Everyone else will keep using Skype, and are glad that MS is keeping it up to date on platforms other than Windows after their acquisition of the software.
That's why they switched to socketed CPUs and removable MXM graphics cards on the iMac, and screw-less PCI card and hard drive caddies in the Pro, right?
Oh, and quick and easy to remove bottom panels (with standard RAM, hard drives and so on) in the Macbook Pro.
But oh wait, they made a new computer with proprietary, tiny parts to make it super thin, that means they hate people who upgrade! Got it! If you don't like it then too bad... err, I mean "buy the other laptops they sell".
And again, you demonstrate why Linux is a niche on the desktop market.
You expect "more", so do I, but my mum expects to be able to chat with her friends and relatives. I can't "force" them all to use something different when Skype works very well for them. With an updated version of Skype on Linux it removes one more barrier to adoption for those looking outside of Windows (or who have technical help who can now consider more options).
It's not all about the technically literate any more - it's about everyone.
Quite possibly. It does seem like it would be very difficult to accurately determine error bars on those plots for exactly the reasons you suggested. Perhaps they were relying on other data that suggested migration was not a significant factor? They have mentioned other tracking methods; radio collars, for example, that they have also used.
Atmospheric CO2 partial pressure is at an all time high (post industrial revolution) for as far back as we can measure.
You contradict yourself - first you say that deep ice core data shows that temperature rises and atmospheric CO2 concentrations are linked, then you claim that "no one has proven... if they just happen to appear together". I'll save you the trouble - the former is the accurate statement, although it's not exclusive to CO2; any molecule that absorbs IR in the atmosphere is a greenhouse gas, which makes the biggest culprits CO2 and water vapour. There are many others that are considerably worse than CO2 (hundreds, sometimes thousands of times more potent as IR absorbers) that are mitigated by low concentrations.
It's very easy to demonstrate with a simple science experiment that you can do yourself at home with a plastic bottle, a thermometer, a stopwatch and a lamp. Seal the bottle then point the lamp at it and leave it for 10 minutes. Measure the temperature inside after this time has elapsed. Now open the bottle and breathe in and out, sealing your mouth around the neck for as long as you can manage it (until all the oxygen is gone) - ie, vastly increase the concentration of CO2 and water vapour inside the bottle. Seal it up and then wait for the temperature inside to fall to the same level as the air was in the first experiment (your breath will obviously be warm, so you want to start from the same air temperature). When it's back to the same level turn the lamp on and wait another 10 minutes and record the temperature. Record your results.
The chemistry of IR absorbing gasses is not controversial. It only seems to be when it's politically inconvenient. Suddenly the idea that CO2 absorbs IR radiation just because it's in the earth's atmosphere rather than in a lab setting is "merely anecdotal".
Most radiation that falls on the earth *is* reflected (our albedo is quite high), and even then, much of the re-radiated IR from the earth's surface is also lost to space - this is not new or controversial information.
"We need to understand climates change and there is absolutely nothing we can do about it" is probably the most hilariously inaccurate and naive statement I think I've ever read on slashdot. Not only is it one of the most ridiculous "head in the sand" conclusions drawn from a fundamental misunderstanding of basic science (if the first part of the comment is anything to go by), but it's contradicted by extensive evidence to the contrary by a number of widely famous examples. The most obvious of these would be the depletion (and subsequent re-establishment) of the ozone layer and the corresponding changes to the climate that were observed and reversed in response to human actions.
If all the people on earth disappeared the climate would indeed continue to change in response to events that occur - the only difference is that there would be no further changes from anthropogenic factors. The fact that it responds to natural changes does not mean that humans have no effect on it. Again, you seem to misunderstand the way that the climate works.
And your proof that Apple is doing anything worse than its competition is? The competition's reports on their contractors' work conditions?
Doing no worse than one's competition is not really a defense or a moral position. It just means that you aren't the only bad person out there, but it doesn't justify what you are doing. Prisons are full of people who didn't do anything worse than somebody else.
