While I'm sure there's some crossover between Canadian CBC and slashdot readers, I'd say that this is visible to more than just the slash-type crowd. I have lots of non-geek friends that have taken notice of this, especially when features disappear from their phones are a result of idiotic lawsuits on obvious tech.
Nobody ever bothers me about my devices when the plane is in-flight. My phone is in "airplane mode", the wifi is off on my eReader, and the tablet similarly has wifi/bluetooth/etc turned off.
Nobody's ever given me any grief about it so long as the devices are off for takeoff/landing. Most airlines do mention having the cellphones turned off, but the rest are just suppose to be not broadcasting. I suppose if I wanted to game with other people in-flight through wifi it might be needed, but what's the issue here?
Tablets and smartphones aren't the problem. The problem (for the vendors) is that few things these days warrant a pricey new PC. It's not that tablet/smartphone users don't have PC's. Most do. Most still use their PC's But the PC they had 3-4 years ago is still good enough (ok, add some RAM if it's Vista/w 1024MB). They may get a virus and require hiring somebody to clean it up, but that's still generally cheaper than a new PC.
However, what most people DON'T need is a quad-core i-7 with 8GB of RAM, 3TB HDD, and a dual-sli video card. At most, they might need under 1TB of space, onboard video, a dual-core CPU, and a few gigs of RAM.
Yes, CAD users, graphic designers, and some others may differ, but the public at large doesn't do that much that requires a new upgrade.
In terms of smartdevices, the evolution is still pushing new product. Newer phone = updated OS, faster processor, better UI, more games, etc. Same for tablet.
They'll hit a ceiling as well, but at the moment the problem isn't that people don't need PC's because of portables, but rather that they don't need upgrades because what they have is good enough.
But you can be assured that the majority of those higher up wouldn't take the time to piss on you were you on-fire.
It's not that they're actually out to screw you, it's that they're out to make the most profit for themselves and friends. That such profit comes at your expense is incidental
Other Android OEMs have been able to avoid the issues that Samsung had
Samsung is not nearly the only vendor being sued by Apple. They are probably the biggest, by value of having the most popular android smartphones in most countries, but the entire industry is like watching somebody play patent-warfare-missile-command.
It seems that this reason is pretty much why companies throw out *insane number X* when asking for penalties. If they ask for a bazillion dollars, then a few trillion seems "more fair" in comparison. We see this a lot with file-sharing penalties etc. The final result is often less than what's asked for, but still adds up to a mind-boggling amount... pretty much a bankrupting amount (without the option of bankruptcy) which will end up in lifetime indebtedness on the behalf of a plaintiff.
Not $1b may not break a big company like Samsung, but it's still a fairly crazy high amount. Not as crazy as $3b though, but crazy is still crazy.
Which I initially thought wasn't a common feature, until I realized what it covers.
On maps I used to be able to search for an address, or just type in a name of somebody in my contacts. This would find their address (if saved in contacts) and allow me to quickly navigate. This feature stopped working on my phone, presumably due the the patent issue.
Multi-source search has been around for *ages* on PC's, etc.
Of course Samsung could have done it better too instead of slamming in a change that broke the functionality. A quick-select to choose either local or network search would have worked well and should have not been affected by the patent.
I seem to remember some of these existing in the wild on emulators quite a long time ago. There was a patch which could be run against the dumped ROM to translate most of the dialog etc. Some things that were actually graphics rather than text still retained Japanese letters/characters, but the character dialog was surprisingly well done.
FPS's: Depends on where the AI etc is. If mostly you're getting data on 32 players then you need a low-latency network connection and most of the rest is going to be rendering of fancy explosions, fog, scenery, etc. Hence things tend to tie up nicely with games like BF3 etc
Now get a bigger RTS. Lots of on-map units. Pathfinding. AI. etc. Latency is important but CPU maybe moreso than graphics
For me, it comes down to price VS performance, which is actually something I'm trying to figure out as I'm looking for a new rig.
At some point, too low performance becomes a regular lag-fest. However, if I can get decent load-times and run at 780P'ish resolution at good detail levels, I'm fairly happy. 1080P would be nice at medium+ detail for use when connected to a bigger TV, but I don't really see the point one an 22-24" LCD. I don't need 200fps, but somewhere consistent between 40-60+ would be nice for gaming.
