The Surface is a wonderful device that I love to use. My seventeen kids all fight over the privilege to use it and they all want to replace their iPads with a Surface. They're just flying off the shelves, and the local stores can't keep them in stock. I have to drive 200 miles to buy more. At work our productivity increased 1,022% when we replaced all of our ipad and android tablets with the Surface. It's so cute and convenient, I just can't keep my hands off of it.
There, did it for you. Cut and paste as necessary.
this is a trial balloon for a society where our leaders continue to eat grass fed beef, and the rest of us survive on grasshoppers. And it'll be marketed to us in such a way that it'll seem like a good idea. Well, to most of us.
We've been doing it the cluster way for years in my neighborhood, and it was our choice. Far be it from a way for the post office to save money, it was a way to secure our mail. Us homeowners came together, pooled our resources, and bought the big armored mail station because we were tired of getting our mail stolen. It was about $70 per household about 15 years ago, and has since survived a collision at respectable speed by a drunk driver.
I think the furthest house is a half block away. (It's at the intersection of two streets, so covers a half block in four directions.) I don't understand why someone would not want to do it this way. It's a better, more secure box than any of us could afford on our own.
I would argue that it's building mindshare and enlarging the ecosystem, which can be used later to sell new devices at an actual profit. On the other hand, this *is* Windows 8 we're talking about, so never mind.
Um, hm. Kind of a stream-of-consciousness thing, which I usually find annoying, but I have to say that "Professional Ignorers" is my new favorite term.
..for a number of reasons, those unsold RT tablets will be crushed under a tractor rather than sold at a loss. I suspect Microsoft never meant for the product to be a success, anyway.
If they do reduce them to $99 or so, I'd get one, just on the off chance someone figures out how to root it and install a different OS.
Now that I think about it, the possibility of installing a different OS is a COMPELLING reason for Microsoft to crush them rather than sell them cheaply.
..for a number of reasons, those unsold RT tablets will be crushed under a tractor rather than sold at a loss. I suspect Microsoft never meant for the product to be a success, anyway.
If they do reduce them to $99 or so, I'd get one, just on the off chance someone figures out how to root it and install a different OS.
I think it's worth pointing out that there will always people who will watch unexceptional movies just for the stunts and special effects. It's usually people who say about a film "it was a fun roller coaster ride" or "it was a great summer popcorn flick". but it seems like there aren't enough people like that anymore to overcome a $200M budget. Maybe there is hope for humanity. (Or maybe we're all just broke.)
It used to be that even a badly made film could do well in the box office if Hollywood put a real effort behind promotion. If there were big enough explosions to make the trailers look good, and enough advertisement to swamp out the bad press, a film could still do well even if it had absolutely noting going for it except some name stars and spectacular explosions. I think one of the things that has changed is how well connected movie goers have become. When a film sucks you tweet it or facebook it and there's a couple hundred people who are now less likely to see it. And they tweet it to their friends, and in surprisingly few steps even Kevin Bacon gives it a miss.
In short, the phenomenon Hollywood is fighting against (perhaps unknowingly) is social networking. They continue to play to their strengths -- trailers attached to other blockbusters that might also have bombed, and TV spots that fewer and fewer people see, because who in the prime demographic watches network tv anymore? So they spend like they always have, and it isn't working anymore because people are migrating to a different model for choosing a movie, and the effect is starting to be seen.
Pretty much true, but perhaps the recent string of formulaic high ticket blockbuster duds are a sign that the formula isn't working anymore. One can only hope.
Guys, you-all are arguing with an account that's only existed for one day. Of course he's going to toe the M$ line, and of course he's not going to offer any hard evidence. It's all hat and no cowboy. 100% shill. Nothing to see here.
> I've said before the Surface marketing was one of the nails in the coffin. The TV ads mostly featured hipster dambasses dancing and hiphoping while spinning the Surface tablet. Very little if any product knowledge is communicated.
I'm convinced that they made this (risky) decision because they knew damn good 'n' well that product knowledge would not have sold the product.
Or did they for marketing reasons need to have anything that played in that space, even if it was ultimately a failure?
The alternate is that they honestly thought that they could come out with a mostly incompatible product with an anemic ecosystem and it would just... somehow take off. Because they're microsoft, and hey, you don't get fired for buying microsoft. This works as a marketing sell but I can't believe that they actually bought that line of thinking.
> In my experience, even in setting up cloud infrastructure, you are not freed from the understanding that you would have to assure against problems with the site.
...but some vendors go out of their way to convince you that you just hand over the keys and don't worry about it anymore.
So is keeping your public-facing servers off-site. You can get extremely good uptime and a ton of scalability by hosting your servers on two or more geographically separated "clouds."
Yes! But it's the "two or more" part that companies keep forgetting. So effectively they have just migrated their essential data from their own server room to someone else's server room, with the added feature that the data is managed by offshore hastily-trained-up admins and the service is concerned about technically meeting the terms of the service contract rather than actually keeping the company in business.
Sorry, hyperbole on my part. In Oregon, registration is $86 for two years. When I first moved here (from California), it was $28 for two years. As I recall, my last California registration renewal (late last century) cost $186 for one year for a six year old car. I naturally assumed it had skyrocketed in the intervening time.
Slashdot Mirror
The Surface is a wonderful device that I love to use. My seventeen kids all fight over the privilege to use it and they all want to replace their iPads with a Surface. They're just flying off the shelves, and the local stores can't keep them in stock. I have to drive 200 miles to buy more. At work our productivity increased 1,022% when we replaced all of our ipad and android tablets with the Surface. It's so cute and convenient, I just can't keep my hands off of it.
