It does when "Buy The iDevice++" is their business model. There's a lot of 3 to 5 year old iDevices out there that are still perfectly suited to what their owners actually need, but Apple has made a metric fuckton of money by convincing people to upgrade every year even if they don't need any of the new features. At it's heart, Apple has become a marketing company that happens to also sell what they market. Without that marketing power, iDevices would have all the popularity of the Zune.
I think that you are completely and utterly wrong on how Apple views their customers. You are listening to too many rabid fanbois and reading too many awesome tech journals.
Looking at phones in particular: before the iPhone came along software upgrades, though possible, were generally a pain. This was further complicated by carrier software versions preventing manufacturer updates being applied. In general you bought a phone and the software was fixed. Apple continue to support older versions of phones with new software releases with as much feature parity as won't impact the experience. Their aim is to keep their customers happy so that when they come to replace their device they will buy it from them. The philosophy is to build the best that they can and build customer loyalty.
I've had two iPhones, a 3G and a 4S. The 4S is still good enough for pretty much whatever I want to do so I can't see me upgrading this year unless the next phone does something magical. When I come to replace I'll buy another iPhone. Why? Because it does the job I want it to.
Its a sign of things to come for the economy though. If electric cars take over the market, the demand for car maintenance will collapse. Thats a big chunk of the job market in some areas and there will have to be some adjustment.
Why? The only change is the drive train, which will need maintenance. The problems will change but that's all.
Another piece of clarification around playing games at a friend’s house – should you choose to play your game at your friend’s house, there is no fee to play that game while you are signed in to your profile.
And there lies the rub. MS probably thinks they are going to do battle with the PS4. I bet their charts don't really show how shattered the whole market is. Does MS realize that one of their competitors is Netflix? The gaming market is part of a larger market called entertainment. People have an entertainment budget and will spend it on different things of which console gaming is just one possible thing. This is something the movie and TV industries have learned the hard way when console gaming vastly reduced people's appetite/budget for network television and movies.
Erm... I reckon Microsoft have a pretty good idea about Netflix usage, probably from the statistics they gather from people's use of their XBox 360. They'll have information about other TV related services. That's the whole point of the TV aspects of this device and the name the XBox One. Its built to be the one device that you use to access all content on your TV.
With the combination of a gaming system, a way to interact with broadcast TV, and a Windows 8 like OS for other content they should have all options covered. It provide a good deal for the entertainment companies too. If they can provide a way of delivering content to Windows 8, then they'll be able to deliver to the XBox One. Oh, and PCs, and tablets, and phones. Microsoft are well aware of the challenge facing this next console which is why they've gone with the approach they have and haven't stuck with a simple game playing console.
It looks like we are different then. I use the main TV in my living, and the associated sound system, for my current game system. I play a variety of games and play for anything from a quick 30 minute frag to your 4-6 hour sessions. Its just a different input channel to the TV. If I wanted to squirrel myself away I'd probably use a PC/laptop rather than a console.
This convergence of technologies was always going to happen. It has been the aim of Microsoft, and Sony, since their original consoles. They want to be the conduit through which entertainment is delivered.
I don't mind the phone home requirement. My console is always connected at the moment. It gives me updates and alerts me to friends coming online. A lot of the games I play have an online element, this is just going to add to it.
With the plethora of inputs to my TV at present this looks like it would reduce them and make the whole thing more manageable for the rest of my family. If it works as advertised it will fly off the shelves at the right price.
The specs are never as good as the spec writers think they are.
I've been a developer (contractor and employee) for nearly 20 years and have never seen specs that clearly defined everything. In any project of notable size, there are always huge portions of "it's obvious what I want," often with the UI. Spec writers are generally terrible at thinking about "edge case" behavior, focussing on the "normal flow" and trivializing the "alternate flows."
Why do you think the OP always has battles at the end of the project?.
Given the spec is incomplete, and your experience, wouldn't best practice be to analyse the requirements at the start and identify those edge cases and get decisions on them before starting.
Whilst building out large systems I have written functional specification and detailed designs for clients that, in the end, stated absolutely what would be done and how each interface would look and perform. This made implementation simpler, because all of the decisions where made up front, and gave something to test against when completed.