That wasn't his point and you know it. The supposed "moral superiority" of Apple's competitors is frequently used as a justification for hating them or for boycotting their products (it's not difficult to find "this is why I don't buy Apple and only use XYZ's products instead" comments here on/. and elsewhere) when in reality the alternatives are no different, and sometimes worse.
This does not excuse either position of course; we've got to continue to push for elimination of worker and environmental exploitation.
The point of widespread communication systems is that you can get in touch with people.
The answer to "why skype [on Linux]?" is "because it works". How is the increased number of choices bad? It's almost infinitely more likely that someone will be reachable via Skype than via something that really doesn't have traction beyond geeks using Linux and OSS exclusively. Part of the whole battle to make Linux much more accessible to the general public is having software that people want to use. Up-to-date Skype on Linux is a win/win for all concerned; both from Microsoft's end (more users make the service as a whole more valuable) and for users (since the software is available) and since it removes one more hurdle to Linux adoption for the general public ("I might try it out, but can I run [$piece of common software] on it?").
Maybe not 3 years but the device will not work forever. At some point the flash memory will stop working, or the battery will leak causing a shortcut, or the ipad will fall or take a glass of Coke.
The obvious point is that other kids could benefit from the app and they are being denied right now.
Yes, clearly - but everyone seems to be blaming Apple for responding to an issue over a lawsuit. The reason the app is being "denied" to other kids is because the maker of the big, fancy expensive "helper" equipment is suing the maker of the much cheaper, much more effective application - it's a classic threat-to-busines-model problem with the original (ineffective and expensive, but only game in town) being threatened by a cheaper and better upstart. Rather than compete, they want to kill it.
If they do succeed in winning the suit, Apple has no choice either way. They have simply pulled the app pending the outcome as a precaution. They haven't done any remote deletion though.
To be fair though, OS X is a very heavily modded Unix based system that is a pretty far ways away from any *nix, aside from a handful of terminal commands.
It *is* certified Unix though, despite what people say. At least, it was - I'm not sure if the more recent releases have been technically certified, but the kernel and BSD layers haven't changed drastically.
What iDevice do you have that "fails" at the end of its "three year" design life?
I've not run into one yet that simply stops working. Batteries are easy to replace, screens are not impossible to repair in the event of damage etc.
I'm curious by what you mean. You were modded insightful, so clearly there's some salient point, I'm just not sure what it is. Why will her device fail after three years and why will she be obligated to replace it with something "incompatable" [sic]?
I thought it was about started projects, not about sales.
Why would you start a project if it's not going to sell.
There are several cases where the paid app earns $X and the same app, except in free "lite" ad-supported form (and thus free) earns Y($X) where Y is an integer bigger than 1.
Please give a glib response to that. You're sockpuppets will even upmod that for you, bonch.
And yes, we know that the 'jo_ham' account is bonch, because all it does it parrot what bonch says, with absolutely zero independent thought.
Again with the ad hom. Doesn't your mum tell you off for that? If you can't play nice with the rest of us then she might take your computer time away from you.
I'm happy to debate, but there's really nothing to do but "dodge" the laughably terrible arguments if the best you have to offer is that paragraph. I'd go point by point, adding quote tags and carefully formatting it, but I know that you would not read it and simply come back with an attack on my character rather than the argument itself. In other words I refuse to have a battle of wits with an unarmed man.
You are a sick, foul, disgusting subhuman piece of filth who is paid to lie, slander, and befoul a medium which was designed to be open and free of corporate mouthpieces like yourself. You are a hideous nonhuman. We didn't create the Internet for you to spew your sick, depraved corporate hatespeak. GTFO now.
Goodness me, such vehemence! Clearly something is chafing. I'd address your supposed discussion points, but given that the highest level of intelligence you seem to possess results in the above paragraph, I'm not sure you'd understand them. Come back when you've grown up, son.
You still forgot to log in, or is that a symptom of mashing at the submit button with such frothing rage that someone is wrong on the internet that you need to rush to attack them and thus forget basic things like how to use a discussion board.
