... They have only one neighbor who they share a land border with who will talk with them, so they likely don't really have a way to set up a redundant second route.
Two countries, they share a short border area with Russia
Makes for interesting questions: Do they have fiber running through Russia, too? Did China decide to shut down the NK internet? If NK has a connection through Russia, did they go along with the idea? Or did the US or someone else do something to the internal NK infrastructure? All of the above assumes the NK blackout is not the decision of the NK government.
But none of that really tells us much about the movie itself; it could just as well be a teaser for Disney's toy catalog for next Christmas.
In other words, ff you get an advance copy of the catalog, you will know what is in the movie.
To this day I don't understand how Lucas could make something as good as "American Graffiti" and an entire collection as mediocre as "Star Wars", other than using them to sell toys. If it wasn't for Harrison Ford, Carrie Fisher and James Earl Jones in the original movie, my guess is that it would have flopped. It's sort of surprising to me that so many people with technical backgrounds like the SW series, given all of the science the movies completely disregard:
Sound in space
Spacecraft that make banked turns in a vacuum
Breathable atmosphere almost everywhere
No variation in gravity on different planets
Humans flying spacecraft while AI sits in the back seat
Humans aiming and shooting weapons while AI sits in the back seat
Large formations of spacecraft in close proximity even though they can move at hyper-light speed
etc, etc
The SW franchise strikes me as a series of repackaged westerns with WWII themes and an abundance of special effects. I like sci-fi that leaves you wondering about possibilities you never thought of before. I don't know why Hollywood has such a hard time with sci-fi given the example of "2001, A Space Odyssey". Not that 2001 was such a great movie given how disjointed it was, but the weightlessness, lack of sound in space, and of course the impossibility of understanding HALs AI made those sequences very alien and intriguing. (Martin Scorsese's comment that Dave Bowman shutting down HAL was actually a murder scene made the question of AI even more interesting.) "Terminator", "Predator", and "Alien" were all better, IMHO. I think all of the Philip K. Dick derived movies were better than SW, too. When it comes to SW, the stories leave little or nothing to the imagination, the antithesis of what good sci-fi should do. But then again, the movies are really just ads for toys and promotions at Burger King. In that regard, they make a lot of money so I will not argue with them as a business proposition. Now "Get off my lawn!"
Given all that we know about GM, can someone explain (aside from the obvious political reasons / TBTF), why this company was bailed out? Romney was correct, it should have been allowed to go bankrupt. In addition, the taxpayer still had to eat a $10 billion loss. GM management was incompetent to the core. This idea is yet another example of it for all of the reasons you list and more.
Actually it's a bit different from what you describe. The government loads contracts with all kinds of deliverables beyond the actual product being requested, such as documentation that never reflects reality since there is never enough time to do all of it and deliver a product. Everyone knows it won't be read anyway.As often as not these things distract the contractors. Then there are the process mandates and contract requirements that employ large numbers of people who are all busy checking checkboxes. All of this is done to prevent failures, but obviously the failures occur anyway. Part of this is often because the government tries to create a Facebook or Google in a couple of years, but also because the regulatory environment designed to prevent failure is so complicated critical information can be lost or obscured. It's not that the "accountable ones" are not held to account because they work for government, it's more the case that the contract complexity almost makes it impossible to determine who really is accountable.
Obviously when you don't really know who is accountable for something you don't know who to ask for reliable information, so people start making assumptions. "You want escalators, not elevators? But the contract says vertical lift system. We interpreted that to as..."
I was involved in a startup in my 40s. It ultimately failed, but I learned lessons that will hopefully be valuable to you to. What you describe sounds like a dream job for most people. As long as you get it, I don't think you have to be concerned at all about being older than the others. They will appreciate the times when someone comes up with a bad idea that looks good, but you can say "I've seen this before, here's what happened..." - as long as you are right. Even better will be the times when someone has an unproven idea and you can say, "I remember a couple of times when one of our developers had an off the wall idea that we all wondered about, but it was appealing enough that we went with it anyway and it worked." As for the hours, there will be 20 and 30 somethings who will go on 24+ hour coding binges. Did you do that when you were in your 20s? Do you think you would be productive doing it? Does management expect you to disrupt your family life? It's hard to believe a company that has grown to have 300 employees would have leadership that expects all of their employees to destroy their personal life. If they do, the company won't be the success everyone hopes for anyway. (Well, the founders might walk away with a lot of money before it implodes, but you won't. You have to assess that risk.)
The great thing about a good startup is the chance it offers to to new kinds of work and see it succeed in the marketplace. This can be really exciting. It's possible that you might have a similar opportunity in a large company but the odds are very low since you will be separated from the product or service by layers of management and bureaucratic rules. Yes you will get a steady paycheck, but it will never compare with the huge win you can get at a startup and the satisfaction of knowing you had a direct role in the success. You can also ask yourself if the startup role will make you a better developer. If the company fails, will you have improved your technical knowledge so that you are still valuable to other companies? In an established company it's more likely that you will just be a code monkey whose skills slowly evaporate without you realizing it, although you don't sound like the kind of person who would let that happen. If OTOH, the company you work for is run by PHBs who are forcing you to work on obsolete stuff, you have to leave anyway. Some large companies do have great jobs, though, but I don't think you would be looking if you were really happy where you are.