Way back in the early '80s when I got my degree the thing that was placed into our heads was to spend 90% of the time designing, 5% coding, and 5% testing. These days we seem to dive into coding way too early.
My code is not guaranteed indefinitely. Any bugs which appear after the contract is expired can be fixed under another contract if I agree to fix them. I am certainly under no obligation to do that later work at all and especially not for free.
Interesting that you're not prepared to guarantee your work. It would make me wary of contracting you as it places the onus on me to ensure that I've throughly tested your code rather than on you. Is this common practice?
Whilst Apple Inc may be a US company it has subsidiary companies in the other countries/regions that it operates. Apple's earnings place 2/3rds of its income outside the US. Why should that income be subject to US tax when tax has already been paid in the region it was earned?
Put it another way, if you were to spend 8 months working overseas and paid local income tax on that income, would you be happy for the IRS to take its cut as well?
I thought that what they were eliminating was XMPP federation, which is what's used to link all the different XMPP servers
But that's a far cry from eliminating XMPP entirely. I understood that they were continuing to use XMPP, with some extensions, and since those extensions were not supported by others, they were disabling the federation to other systems.
If you are right, then for all practical purposes XMPP != XMPPwithGoogleExtensions.
Just like Java != JavaWithMicrosoftExtensions (a.k.a. J++). Sigh - it seems that Google has finally discovered Embrace/Extend/Extinguish.
I don't know why you're posting as an AC, this seems to be pretty standard procedure for Google these days. They have done some cool things, but so has Microsoft. Google have got a long way on "Do no Evil", so far in fact that people who should know better let it blind them.
Highway 17's biggest problem is that they allow trucks and buses on it.
The car speed limit is 50. Most cars drive 50-65, with the most common speed being about 55, but with 65+ being not uncommon.
The truck speed limit is 35.
So, there's a 30+ MPH difference between the fastest and slowest vehicles. Anything more than about a 15 MPH speed difference translates to a very, very unsafe road.
Interesting comment, and perhaps it related to a GP about US drivers. In the UK trucks have a speed limit of 60 (though most are limited to 56) on the motorways, and the car speed limit is 70, though there is typically traffic moving at 80-85 in one lane at least. This would translate to these roads being very, very unsafe when in fact they are the safest group of roads in our network. Now, we do have good lane discipline on our motorways, undertaking is illegal and the vast majority don't even contemplate it, which may contribute to these speed differentials working. The point I'm trying to make is that its how you drive rather than speed differential that makes your Highway 17 an unsafe road.
First there is a responsibility of the OS maker to be secure from the beginning, MS got the point - Windows is rock solid out of the box these days (assuming you run Windows Update).
Second: the security hoes that cant be fixed without blocking 3rd party apps should be done by the OS Vendor as a built in (or at least freely available provided by the OS maker) feature. MS gave away Security Essentials for a while and now includes it with Win 8, you can of course disable it easily and / or replace it with another third party AV.
If you make an OS that isn't totally secure or locked down, you should provide an AV. There should be no market for Norton/Symantec
The problem is that, even with free AV integrated into the OS, virus management is reactive. So what if Microsoft ships AV in Windows 8, or Google includes AV in Android 4.2. Its only going to catch things once the AV vendor/team have seen a new virus, identified it, and updated the systems to deal with it. So there is a window for viruses to spread.
With a single, well known, AV protection system available on a system the first thing the new virus will is to prevent the AV software detecting it. If you're a novice user you won't even know that your system is compromised. There may be some odd behaviour, but you won't know what to do to fix it.
Getting back to the original topic of AV on Android. There is a lot of fragmentation with Android (many different versions out there with different manufacturer tweaks) with only the top end phones receiving timely updates. This makes things easier for virus writers. They can target those phones that are unlikely to get updates and collect data from there safe in the knowledge that an update to detect the virus is unlikely to come along.
People have shown that they aren't capable of identifying risk to their computer systems, why are we happy to give them the same choices on phones?
