If it's been sold through iTunes then air time data costs aren't applicable and as far as AT&T getting a share I seriously doubt it. Remember who is paying who to have access to the iPhone.
I'm writing this on a 12" iBook G4 which was only discontinued just over a year ago. While I've had laptops with larger screens I prefer the size/weight of this machine. I don't think you can call 15.4 a notebook by the way.
... because some idiots signed mortgages they were never able to afford. How about placing some of that blame with the idiots in the banks? I didn't see any gun at the head of the banks forcing them to offer these mortgages. There was also nothing stopping them from performing some sort of check or restricting how many of these mortgages they agreed to.
I should point out that I'm not American so maybe the US government was stupid enough to force banks to offer these kinds of mortgages
Thanks for the mature and detailed rebuttal, boys! Considering some the actions the CoS have been accused of do you really expect anything better? You should probably be grateful you haven't been kidnapped or harassed.
You could call shenanigans if you'd interpreted the summary correctly. It's stating that for the amount of information you could send via your ISP for $1, it would cost you, the consumer, $61 million to do so via txt messaging. What it is trying to highlight is the inflated cost of data transmission via sms.
I've not seen TFA so am not willing to say anything about the correctness (or not) of the math alluded at in the summary.
Someone might be using it... there are always a few late users. Trying to determine if a computer is in use in order to shut it down isn't always that simple. It also can't be that hard. My university does exactly this.
Also I don't think signs will have anywhere near the impact you imagine. We can't even get users to not eat around the machines.
what is the difference between encrypted and encoded? You mean you don't know? By encrypting and encoding you make it impossible to break into. It's the same reason why the biometric ID's they want to introduce in the UK are impossible to break (according to the politicians). The information community has been sitting on this for decades now as they'd rather see what you're up to.
At least that should be harder for an external person to tamper with than a wireless version. Seriously... they can't see the problems with doing this with a radio signal???
I'm with the parent poster on this one. Until I'd be willing to take complaints about hardware being cooked I would want to see some verifiable numbers being presented. What temperature you normally keep your house, how much higher the temperature can get in 2/4 hours if the aircon was turned off completely and what a change of a few degrees means. Even if they were to change it drastically by say 10 degrees centigrade - do you keep your machines that close to overheating that they couldn't cope with that?
Lets not even get started on how bad an idea having wireless control is for now
...can't condone the taking of innocent lives (such as the Pepsi machine refill guy who happens to be there... Thank god I wasn't eating or drinking anything when I read that. I'd be picking organic material out of my keyboard for ages afterwards. If I had mod points I wouldn't know to mod you funny or informative:-P
Does it really matter what protocol is used to get the data? I would say so yes. Would you log on to a remote client over the internet with telnet anymore or would you sensibly use ssh? Slightly off topic as far as examples go but it should get the point across.
The BitTorrent protocol keeps connections open with multiple peers and periodic communication with a server. If I was mad enough to download a video or music file on my phone I certainly wouldn't want the phone spending the next several hours uploading on my behalf - the battery drain being a major factor. I think the BitTorrent protocol is fantastic. It is very efficient in using as much bandwidth as you can throw at it and serves its intended purpose of distributing the impact of serving large sets of data. There are more sensible protocols in existence though for devices such as phones.
Probably without exception the data plans here in the uk aren't cheap. I doubt this is much different to most countries right now. What 'unlimited' plans there are are just like the 'unlimited' plans we get from our ISPs - in other words there isn't anything unlimited about it. So BitTorrenting on a phone is likely to be an expensive proposition compared to BitTorrenting on a home pc.
Next is battery life. The battery life on my n70 is crappy enough as it is. I really don't need to be draining it any faster.
Instead of worrying about whether or not a phone has a BitTorrent client on it how about developers worry about making decent calender programs etc and phones that can synchronize with all the key OS's? Oh and if ZdNet are running an article how about a link?
I can't wait for the GPhone platform to materialize. I will dump this piece of locked-down Apple junk faster than you can say "Android". Why exactly did you buy an iPhone?
