Let's say there are a lot of Italian businesses selling to people overseas via the internet. Forcing them to pay tax in the location of the customer means they need to be compliant with the tax codes of all the nations they sell to, so that they can pay corporation tax. Instead of coming up with a singular profit/loss figure, they need to work out profit for each country they sell to so that they can sell an appropriate amount of tax to each country's tax service.
Seems rather onerous and potential devastating for the economy.
If I visit a site on my phone or tablet intending to buy something and the site doesn't work for me, I will go to another online shop whose site does work on my chosen device. As a customer, all I know is that Joe's Widget Store works on mobile Safari whereas Jack's Widget Store does not.
Developers, suits and designers should meet to their customers needs and wants (obviously within reason) because the customers are the ones who have an interest in buying your product. There was a recent news article (Black Friday I think) which showed that iPhone/iPad customers spent the most money via mobile shopping. Do you really want to alienate such a large potential customer base because you think it isn't your fault?
(Note: I would argue that failing to test your site in the most common web browsers, and modify the code to correct any weird stuff, probably is your fault).
All a business has to do is deny entry to "all those wearing recording devices." If the Google Glass users are too fucking stupid to leave their recording devices at home, then the problem is of their own making - it's not a discriminatory practice.
It becomes a discriminatory practice when the rule is not waived for those who need prescription glasses to manage their disability. Your alternative, of course, is to provide standard glasses with the appropriate prescription strength to those who require them.
Try putting up a sign in your business denying entry to all those in wheelchairs and see how far you get.
Personally, I don't like OS X but if you want a fully functioning workstation which runs Apple's OS and you don't want to deal with the hassle of building an unsupported Hackintosh setup, then maybe an Apple computer is the most appropriate solution.
Besides, from what I've read from other posters and sources, it sounds like you can't actually build a superior machine (or even one with the same specs) unless you spend more money than the Apple model.
Certainly, looking at some their other products, there is no evidence to support your theory that it's a tax on the ignorant considering my Sony Z1 cost more than my iPhone 5 did.
I've used WP8 and it is a very nice OS with a modern design. I'm one of those crazy people who quite likes the Metro UI and I think the live tiles are quite useful.
While it isn't ready for my use yet (variety of reasons) there are certainly a lot of advantages to the OS when compared to the likes of Android and iOS.
If I was one of the early miners who made thousands of bitcoins and still had them, I might decide to sell the wallet itself rather than transferring them.
Leaves less of a paper trail and makes it somewhat easier to avoid paying capital gains tax on the proceeds.
One of the "facts" mentioned was "it is the distro with the best variety of packages". and you claim this to be correct.
Yet Debian specifically only allows Free Software and excludes closed source software solely on the basis that it is not Free. While I admire this stance, it does however rule it out of being the distro with the best variety of packages.
You are confusing the Free Software community with the Linux community.
I'm quite sure the Free Software community still has your ideals and you will probably find some like minded individuals there. Over the past few years, the "Linux community" now includes millions of people who accept locked bootloaders as standard and install closed source apps from an app store whose goal is to collect as much information about them as possible.
The Spotify technique has always impressed me. Turning the volume too low is clearly the obvious solution to avoiding adverts, so they figured out how to reduce the number of customers who don't pay but still want to avoid the ads.
As a premium subscriber, I have managed to avoid the Spotify commercials for about two years - so it is possible to avoid them, at least in the UK. If only I had the option of paying £10 a month to cut adverts out of broadcast TV too.
UK law is clear in that ownership has not transferred to the recipients and that the items should be returned.
I think in this type of situation, it's a reasonable expectation that the recipient should return the PS Vita too. They paid £19.99 and got sent a completely different item; it isn't as if the PS Vita was priced at £19.99 in error and the company mistakenly fulfilled the order.
Sadly, I see similar situations happen all the time. Companies make a mistake with their pricing online and don't fulfil the order and the people who thought they were getting a 40" TV for £50 start talking about their "right" to buy it for that price.