This seems like a bad thing - I don't really trust any of the AV companies after 20 years of experience on Windows OEM AV crap...Is android doomed to the same bundled security crapware that plauges off the shelf Windows PCs in the retail channel?
Give it 12 months from the launch of this and you will have Norton/Mcafee trial crap on every android device when Asus/Samsung/Whoever figure out that there is money on the table...
Android is doomed to this for the same reason Windows was. Its too easy to install programs from anywhere.
Now, before I get shouted down let me explain a little.
Having open systems where we can install whatever we like is good. It does however come with at a price. That price is that in order that this isn't exploited the user has to have sufficient knowledge to be able to evaluate the decisions they make regarding installing software. These days that's more than just whether to install the software but what level of access to give it. E.g. does that drawing program really need access to my contacts? Sadly the people capable of making these decisions is a subset of those people that buy the systems. Its also a subset of those people that believe that they are capable of making these decisions. The outcome of this is that systems become infected.
Currently the only protection we have against infected systems are AV suites. These are, not to put too fine a point on it, crap. Yes, they do the job that they are asked to but in a reactive manner and in such a way as to consume resource, valuable resource in the case of mobile devices.
The alternative is some sort of trust based vetting of software; Apple does this with their approvals system for their app store, Google does it retrospectively with Play. They are different approaches to the same issue but have their own drawbacks.
So there are your choices; keep the AV, or surrender the ability for the general public to load software from any source onto their devices. Which is it to be?
I think if you look into it a bit further you'll find that the ownership is related to the monarch, if the queen is removed as the monarch then those rights will go with it. This is certainly true for the Duchy of Cornwall which is related to the holder of the position of the Prince of Wales rather than for the Windsor family to divvy up as they see fit.
Luckily I can't see how it's even technically possible though beyond the mobile world, so I think such ideas will die a rather quick death when they recognise you can't really attach an IP address to a person. Even in the mobile world it's not like you can prove someone else used or didn't use the phone and that it wasn't hacked and some remote entity was proxying via it.
If the mobile carriers used IPv6 couldn't they give each device a unique, fixed, IP address within their network? The IP address could be tied to SIM card and IMEI of the device which would allow identification of a mobile device. This could be used to identify an owner in a legal sense. Whilst its not perfect its reasonable to assume that the law would work in a similar way to identifying car drivers from the car registration. The owner would be required to provide information as to who was using the device at the time, if it wasn't them. I'm not advocating this but its not a stretch to see how you could get to it legally.
As to a question of whether it should be done. That's a tricky one. Just think though, if you were liable for traffic coming from your computer would you take more care securing it, and making sure that it was free of viruses etc? If could have an impact on botnets and the like.
Her allowance is paid out of the income from the Windsor's family Land... the Government would be loath to lose the 94% of this they currently keep...
We don't have a dismissable monarchy, it would require great constitutional change to get rid of the Royal's, and even then they would still be the monarch of 15 other countries and head of the Commonwealth...
Just how did they come by this land? Was it the land that belong to the monarch that they inherited when George I was offered the crown and the House of Hanover took over from the Stuarts as monarch? In that case it's not really their land, but rather the land of the monarch, whoever that may be. Its wrong to think of it as the Windsor's family land in that sense, rather the income from that land is used to fund them and their endeavours. If the monarchy were to be removed I would see those lands as largely reverting to the state.
No, actually, Adobe (and everyone else) will be competing with CS2, the 2005 era program that is still quite functional. It's currently 'free' (for valid purchasers or anyone who can copy the activation codes on the page.
No idea how long Adobe will let this slide, but at least on the Photoshop side, it has all the core functionality (except Adobe Camera Raw which can be finessed in several other ways).
This only works on PowerPC Macs or on Snow Leopard (10.6) or earlier versions of OS X. Its not a viable option for many people unless they switch to Windows.
Note that the first 50% of easy and cheap to get at oil was mostly consumed in a century.
No. The 50% of total oil we've extracted was the easy and cheap oil. The remaining 50% is hard to get oil.
~sigh~ as you're so sure of yourself could you please provide a proof or the references to back up your statement.
Just a hint: You can claim to have used a percentage of something if you don't know what the total amount is. As long as we continue to find new sources of oil that percentage used by a particular time will go down. Its simple mathematics.