There, did it for you. Cut and paste as necessary.
this is a trial balloon for a society where our leaders continue to eat grass fed beef, and the rest of us survive on grasshoppers. And it'll be marketed to us in such a way that it'll seem like a good idea. Well, to most of us.
Are there any laptops that don't have components made or assembled in china?
Do they ban cell phones too?
We've been doing it the cluster way for years in my neighborhood, and it was our choice. Far be it from a way for the post office to save money, it was a way to secure our mail. Us homeowners came together, pooled our resources, and bought the big armored mail station because we were tired of getting our mail stolen. It was about $70 per household about 15 years ago, and has since survived a collision at respectable speed by a drunk driver.
I think the furthest house is a half block away. (It's at the intersection of two streets, so covers a half block in four directions.) I don't understand why someone would not want to do it this way. It's a better, more secure box than any of us could afford on our own.
I would argue that it's building mindshare and enlarging the ecosystem, which can be used later to sell new devices at an actual profit. On the other hand, this *is* Windows 8 we're talking about, so never mind.
Um, hm. Kind of a stream-of-consciousness thing, which I usually find annoying, but I have to say that "Professional Ignorers" is my new favorite term.
If they do reduce them to $99 or so, I'd get one, just on the off chance someone figures out how to root it and install a different OS.
Now that I think about it, the possibility of installing a different OS is a COMPELLING reason for Microsoft to crush them rather than sell them cheaply.
If they do reduce them to $99 or so, I'd get one, just on the off chance someone figures out how to root it and install a different OS.
I think it's worth pointing out that there will always people who will watch unexceptional movies just for the stunts and special effects. It's usually people who say about a film "it was a fun roller coaster ride" or "it was a great summer popcorn flick". but it seems like there aren't enough people like that anymore to overcome a $200M budget. Maybe there is hope for humanity. (Or maybe we're all just broke.)
It used to be that even a badly made film could do well in the box office if Hollywood put a real effort behind promotion. If there were big enough explosions to make the trailers look good, and enough advertisement to swamp out the bad press, a film could still do well even if it had absolutely noting going for it except some name stars and spectacular explosions. I think one of the things that has changed is how well connected movie goers have become. When a film sucks you tweet it or facebook it and there's a couple hundred people who are now less likely to see it. And they tweet it to their friends, and in surprisingly few steps even Kevin Bacon gives it a miss.
In short, the phenomenon Hollywood is fighting against (perhaps unknowingly) is social networking. They continue to play to their strengths -- trailers attached to other blockbusters that might also have bombed, and TV spots that fewer and fewer people see, because who in the prime demographic watches network tv anymore? So they spend like they always have, and it isn't working anymore because people are migrating to a different model for choosing a movie, and the effect is starting to be seen.
Sounds like something Phillip K. Dick would write.
> I've always known we could be manipulated
Pretty much true, but perhaps the recent string of formulaic high ticket blockbuster duds are a sign that the formula isn't working anymore. One can only hope.
It's all hat and no cowboy.
All hat and no cattle is the expression you are looking for.
That works also, but in this case there isn't a cowboy either.
Guys, you-all are arguing with an account that's only existed for one day. Of course he's going to toe the M$ line, and of course he's not going to offer any hard evidence. It's all hat and no cowboy. 100% shill. Nothing to see here.
> I've said before the Surface marketing was one of the nails in the coffin. The TV ads mostly featured hipster dambasses dancing and hiphoping while spinning the Surface tablet. Very little if any product knowledge is communicated.
I'm convinced that they made this (risky) decision because they knew damn good 'n' well that product knowledge would not have sold the product.
It would probably be a pretty good tablet if it wasn't running Window.
I see what you did there.
Call me when they drop to $99.
*And* run a different OS.
> Aye, it's the sort of thing if they do a firesale on it, everyone will only get it to try and install Android on!
I would.
> At 99bucks, maybe 150 in a firesale, I'd pick 1 or 2 up for bathroom browsing.
Bathroom brows.... No, I don't wanna know...
At 99 bucks each I could hang several up to act as dynamic picture frames.
The iPhone UI was the top of the game at one time. It's kinda stale now.
Metro, on the other hand, was broken from day one.
Or did they for marketing reasons need to have anything that played in that space, even if it was ultimately a failure?
The alternate is that they honestly thought that they could come out with a mostly incompatible product with an anemic ecosystem and it would just... somehow take off. Because they're microsoft, and hey, you don't get fired for buying microsoft. This works as a marketing sell but I can't believe that they actually bought that line of thinking.
> In my experience, even in setting up cloud infrastructure, you are not freed from the understanding that you would have to assure against problems with the site.
So is keeping your public-facing servers off-site. You can get extremely good uptime and a ton of scalability by hosting your servers on two or more geographically separated "clouds."
Yes! But it's the "two or more" part that companies keep forgetting. So effectively they have just migrated their essential data from their own server room to someone else's server room, with the added feature that the data is managed by offshore hastily-trained-up admins and the service is concerned about technically meeting the terms of the service contract rather than actually keeping the company in business.
*I* had a lot of time on my hands...
Sorry, hyperbole on my part. In Oregon, registration is $86 for two years. When I first moved here (from California), it was $28 for two years. As I recall, my last California registration renewal (late last century) cost $186 for one year for a six year old car. I naturally assumed it had skyrocketed in the intervening time.
But without the class.