It's an obvious mistake by the retailer and if their customers are being uncooperative then they have every right to pursue the legal avenue. Let's turn it around a bit: if the customers had asked to return the game they bought and accidentally sent a PS Vita to the company, would the customers be arguing that their mistake represented an "unsolicited gift"?
DVD replaced VHS because it offered vastly superior video playback quality as well as many other advantages.
Linux does have some advantages over Windows, but the reverse is also true. Windows also has an entrenched position in workplaces as well as in the home.
Having first tried Linux on the desktop about 14 years ago and having continued to follow its development, along with the progress of Windows, I don't see any evidence which suggest Linux is suddenly going to acquire so many advantages over Windows any time soon.
I used to be into free WiFi but over the last few years it has become a chore, with more and more places (even smaller stores) replacing unprotected WiFi routers with these annoying systems that make you login with an email address or force you to accept their terms and conditions.
With mobile data plans veering towards truly unlimited (at least in the UK) and mobile data speeds even surpassing that of home broadband, there is less of a need for these free WiFi solutions. And whilst there are some places, like pubs in the countryside where there is no mobile coverage, where free WiFi would be useful, its usefulness is almost always outweighed by the scenarios where I'm passing a shop or coffee place and my mobile internet stops working because my phone has decided to latch onto a WiFi hotspot that wants me to login.
My Sony Z1 cost £30 more than my iPhone 5 did the previous year (both bought unsubsidised). Even accounting for inflation, it still works out more in real terms.
Based on this true anecdote, let's reverse your statement and see how ridiculous it sounds.
*sigh* Android devices are more expensive to begin with. Android users obviously have more money to spend than brains. It has nothing to do with the quality of the device, and everything to do with being willing to be gouged.
Textual methods of communication offer much, much less room for confusion.
I found this part of your comment interesting and certainly at odds with what most people believe.
Maybe you could explain how I might deal with the following scenarios in a text message?
- Applying inflection to certain words or parts of a sentence. - Making it obvious that a question is rhetorical. - Using sarcasm in a sentence (and making it obvious). - Use of an obviously humourous comment, which when written may seem like a comment devoid of humour.
I completely agree that there are some advantages to textual methods of communication, particularly when an instant response isn't required. But don't fool yourself into thinking that it is automatically superior.
And no, also-runs like Bing and Yahoo will not be able to pick up the slack.
Of course they can. When the previous top dogs like Altavista became less than useful, we simply switched to services like Google. If Google was to suddenly go dark, those people who didn't know any alternatives would simply ask their neighbour or friend and they would have a new search engine. Most people i.e. those non-power users who don't have a clue about boolean search and advanced options in Google probably wouldn't notice much difference.
Sarcasm aside, what do you really expect by way of innovation (from Apple or its competitors) when it comes to the smartphone itself? The device has matured very quickly compared to other industries and as we've seen with the hype about wearables, the next innovations are likely going to be separate to the actual touchscreen itself.
I got a Sony Z1 and at 5" it is too big to use with one hand.
Shame as it is a really nice device otherwise, and KitKat is coming to it in January. The Z1S/Z1F is appealing however; the same phone with the same specs, except with a 4.3" screen. I figure that would just be about usable with one hand (this is a big thing for me as I like to walk and type).
On the other hand, on those occasions when I use my iPhone 5 (I'm still in that phase of working out which I like the most as the Sony is my first Android device), the experience is far superior and refined compared to the Sony. But I miss being able to customise certain features and set default apps, and the screen looks tiny in comparison.
I have recently switched from Mac to Windows 8.1 after living in the Mac world for 5-6 years (at home).
The difference is like night and day. It might not be as "simple" but I can actually set up my computer exactly how I want it and make it adapt to my workflow and not the other way round. All the freeware utility software you take for granted on Windows just isn't available for Mac.
And if I ever end up using a Mac again and the OS takes focus from what I'm doing and decides to activate another window (because the other app asked for focus) then I will throw said Mac out of the window:-)
Even a quick and basic search of Google Play apps reveals there to be quite a number of competing products in the market. MS doesn't have one, so it clearly wouldn't have a case. The makers of Kingsoft Office and Officesuite 7 may well have a case.
