I have sampled more than enough smartphones over the years, SonyEricsson 900i, 990i, Nokia Communicator, Nokia 6110, Blackberry, Palm Tungsten, Treo, iPhone etc. The reason not many people was interested in them was that cellular internet connections sucked, bigtime. Both internet speeds and battery consumption made a smartphone worthless unless you had an extension cord and an ethernet jack. The phones was on top of this crap all by themselves, both in software and hardware.
It would have been enough if i had tried one phone and then waited for something working to come out but what can i say, im pretty stubborn. The first phone im really satisfied with is my Nexus One. All the others had major flaws like not being able to multitask, being totally locked down, having sucky camera, lack flash, crappy screen resolution, the list goes on.
I fully understand all the people who just looked at smartphones a couple of years ago and said to themselves "that sucks donkeys" and decided to wait a year or two. If i had been a bit smarter i could have saved myself oodles of money and sanity.
I feel most sorry for the mislead idiots doing the dirty work for Scientology higher ups. They dont know they are following a Scifi novel, a pretty lame one sadly. Written by an utter bastard that once said, "If you want to make a little money, write a book. If you want to make a lot of money, create a religion."
I think this is a really stupid move. If Nokia, Samsung, Palm, RIM and Google pool their patents and fight back Apple will be nothing but smoking rubble when this is over with. Even Microsoft has interest in this since their Win Mob 7 phone tries to be like iPhone so much it gotta hurt.
The patents in themselves looks laughable and obvious so Apple could very well wind up loosing them in the process while being left defending themselves with the avalanche of patents the others has.
The problem with the current patent system is that Google needs a war chest full of patents to survive. When Microsoft goes on a rampage like they do now, demanding anyone using linux to pay Microsoft its essential.
Having a patents like this makes Google less of a target.
The system is utterly broken but i dont blame the companies playing the game, i blame the stupid politicians who allow this.
Its one thing to blatantly abuse a monopoly like Microsoft has been documented doing time and time again. Having a monopoly because you have a good popular product have never been illegal.
That said im not so sure Google even fit into the monopoly description. A monopoly have barriers making it hard to switch to a competitor.
Only reason i have not using Bing is that i wouldnt trust Microsoft with filtering my information. When dead people write letters i stay the hell away.
Define work? I tried it and i havent been successful with any site where i did need Silverlight support. It always seem to lag a version behind whats on the net.
Android supports various hardware directly in the SDK. Develop for 1.5 and it works in the later phones. The SDK also supports various screen sizes, hardware checks and many many other features that makes developing for various hardware a non issue.
The only way to avoid different hardware is to limit the hardware accepted. That would be insane considering the rapid development today in mobile hardware be it phones, netbooks, smartbooks, e-readers or pads. Googles solution is much nicer and works very well except for a few applications where they need hardware your gadget dont have. Like, not being able to run "Compass elite app" without having the friggin compass.
It seems like the problem lies in the same crappy logic handling memory in Windows 7 as in Vista. Superfetch can work but the logic has to be extremely good and Microsoft arent capable of such feats.
People notice their computer slow down to a crawl, look at memstats and see most memory used. See that little disk light illuminating bright as a star and condlude something is probably wrong in memory world. The problem isnt that most memory is used, its that its in use by a schizofrenic alzheimer despotic whirlhead.
Seriously, i can live with cheaters ruining my game. First of all, i alway look at cheaters with pity and not hate. I feel sad for the sorry bastards as i blast them to pieces without any cheats whatsoever. Cheating in a game is like faking your own orgasm as you pound your meat because nobody wants you.
I think its the wrong approach trying to stop people from cheating. Probably better to put effort and energy into finding cheaters like poker sites do by behavioral and statistical analysis.
Put a warning up on people who look like cheaters and let people know their statistics are inhuman. That way people can just/ignore cheaters and their appearance in games wont be such a bother. If i know an extensive review thinks someone is a cheater its much easier to accept that idiot sniping me with a gun from mid-air three miles away.
Why on earth do they do everything in their might to discourage people from buying games and instead pirating them? Im starting to believe its intentional and that for some reason the media industry think they will make more money out of lawsuits than from selling games the normal way.
Google do need some competition on the technical merits of search, not from a convicted monopolist with years of abuse in their belt. Now that Yahoo is gone competition have disappeared, not increased.
The US did a major mistake when they denied Google helping Yahoo out. Google wants healthy competition, not the kind Microsoft brings.
Well, one possible explanation would be that this rootkit snuck into one or more of Microsofts update servers. Wouldnt surprise me at all actually. Microsoft would never ever acknowledge something like that or tell the outside world.
Its sad to see yahoo going down like this. It really had some excellent services and i will miss many of them. With the Google agreement they would have had a chance of surviving and even grow but now i give them at most a couple of years. Icahn must have some reverse Midas touch where things he gets involved in turns to shit.
Chronicles of Riddick is one of the better Sci-fi movies i know. I had to search for it a long time before i got to see it in cinema and then even longer before i could get my hands on the DVD. Never once did i see any marketing at all.