Also amusing on "having facts to hand" and "who cares outside of China". I assume you haven't heard of this cool new thing. It's called "Google". You can type things into it and it returns a list of relevant URLs (also called "links" or "website addresses") that you can follow. You can find almost anything really quickly and easily! Maybe you should try it sometime. The website address is http://www.google.com./ Type that into the address bar at the top of your browser window. You don't have to type the http:/// part if you don't want to. Type what you want to find in the search box that comes up and then you too can have facts "close at hand". Well, assuming that your parents haven't blocked Google on your computer. You might have to ask them if it's ok to go there.
I've always wondered, why is that you make these kinds of posts?
What does apple's market share matter to you, and why do you always rush in to praise them whenever possible?
It just seems very odd for a disinterested individual to have so many factoids at hand and such a strong desire to promote and defend a company which already has a billion-dollar advertising and PR budget.
I think it says more about you than it does me. Where do you get that I'm "praising" Apple in my post? All it offers is a potential reason for Microsoft's original statement (that the OP questioned might be a lie because Microsoft said it) to be true. My comment was neutral regarding Apple - it neither praises nor condemns.
Apple's market share doesn't bother me at all, but I thought the point of a discussion site was to have, y'know, actual discussions? Or is coming in with a point that effectively says "I don't think Microsoft is lying about Windows Phone sales in China" not allowed, or considered to be "promoting and defending" a company with a "billion-dollar advertising and PR budget" merely because I mentioned them.
If you think me pointing out that Windows Phone is "only" outselling iPhone due to some "artificial crippling" of sales due to carrier availability is some sort of "fanboy defence" then I think you're projecting your own prejudices and bias into it. I was merely pointing out possible explanations about why Microsoft was unlikely to be lying.
Either way, it says more about you than it does me. Also, you forgot to log in.
Windows phones probably are outselling iPhones in China because the iPhone still has limited carrier selectivity over there at the moment, at least according to all the news reports about Chinese carriers indicating they'll be offering it "soon".
This is also the man who, when going into hiding from the new Empire because they were hunting down and exterminating his kind decided to hide on Darth Vader's home planet and only change his first name.
I thought it was Steve Jobs, or have you updated the joke because Tim Cook is the new CEO? Surely the whole point of the original joke was that Jobs himself was such a charismatic figure and the face of "the real Apple" that created so much fervour in the fanbase, thus changing it to whoever the current CEO is really doesn't work.
I'm also wondering why you'd go for that line of argument when I point out something relevant to the discussion - namely that the supposed "pwning" prior art linked by the GP was actually referenced by Apple in the design patent in question. Thus, the supposed mockery by the original AC was not only inaccurate but demonstrated his extreme ignorance.
I mean, if that's the best you've got then fair enough, and I suppose you are lame enough to "forget" to log in so I suppose we can't expect much of you in the way of a decent argument. Come back to us when you've grown up a bit, kid.
But the average person understands climate, that's like the polar caps melting, right? Sure everyone's an expert on that. Particle Physics on the other hand, I challenge you to walk down the street and ask people what they think particle physics is all about.
I challenge you to walk down a corridor in the Physics department of any major university and ask people what they think particle physics is all about;)
The same is true for Quantum Mechanics in anything except the Phys Chem department of the Chemistry building.
Slashdot Mirror
Fields and frames are not the same thing. Related, but different.
You and both other people can keep on doing that.
Everyone else will keep using Skype, and are glad that MS is keeping it up to date on platforms other than Windows after their acquisition of the software.
That's why they switched to socketed CPUs and removable MXM graphics cards on the iMac, and screw-less PCI card and hard drive caddies in the Pro, right?
Oh, and quick and easy to remove bottom panels (with standard RAM, hard drives and so on) in the Macbook Pro.
But oh wait, they made a new computer with proprietary, tiny parts to make it super thin, that means they hate people who upgrade! Got it! If you don't like it then too bad... err, I mean "buy the other laptops they sell".
And again, you demonstrate why Linux is a niche on the desktop market.