Why not have the cooling system in a closed loop and use solar power to chill the helium back down - keeping the satellite dormant until it could operate again? It seems like a waste of $billions to not think of such a system. Even if it could only operate 10% of the time, it could provide decades of additional science.
If you read one of the linked articles it explains that they did think of this but at the time it was too risky so went for a simpler solution with a known maximum operational life. A new telescope is being designed that will incorporate mechanical cooling and be able to operate for longer.
"You were made as well as we could make you."
"But not to last."
"The light that burns twice as bright burns for half as long - and you have burned so very, very brightly"
Overwhelming market advantage. Not unlike what the RIAA has on artists. Itunes has around 70% of the market for music downloads. Sure you can buy an MP3 from Amazon just like you can find music from bands that haven't signed with the RIAA. But Apple and the RIAA are both at least 3x larger than their nearest competitors.
I don't think that you understand what a monopoly is. Apple would have a monopoly if the music sold on iTunes wasn't available elsewhere. They don't so there isn't a monopoly. Whether Apple have a commercial advantage due to the ease of use is a different issue, and more like the one that you're referring to, but it isn't a monopoly.
This is nothing like the RIAA and artists. If an artist signs for a record company they sign away rights to the record company in return for money and services from the record company.
I'm on my third smartphone (seventh phone overall), and I've removed the battery from all of them at one time or another. I replaced a dead battery in two of them, and have had to do a battery pull on all of the smartphones at one time or another due to them being locked up and not responding to the power button. Another anecdote.
Its funny but none on my iPhones or iPods, with their fixed batteries, have got into a state where removing the battery to reset them has been an option. I have had other smart phones where that has been the only option. Why is this?
Is it just lazy engineering that says, "oh, don't worry they can alway remove the battery", so they don't cater for faults properly?
I'm trying hard to see your point but the figures just don't back it up. If the iPhone is in a slump what does that say about the Galaxy S3?
The SD card slot is a feature that appeals to a very small demographic. You may be in it, but just because its part of your decision making process doesn't mean that its part of everyone else's. Personally I don't care. I don't want to micro manage storage in this century.
There's nothing really to see here. He's been CFO for over three years, been at the company for much longer. Why not cash in on his various options and enjoy his life?
The doom and gloom about Microsoft on here is all wishful thinking. PC Windows is on a decline in the marketplace and has been since the the iPhone/iPad changed the game. Android has accelerated this by making smart touch devices available at a lower price point. Microsoft are aware of this, the speed of change has caught them out and they are going to stumble a little before they make the right move.
In the long run Office will survive because its a standard, nothing else can claim this. Office 365 gives them the ability to make money from Office without owning the OS. This is the future of Microsoft. Google may have been doing this longer but Office is Office.
Cloud computing/storage is going to be a big money earner going forward. Microsoft have positioned themselves for this. Going forward they would rather provide Windows servers using Azure than sell the OS. As unit sales of Windows server decline, look to Microsoft aggressively market and price Azure as an alternative. Especially in the SME space. Why run your own servers when you can get a reliable DR capable cloud solution from Microsoft. This is where the market is heading.
Xbox Live. The next Xbox is going to be a money earner. They are currently making money with the current service. The new one should come in at a reasonable price and allow them to continue this. It will also leverage cloud based services.
Consumer Windows is the bad news. This will move to become a phone/tablet OS which is where the consumer market is going. The chances are that they will come good, they have a lot of smart people working there.
Oh, and before the accusations start I'm not a Microsoft shill. I've never bought a computer that runs Windows. I just like to look at things a little more realistically. I still expect to get modded down because that's what happens on Slashdot.
Slashdot Mirror
It does when "Buy The iDevice++" is their business model. There's a lot of 3 to 5 year old iDevices out there that are still perfectly suited to what their owners actually need, but Apple has made a metric fuckton of money by convincing people to upgrade every year even if they don't need any of the new features. At it's heart, Apple has become a marketing company that happens to also sell what they market. Without that marketing power, iDevices would have all the popularity of the Zune.
