doesn't reflect if it was driven on private roads or out of state
It isn't a perfect system, that's for sure, but it's probably good enough. If it's based on odometer readings rather than GPS data, there are fewer privacy concerns.
Perhaps there should be a way to file for a refund if you drive out of state frequently and are willing to prove it with GPS data.
Of course it isn't. It runs on Linux the same way that Gnome does or Emacs does.
Android is irrelevant to the desktop, or server, market
Since Android is by far the predominant use of Linux, you might have it backwards. The desktop and server market might be irrelevant to Linux. I would argue the server market matters, but it would be very difficult to argue that the desktop market matters at all, except for things like Chrome books.
If desktop Unix is what you want, a Mac running OSX is what you should get.
About a billion Android devices ship every year and all of these are running Linux. Red Hat might yield a lot of power, but it's over a relatively small slice of the market.
I wish articles like this would provide some context. How much do the rights holders get per play on terrestrial radio? Satellite radio? Is internet radio higher or lower?
I don't think social programs like basic income and universal health will happen in the US until the unemployment rate gets much higher than it is now. Once enough voters are unemployed, the political power of that group will be formidable. It's going to be a rough transition, but we'll get there.
Why would view a program intended to help girls as a put-down on men?
I'm all for programs like this. Give it a try, see what the outcome is. If it fails, end it and start the next experiment. If there are successes, tweak the program and continue.
If Microsoft can do something to better integrate Cyanogen based devices into the corporate workflow they might have some leverage. Plus an operating system that gets bug fixes and security updates might warrant some attention.
What leverage? For what purpose?
The enterprise market doesn't really matter. Back in the IBM vs Microsoft days, the consumer market was tiny compared to the corporate market. Today, the enterprise market is a fraction of the consumer market. As long as the C-level executives want to use iPhones, that's what corporate IT will have to support.
Still, it makes sense for Microsoft. They have absolutely nothing to lose. Their new focus on going where the customers are (even on other platforms) is refreshing and smart. Cyanogen, on the other hand, is less interesting all the time. They seem to be trying to make a corporate version of FireOS. I guess you can't support a business selling themes.
Is anybody other than Google and Samsung making money from the Android ecosystem?
So they make something no better, double the price and sell it to twats with more money than sense. That is the apple marketing plan alright.
If that's all there is to it, then why don't other companies follow the same playbook? Despite having a relatively small chunk of the total smartphone market, they make almost all the money. I believe Samsung is the only other smartphone maker that is profitable and their profit is much, much smaller than Apple's. All the rest of the handset makers are either losing money or just breaking even.
Do you really think you know more about the phone business than the executives at Blackberry, Nokia, HTC, LG, and Sony?
It certainly is in tech-rich areas like Northern California and NYC. They didn't sell a million of these things to cautious consumers that planned carefully. People wanted it and bought it after knowing very little about it.
In fact, there are many cheaper Android Wear devices out there.
What's your point? Apple rarely competes on price. The bottom of the market is fiercely competitive and thus has razor thin margins. It's a terrible place to try to make money.
There's a big difference - the Apple watch starts around $400 which is impulse buy territory for lots and lots of people. I think it's pretty neat, especially the ResearchKit stuff.
They saw Google, Netflix, and others making money online and thought "people are using our connections to buy stuff so why doesn't some of that money go to us?!!!" (Completely ignoring that some does in the form of ISP service bills.) They tried to charge companies extra to reach customers via "fast lanes" lest their data be regulated to an unusable slow lane.
The proposed Title II regulations shut down fast lanes, but does nothing about other forms of preferential treatment. Data cap exclusions are one example. ISPs offer big bandwidth services (like Netflix and Spotify) deals that would make their data not count against bandwidth caps. If you are a Comcast customer and rent a movie from their video service, it won't count against your bandwidth cap, but watch the same movie through Hulu and it will.
I think the concern is that it would benefit the big guys at the expense of the little guys. Will the huge entertainment businesses of the UK overwhelm the many, much smaller, businesses in other countries? Maybe.
I say eliminate the barriers and see what happens. You can always put them back up again if your citizens want them back up.
I cant tell you how many job postings I read that said things like you need 5 years experience with X,Y, and Z.... only problem is Y and Z have only been out for 2 years and 4 years respectively.
And guess what? Somebody still applied for and got that job. You have to understand how the hiring process works at a lot of companies. The process of applying for jobs is essentially a sales job - you are selling yourself. A clueless job posting like that might make you think "I'm not going to work for these idiots" or you might see the opportunity it presents. It's really a job posting that is going to have fewer applicants.
The company I work for has a really hard time hiring developers. You would be shocked at the number of people who have a degree in computer science who don't know how to program. After reading about it on Jeff Atwood's blog, I've given a few applicants the fizz-buzz problem and the results were very depressing. Probably 25% couldn't code the answer or write out pseudo code on a whiteboard.
I agree with you that it's all about the apps. Unfortunately, Microsoft has a problem. Nobody is making apps for the phone because nobody uses Windows Phone because there are no apps for it. Universal apps aren't going to help, except for certain verticals, maybe. It's not like Windows desktop is a hotbed of development anymore (except for games). Excluding games, what's the last Windows title that was mildly interesting to the general public?
iOS and Android are all that matter and I can't see that changing in the next 3 years.
Slashdot Mirror
It isn't a perfect system, that's for sure, but it's probably good enough. If it's based on odometer readings rather than GPS data, there are fewer privacy concerns.