You expect "more", so do I, but my mum expects to be able to chat with her friends and relatives. I can't "force" them all to use something different when Skype works very well for them. With an updated version of Skype on Linux it removes one more barrier to adoption for those looking outside of Windows (or who have technical help who can now consider more options).
It's not all about the technically literate any more - it's about everyone.
Quite possibly. It does seem like it would be very difficult to accurately determine error bars on those plots for exactly the reasons you suggested. Perhaps they were relying on other data that suggested migration was not a significant factor? They have mentioned other tracking methods; radio collars, for example, that they have also used.
Atmospheric CO2 partial pressure is at an all time high (post industrial revolution) for as far back as we can measure.
You contradict yourself - first you say that deep ice core data shows that temperature rises and atmospheric CO2 concentrations are linked, then you claim that "no one has proven ... if they just happen to appear together". I'll save you the trouble - the former is the accurate statement, although it's not exclusive to CO2; any molecule that absorbs IR in the atmosphere is a greenhouse gas, which makes the biggest culprits CO2 and water vapour. There are many others that are considerably worse than CO2 (hundreds, sometimes thousands of times more potent as IR absorbers) that are mitigated by low concentrations.
It's very easy to demonstrate with a simple science experiment that you can do yourself at home with a plastic bottle, a thermometer, a stopwatch and a lamp. Seal the bottle then point the lamp at it and leave it for 10 minutes. Measure the temperature inside after this time has elapsed. Now open the bottle and breathe in and out, sealing your mouth around the neck for as long as you can manage it (until all the oxygen is gone) - ie, vastly increase the concentration of CO2 and water vapour inside the bottle. Seal it up and then wait for the temperature inside to fall to the same level as the air was in the first experiment (your breath will obviously be warm, so you want to start from the same air temperature). When it's back to the same level turn the lamp on and wait another 10 minutes and record the temperature. Record your results.
The chemistry of IR absorbing gasses is not controversial. It only seems to be when it's politically inconvenient. Suddenly the idea that CO2 absorbs IR radiation just because it's in the earth's atmosphere rather than in a lab setting is "merely anecdotal".
Most radiation that falls on the earth *is* reflected (our albedo is quite high), and even then, much of the re-radiated IR from the earth's surface is also lost to space - this is not new or controversial information.
"We need to understand climates change and there is absolutely nothing we can do about it" is probably the most hilariously inaccurate and naive statement I think I've ever read on slashdot. Not only is it one of the most ridiculous "head in the sand" conclusions drawn from a fundamental misunderstanding of basic science (if the first part of the comment is anything to go by), but it's contradicted by extensive evidence to the contrary by a number of widely famous examples. The most obvious of these would be the depletion (and subsequent re-establishment) of the ozone layer and the corresponding changes to the climate that were observed and reversed in response to human actions.
If all the people on earth disappeared the climate would indeed continue to change in response to events that occur - the only difference is that there would be no further changes from anthropogenic factors. The fact that it responds to natural changes does not mean that humans have no effect on it. Again, you seem to misunderstand the way that the climate works.
And your proof is? Mike Daisy's narratives?
And your proof that Apple is doing anything worse than its competition is? The competition's reports on their contractors' work conditions?
Doing no worse than one's competition is not really a defense or a moral position. It just means that you aren't the only bad person out there, but it doesn't justify what you are doing. Prisons are full of people who didn't do anything worse than somebody else.
That wasn't his point and you know it. The supposed "moral superiority" of Apple's competitors is frequently used as a justification for hating them or for boycotting their products (it's not difficult to find "this is why I don't buy Apple and only use XYZ's products instead" comments here on /. and elsewhere) when in reality the alternatives are no different, and sometimes worse.
This does not excuse either position of course; we've got to continue to push for elimination of worker and environmental exploitation.
Or alcohol, depending on what process you use ;)
Although I prefer pear cider myself.
So my grandma uses that too, right?
The point of widespread communication systems is that you can get in touch with people.