I think that you are completely and utterly wrong on how Apple views their customers. You are listening to too many rabid fanbois and reading too many awesome tech journals.
Looking at phones in particular: before the iPhone came along software upgrades, though possible, were generally a pain. This was further complicated by carrier software versions preventing manufacturer updates being applied. In general you bought a phone and the software was fixed. Apple continue to support older versions of phones with new software releases with as much feature parity as won't impact the experience. Their aim is to keep their customers happy so that when they come to replace their device they will buy it from them. The philosophy is to build the best that they can and build customer loyalty.
I've had two iPhones, a 3G and a 4S. The 4S is still good enough for pretty much whatever I want to do so I can't see me upgrading this year unless the next phone does something magical. When I come to replace I'll buy another iPhone. Why? Because it does the job I want it to.
Its a sign of things to come for the economy though. If electric cars take over the market, the demand for car maintenance will collapse. Thats a big chunk of the job market in some areas and there will have to be some adjustment.
Why? The only change is the drive train, which will need maintenance. The problems will change but that's all.
RTFA
Another piece of clarification around playing games at a friend’s house – should you choose to play your game at your friend’s house, there is no fee to play that game while you are signed in to your profile.
And there lies the rub. MS probably thinks they are going to do battle with the PS4. I bet their charts don't really show how shattered the whole market is. Does MS realize that one of their competitors is Netflix? The gaming market is part of a larger market called entertainment. People have an entertainment budget and will spend it on different things of which console gaming is just one possible thing. This is something the movie and TV industries have learned the hard way when console gaming vastly reduced people's appetite/budget for network television and movies.
Erm ... I reckon Microsoft have a pretty good idea about Netflix usage, probably from the statistics they gather from people's use of their XBox 360. They'll have information about other TV related services. That's the whole point of the TV aspects of this device and the name the XBox One. Its built to be the one device that you use to access all content on your TV.
With the combination of a gaming system, a way to interact with broadcast TV, and a Windows 8 like OS for other content they should have all options covered. It provide a good deal for the entertainment companies too. If they can provide a way of delivering content to Windows 8, then they'll be able to deliver to the XBox One. Oh, and PCs, and tablets, and phones. Microsoft are well aware of the challenge facing this next console which is why they've gone with the approach they have and haven't stuck with a simple game playing console.
It looks like we are different then. I use the main TV in my living, and the associated sound system, for my current game system. I play a variety of games and play for anything from a quick 30 minute frag to your 4-6 hour sessions. Its just a different input channel to the TV. If I wanted to squirrel myself away I'd probably use a PC/laptop rather than a console.
This convergence of technologies was always going to happen. It has been the aim of Microsoft, and Sony, since their original consoles. They want to be the conduit through which entertainment is delivered.
I don't mind the phone home requirement. My console is always connected at the moment. It gives me updates and alerts me to friends coming online. A lot of the games I play have an online element, this is just going to add to it.
With the plethora of inputs to my TV at present this looks like it would reduce them and make the whole thing more manageable for the rest of my family. If it works as advertised it will fly off the shelves at the right price.
The specs are never as good as the spec writers think they are.
I've been a developer (contractor and employee) for nearly 20 years and have never seen specs that clearly defined everything. In any project of notable size, there are always huge portions of "it's obvious what I want," often with the UI. Spec writers are generally terrible at thinking about "edge case" behavior, focussing on the "normal flow" and trivializing the "alternate flows."
Why do you think the OP always has battles at the end of the project?.
Given the spec is incomplete, and your experience, wouldn't best practice be to analyse the requirements at the start and identify those edge cases and get decisions on them before starting.
Whilst building out large systems I have written functional specification and detailed designs for clients that, in the end, stated absolutely what would be done and how each interface would look and perform. This made implementation simpler, because all of the decisions where made up front, and gave something to test against when completed.
Way back in the early '80s when I got my degree the thing that was placed into our heads was to spend 90% of the time designing, 5% coding, and 5% testing. These days we seem to dive into coding way too early.
My code is not guaranteed indefinitely. Any bugs which appear after the contract is expired can be fixed under another contract if I agree to fix them. I am certainly under no obligation to do that later work at all and especially not for free.