From your description of the job and given that you don't sound like the Get Off My Lawn type, I would suggest that you join the startup if they make you an offer that is reasonable.
I sympathize. I have a similar story about my former Benz. At 70K miles I had repair problem with the motor. MB's fault really, had to have been set up wrong at the factory. Cost of repair was about $7K. They put in $2K, but I had to fork over the rest. I will never buy another Benz. I have owned several cars. None ever had a catastrophic failure at 70K miles. Of course the dealers will tell you that is why you should buy an extended warranty. My response is the policy and its renewal fee would have been about as much, so it would have been worthless to me. After I decided to get rid of the Benz, I was quite tempted to buy a Model S after driving one. Ultimately I thought I would wait until they add a few features I like that are available on other cars. When the warranty is about to expire on the new car I will buy the Tesla.
It's also worth noting what a huge difference there is when buying a car from a dealership and a Tesla from the store. I think 99% of us share the opinion that buying a car from a dealership is the most insulting retail experience there is. Dealers know it but don't care since the franchise laws protect them from reasonable market forces. No wonder they are all trying to stop Tesla from selling direct to consumers. But car dealers are not the only industry that plays the regulatory game. Just one of the worst abusers.
Actually electric motors power the biggest machines I can think of, such as draglines, railroad locomotives and ships. The Presidential limo is not designed for a high speed getaway, it is really an armored personnel carrier with a nice paint job. It also doesn't have to go very far. The only time a limo had to go very "fast" was after an assassination attempt, but remember that it has a police escort that will clear all other traffic ahead of it. In JFK's case, speed would have been irrelevant, and in Reagan's case, they still had to drive through Washington D.C. streets which were more of a speed limitation than the limo itself. In addition, there is always an ambulance following the motorcade, so the POTUS would be transferred to it for a medical emergency. (This didn't happen for Reagan since he was shot right next to the limo. His Secret Service agent pushed him in after noticing blood and made the decision to go to the ER immediately.)
Four independent electric motors might actually give the limo more mobility than a single ICE, since all four would have to be knocked out to immobilize the car. They would also be lighter than the ICE. As for power, they could always charge up an electric limo using the APU on board AF1, or just carry additional battery packs. Another option would be to put a turbine generator in the car if extra range were needed, but I seriously doubt the POTUS will ever take a road trip in the limo. Truman might have done it for fun since he liked driving so much, but that was a different time.
Consumers will buy another brand without these annoyances
This model already exists:
Satellite radio
On Star
Nav map updates (in some cases)
Enabling heated seats by subscription is an interesting example. It might be a good deal for the consumer depending on how much cheaper a car is without them, with the subscription version, and always available. Pricing would vary by region no doubt. People in desert climates might opt for the subscription where they are primarily useful at night, but people in cold climates might be willing to pay the price for constant availability. The opposite might be true for AC. Pricing various features sounds like it could be more complex than pricing airfares, however.
Snowden played this excessively smart, and that's the only reason he's sort of free now.
I don't think Snowden is that smart or free. Today he does what the Russian government allows him to do. But consider the Russians have protesters in Moscow, protesters in Kiev, and suicide bombers in their midst. How long will the Russian government tolerate an icon for freedom from surveillance, especially given their history? I believe Snowden is in considerable danger.
Trust has very little to do with it. The people who have these weapons have them. The best that can be hoped for is a process of disarmament that does not cause too much damage if trust is broken, and one which prevents other parties from gaining the weapons and thus becoming risk factors in and of themselves.
A general perspective from Sen. Sam Nunn. The world requires more progress. I think people have become too complacent about these weapons.
Snowden's slow release has been keeping this story in the news. He's helping to build controversy around the programs.
Do you really think Snowden has ANY autonomy as a "guest" of Putin? The only thing we know is that Snowden is an American citizen who worked for NSA. He apparently released classified information he thought the public should know. But even with everything that has been written in the press, I doubt anyone outside of NSA, including Greenwald, really knows what he copied and what information is valid. You can be certain that any information attributed to Snowden now is very carefully crafted to serve Russian interests. Russia could release false information and attribute it to Snowden just to see the reaction, or various other reasons. I would be surprised if more than a very small number of people knows more than 10% of the story.
Maybe. I find myself using my iPad much less than I used to. iPad Air? Who cares. My iPod Touch weighs less, fits in my pocket and runs the iOS apps I need. But a tablet that is also a fully capable PC, one that can also run VMs and legacy Windows apps? Far more useful than an iPad. I sold my old laptop; I will replace it with a Surface Pro 2. Yes it's more expensive than I would like, but now I can subtract the price of the iPad I really don't need anymore. I thought about buying an iPhone 5 as an international phone, but now I'm looking at a Nexus 5 given the huge price difference.
I don't know what is happening at Apple HQ, but their products are becoming so expensive compared to the competition they should be sold at Tiffany's.
