corporate laws that get pushed constantly.
Of course, I have no problem with using government against corporations. They aren't people, but artificial, amoral constructs, after all.
You are far too nice. That is actually deliberately spread FUD and lies used by people who hate FOSS (like Microsoft) to basically carry out ad-hominem attacks on the developers, users, and software itself.
Mussolini would be proud.
Active cables probably won't ever be as cheap as passive cables. While I expect Monoprice to be cheaper, I don't foresee a Thunderbolt cable ever being as cheap, nor would I expect it, considering what's being routed over it.
Jailbreaking just forces you to violate the EULA, and you simply encourage Apple's behavior.
Yeah, and their arguments are bullshit from end to end. They should just keep it closed and drop this facade of Android being open.
Everyone who knows about them should discourage purchase of those shitty Chinese tablets anyway. Virtually all of them violate the GPL and don't distribute the kernel sources.
I like how you come out of the gate with an insult, and expect people to fix things for you.
PROTIP: Kernel devs would rather play it safe than risk causing data loss.
No, it's unlikely they will either. I doubt they want to start randomly crashing people's machines.
You should. You're aware of what's going on, so you should blame the people responsible.
His definition of "Free" and mine differ, obviously, so my making such a statement would be to deliberately confuse the issue.
And I consider software that can end up in users hands in a closed state with restrictions piled on top non-Free. Again, it depends on what you consider to be "free" and, as we can see, that is pretty diverse.