Intel definitely tends to deliver more in the performance arena, but even the cheaper CPU's are often double the price of the AMD counterparts, and the motherboards tend to be a bit more costly as well.
Beyond gaming, compile-performance is nice. I do a bit of graphics work so while being able to play something like BF3 or Crysis at 1080P@60FPS or better is nice, not having to wait a long time for my app to compile or my mesh to render is equally as important, as is being able to run my desktop OS + possibly a VM or two.
Lastly of course is drivers. I haven't yet tried one of AMD's FM-series chips, but I'd hope they're Linux-friendly in terms of the graphics driver, etc. One thing I'd say for AMD is that their ATI acquisition seems to have improved their chips' graphical capabilities a notch, but also made a difference in the quality of drivers for the graphics line.
At the end of the day, is double the price or more going to double my performance, or is the more reasonably-price offering going to give me enough performance to suit my needs.
But in that case it would be really nice if they could have kept up two trees for awhile. I know it's a bit more of a PITA, but at least being able to choose *one* of either gnome2 or gnome3 would be nice.
I don't personally see a need to have both installed, but think that most would prefer not to have had gnome2 yanked up from under their feet.
It also makes it harder to replace your stock deck with third-party alternatives. Your third-party stereo may be better and cheaper, but will you install it if it breaks the integrated features (such as audio notifications that are pumped through the stereo system, or other stupid crap that doesn't need integration). If you do install it, then the cost of install goes up because of the complexity, making the overpriced manufacturer supplied/supported units seem like a better choice...
I think what sours a lot of people is a) Obtrusive ads (flashing, popover, etc) b) Repeated ads (repetition of the same crap over and over) c) Untargetted ads (not related to the interests of the viewer) d) Dangerous ads (malware-related spew from third-party ad-vendors)
At the least, most sites should be able to get rid of (c). Slashdot does had ads with neat stuff from ThinkGeek, for example, which might appeal to the viewers. NOBODY needs (a) or (d), and some variety would be nice for (b).
Personally, I use noscript/etc mainly to do with (d). Sites that have shite javascripts or flash that slow/lock up my browser, ads that try and force popups or redirects on me, or even ones that try to serve malware.
"YOUR PC IS INFECTED WITH A VIRUS"
One doesn't have to see that shit with noscript. If sites were more scrupulous about their ad networks, perhaps they wouldn't get blocked.
even though the science to determine potentially ill consequences may not yet exist
The existing regulations doesn't really expect this (although if it's medication there is a "trial" period), but they do alright in making sure that products do pass various existing tests and requirements.
For the product itself, a simple "be based on demonstratives effective science with no known ill side effects" (a.k.a put up or shut up) would be a good start.
I don't think that U.S. entrepreneurship is going to suffer from regulating "medical" iDevice apps, unless you're talking about the type of entrepreneur that sells body-part enhancement kits, miracle supplements, and perhaps bridges in New York.
I used to work at a company that ran some fairly big-name web-forums. It happens anywhere you get lots of people and the ability to post content, not just on "art" or whatever related forums.
It wasn't a problem with 99% of the userbase, say on a forum of 100k users I might have a dozen or less that were problematic, but you'd still regularly get people posting nasty/inappropriate stuff.
It used to make for interesting moments when the boss popped by our desk. Boss: "What's that!!!?" [shocked look while pointing at something on my screen] Me: [Pull up email] "User X reported a bunch of posts. I'm going through them, validating, then removing the posts and banning the users" Boss: "OK, finish up quickly and get that off your screen"
Think people with the personality of slashdot trolls but the ability to post pictures/links/etc. Some people seems to get their thrills in proportion to how many others they can mess with and how disturbing they can be. They didn't even have the ability to post such stuff right away, but actually cultivated accounts as "normals" until they got the ability to post rude sh**... then BAM.
Slashdot Mirror
How about this article in Canada.
While I'm sure there's some crossover between Canadian CBC and slashdot readers, I'd say that this is visible to more than just the slash-type crowd.
I have lots of non-geek friends that have taken notice of this, especially when features disappear from their phones are a result of idiotic lawsuits on obvious tech.
Nobody ever bothers me about my devices when the plane is in-flight. My phone is in "airplane mode", the wifi is off on my eReader, and the tablet similarly has wifi/bluetooth/etc turned off.