I bought a new car recently. I try to keep my cars as long as possible, but the old one was causing me to wonder how long it would last without another expensive repair. That meant a trip to the dealership, knowing quite well that I was about to have the worst category of retail experience known. It doesn't matter if you are buying a cheap car or an expensive one - dealers treat all customers the same way. Haggle, make you wait while the sales person "I will try to get my manager to accept your price, but he is going to beat me up..." talks fantasy football with his manager as you wait. (If you are trading in a car, they will take your keys to look at your trade-in. You will not be getting them back any time soon, so be sure to bring an extra set of keys you can drive off the lot while they are playing this game to wear you down.) Make them wait while you enjoy a sandwich or read a book in the coffee shop across the street.
After you endure that nonsense, you get to talk tot he "finance manager" who will try to get you to by an insanely overpriced extended warranty contract. If that doesn't work for the dealership, they will be happy to offer you very high rate auto loan. Think of what is happening: The sales rep is telling you how great the car is while you are looking at it, then the finance person is telling you an extended warranty is really needed because the car will probably have a major repair after the warranty period is over. Be sure to ask the finance person if they think you should tell the sales person you will not be buying the car since he or she just told you it really isn't a very well made car.
Car dealerships are really parasitic IMHO. They use their intermediary status to extract as much as possible from customers, and in doing so alienate the customers from the manufacturers. The manufacturer spends a huge amount of money establishing a brand, designing cars they hope will appeal to the public, taking capital risk, and managing production. Think of the extended warranty pitch - it totally undermines the manufacturer since it implies the car really isn't very reliable. My previous car was a high end brand, but I detested the sales and service department at the local dealer so much I vowed to never buy another model of that brand, even though I really liked the car. But none of this is new to anyone who has purchased a car from a dealership, new or used.
Given the above, and manufacturers know all of it, I am surprised that Ford and Chrysler aren't jumping on the direct sales model, too. They probably will though; the dealership model makes far less sense now that consumers can learn more about a car online than most car sales people will ever know, since that is not what they care about. Before the internet, it was necessary to go to a dealership to look at a car, maybe get a brochure and see what the car actually looked like. Of course the buyer still has to test drive the car, but there is no reason manufacturers can't follow the Tesla model. This is a bit of a simplification, since Tesla cars in high demand and people are willing to wait for one. There is also a lot to be said for having inventory on a lot since it simplifies distribution and might help close a deal. But... I think every manufacturer would clamp down on the pathetic treatment of customers their dealers engage in if they were selling directly.
A friend of mine is thinking about buying a BMW M3, but I told him he should drive a Tesla first given that the two models are similar in price. The BMW might be a good car, but he dislikes the dealership experience as much as anyone. Why support the dealership business model if there is a choice? My thought is that my next car will be a Tesla not only because it is a great car, but also because I know my money won't support the jerks who run auto dealerships.
Given the intermediary advantage the dealer has when approached by a customer, it is no wonder they are fighting the direct sales model. They have a license to steal, and don't want to give it up. We hav
I recommend the videos, since they are applicable to any electric or hybrid vehicle. There are special considerations for the electrified elements of these cars, which everyone should know about. You may very well be a first responder, so check out the documents and videos.
Because the phone manufacturers who use standard usb connectors are having so much trouble...
Not just phones! My sports watch, camera, Bluetooth headset all charge with USB cables. The same cables attached to any number of different chargers. So what stands out as being a PITA ? All of the Apple devices. I have an adapter for my proprietary Apple 30 pin to Lightning adapter, bought for $3 on eBay. Apple equivalent? $29. My $3 device worked fine until I upgraded to iOS7... Apple is turning into Countrywide Finance under Cook.
It may be fun and easy to bash Windows 8, but I don't think that is the reason. It's fine. When I see the metro desktop after logging in, it just looks like the menu was automatically opened on Win 7. That's not such a big deal. Once you have organized your app icons, though, it is really no different than clicking on one in the taskbar or the desktop. I find it inconsequential from that perspective, but you also get the live tiles and new apps, some of which are useful. Windows 8 is not the fiasco that Vista was, with its required hunt for drivers. On a multi-monitor setup, I can have the metro UI pop-up on any monitor, which is useful at times. Most of the time I am in the desktop. but I really don't notice switching between metro and the desktop. I run Windows 7 in a VM as an attempt to isolate the email, Flash, etc, and browsing risks. I am impressed with the performance if Hyper-V, but not happy that you can't mount USB drives or burn CDs from the VM. Hopefully that will be fixed in the future.
If I think of my own hardware purchases, it's easy to understand why PC sales are declining - tablets and phones. I by a new PC or motherboard about once every 7 years. I just bought a new PC after upgrading my mb about 7 years ago. I put it in a case that is 10 years old now. Since buying that last mb, I bought:
iMac
MBP
2 iPads, sold one
iPod
2 smartphones
Windows laptop
I am going to sell the iMac and Windows laptop soon. I'm interested in a Chromebook and some sort of Win 8 laptop. I am sure all of the above will be replaced by the time I upgrade my PC again, part of which is due to how its speed is now more than sufficient for almost everything I do. Eventually I expect my hardware mix to be a powerful desktop, a cloud-centric tablet/laptop, and a phone, with the latter two being replaced much more frequently than the desktop. Note also that it is easier to upgrade desktop hardware, so the replacement cycle is longer for PCs. Tablet and phone hardware improves much more noticeably with each new model at the moment. The same isn't true for PCs. That is what is slowing PC sales, not Windows 8, IMHO.