Interesting that you're not prepared to guarantee your work. It would make me wary of contracting you as it places the onus on me to ensure that I've throughly tested your code rather than on you. Is this common practice?
Whilst Apple Inc may be a US company it has subsidiary companies in the other countries/regions that it operates. Apple's earnings place 2/3rds of its income outside the US. Why should that income be subject to US tax when tax has already been paid in the region it was earned?
Put it another way, if you were to spend 8 months working overseas and paid local income tax on that income, would you be happy for the IRS to take its cut as well?
Usernames and passwords can be shared...
I thought that what they were eliminating was XMPP federation, which is what's used to link all the different XMPP servers
But that's a far cry from eliminating XMPP entirely. I understood that they were continuing to use XMPP, with some extensions, and since those extensions were not supported by others, they were disabling the federation to other systems.
If you are right, then for all practical purposes XMPP != XMPPwithGoogleExtensions.
Just like Java != JavaWithMicrosoftExtensions (a.k.a. J++). Sigh - it seems that Google has finally discovered Embrace/Extend/Extinguish.
I don't know why you're posting as an AC, this seems to be pretty standard procedure for Google these days. They have done some cool things, but so has Microsoft. Google have got a long way on "Do no Evil", so far in fact that people who should know better let it blind them.
Someone in it for the Lulz
Highway 17's biggest problem is that they allow trucks and buses on it.
So, there's a 30+ MPH difference between the fastest and slowest vehicles. Anything more than about a 15 MPH speed difference translates to a very, very unsafe road.
Interesting comment, and perhaps it related to a GP about US drivers. In the UK trucks have a speed limit of 60 (though most are limited to 56) on the motorways, and the car speed limit is 70, though there is typically traffic moving at 80-85 in one lane at least. This would translate to these roads being very, very unsafe when in fact they are the safest group of roads in our network. Now, we do have good lane discipline on our motorways, undertaking is illegal and the vast majority don't even contemplate it, which may contribute to these speed differentials working. The point I'm trying to make is that its how you drive rather than speed differential that makes your Highway 17 an unsafe road.
Virus protection should be part of teh OS.
First there is a responsibility of the OS maker to be secure from the beginning, MS got the point - Windows is rock solid out of the box these days (assuming you run Windows Update).
Second: the security hoes that cant be fixed without blocking 3rd party apps should be done by the OS Vendor as a built in (or at least freely available provided by the OS maker) feature. MS gave away Security Essentials for a while and now includes it with Win 8, you can of course disable it easily and / or replace it with another third party AV.
If you make an OS that isn't totally secure or locked down, you should provide an AV. There should be no market for Norton/Symantec
The problem is that, even with free AV integrated into the OS, virus management is reactive. So what if Microsoft ships AV in Windows 8, or Google includes AV in Android 4.2. Its only going to catch things once the AV vendor/team have seen a new virus, identified it, and updated the systems to deal with it. So there is a window for viruses to spread.
With a single, well known, AV protection system available on a system the first thing the new virus will is to prevent the AV software detecting it. If you're a novice user you won't even know that your system is compromised. There may be some odd behaviour, but you won't know what to do to fix it.
Getting back to the original topic of AV on Android. There is a lot of fragmentation with Android (many different versions out there with different manufacturer tweaks) with only the top end phones receiving timely updates. This makes things easier for virus writers. They can target those phones that are unlikely to get updates and collect data from there safe in the knowledge that an update to detect the virus is unlikely to come along.
People have shown that they aren't capable of identifying risk to their computer systems, why are we happy to give them the same choices on phones?
This seems like a bad thing - I don't really trust any of the AV companies after 20 years of experience on Windows OEM AV crap...Is android doomed to the same bundled security crapware that plauges off the shelf Windows PCs in the retail channel?
Give it 12 months from the launch of this and you will have Norton/Mcafee trial crap on every android device when Asus/Samsung/Whoever figure out that there is money on the table...
Android is doomed to this for the same reason Windows was. Its too easy to install programs from anywhere.
Now, before I get shouted down let me explain a little.