Nobody's ever given me any grief about it so long as the devices are off for takeoff/landing. Most airlines do mention having the cellphones turned off, but the rest are just suppose to be not broadcasting. I suppose if I wanted to game with other people in-flight through wifi it might be needed, but what's the issue here?
Most do care about email though. While facebook is working at supplanting it, this seems to still do better on something with an actual keyboard.
Tablets and smartphones aren't the problem. The problem (for the vendors) is that few things these days warrant a pricey new PC. /w 1024MB).
It's not that tablet/smartphone users don't have PC's. Most do. Most still use their PC's
But the PC they had 3-4 years ago is still good enough (ok, add some RAM if it's Vista
They may get a virus and require hiring somebody to clean it up, but that's still generally cheaper than a new PC.
However, what most people DON'T need is a quad-core i-7 with 8GB of RAM, 3TB HDD, and a dual-sli video card.
At most, they might need under 1TB of space, onboard video, a dual-core CPU, and a few gigs of RAM.
Yes, CAD users, graphic designers, and some others may differ, but the public at large doesn't do that much that requires a new upgrade.
In terms of smartdevices, the evolution is still pushing new product. Newer phone = updated OS, faster processor, better UI, more games, etc. Same for tablet.
They'll hit a ceiling as well, but at the moment the problem isn't that people don't need PC's because of portables, but rather that they don't need upgrades because what they have is good enough.
Which wouldn't work with this VPN, as it is windows-only?
Could you be sure that some other backdoor wasn't installed with the VPN software?
But you can be assured that the majority of those higher up wouldn't take the time to piss on you were you on-fire.
It's not that they're actually out to screw you, it's that they're out to make the most profit for themselves and friends. That such profit comes at your expense is incidental
Other Android OEMs have been able to avoid the issues that Samsung had
Samsung is not nearly the only vendor being sued by Apple. They are probably the biggest, by value of having the most popular android smartphones in most countries, but the entire industry is like watching somebody play patent-warfare-missile-command.
It seems that this reason is pretty much why companies throw out *insane number X* when asking for penalties. If they ask for a bazillion dollars, then a few trillion seems "more fair" in comparison.
We see this a lot with file-sharing penalties etc. The final result is often less than what's asked for, but still adds up to a mind-boggling amount... pretty much a bankrupting amount (without the option of bankruptcy) which will end up in lifetime indebtedness on the behalf of a plaintiff.
Not $1b may not break a big company like Samsung, but it's still a fairly crazy high amount. Not as crazy as $3b though, but crazy is still crazy.
Which I initially thought wasn't a common feature, until I realized what it covers.
On maps I used to be able to search for an address, or just type in a name of somebody in my contacts. This would find their address (if saved in contacts) and allow me to quickly navigate. This feature stopped working on my phone, presumably due the the patent issue.
Multi-source search has been around for *ages* on PC's, etc.
Of course Samsung could have done it better too instead of slamming in a change that broke the functionality. A quick-select to choose either local or network search would have worked well and should have not been affected by the patent.
"If you don't learn to share and play nice, I'm taking away *both* your toys!"
I seem to remember some of these existing in the wild on emulators quite a long time ago. There was a patch which could be run against the dumped ROM to translate most of the dialog etc. Some things that were actually graphics rather than text still retained Japanese letters/characters, but the character dialog was surprisingly well done.
FPS's:
Depends on where the AI etc is. If mostly you're getting data on 32 players then you need a low-latency network connection and most of the rest is going to be rendering of fancy explosions, fog, scenery, etc. Hence things tend to tie up nicely with games like BF3 etc
Now get a bigger RTS.
Lots of on-map units. Pathfinding. AI. etc. Latency is important but CPU maybe moreso than graphics
For me, it comes down to price VS performance, which is actually something I'm trying to figure out as I'm looking for a new rig.
At some point, too low performance becomes a regular lag-fest. However, if I can get decent load-times and run at 780P'ish resolution at good detail levels, I'm fairly happy. 1080P would be nice at medium+ detail for use when connected to a bigger TV, but I don't really see the point one an 22-24" LCD. I don't need 200fps, but somewhere consistent between 40-60+ would be nice for gaming.
Intel definitely tends to deliver more in the performance arena, but even the cheaper CPU's are often double the price of the AMD counterparts, and the motherboards tend to be a bit more costly as well.