Give any big change 3 months and it will get accepted if you don't give in as the change forcer.
I've seen it at work too many times to count. Manglement makes a decision that upsets everyone and lots of people talk about how they are going to start looking elsewhere for employment and the sky will fall and this is terrible, but after the 3 month gripe period, everyone accepts the changes and life moves on.
I agree with you in general, but not in the case of Windows 8. At first I was skeptical about it, but then I tried using it on a laptop with a good trackpad. I was rather amazed at how fast I could navigate the OS. I think the most complaint about Win 8 is the Metro/desktop context switch. In other words, people are more comfortable with having everything jammed under the familiar "Start" button, since that is where everything has been for almost 20 years. After using Win 8 for a few minutes on proper hardware, I became very used to the context switch. In a way, it serves as a way of convenient way categorizing apps. Multi-function, multi-window work = desktop. Singular task, single window touch centric apps = metro.
Mac OS, OTOH, is old and creaking. It has the same paradigm it was designed with in the 80s. iOS was clearly a step in the right direction for touch, but it is antiquated now, too. The rich gesture environment of Win 8 on a tablet makes it much nicer to use than iOS in my experience. YMMV. But in my view, it is Apple that is forcing users to adapt to their way of doing things, not Microsoft. I think it is safe to say that Microsoft did incorporate user feedback into Win 8 design. Apple seems to think they figured it all out with the original Macintosh. I am now beginning to believe that Win 8 will become quite popular, much to everyone's surprise - including me.
I don't think the iPad is as cool and hip as it was, simply because so many people have one now. This is a subjective assessment, and you might be right, but I think the coolness of Apple products is diminishing simply because of their ubiquity.
The big problem the Surface RT has is the lack of apps, but the presence of Office is not trivial. My guess is that the Surface Pro (and the 3rd party versions of it) will be popular, and that will attract Win8 developers, which will then make the Surface RT more compelling. Note also that the Win 8 phones will run apps that run on Surface RT.
The hardware is really much more compelling than the iPad. USB ports, memory expansion slots, more RAM than the iPad for the same money, and Touch/Type covers. I looked at a Surface RT in the store, and I have to say that the Touch cover was really easy to use. It is a compelling combination.
As for Win 8, IMHO it is more user friendly than iOS. Using the screen edges for gestures really makes the Win 8 touch experience much better than iOS. Again, this is subjective, and others may not like it. But it is a lot better than people think. Even Walt Mossberg liked the Surface, though he said it still needs refinement and of course - Apps. In my view, the real competition is now between the Nexus and Surface. Both are more compelling from a hardware perspective than the iPad. Kudos to Jobs and Apple for bringing us the iPad. Without it we probably wouldn't have the choices we have today. But in my view, the iPad has stagnated.
Short MSFT? I would be careful about that. If you look at the hardware features of the Surface (especially the x86 version) and the Nexus 7/10, I would guess that AAPL is the better short. Surface / Nexus are better, far more flexible hardware designs than the iPad . In terms of software, iPad still has a critical advantage, but I don't think this will last long. I think Cook has a real problem now. I looked at a Surface in a Microsoft store and had to say I was impressed with the touch cover. I think even Jobs would have appreciated its functionality. The type cover is even better, but costs more. The store was busy with lots of people looking at the Surface, but I have no idea as to how many they were selling. The sales person at the store said they were selling a lot of them, but who knows.
I intend to get a Surface Pro, and keep the iPad I have. The important thing to recognize is that I have no intention of upgrading the iPad now. I would get a Nexus 10 before buying another iPad. My guess is that when the Surface Pro comes out, they will sell well and developers will start porting the most popular apps, riding on the popularity / legacy Windows apps that will drive Surface Pro sales. As more apps are ported, the iPad's hardware limitations will cause serious problems for AAPL, especially as the increased number of apps makes the Surface RT and Windows 8 phones more compelling.
Nice to hear Cook pointing out the fact that vertical touchscreens really don't work.
No one will be forced to use a vertical touch screen. The Surface comes with a keyboard. You can use the touch pad or a mouse if you want to. One thing Win 8 does when using touch that is really rather brilliant is make use of all four screen edges for gestures. In retrospect, iOS is seriously lacking this feature. IMHO, it makes a tablet much easier to use. As a touch OS, I think Win8 is much more user friendly and flexible than iOS.
Still, Apple spreading FUD on Microsoft instead of the other way around makes me wanna think Microsoft is cool. Probably not a good strategy on Apple's part.
Cook is becoming the new Ballmer. I plan to buy an x86 Surface when it is available. I will keep the iPad 1 that I have, but don't plan to buy another one. The Surface, if executed properly by Microsoft will be the killer hardware / software combination especially when linked with SkyDrive.
I have no way of knowing, but I would guess Microsoft expects Windows 8 to be adopted by Surface/tablet users first. Windows 7 will be the enterprise desktop of choice for some time. If things go according to Microsoft's plan, a few years from now users will be comfortable with the UI formerly known as Metro. Then the enterprise will migrate to Windows 9+ with whatever refinements it has. Whether this works or not, we shall see.