Having open systems where we can install whatever we like is good. It does however come with at a price. That price is that in order that this isn't exploited the user has to have sufficient knowledge to be able to evaluate the decisions they make regarding installing software. These days that's more than just whether to install the software but what level of access to give it. E.g. does that drawing program really need access to my contacts? Sadly the people capable of making these decisions is a subset of those people that buy the systems. Its also a subset of those people that believe that they are capable of making these decisions. The outcome of this is that systems become infected.
Currently the only protection we have against infected systems are AV suites. These are, not to put too fine a point on it, crap. Yes, they do the job that they are asked to but in a reactive manner and in such a way as to consume resource, valuable resource in the case of mobile devices.
The alternative is some sort of trust based vetting of software; Apple does this with their approvals system for their app store, Google does it retrospectively with Play. They are different approaches to the same issue but have their own drawbacks.
So there are your choices; keep the AV, or surrender the ability for the general public to load software from any source onto their devices. Which is it to be?
I think if you look into it a bit further you'll find that the ownership is related to the monarch, if the queen is removed as the monarch then those rights will go with it. This is certainly true for the Duchy of Cornwall which is related to the holder of the position of the Prince of Wales rather than for the Windsor family to divvy up as they see fit.
Luckily I can't see how it's even technically possible though beyond the mobile world, so I think such ideas will die a rather quick death when they recognise you can't really attach an IP address to a person. Even in the mobile world it's not like you can prove someone else used or didn't use the phone and that it wasn't hacked and some remote entity was proxying via it.
If the mobile carriers used IPv6 couldn't they give each device a unique, fixed, IP address within their network? The IP address could be tied to SIM card and IMEI of the device which would allow identification of a mobile device. This could be used to identify an owner in a legal sense. Whilst its not perfect its reasonable to assume that the law would work in a similar way to identifying car drivers from the car registration. The owner would be required to provide information as to who was using the device at the time, if it wasn't them. I'm not advocating this but its not a stretch to see how you could get to it legally.
As to a question of whether it should be done. That's a tricky one. Just think though, if you were liable for traffic coming from your computer would you take more care securing it, and making sure that it was free of viruses etc? If could have an impact on botnets and the like.
She could decide not to read it out.
Not without provoking a constitutional crisis that would probably lead to her being removed as head of state.
Her allowance is paid out of the income from the Windsor's family Land ... the Government would be loath to lose the 94% of this they currently keep ...
We don't have a dismissable monarchy, it would require great constitutional change to get rid of the Royal's, and even then they would still be the monarch of 15 other countries and head of the Commonwealth ...
Just how did they come by this land? Was it the land that belong to the monarch that they inherited when George I was offered the crown and the House of Hanover took over from the Stuarts as monarch? In that case it's not really their land, but rather the land of the monarch, whoever that may be. Its wrong to think of it as the Windsor's family land in that sense, rather the income from that land is used to fund them and their endeavours. If the monarchy were to be removed I would see those lands as largely reverting to the state.
No, actually, Adobe (and everyone else) will be competing with CS2, the 2005 era program that is still quite functional. It's currently 'free' (for valid purchasers or anyone who can copy the activation codes on the page.
No idea how long Adobe will let this slide, but at least on the Photoshop side, it has all the core functionality (except Adobe Camera Raw which can be finessed in several other ways).
This only works on PowerPC Macs or on Snow Leopard (10.6) or earlier versions of OS X. Its not a viable option for many people unless they switch to Windows.
Note that the first 50% of easy and cheap to get at oil was mostly consumed in a century.
No. The 50% of total oil we've extracted was the easy and cheap oil. The remaining 50% is hard to get oil.
~sigh~ as you're so sure of yourself could you please provide a proof or the references to back up your statement.
Just a hint: You can claim to have used a percentage of something if you don't know what the total amount is. As long as we continue to find new sources of oil that percentage used by a particular time will go down. Its simple mathematics.
Why not have the cooling system in a closed loop and use solar power to chill the helium back down - keeping the satellite dormant until it could operate again? It seems like a waste of $billions to not think of such a system. Even if it could only operate 10% of the time, it could provide decades of additional science.