Perhaps there should be a way to file for a refund if you drive out of state frequently and are willing to prove it with GPS data.
Of course it isn't. It runs on Linux the same way that Gnome does or Emacs does.
Since Android is by far the predominant use of Linux, you might have it backwards. The desktop and server market might be irrelevant to Linux. I would argue the server market matters, but it would be very difficult to argue that the desktop market matters at all, except for things like Chrome books.
If desktop Unix is what you want, a Mac running OSX is what you should get.
About a billion Android devices ship every year and all of these are running Linux. Red Hat might yield a lot of power, but it's over a relatively small slice of the market.
Of course one could also cite many companies that aren't afraid to aggressively move forward. Apple is the best example.
Sometimes backwards compatibility just isn't worth the cost.
AOSP sits on top of Linux. They are two separate things.
Thanks to Android, Linux is the most popular operating system on the planet now.
You drink one regular soda per month and it's the reason you developed liver disease? How big is that soda?
That's not true for satellite radio.
Radio stations pay BMI and ASCAP.
I wish articles like this would provide some context. How much do the rights holders get per play on terrestrial radio? Satellite radio? Is internet radio higher or lower?
> Broadcast radio pays nothing
In the US, they pay BMI and ASCAP.
I'm okay with that if the price is reasonable. Netflix is a good example of an entertainment service that I think is very fairly priced.
The back-against-the-wall statement baffles me. Whose back is against the wall?
I don't think social programs like basic income and universal health will happen in the US until the unemployment rate gets much higher than it is now. Once enough voters are unemployed, the political power of that group will be formidable. It's going to be a rough transition, but we'll get there.
Why would view a program intended to help girls as a put-down on men?
I'm all for programs like this. Give it a try, see what the outcome is. If it fails, end it and start the next experiment. If there are successes, tweak the program and continue.
What leverage? For what purpose?
The enterprise market doesn't really matter. Back in the IBM vs Microsoft days, the consumer market was tiny compared to the corporate market. Today, the enterprise market is a fraction of the consumer market. As long as the C-level executives want to use iPhones, that's what corporate IT will have to support.
Still, it makes sense for Microsoft. They have absolutely nothing to lose. Their new focus on going where the customers are (even on other platforms) is refreshing and smart. Cyanogen, on the other hand, is less interesting all the time. They seem to be trying to make a corporate version of FireOS. I guess you can't support a business selling themes.
Is anybody other than Google and Samsung making money from the Android ecosystem?
If that's all there is to it, then why don't other companies follow the same playbook? Despite having a relatively small chunk of the total smartphone market, they make almost all the money. I believe Samsung is the only other smartphone maker that is profitable and their profit is much, much smaller than Apple's. All the rest of the handset makers are either losing money or just breaking even.
Do you really think you know more about the phone business than the executives at Blackberry, Nokia, HTC, LG, and Sony?
It certainly is in tech-rich areas like Northern California and NYC. They didn't sell a million of these things to cautious consumers that planned carefully. People wanted it and bought it after knowing very little about it.
What's your point? Apple rarely competes on price. The bottom of the market is fiercely competitive and thus has razor thin margins. It's a terrible place to try to make money.
There's a big difference - the Apple watch starts around $400 which is impulse buy territory for lots and lots of people. I think it's pretty neat, especially the ResearchKit stuff.
The proposed Title II regulations shut down fast lanes, but does nothing about other forms of preferential treatment. Data cap exclusions are one example. ISPs offer big bandwidth services (like Netflix and Spotify) deals that would make their data not count against bandwidth caps. If you are a Comcast customer and rent a movie from their video service, it won't count against your bandwidth cap, but watch the same movie through Hulu and it will.
I think the concern is that it would benefit the big guys at the expense of the little guys. Will the huge entertainment businesses of the UK overwhelm the many, much smaller, businesses in other countries? Maybe.
I say eliminate the barriers and see what happens. You can always put them back up again if your citizens want them back up.
And guess what? Somebody still applied for and got that job. You have to understand how the hiring process works at a lot of companies. The process of applying for jobs is essentially a sales job - you are selling yourself. A clueless job posting like that might make you think "I'm not going to work for these idiots" or you might see the opportunity it presents. It's really a job posting that is going to have fewer applicants.
The company I work for has a really hard time hiring developers. You would be shocked at the number of people who have a degree in computer science who don't know how to program. After reading about it on Jeff Atwood's blog, I've given a few applicants the fizz-buzz problem and the results were very depressing. Probably 25% couldn't code the answer or write out pseudo code on a whiteboard.
I suspect the laser light scattered by the hood would just blind the driver anyway. One way or another, the chase would end.
I agree with you that it's all about the apps. Unfortunately, Microsoft has a problem. Nobody is making apps for the phone because nobody uses Windows Phone because there are no apps for it. Universal apps aren't going to help, except for certain verticals, maybe. It's not like Windows desktop is a hotbed of development anymore (except for games). Excluding games, what's the last Windows title that was mildly interesting to the general public?
iOS and Android are all that matter and I can't see that changing in the next 3 years.
> IF he really had good and legal reasons to do what he did, take it to court and face the music.
What if he did the right thing but that happened to be illegal? Then I think running is a reasonable thing to do.
You are overestimating the "value" of the bloatware by an order of magnitude. That $350 computer will now be $385, not $700.