Slashdot Mirror
Two countries, they share a short border area with Russia
Makes for interesting questions: Do they have fiber running through Russia, too? Did China decide to shut down the NK internet? If NK has a connection through Russia, did they go along with the idea? Or did the US or someone else do something to the internal NK infrastructure? All of the above assumes the NK blackout is not the decision of the NK government.
Don't forget "American Graffiti", arguably a classic and made when Ford was not well known. Lucas wasn't either.
Good article on Bloomberg View about this. It's not the panacea some think it is.
But none of that really tells us much about the movie itself; it could just as well be a teaser for Disney's toy catalog for next Christmas.
In other words, ff you get an advance copy of the catalog, you will know what is in the movie.
To this day I don't understand how Lucas could make something as good as "American Graffiti" and an entire collection as mediocre as "Star Wars", other than using them to sell toys. If it wasn't for Harrison Ford, Carrie Fisher and James Earl Jones in the original movie, my guess is that it would have flopped. It's sort of surprising to me that so many people with technical backgrounds like the SW series, given all of the science the movies completely disregard:
The SW franchise strikes me as a series of repackaged westerns with WWII themes and an abundance of special effects. I like sci-fi that leaves you wondering about possibilities you never thought of before. I don't know why Hollywood has such a hard time with sci-fi given the example of "2001, A Space Odyssey". Not that 2001 was such a great movie given how disjointed it was, but the weightlessness, lack of sound in space, and of course the impossibility of understanding HALs AI made those sequences very alien and intriguing. (Martin Scorsese's comment that Dave Bowman shutting down HAL was actually a murder scene made the question of AI even more interesting.) "Terminator", "Predator", and "Alien" were all better, IMHO. I think all of the Philip K. Dick derived movies were better than SW, too. When it comes to SW, the stories leave little or nothing to the imagination, the antithesis of what good sci-fi should do. But then again, the movies are really just ads for toys and promotions at Burger King. In that regard, they make a lot of money so I will not argue with them as a business proposition. Now "Get off my lawn!"
Given all that we know about GM, can someone explain (aside from the obvious political reasons / TBTF), why this company was bailed out? Romney was correct, it should have been allowed to go bankrupt. In addition, the taxpayer still had to eat a $10 billion loss. GM management was incompetent to the core. This idea is yet another example of it for all of the reasons you list and more.
Actually it's a bit different from what you describe. The government loads contracts with all kinds of deliverables beyond the actual product being requested, such as documentation that never reflects reality since there is never enough time to do all of it and deliver a product. Everyone knows it won't be read anyway.As often as not these things distract the contractors. Then there are the process mandates and contract requirements that employ large numbers of people who are all busy checking checkboxes. All of this is done to prevent failures, but obviously the failures occur anyway. Part of this is often because the government tries to create a Facebook or Google in a couple of years, but also because the regulatory environment designed to prevent failure is so complicated critical information can be lost or obscured. It's not that the "accountable ones" are not held to account because they work for government, it's more the case that the contract complexity almost makes it impossible to determine who really is accountable.
Obviously when you don't really know who is accountable for something you don't know who to ask for reliable information, so people start making assumptions. "You want escalators, not elevators? But the contract says vertical lift system. We interpreted that to as..."
I was involved in a startup in my 40s. It ultimately failed, but I learned lessons that will hopefully be valuable to you to. What you describe sounds like a dream job for most people. As long as you get it, I don't think you have to be concerned at all about being older than the others. They will appreciate the times when someone comes up with a bad idea that looks good, but you can say "I've seen this before, here's what happened..." - as long as you are right. Even better will be the times when someone has an unproven idea and you can say, "I remember a couple of times when one of our developers had an off the wall idea that we all wondered about, but it was appealing enough that we went with it anyway and it worked." As for the hours, there will be 20 and 30 somethings who will go on 24+ hour coding binges. Did you do that when you were in your 20s? Do you think you would be productive doing it? Does management expect you to disrupt your family life? It's hard to believe a company that has grown to have 300 employees would have leadership that expects all of their employees to destroy their personal life. If they do, the company won't be the success everyone hopes for anyway. (Well, the founders might walk away with a lot of money before it implodes, but you won't. You have to assess that risk.)
The great thing about a good startup is the chance it offers to to new kinds of work and see it succeed in the marketplace. This can be really exciting. It's possible that you might have a similar opportunity in a large company but the odds are very low since you will be separated from the product or service by layers of management and bureaucratic rules. Yes you will get a steady paycheck, but it will never compare with the huge win you can get at a startup and the satisfaction of knowing you had a direct role in the success. You can also ask yourself if the startup role will make you a better developer. If the company fails, will you have improved your technical knowledge so that you are still valuable to other companies? In an established company it's more likely that you will just be a code monkey whose skills slowly evaporate without you realizing it, although you don't sound like the kind of person who would let that happen. If OTOH, the company you work for is run by PHBs who are forcing you to work on obsolete stuff, you have to leave anyway. Some large companies do have great jobs, though, but I don't think you would be looking if you were really happy where you are.
From your description of the job and given that you don't sound like the Get Off My Lawn type, I would suggest that you join the startup if they make you an offer that is reasonable.