Maybe it was troublesome but the simple and obvious point of the parent stands - the quote used in the link is not contained within the text at the link.
If I offer you a link labled ATI graphics card and it takes you to NVIDIA what would you say? Somehow I don't think it would be "well they're all doing the same job"
Anyway this is all moot. As this is slashdot any quote such as this is not allowed to come from wikipedia when there is a perfectly viable source.
Blackadder:)
Actually there are options to state what the resulting stream is for and mpeg4 has been designed to cater for everything from handheld devices up to movies. It is a very good option to use
Nobody bothered to tell that to the company that made my mp3 player. I don't even know if e.Digital make mp3 players any more but the cheap and cheerful mxp 100 allows you to select which folder you want by saying it's name. I don't use that functionality as I feel like a complete prat doing so while walking down the street.
That doesn't take away from the fact that it is not only possible (because they have done it) but that it doesn't require much in the way of overhead if done correctly (no reason to believe that decoding is software based rather than hardware based).
Only thing is a large portion of that code is still in use. The only place you are likely to see the source is in either your dreams or at a guess a warez site?
We are talking about the company that tried to halt access to it's api's code? (should look it up, don't have time) in court citing security reasons...
"So everything is based on estimates. Now, you know and I know that the Linux kernel has less bugs... but this is a tentative (at best, shoddy at worst) way of presenting that idea."
You're right. Absolutely correct but what can you do about it. Most commercial offerings will of course be closed source as is their right and we have all seen what 'independent reviews' from Microsoft are like and who can blame them really? If you owned Microsoft would you really want reports being dispersed that said your software was so flaky a minor breeze would take it out if those reports came from your own company? (I'm not trying to suggest that it is that bad, just saying for examples sake but surely nothing can look worse than saying your own product is crap*).
Quite honestly it is surprising sometimes how unscientific some research is at times (just an observance in general) but every so often I suppose we need it to help balance out the crud from the other side.
and somewhere in between you hope is something approximating the truth...
* With the exception of when you have brought out the new improved model
Again, how does this affect the legality of what you are doing? I fail to see in what country you could state "Well I wasn't the first or only one doing it" in court as a defence and hope to get away with it.
You also state in many countries it is legal to make personal non-commercial copies. That is true but it is no longer personal as soon as you begin to distribute said copy. The chances are that you didn't own a legitimate copy of what you downloaded as a 'personal non-commercial copy' and so it is piracy plain and simple. This statement is from the viewpoint of you having downloaded a file which you are now uploading. The person downloading it is in the wrong as is the person uploading it if the material is copyrighted.
Lastly, 'uploaders are innocent until proven guilty'. In most countries you are innocent until proven guilty no matter what the allegation is. You can be a thief, murderer or rapist and are still technically innocent until proven guilty so this statement has no relevance here.
Slashdot Mirror
If it's been sold through iTunes then air time data costs aren't applicable and as far as AT&T getting a share I seriously doubt it. Remember who is paying who to have access to the iPhone.
I'm writing this on a 12" iBook G4 which was only discontinued just over a year ago. While I've had laptops with larger screens I prefer the size/weight of this machine. I don't think you can call 15.4 a notebook by the way.
... because some idiots signed mortgages they were never able to afford. How about placing some of that blame with the idiots in the banks? I didn't see any gun at the head of the banks forcing them to offer these mortgages. There was also nothing stopping them from performing some sort of check or restricting how many of these mortgages they agreed to.I should point out that I'm not American so maybe the US government was stupid enough to force banks to offer these kinds of mortgages
In fairness I don't think eBay have much of a reputation left that can tarnished by even a bunch of nut jobs like the CoS
You could call shenanigans if you'd interpreted the summary correctly. It's stating that for the amount of information you could send via your ISP for $1, it would cost you, the consumer, $61 million to do so via txt messaging. What it is trying to highlight is the inflated cost of data transmission via sms.
I've not seen TFA so am not willing to say anything about the correctness (or not) of the math alluded at in the summary.