The mere bundling of Internet Explorer and latterly Windows Media Player with Windows was enough to be classed as anti trust, because MS were deemed to be trying to use a monopoly position in one market to secure a monopoly position in another market.
In this case, Google could quite easily be seen to be trying to use a dominant position in the smartphone market to extend their dominance into the mobile office app market.
This is probably about as big a deal as Apple giving away their office suite and iLife package to new customers; nice to have, but not a decision maker.
There are so many different use cases for smartphones and I haven't personally heard any friends or colleagues saying that the ability to edit MS Office apps is anywhere near the top of the list.
For tablet devices, the situation is different and it makes sense for Google to catch up with Microsoft and Apple who already offer free versions of their office software to tablet purchasers. Though if the decision comes down to MS Office RT vs QuickOffice, I know which one I'm going to pick - and it's not the Google ersion.
I think it depends on the company. If you tried this at a meeting held at my employer's you would very quickly be told where to go. I think there is a need for new employees to a business to adapt to the business ethos and behaviours and this works both ways; for the managers hosting the meetings right down to the underlings attending the meetings.
I'm happy with the way our meetings operate. Quite happy to be involved in a meeting but when the topic has moved to an irrelevant subject, I will quite happily check my phone. Sure, business hours are business hours etc but when you have people willing and able to check and respond to emails out of hours, the lines between personal and business time do become rather blurred.
I doubt Apple is really bothered about being a threat to Linux.
For the server market, Linux and Windows largely have this tied up. For the enterprise desktop market (excluding pros), Microsoft largely has this tied up. Apple's computers with the exception of the Mac Pro are aimed at the consumer market - those people who have disposable income and are cool with spending an extra $100 or so to get a Mac.
Slashdot Mirror
I don't think it is a sensible idea though.
Let's say there are a lot of Italian businesses selling to people overseas via the internet. Forcing them to pay tax in the location of the customer means they need to be compliant with the tax codes of all the nations they sell to, so that they can pay corporation tax. Instead of coming up with a singular profit/loss figure, they need to work out profit for each country they sell to so that they can sell an appropriate amount of tax to each country's tax service.
Seems rather onerous and potential devastating for the economy.
If I visit a site on my phone or tablet intending to buy something and the site doesn't work for me, I will go to another online shop whose site does work on my chosen device. As a customer, all I know is that Joe's Widget Store works on mobile Safari whereas Jack's Widget Store does not.
Developers, suits and designers should meet to their customers needs and wants (obviously within reason) because the customers are the ones who have an interest in buying your product. There was a recent news article (Black Friday I think) which showed that iPhone/iPad customers spent the most money via mobile shopping. Do you really want to alienate such a large potential customer base because you think it isn't your fault?
(Note: I would argue that failing to test your site in the most common web browsers, and modify the code to correct any weird stuff, probably is your fault).
All a business has to do is deny entry to "all those wearing recording devices." If the Google Glass users are too fucking stupid to leave their recording devices at home, then the problem is of their own making - it's not a discriminatory practice.
It becomes a discriminatory practice when the rule is not waived for those who need prescription glasses to manage their disability. Your alternative, of course, is to provide standard glasses with the appropriate prescription strength to those who require them.
Try putting up a sign in your business denying entry to all those in wheelchairs and see how far you get.
Personally, I don't like OS X but if you want a fully functioning workstation which runs Apple's OS and you don't want to deal with the hassle of building an unsupported Hackintosh setup, then maybe an Apple computer is the most appropriate solution.
Besides, from what I've read from other posters and sources, it sounds like you can't actually build a superior machine (or even one with the same specs) unless you spend more money than the Apple model.
Certainly, looking at some their other products, there is no evidence to support your theory that it's a tax on the ignorant considering my Sony Z1 cost more than my iPhone 5 did.
What in particular don't you like about it?