If you read one of the linked articles it explains that they did think of this but at the time it was too risky so went for a simpler solution with a known maximum operational life. A new telescope is being designed that will incorporate mechanical cooling and be able to operate for longer.
"You were made as well as we could make you."
"But not to last."
"The light that burns twice as bright burns for half as long - and you have burned so very, very brightly"
Please define monopoly
Overwhelming market advantage. Not unlike what the RIAA has on artists. Itunes has around 70% of the market for music downloads. Sure you can buy an MP3 from Amazon just like you can find music from bands that haven't signed with the RIAA. But Apple and the RIAA are both at least 3x larger than their nearest competitors.
I don't think that you understand what a monopoly is. Apple would have a monopoly if the music sold on iTunes wasn't available elsewhere. They don't so there isn't a monopoly. Whether Apple have a commercial advantage due to the ease of use is a different issue, and more like the one that you're referring to, but it isn't a monopoly.
This is nothing like the RIAA and artists. If an artist signs for a record company they sign away rights to the record company in return for money and services from the record company.
I'm on my third smartphone (seventh phone overall), and I've removed the battery from all of them at one time or another. I replaced a dead battery in two of them, and have had to do a battery pull on all of the smartphones at one time or another due to them being locked up and not responding to the power button. Another anecdote.
Its funny but none on my iPhones or iPods, with their fixed batteries, have got into a state where removing the battery to reset them has been an option. I have had other smart phones where that has been the only option. Why is this?
Is it just lazy engineering that says, "oh, don't worry they can alway remove the battery", so they don't cater for faults properly?
I'm genuinely interested as to why this would be.
Now Google iPhone or HTC and look at the sales slump these two companies are facing. Guess their flagship phones don't come with an SD slot.
I Googled iPhone sales and saw that they've sold more this last quarter than they did in the same quarter last year. Isn't that odd?
Then I Googled iPhone 5 v Samsung Galaxy S3 sales and these were the top 3 results:
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/technology-science/technology/iphone-5-overtakes-samsung-galaxy-1798091
http://news.cnet.com/8301-13579_3-57570235-37/iphone-5-beats-galaxy-s3-as-top-seller-says-report/
http://uk.ign.com/articles/2013/02/20/apples-iphone-5-passes-samsung-galaxy-s3-in-q4-global-sales
I'm trying hard to see your point but the figures just don't back it up. If the iPhone is in a slump what does that say about the Galaxy S3?
The SD card slot is a feature that appeals to a very small demographic. You may be in it, but just because its part of your decision making process doesn't mean that its part of everyone else's. Personally I don't care. I don't want to micro manage storage in this century.
There's nothing really to see here. He's been CFO for over three years, been at the company for much longer. Why not cash in on his various options and enjoy his life?
The doom and gloom about Microsoft on here is all wishful thinking. PC Windows is on a decline in the marketplace and has been since the the iPhone/iPad changed the game. Android has accelerated this by making smart touch devices available at a lower price point. Microsoft are aware of this, the speed of change has caught them out and they are going to stumble a little before they make the right move.
In the long run Office will survive because its a standard, nothing else can claim this. Office 365 gives them the ability to make money from Office without owning the OS. This is the future of Microsoft. Google may have been doing this longer but Office is Office.
Cloud computing/storage is going to be a big money earner going forward. Microsoft have positioned themselves for this. Going forward they would rather provide Windows servers using Azure than sell the OS. As unit sales of Windows server decline, look to Microsoft aggressively market and price Azure as an alternative. Especially in the SME space. Why run your own servers when you can get a reliable DR capable cloud solution from Microsoft. This is where the market is heading.
Xbox Live. The next Xbox is going to be a money earner. They are currently making money with the current service. The new one should come in at a reasonable price and allow them to continue this. It will also leverage cloud based services.
Consumer Windows is the bad news. This will move to become a phone/tablet OS which is where the consumer market is going. The chances are that they will come good, they have a lot of smart people working there.
Oh, and before the accusations start I'm not a Microsoft shill. I've never bought a computer that runs Windows. I just like to look at things a little more realistically. I still expect to get modded down because that's what happens on Slashdot.