They wouldn't? Seems like it isn't without precedent.
Also I don't think signs will have anywhere near the impact you imagine. We can't even get users to not eat around the machines.
At least that should be harder for an external person to tamper with than a wireless version. Seriously... they can't see the problems with doing this with a radio signal???
Lets not even get started on how bad an idea having wireless control is for now
At the time of this reply I see the parent post has been modded funny. I'm not sure why - hell I'd mod this insightful.
...can't condone the taking of innocent lives (such as the Pepsi machine refill guy who happens to be there... Thank god I wasn't eating or drinking anything when I read that. I'd be picking organic material out of my keyboard for ages afterwards. If I had mod points I wouldn't know to mod you funny or informativeThe BitTorrent protocol keeps connections open with multiple peers and periodic communication with a server. If I was mad enough to download a video or music file on my phone I certainly wouldn't want the phone spending the next several hours uploading on my behalf - the battery drain being a major factor. I think the BitTorrent protocol is fantastic. It is very efficient in using as much bandwidth as you can throw at it and serves its intended purpose of distributing the impact of serving large sets of data. There are more sensible protocols in existence though for devices such as phones.
Next is battery life. The battery life on my n70 is crappy enough as it is. I really don't need to be draining it any faster.
Instead of worrying about whether or not a phone has a BitTorrent client on it how about developers worry about making decent calender programs etc and phones that can synchronize with all the key OS's? Oh and if ZdNet are running an article how about a link?
Maybe it was troublesome but the simple and obvious point of the parent stands - the quote used in the link is not contained within the text at the link. If I offer you a link labled ATI graphics card and it takes you to NVIDIA what would you say? Somehow I don't think it would be "well they're all doing the same job" Anyway this is all moot. As this is slashdot any quote such as this is not allowed to come from wikipedia when there is a perfectly viable source. Blackadder :)
Actually there are options to state what the resulting stream is for and mpeg4 has been designed to cater for everything from handheld devices up to movies. It is a very good option to use
Nobody bothered to tell that to the company that made my mp3 player. I don't even know if e.Digital make mp3 players any more but the cheap and cheerful mxp 100 allows you to select which folder you want by saying it's name. I don't use that functionality as I feel like a complete prat doing so while walking down the street.
That doesn't take away from the fact that it is not only possible (because they have done it) but that it doesn't require much in the way of overhead if done correctly (no reason to believe that decoding is software based rather than hardware based).
HUD's would be cool though
Learn Portuguese?
We are talking about the company that tried to halt access to it's api's code? (should look it up, don't have time) in court citing security reasons...
Nope, no way, not today.
but if you could you'd make a fortune ;-)
You're right. Absolutely correct but what can you do about it. Most commercial offerings will of course be closed source as is their right and we have all seen what 'independent reviews' from Microsoft are like and who can blame them really? If you owned Microsoft would you really want reports being dispersed that said your software was so flaky a minor breeze would take it out if those reports came from your own company? (I'm not trying to suggest that it is that bad, just saying for examples sake but surely nothing can look worse than saying your own product is crap*).
Quite honestly it is surprising sometimes how unscientific some research is at times (just an observance in general) but every so often I suppose we need it to help balance out the crud from the other side.
and somewhere in between you hope is something approximating the truth...
* With the exception of when you have brought out the new improved model
True but considering they get paid a damn sight more than I do maybe they could at least try... ;-)
You also state in many countries it is legal to make personal non-commercial copies. That is true but it is no longer personal as soon as you begin to distribute said copy. The chances are that you didn't own a legitimate copy of what you downloaded as a 'personal non-commercial copy' and so it is piracy plain and simple. This statement is from the viewpoint of you having downloaded a file which you are now uploading. The person downloading it is in the wrong as is the person uploading it if the material is copyrighted.
Lastly, 'uploaders are innocent until proven guilty'. In most countries you are innocent until proven guilty no matter what the allegation is. You can be a thief, murderer or rapist and are still technically innocent until proven guilty so this statement has no relevance here.