I thought this was one of those rare occasions where the sequel is much better than the original. I was pretty impressed by how they managed to squeeze a whole world out of the minimal plot in Pitch Black.
There is no backlash, thats why we only read about it from a selected few mouthpieces. Someone is trying to create one but it looks as if its in vain. Imagine being Microsoft, the company with the worst possible pr rating of all. Now imagine trying to compete with Google on perception? The only way for Microsoft to look good is to bring Google down into the mud.
"the increasing backlash Google is seeing from the general public"
I dont for a second believe that the so called backlash stems from the same general public that happily posts medical, sensitive, embarrassing and sexy stuff on Facebook/Myspace. The "backlash" is a PR-stunt.
Im not a Google fanboy, im a computer historian. Thats why i take such issue when people try to compare a pretty normal and so far benign company like Google with a multiple times convicted monopolist like Microsoft.
Google history has nothing like the history of Microsoft. Microsoft has been breaking laws all the way back from when they stole computer time from The Computer Center Corporation (and caused important systems to crash) to write their "borrowed" basic interpreter. Bill Gates didnt start with a nice little upstart company with blue eyes and good intentions, its been bad to the bone from day one. Compared to Microsoft, Google must have been founded by nuns
While Microsofts history is riddled with bad behaviour, total disregard to laws, abusing partnership, killing competition, abusing monopolies, bribing and pretty much anything you can think of Google has none of those traits, at all.
While Google goes after buys services that people find useful and are popular, Microsoft goes after any service that could in time pose a threat to their only income and kills it. Google makes popular services more popular and useful, Microsoft kills the ones posing a threat. One kills any innovation, one takes it further. Ill take Googles approach thank you.
Why do i think it is a fad? Because once the novelty wears off its just a glorified diary. Some people will stay on but most will do better things with their time. Just like Second Life its fun while its new but really not something people spend years doing.
Most people on facebook havent given a seconds thought about just why it can be bad to put your photos, innermost thoughts, friends and secrets online. They will discover in time how hard it is to erase something already online. Im just waiting for the newspapers plastering every edition with horror stories about Facebook.
Facebook and Myspace isnt exactly something new outside the US. Several alternatives have come and gone throughout the years. Its a fad that will subside in time just like blogging and the like. Most of the services like facebook has tried to transform into their own universe/internet and imploded on itself.
You already have tons of third choices. What matters is, can any one of those third choices keep Microsoft from assimilating the internet and walling it in to be a new MSN Network?
Slashdot Mirror
I have sampled more than enough smartphones over the years, SonyEricsson 900i, 990i, Nokia Communicator, Nokia 6110, Blackberry, Palm Tungsten, Treo, iPhone etc. The reason not many people was interested in them was that cellular internet connections sucked, bigtime. Both internet speeds and battery consumption made a smartphone worthless unless you had an extension cord and an ethernet jack. The phones was on top of this crap all by themselves, both in software and hardware.
It would have been enough if i had tried one phone and then waited for something working to come out but what can i say, im pretty stubborn. The first phone im really satisfied with is my Nexus One. All the others had major flaws like not being able to multitask, being totally locked down, having sucky camera, lack flash, crappy screen resolution, the list goes on.
I fully understand all the people who just looked at smartphones a couple of years ago and said to themselves "that sucks donkeys" and decided to wait a year or two. If i had been a bit smarter i could have saved myself oodles of money and sanity.
Thanks!
I feel most sorry for the mislead idiots doing the dirty work for Scientology higher ups. They dont know they are following a Scifi novel, a pretty lame one sadly. Written by an utter bastard that once said, "If you want to make a little money, write a book. If you want to make a lot of money, create a religion."
He did...
I think this is a really stupid move. If Nokia, Samsung, Palm, RIM and Google pool their patents and fight back Apple will be nothing but smoking rubble when this is over with. Even Microsoft has interest in this since their Win Mob 7 phone tries to be like iPhone so much it gotta hurt.
The patents in themselves looks laughable and obvious so Apple could very well wind up loosing them in the process while being left defending themselves with the avalanche of patents the others has.
The problem with the current patent system is that Google needs a war chest full of patents to survive. When Microsoft goes on a rampage like they do now, demanding anyone using linux to pay Microsoft its essential.
Having a patents like this makes Google less of a target.
The system is utterly broken but i dont blame the companies playing the game, i blame the stupid politicians who allow this.
Its one thing to blatantly abuse a monopoly like Microsoft has been documented doing time and time again. Having a monopoly because you have a good popular product have never been illegal.
That said im not so sure Google even fit into the monopoly description. A monopoly have barriers making it hard to switch to a competitor.
Only reason i have not using Bing is that i wouldnt trust Microsoft with filtering my information. When dead people write letters i stay the hell away.
Define work? I tried it and i havent been successful with any site where i did need Silverlight support. It always seem to lag a version behind whats on the net.
Android supports various hardware directly in the SDK. Develop for 1.5 and it works in the later phones. The SDK also supports various screen sizes, hardware checks and many many other features that makes developing for various hardware a non issue.