I've used WP8 and it is a very nice OS with a modern design. I'm one of those crazy people who quite likes the Metro UI and I think the live tiles are quite useful.
While it isn't ready for my use yet (variety of reasons) there are certainly a lot of advantages to the OS when compared to the likes of Android and iOS.
If I was one of the early miners who made thousands of bitcoins and still had them, I might decide to sell the wallet itself rather than transferring them.
Leaves less of a paper trail and makes it somewhat easier to avoid paying capital gains tax on the proceeds.
One of the "facts" mentioned was "it is the distro with the best variety of packages". and you claim this to be correct.
Yet Debian specifically only allows Free Software and excludes closed source software solely on the basis that it is not Free. While I admire this stance, it does however rule it out of being the distro with the best variety of packages.
You are confusing the Free Software community with the Linux community.
I'm quite sure the Free Software community still has your ideals and you will probably find some like minded individuals there. Over the past few years, the "Linux community" now includes millions of people who accept locked bootloaders as standard and install closed source apps from an app store whose goal is to collect as much information about them as possible.
The Spotify technique has always impressed me. Turning the volume too low is clearly the obvious solution to avoiding adverts, so they figured out how to reduce the number of customers who don't pay but still want to avoid the ads.
As a premium subscriber, I have managed to avoid the Spotify commercials for about two years - so it is possible to avoid them, at least in the UK. If only I had the option of paying £10 a month to cut adverts out of broadcast TV too.
UK law is clear in that ownership has not transferred to the recipients and that the items should be returned.
I think in this type of situation, it's a reasonable expectation that the recipient should return the PS Vita too. They paid £19.99 and got sent a completely different item; it isn't as if the PS Vita was priced at £19.99 in error and the company mistakenly fulfilled the order.
Sadly, I see similar situations happen all the time. Companies make a mistake with their pricing online and don't fulfil the order and the people who thought they were getting a 40" TV for £50 start talking about their "right" to buy it for that price.
It's an obvious mistake by the retailer and if their customers are being uncooperative then they have every right to pursue the legal avenue. Let's turn it around a bit: if the customers had asked to return the game they bought and accidentally sent a PS Vita to the company, would the customers be arguing that their mistake represented an "unsolicited gift"?
DVD replaced VHS because it offered vastly superior video playback quality as well as many other advantages.
Linux does have some advantages over Windows, but the reverse is also true. Windows also has an entrenched position in workplaces as well as in the home.
Having first tried Linux on the desktop about 14 years ago and having continued to follow its development, along with the progress of Windows, I don't see any evidence which suggest Linux is suddenly going to acquire so many advantages over Windows any time soon.
I used to be into free WiFi but over the last few years it has become a chore, with more and more places (even smaller stores) replacing unprotected WiFi routers with these annoying systems that make you login with an email address or force you to accept their terms and conditions.
With mobile data plans veering towards truly unlimited (at least in the UK) and mobile data speeds even surpassing that of home broadband, there is less of a need for these free WiFi solutions. And whilst there are some places, like pubs in the countryside where there is no mobile coverage, where free WiFi would be useful, its usefulness is almost always outweighed by the scenarios where I'm passing a shop or coffee place and my mobile internet stops working because my phone has decided to latch onto a WiFi hotspot that wants me to login.
My Sony Z1 cost £30 more than my iPhone 5 did the previous year (both bought unsubsidised). Even accounting for inflation, it still works out more in real terms.
Based on this true anecdote, let's reverse your statement and see how ridiculous it sounds.
*sigh* Android devices are more expensive to begin with. Android users obviously have more money to spend than brains. It has nothing to do with the quality of the device, and everything to do with being willing to be gouged.
Textual methods of communication offer much, much less room for confusion.
I found this part of your comment interesting and certainly at odds with what most people believe.
Maybe you could explain how I might deal with the following scenarios in a text message?
- Applying inflection to certain words or parts of a sentence.
- Making it obvious that a question is rhetorical.
- Using sarcasm in a sentence (and making it obvious).