I sympathize. I have a similar story about my former Benz. At 70K miles I had repair problem with the motor. MB's fault really, had to have been set up wrong at the factory. Cost of repair was about $7K. They put in $2K, but I had to fork over the rest. I will never buy another Benz. I have owned several cars. None ever had a catastrophic failure at 70K miles. Of course the dealers will tell you that is why you should buy an extended warranty. My response is the policy and its renewal fee would have been about as much, so it would have been worthless to me. After I decided to get rid of the Benz, I was quite tempted to buy a Model S after driving one. Ultimately I thought I would wait until they add a few features I like that are available on other cars. When the warranty is about to expire on the new car I will buy the Tesla.
It's also worth noting what a huge difference there is when buying a car from a dealership and a Tesla from the store. I think 99% of us share the opinion that buying a car from a dealership is the most insulting retail experience there is. Dealers know it but don't care since the franchise laws protect them from reasonable market forces. No wonder they are all trying to stop Tesla from selling direct to consumers. But car dealers are not the only industry that plays the regulatory game. Just one of the worst abusers.
Actually electric motors power the biggest machines I can think of, such as draglines, railroad locomotives and ships. The Presidential limo is not designed for a high speed getaway, it is really an armored personnel carrier with a nice paint job. It also doesn't have to go very far. The only time a limo had to go very "fast" was after an assassination attempt, but remember that it has a police escort that will clear all other traffic ahead of it. In JFK's case, speed would have been irrelevant, and in Reagan's case, they still had to drive through Washington D.C. streets which were more of a speed limitation than the limo itself. In addition, there is always an ambulance following the motorcade, so the POTUS would be transferred to it for a medical emergency. (This didn't happen for Reagan since he was shot right next to the limo. His Secret Service agent pushed him in after noticing blood and made the decision to go to the ER immediately.)
Four independent electric motors might actually give the limo more mobility than a single ICE, since all four would have to be knocked out to immobilize the car. They would also be lighter than the ICE. As for power, they could always charge up an electric limo using the APU on board AF1, or just carry additional battery packs. Another option would be to put a turbine generator in the car if extra range were needed, but I seriously doubt the POTUS will ever take a road trip in the limo. Truman might have done it for fun since he liked driving so much, but that was a different time.
Dear NIssan,
One word will explain why the LEAF is not popular:
FUGLY
Consumers will buy another brand without these annoyances
This model already exists:
Enabling heated seats by subscription is an interesting example. It might be a good deal for the consumer depending on how much cheaper a car is without them, with the subscription version, and always available. Pricing would vary by region no doubt. People in desert climates might opt for the subscription where they are primarily useful at night, but people in cold climates might be willing to pay the price for constant availability. The opposite might be true for AC. Pricing various features sounds like it could be more complex than pricing airfares, however.
Snowden played this excessively smart, and that's the only reason he's sort of free now.
I don't think Snowden is that smart or free. Today he does what the Russian government allows him to do. But consider the Russians have protesters in Moscow, protesters in Kiev, and suicide bombers in their midst. How long will the Russian government tolerate an icon for freedom from surveillance, especially given their history? I believe Snowden is in considerable danger.
Another reference: Sergei Guriev
Also Mikhail Khodorkovsky
As for Snowden, I still think we know 10% or less of the story. There is a lot that does not make sense.
Trust has very little to do with it. The people who have these weapons have them. The best that can be hoped for is a process of disarmament that does not cause too much damage if trust is broken, and one which prevents other parties from gaining the weapons and thus becoming risk factors in and of themselves.
A general perspective from Sen. Sam Nunn. The world requires more progress. I think people have become too complacent about these weapons.
Snowden's slow release has been keeping this story in the news. He's helping to build controversy around the programs.
Do you really think Snowden has ANY autonomy as a "guest" of Putin? The only thing we know is that Snowden is an American citizen who worked for NSA. He apparently released classified information he thought the public should know. But even with everything that has been written in the press, I doubt anyone outside of NSA, including Greenwald, really knows what he copied and what information is valid. You can be certain that any information attributed to Snowden now is very carefully crafted to serve Russian interests. Russia could release false information and attribute it to Snowden just to see the reaction, or various other reasons. I would be surprised if more than a very small number of people knows more than 10% of the story.
Maybe. I find myself using my iPad much less than I used to. iPad Air? Who cares. My iPod Touch weighs less, fits in my pocket and runs the iOS apps I need. But a tablet that is also a fully capable PC, one that can also run VMs and legacy Windows apps? Far more useful than an iPad. I sold my old laptop; I will replace it with a Surface Pro 2. Yes it's more expensive than I would like, but now I can subtract the price of the iPad I really don't need anymore. I thought about buying an iPhone 5 as an international phone, but now I'm looking at a Nexus 5 given the huge price difference.
I don't know what is happening at Apple HQ, but their products are becoming so expensive compared to the competition they should be sold at Tiffany's.