The answer to "why skype [on Linux]?" is "because it works". How is the increased number of choices bad? It's almost infinitely more likely that someone will be reachable via Skype than via something that really doesn't have traction beyond geeks using Linux and OSS exclusively. Part of the whole battle to make Linux much more accessible to the general public is having software that people want to use. Up-to-date Skype on Linux is a win/win for all concerned; both from Microsoft's end (more users make the service as a whole more valuable) and for users (since the software is available) and since it removes one more hurdle to Linux adoption for the general public ("I might try it out, but can I run [$piece of common software] on it?").
Maybe not 3 years but the device will not work forever. At some point the flash memory will stop working, or the battery will leak causing a shortcut, or the ipad will fall or take a glass of Coke.
The obvious point is that other kids could benefit from the app and they are being denied right now.
Yes, clearly - but everyone seems to be blaming Apple for responding to an issue over a lawsuit. The reason the app is being "denied" to other kids is because the maker of the big, fancy expensive "helper" equipment is suing the maker of the much cheaper, much more effective application - it's a classic threat-to-busines-model problem with the original (ineffective and expensive, but only game in town) being threatened by a cheaper and better upstart. Rather than compete, they want to kill it.
If they do succeed in winning the suit, Apple has no choice either way. They have simply pulled the app pending the outcome as a precaution. They haven't done any remote deletion though.
To be fair though, OS X is a very heavily modded Unix based system that is a pretty far ways away from any *nix, aside from a handful of terminal commands.
It *is* certified Unix though, despite what people say. At least, it was - I'm not sure if the more recent releases have been technically certified, but the kernel and BSD layers haven't changed drastically.
The problem with that is that these new tablets do not support AD. I'd at least think that would be an optional component, but it isn't.
Considering Android runs on top of a Linux kernel...I think it is safe to call it a Linux.
Tell that to those claiming OS X is not Unix, despite running on top of Unix. I assume those people would also claim Android is not really Linux.
What iDevice do you have that "fails" at the end of its "three year" design life?
I've not run into one yet that simply stops working. Batteries are easy to replace, screens are not impossible to repair in the event of damage etc.
I'm curious by what you mean. You were modded insightful, so clearly there's some salient point, I'm just not sure what it is. Why will her device fail after three years and why will she be obligated to replace it with something "incompatable" [sic]?
I thought it was about started projects, not about sales.
Why would you start a project if it's not going to sell.
There are several cases where the paid app earns $X and the same app, except in free "lite" ad-supported form (and thus free) earns Y($X) where Y is an integer bigger than 1.
Apps don't have to sell to be profitable.
so, in other words, you're dodging the question.
Try this: fuck off you piece of shit shill
Please give a glib response to that. You're sockpuppets will even upmod that for you, bonch.
And yes, we know that the 'jo_ham' account is bonch, because all it does it parrot what bonch says, with absolutely zero independent thought.
Again with the ad hom. Doesn't your mum tell you off for that? If you can't play nice with the rest of us then she might take your computer time away from you.
I'm happy to debate, but there's really nothing to do but "dodge" the laughably terrible arguments if the best you have to offer is that paragraph. I'd go point by point, adding quote tags and carefully formatting it, but I know that you would not read it and simply come back with an attack on my character rather than the argument itself. In other words I refuse to have a battle of wits with an unarmed man.
You forgot to log in again.
Yawn, not this nonsense again. Not bonch, never been bonch, never been anyone else. yadda yadda, never roller skate in a buffalo herd.
You can do better than baseless, inaccurate AC trolling. Or maybe you can't, my deepest sympathies to your carer.
You are a sick, foul, disgusting subhuman piece of filth who is paid to lie, slander, and befoul a medium which was designed to be open and free of corporate mouthpieces like yourself. You are a hideous nonhuman. We didn't create the Internet for you to spew your sick, depraved corporate hatespeak. GTFO now.
Goodness me, such vehemence! Clearly something is chafing. I'd address your supposed discussion points, but given that the highest level of intelligence you seem to possess results in the above paragraph, I'm not sure you'd understand them. Come back when you've grown up, son.