- Use of an obviously humourous comment, which when written may seem like a comment devoid of humour.
I completely agree that there are some advantages to textual methods of communication, particularly when an instant response isn't required. But don't fool yourself into thinking that it is automatically superior.
Perhaps they do this as they know they can easily retrieve the copies of the contracts from the vendors' own systems if they ever need to access them.
So, it's the equivalent of a click through EULA?
I thought we didn't like those around here.
And no, also-runs like Bing and Yahoo will not be able to pick up the slack.
Of course they can. When the previous top dogs like Altavista became less than useful, we simply switched to services like Google. If Google was to suddenly go dark, those people who didn't know any alternatives would simply ask their neighbour or friend and they would have a new search engine. Most people i.e. those non-power users who don't have a clue about boolean search and advanced options in Google probably wouldn't notice much difference.
Sarcasm aside, what do you really expect by way of innovation (from Apple or its competitors) when it comes to the smartphone itself? The device has matured very quickly compared to other industries and as we've seen with the hype about wearables, the next innovations are likely going to be separate to the actual touchscreen itself.
I got a Sony Z1 and at 5" it is too big to use with one hand.
Shame as it is a really nice device otherwise, and KitKat is coming to it in January. The Z1S/Z1F is appealing however; the same phone with the same specs, except with a 4.3" screen. I figure that would just be about usable with one hand (this is a big thing for me as I like to walk and type).
On the other hand, on those occasions when I use my iPhone 5 (I'm still in that phase of working out which I like the most as the Sony is my first Android device), the experience is far superior and refined compared to the Sony. But I miss being able to customise certain features and set default apps, and the screen looks tiny in comparison.
I have recently switched from Mac to Windows 8.1 after living in the Mac world for 5-6 years (at home).
The difference is like night and day. It might not be as "simple" but I can actually set up my computer exactly how I want it and make it adapt to my workflow and not the other way round. All the freeware utility software you take for granted on Windows just isn't available for Mac.
And if I ever end up using a Mac again and the OS takes focus from what I'm doing and decides to activate another window (because the other app asked for focus) then I will throw said Mac out of the window :-)
Even a quick and basic search of Google Play apps reveals there to be quite a number of competing products in the market. MS doesn't have one, so it clearly wouldn't have a case. The makers of Kingsoft Office and Officesuite 7 may well have a case.
The mere bundling of Internet Explorer and latterly Windows Media Player with Windows was enough to be classed as anti trust, because MS were deemed to be trying to use a monopoly position in one market to secure a monopoly position in another market.
In this case, Google could quite easily be seen to be trying to use a dominant position in the smartphone market to extend their dominance into the mobile office app market.
This is probably about as big a deal as Apple giving away their office suite and iLife package to new customers; nice to have, but not a decision maker.
There are so many different use cases for smartphones and I haven't personally heard any friends or colleagues saying that the ability to edit MS Office apps is anywhere near the top of the list.
For tablet devices, the situation is different and it makes sense for Google to catch up with Microsoft and Apple who already offer free versions of their office software to tablet purchasers. Though if the decision comes down to MS Office RT vs QuickOffice, I know which one I'm going to pick - and it's not the Google ersion.
I think it depends on the company. If you tried this at a meeting held at my employer's you would very quickly be told where to go. I think there is a need for new employees to a business to adapt to the business ethos and behaviours and this works both ways; for the managers hosting the meetings right down to the underlings attending the meetings.
I'm happy with the way our meetings operate. Quite happy to be involved in a meeting but when the topic has moved to an irrelevant subject, I will quite happily check my phone. Sure, business hours are business hours etc but when you have people willing and able to check and respond to emails out of hours, the lines between personal and business time do become rather blurred.
I doubt Apple is really bothered about being a threat to Linux.
For the server market, Linux and Windows largely have this tied up. For the enterprise desktop market (excluding pros), Microsoft largely has this tied up. Apple's computers with the exception of the Mac Pro are aimed at the consumer market - those people who have disposable income and are cool with spending an extra $100 or so to get a Mac.