I bought a new car recently. I try to keep my cars as long as possible, but the old one was causing me to wonder how long it would last without another expensive repair. That meant a trip to the dealership, knowing quite well that I was about to have the worst category of retail experience known. It doesn't matter if you are buying a cheap car or an expensive one - dealers treat all customers the same way. Haggle, make you wait while the sales person "I will try to get my manager to accept your price, but he is going to beat me up..." talks fantasy football with his manager as you wait. (If you are trading in a car, they will take your keys to look at your trade-in. You will not be getting them back any time soon, so be sure to bring an extra set of keys you can drive off the lot while they are playing this game to wear you down.) Make them wait while you enjoy a sandwich or read a book in the coffee shop across the street.
After you endure that nonsense, you get to talk tot he "finance manager" who will try to get you to by an insanely overpriced extended warranty contract. If that doesn't work for the dealership, they will be happy to offer you very high rate auto loan. Think of what is happening: The sales rep is telling you how great the car is while you are looking at it, then the finance person is telling you an extended warranty is really needed because the car will probably have a major repair after the warranty period is over. Be sure to ask the finance person if they think you should tell the sales person you will not be buying the car since he or she just told you it really isn't a very well made car.
Car dealerships are really parasitic IMHO. They use their intermediary status to extract as much as possible from customers, and in doing so alienate the customers from the manufacturers. The manufacturer spends a huge amount of money establishing a brand, designing cars they hope will appeal to the public, taking capital risk, and managing production. Think of the extended warranty pitch - it totally undermines the manufacturer since it implies the car really isn't very reliable. My previous car was a high end brand, but I detested the sales and service department at the local dealer so much I vowed to never buy another model of that brand, even though I really liked the car. But none of this is new to anyone who has purchased a car from a dealership, new or used.
Given the above, and manufacturers know all of it, I am surprised that Ford and Chrysler aren't jumping on the direct sales model, too. They probably will though; the dealership model makes far less sense now that consumers can learn more about a car online than most car sales people will ever know, since that is not what they care about. Before the internet, it was necessary to go to a dealership to look at a car, maybe get a brochure and see what the car actually looked like. Of course the buyer still has to test drive the car, but there is no reason manufacturers can't follow the Tesla model. This is a bit of a simplification, since Tesla cars in high demand and people are willing to wait for one. There is also a lot to be said for having inventory on a lot since it simplifies distribution and might help close a deal. But... I think every manufacturer would clamp down on the pathetic treatment of customers their dealers engage in if they were selling directly.
A friend of mine is thinking about buying a BMW M3, but I told him he should drive a Tesla first given that the two models are similar in price. The BMW might be a good car, but he dislikes the dealership experience as much as anyone. Why support the dealership business model if there is a choice? My thought is that my next car will be a Tesla not only because it is a great car, but also because I know my money won't support the jerks who run auto dealerships.
Given the intermediary advantage the dealer has when approached by a customer, it is no wonder they are fighting the direct sales model. They have a license to steal, and don't want to give it up. We hav
Tesla provides information for first responders on the site.
I recommend the videos, since they are applicable to any electric or hybrid vehicle. There are special considerations for the electrified elements of these cars, which everyone should know about. You may very well be a first responder, so check out the documents and videos.
Because the phone manufacturers who use standard usb connectors are having so much trouble...
Not just phones! My sports watch, camera, Bluetooth headset all charge with USB cables. The same cables attached to any number of different chargers. So what stands out as being a PITA ? All of the Apple devices. I have an adapter for my proprietary Apple 30 pin to Lightning adapter, bought for $3 on eBay. Apple equivalent? $29. My $3 device worked fine until I upgraded to iOS7... Apple is turning into Countrywide Finance under Cook.
Windows 8.
It may be fun and easy to bash Windows 8, but I don't think that is the reason. It's fine. When I see the metro desktop after logging in, it just looks like the menu was automatically opened on Win 7. That's not such a big deal. Once you have organized your app icons, though, it is really no different than clicking on one in the taskbar or the desktop. I find it inconsequential from that perspective, but you also get the live tiles and new apps, some of which are useful. Windows 8 is not the fiasco that Vista was, with its required hunt for drivers. On a multi-monitor setup, I can have the metro UI pop-up on any monitor, which is useful at times. Most of the time I am in the desktop. but I really don't notice switching between metro and the desktop. I run Windows 7 in a VM as an attempt to isolate the email, Flash, etc, and browsing risks. I am impressed with the performance if Hyper-V, but not happy that you can't mount USB drives or burn CDs from the VM. Hopefully that will be fixed in the future.
If I think of my own hardware purchases, it's easy to understand why PC sales are declining - tablets and phones. I by a new PC or motherboard about once every 7 years. I just bought a new PC after upgrading my mb about 7 years ago. I put it in a case that is 10 years old now. Since buying that last mb, I bought:
I am going to sell the iMac and Windows laptop soon. I'm interested in a Chromebook and some sort of Win 8 laptop. I am sure all of the above will be replaced by the time I upgrade my PC again, part of which is due to how its speed is now more than sufficient for almost everything I do. Eventually I expect my hardware mix to be a powerful desktop, a cloud-centric tablet/laptop, and a phone, with the latter two being replaced much more frequently than the desktop. Note also that it is easier to upgrade desktop hardware, so the replacement cycle is longer for PCs. Tablet and phone hardware improves much more noticeably with each new model at the moment. The same isn't true for PCs. That is what is slowing PC sales, not Windows 8, IMHO.