You still forgot to log in, or is that a symptom of mashing at the submit button with such frothing rage that someone is wrong on the internet that you need to rush to attack them and thus forget basic things like how to use a discussion board.
Also amusing on "having facts to hand" and "who cares outside of China". I assume you haven't heard of this cool new thing. It's called "Google". You can type things into it and it returns a list of relevant URLs (also called "links" or "website addresses") that you can follow. You can find almost anything really quickly and easily! Maybe you should try it sometime. The website address is http://www.google.com./ Type that into the address bar at the top of your browser window. You don't have to type the http:/// part if you don't want to. Type what you want to find in the search box that comes up and then you too can have facts "close at hand". Well, assuming that your parents haven't blocked Google on your computer. You might have to ask them if it's ok to go there.
I've always wondered, why is that you make these kinds of posts?
What does apple's market share matter to you, and why do you always rush in to praise them whenever possible?
It just seems very odd for a disinterested individual to have so many factoids at hand and such a strong desire to promote and defend a company which already has a billion-dollar advertising and PR budget.
I think it says more about you than it does me. Where do you get that I'm "praising" Apple in my post? All it offers is a potential reason for Microsoft's original statement (that the OP questioned might be a lie because Microsoft said it) to be true. My comment was neutral regarding Apple - it neither praises nor condemns.
Apple's market share doesn't bother me at all, but I thought the point of a discussion site was to have, y'know, actual discussions? Or is coming in with a point that effectively says "I don't think Microsoft is lying about Windows Phone sales in China" not allowed, or considered to be "promoting and defending" a company with a "billion-dollar advertising and PR budget" merely because I mentioned them.
If you think me pointing out that Windows Phone is "only" outselling iPhone due to some "artificial crippling" of sales due to carrier availability is some sort of "fanboy defence" then I think you're projecting your own prejudices and bias into it. I was merely pointing out possible explanations about why Microsoft was unlikely to be lying.
Either way, it says more about you than it does me. Also, you forgot to log in.
Windows phones probably are outselling iPhones in China because the iPhone still has limited carrier selectivity over there at the moment, at least according to all the news reports about Chinese carriers indicating they'll be offering it "soon".
For example, it's still not on China Mobile (the world's largest cellphone network) as of May 2012: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/mediatechnologyandtelecoms/electronics/9268854/Worlds-largest-phone-company-China-Mobile-in-iPhone-talks-with-Apple.html
This is also the man who, when going into hiding from the new Empire because they were hunting down and exterminating his kind decided to hide on Darth Vader's home planet and only change his first name.
Real S.M.R.T.
I thought it was Steve Jobs, or have you updated the joke because Tim Cook is the new CEO? Surely the whole point of the original joke was that Jobs himself was such a charismatic figure and the face of "the real Apple" that created so much fervour in the fanbase, thus changing it to whoever the current CEO is really doesn't work.
I'm also wondering why you'd go for that line of argument when I point out something relevant to the discussion - namely that the supposed "pwning" prior art linked by the GP was actually referenced by Apple in the design patent in question. Thus, the supposed mockery by the original AC was not only inaccurate but demonstrated his extreme ignorance.
I mean, if that's the best you've got then fair enough, and I suppose you are lame enough to "forget" to log in so I suppose we can't expect much of you in the way of a decent argument. Come back to us when you've grown up a bit, kid.
Yes indeed, but it seems Apple *did* pay attention, since they referenced that very thing in the patent itself.
Oh wait, you didn't read it! My mistake! Carry on!
No, it's a design patent.
It also references earlier wedged laptops (like Sony's X505) in the patent application itself.
It's not a utility patent. The sky is not falling, but the original submitter did succeed in driving ad revenue to Cnet. Mission accomplished.
But the average person understands climate, that's like the polar caps melting, right? Sure everyone's an expert on that. Particle Physics on the other hand, I challenge you to walk down the street and ask people what they think particle physics is all about.
I challenge you to walk down a corridor in the Physics department of any major university and ask people what they think particle physics is all about ;)
The same is true for Quantum Mechanics in anything except the Phys Chem department of the Chemistry building.