Beyond gaming, compile-performance is nice. I do a bit of graphics work so while being able to play something like BF3 or Crysis at 1080P@60FPS or better is nice, not having to wait a long time for my app to compile or my mesh to render is equally as important, as is being able to run my desktop OS + possibly a VM or two.
Lastly of course is drivers. I haven't yet tried one of AMD's FM-series chips, but I'd hope they're Linux-friendly in terms of the graphics driver, etc. One thing I'd say for AMD is that their ATI acquisition seems to have improved their chips' graphical capabilities a notch, but also made a difference in the quality of drivers for the graphics line.
At the end of the day, is double the price or more going to double my performance, or is the more reasonably-price offering going to give me enough performance to suit my needs.
Which is why when you want to set a precedent in court, you choose the guy that nobody will love.
Once that's done, you can go after everyone else.
But in that case it would be really nice if they could have kept up two trees for awhile. I know it's a bit more of a PITA, but at least being able to choose *one* of either gnome2 or gnome3 would be nice.
I don't personally see a need to have both installed, but think that most would prefer not to have had gnome2 yanked up from under their feet.
It also makes it harder to replace your stock deck with third-party alternatives.
Your third-party stereo may be better and cheaper, but will you install it if it breaks the integrated features (such as audio notifications that are pumped through the stereo system, or other stupid crap that doesn't need integration). If you do install it, then the cost of install goes up because of the complexity, making the overpriced manufacturer supplied/supported units seem like a better choice...
The way I read it, is the event happened because the locks weren't changed (not that they weren't afterwards).
I'd be interested in seeing what your site looks like. Perhaps you'd care to share (in public or PM)?
Sounds like it might be a feedback forum of sorts, or just something with good product placement?
I think what sours a lot of people is
a) Obtrusive ads (flashing, popover, etc)
b) Repeated ads (repetition of the same crap over and over)
c) Untargetted ads (not related to the interests of the viewer)
d) Dangerous ads (malware-related spew from third-party ad-vendors)
At the least, most sites should be able to get rid of (c). Slashdot does had ads with neat stuff from ThinkGeek, for example, which might appeal to the viewers. NOBODY needs (a) or (d), and some variety would be nice for (b).
Personally, I use noscript/etc mainly to do with (d). Sites that have shite javascripts or flash that slow/lock up my browser, ads that try and force popups or redirects on me, or even ones that try to serve malware.
"YOUR PC IS INFECTED WITH A VIRUS"
One doesn't have to see that shit with noscript. If sites were more scrupulous about their ad networks, perhaps they wouldn't get blocked.
But that doesn't mean I wouldn't monitor in general what's going on, and set time for a chat if things stray over the line.
even though the science to determine potentially ill consequences may not yet exist
The existing regulations doesn't really expect this (although if it's medication there is a "trial" period), but they do alright in making sure that products do pass various existing tests and requirements.
For the product itself, a simple "be based on demonstratives effective science with no known ill side effects" (a.k.a put up or shut up) would be a good start.
I don't think that U.S. entrepreneurship is going to suffer from regulating "medical" iDevice apps, unless you're talking about the type of entrepreneur that sells body-part enhancement kits, miracle supplements, and perhaps bridges in New York.
Most servers I know of support remote KVM.
HP has iLO.
Dell has DRAC
Etc
And add the overhead of an X environment, plus the possible security issues, just for console access?
I used to work at a company that ran some fairly big-name web-forums. It happens anywhere you get lots of people and the ability to post content, not just on "art" or whatever related forums.
It wasn't a problem with 99% of the userbase, say on a forum of 100k users I might have a dozen or less that were problematic, but you'd still regularly get people posting nasty/inappropriate stuff.
It used to make for interesting moments when the boss popped by our desk.
Boss: "What's that!!!?" [shocked look while pointing at something on my screen]
Me: [Pull up email] "User X reported a bunch of posts. I'm going through them, validating, then removing the posts and banning the users"
Boss: "OK, finish up quickly and get that off your screen"
Think people with the personality of slashdot trolls but the ability to post pictures/links/etc. Some people seems to get their thrills in proportion to how many others they can mess with and how disturbing they can be. They didn't even have the ability to post such stuff right away, but actually cultivated accounts as "normals" until they got the ability to post rude sh**... then BAM.