Give any big change 3 months and it will get accepted if you don't give in as the change forcer.
I've seen it at work too many times to count. Manglement makes a decision that upsets everyone and lots of people talk about how they are going to start looking elsewhere for employment and the sky will fall and this is terrible, but after the 3 month gripe period, everyone accepts the changes and life moves on.
I agree with you in general, but not in the case of Windows 8. At first I was skeptical about it, but then I tried using it on a laptop with a good trackpad. I was rather amazed at how fast I could navigate the OS. I think the most complaint about Win 8 is the Metro/desktop context switch. In other words, people are more comfortable with having everything jammed under the familiar "Start" button, since that is where everything has been for almost 20 years. After using Win 8 for a few minutes on proper hardware, I became very used to the context switch. In a way, it serves as a way of convenient way categorizing apps. Multi-function, multi-window work = desktop. Singular task, single window touch centric apps = metro.
Mac OS, OTOH, is old and creaking. It has the same paradigm it was designed with in the 80s. iOS was clearly a step in the right direction for touch, but it is antiquated now, too. The rich gesture environment of Win 8 on a tablet makes it much nicer to use than iOS in my experience. YMMV. But in my view, it is Apple that is forcing users to adapt to their way of doing things, not Microsoft. I think it is safe to say that Microsoft did incorporate user feedback into Win 8 design. Apple seems to think they figured it all out with the original Macintosh. I am now beginning to believe that Win 8 will become quite popular, much to everyone's surprise - including me.
I don't think the iPad is as cool and hip as it was, simply because so many people have one now. This is a subjective assessment, and you might be right, but I think the coolness of Apple products is diminishing simply because of their ubiquity.
The big problem the Surface RT has is the lack of apps, but the presence of Office is not trivial. My guess is that the Surface Pro (and the 3rd party versions of it) will be popular, and that will attract Win8 developers, which will then make the Surface RT more compelling. Note also that the Win 8 phones will run apps that run on Surface RT.
The hardware is really much more compelling than the iPad. USB ports, memory expansion slots, more RAM than the iPad for the same money, and Touch/Type covers. I looked at a Surface RT in the store, and I have to say that the Touch cover was really easy to use. It is a compelling combination.
As for Win 8, IMHO it is more user friendly than iOS. Using the screen edges for gestures really makes the Win 8 touch experience much better than iOS. Again, this is subjective, and others may not like it. But it is a lot better than people think. Even Walt Mossberg liked the Surface, though he said it still needs refinement and of course - Apps. In my view, the real competition is now between the Nexus and Surface. Both are more compelling from a hardware perspective than the iPad. Kudos to Jobs and Apple for bringing us the iPad. Without it we probably wouldn't have the choices we have today. But in my view, the iPad has stagnated.
This and Win8 is going to be ugly.
Short MSFT? I would be careful about that. If you look at the hardware features of the Surface (especially the x86 version) and the Nexus 7/10, I would guess that AAPL is the better short. Surface / Nexus are better, far more flexible hardware designs than the iPad . In terms of software, iPad still has a critical advantage, but I don't think this will last long. I think Cook has a real problem now. I looked at a Surface in a Microsoft store and had to say I was impressed with the touch cover. I think even Jobs would have appreciated its functionality. The type cover is even better, but costs more. The store was busy with lots of people looking at the Surface, but I have no idea as to how many they were selling. The sales person at the store said they were selling a lot of them, but who knows.
I intend to get a Surface Pro, and keep the iPad I have. The important thing to recognize is that I have no intention of upgrading the iPad now. I would get a Nexus 10 before buying another iPad. My guess is that when the Surface Pro comes out, they will sell well and developers will start porting the most popular apps, riding on the popularity / legacy Windows apps that will drive Surface Pro sales. As more apps are ported, the iPad's hardware limitations will cause serious problems for AAPL, especially as the increased number of apps makes the Surface RT and Windows 8 phones more compelling.
Nice to hear Cook pointing out the fact that vertical touchscreens really don't work.
No one will be forced to use a vertical touch screen. The Surface comes with a keyboard. You can use the touch pad or a mouse if you want to. One thing Win 8 does when using touch that is really rather brilliant is make use of all four screen edges for gestures. In retrospect, iOS is seriously lacking this feature. IMHO, it makes a tablet much easier to use. As a touch OS, I think Win8 is much more user friendly and flexible than iOS.
Still, Apple spreading FUD on Microsoft instead of the other way around makes me wanna think Microsoft is cool. Probably not a good strategy on Apple's part.
Cook is becoming the new Ballmer. I plan to buy an x86 Surface when it is available. I will keep the iPad 1 that I have, but don't plan to buy another one. The Surface, if executed properly by Microsoft will be the killer hardware / software combination especially when linked with SkyDrive.
I have no way of knowing, but I would guess Microsoft expects Windows 8 to be adopted by Surface/tablet users first. Windows 7 will be the enterprise desktop of choice for some time. If things go according to Microsoft's plan, a few years from now users will be comfortable with the UI formerly known as Metro. Then the enterprise will migrate to Windows 9+ with whatever refinements it has. Whether this works or not, we shall see.