The only way to avoid different hardware is to limit the hardware accepted. That would be insane considering the rapid development today in mobile hardware be it phones, netbooks, smartbooks, e-readers or pads. Googles solution is much nicer and works very well except for a few applications where they need hardware your gadget dont have. Like, not being able to run "Compass elite app" without having the friggin compass.
Do not critizise Vista 7 *cough* Windows 7 or Microsoft will eat your soul, get you fired and send lawyers at you.
It seems like the problem lies in the same crappy logic handling memory in Windows 7 as in Vista. Superfetch can work but the logic has to be extremely good and Microsoft arent capable of such feats.
People notice their computer slow down to a crawl, look at memstats and see most memory used. See that little disk light illuminating bright as a star and condlude something is probably wrong in memory world. The problem isnt that most memory is used, its that its in use by a schizofrenic alzheimer despotic whirlhead.
Seriously, i can live with cheaters ruining my game. First of all, i alway look at cheaters with pity and not hate. I feel sad for the sorry bastards as i blast them to pieces without any cheats whatsoever. Cheating in a game is like faking your own orgasm as you pound your meat because nobody wants you.
I think its the wrong approach trying to stop people from cheating. Probably better to put effort and energy into finding cheaters like poker sites do by behavioral and statistical analysis.
Put a warning up on people who look like cheaters and let people know their statistics are inhuman. That way people can just /ignore cheaters and their appearance in games wont be such a bother. If i know an extensive review thinks someone is a cheater its much easier to accept that idiot sniping me with a gun from mid-air three miles away.
Why on earth do they do everything in their might to discourage people from buying games and instead pirating them? Im starting to believe its intentional and that for some reason the media industry think they will make more money out of lawsuits than from selling games the normal way.
Google do need some competition on the technical merits of search, not from a convicted monopolist with years of abuse in their belt. Now that Yahoo is gone competition have disappeared, not increased.
The US did a major mistake when they denied Google helping Yahoo out. Google wants healthy competition, not the kind Microsoft brings.
Well, one possible explanation would be that this rootkit snuck into one or more of Microsofts update servers. Wouldnt surprise me at all actually. Microsoft would never ever acknowledge something like that or tell the outside world.
Its sad to see yahoo going down like this. It really had some excellent services and i will miss many of them. With the Google agreement they would have had a chance of surviving and even grow but now i give them at most a couple of years. Icahn must have some reverse Midas touch where things he gets involved in turns to shit.
Chronicles of Riddick is one of the better Sci-fi movies i know. I had to search for it a long time before i got to see it in cinema and then even longer before i could get my hands on the DVD. Never once did i see any marketing at all.
I thought this was one of those rare occasions where the sequel is much better than the original. I was pretty impressed by how they managed to squeeze a whole world out of the minimal plot in Pitch Black.
There is no backlash, thats why we only read about it from a selected few mouthpieces. Someone is trying to create one but it looks as if its in vain. Imagine being Microsoft, the company with the worst possible pr rating of all. Now imagine trying to compete with Google on perception? The only way for Microsoft to look good is to bring Google down into the mud.
"the increasing backlash Google is seeing from the general public"
I dont for a second believe that the so called backlash stems from the same general public that happily posts medical, sensitive, embarrassing and sexy stuff on Facebook/Myspace. The "backlash" is a PR-stunt.
Let the users sort the rest out. Be very upfront with why things break in IE.
So i guess you dont run any Windows machines at all then?
Im not a Google fanboy, im a computer historian. Thats why i take such issue when people try to compare a pretty normal and so far benign company like Google with a multiple times convicted monopolist like Microsoft.
Bullshit, pure fucking bullshit.
Google history has nothing like the history of Microsoft. Microsoft has been breaking laws all the way back from when they stole computer time from The Computer Center Corporation (and caused important systems to crash) to write their "borrowed" basic interpreter. Bill Gates didnt start with a nice little upstart company with blue eyes and good intentions, its been bad to the bone from day one. Compared to Microsoft, Google must have been founded by nuns
While Microsofts history is riddled with bad behaviour, total disregard to laws, abusing partnership, killing competition, abusing monopolies, bribing and pretty much anything you can think of Google has none of those traits, at all.
While Google goes after buys services that people find useful and are popular, Microsoft goes after any service that could in time pose a threat to their only income and kills it. Google makes popular services more popular and useful, Microsoft kills the ones posing a threat. One kills any innovation, one takes it further. Ill take Googles approach thank you.
Why do i think it is a fad? Because once the novelty wears off its just a glorified diary. Some people will stay on but most will do better things with their time. Just like Second Life its fun while its new but really not something people spend years doing.
Most people on facebook havent given a seconds thought about just why it can be bad to put your photos, innermost thoughts, friends and secrets online. They will discover in time how hard it is to erase something already online. Im just waiting for the newspapers plastering every edition with horror stories about Facebook.
Facebook and Myspace isnt exactly something new outside the US. Several alternatives have come and gone throughout the years. Its a fad that will subside in time just like blogging and the like. Most of the services like facebook has tried to transform into their own universe/internet and imploded on itself.
You already have tons of third choices. What matters is, can any one of those third choices keep Microsoft from assimilating the internet and walling it in to be a new MSN Network?