Remember when Google first put their turn-by-turn on Android 3 years ago, and said they'd be bringing it to iOS too at an unspecified future time?
Isn't it funny that no one holds Google to that kind of thing, but wants to beat the crap out of Apple when they try to compete rather than eat a competitor's shit?
Both good questions, but unfortunately, changing telcos in the US is hard because B isn't always true. In major cities you usually have two, if not three or more carriers that have reasonable service.
In the middle of the country you get one, or none. Those are the people getting the fuzzy end of the lollipop on this kind of stuff.
You're actually trying to say that because of an anticompetitive money grab from a telco, that users should just shrug and go use something more complicated and requires far more configuration and hassle. Now that's revolutionary.
Here's a real revolutionary thought: AT&T gets the fuck out of the way, and lets a user do whatever the fuck they want with the bandwidth they pay for, whenever the fuck they want to do it.
The Galaxy S3 preorders were over two weeks. Worldwide. iPhone 5 clocked it's 2M in 24 hours, and that only counts the sales from apple.com - not AT&T, Verizon, Sprint. And only in the US.
Also, I believe the Galaxy S3 pre-orders were "shipment" and not sell-through numbers, which is what Apple always quotes.
Someone walks up to a mall booth and sees a shedload of Android phones, and a few iPhones, and they walk away with a $0 low-end android rather than a $200 iPhone because they're going to use it to make phone calls and text, and download maybe 3 apps and never browse the Internet; but that choice was made because of Linux, Openness, the hacker community, and Freedom.
Do you actually believe this bullshit? Neither does anyone else. Stop posting.
For many people, it isn't about software that only runs on the Mac. It's about software that only runs properly on the Mac, without massive hassle or paying consultants on a monthly basis.
You can assign malice to their actions if you want, and that may well be a fair assessment. Nobody truly knows what is going through the senior bosses' heads if they aren't in the room. However, having been in the Apple ecosystem for over about two decades now in various professional capacities, I can say that they got to their current attitude towards product announcements by having those "partners" blab to the press about product features and specs before Apple is ready to announce them.
You get burnt by that enough times, and you start to just not tell anyone that doesn't need to know beforehand, and those that do get a 5-ton anvil of an NDA dropped on them.
Something like a dock connector can probably get you a long way towards seeing what features the device supports; much farther than physical dimensions given to prospective case manufacturers and such. I don't find it that surprising that they would NDA the shit out of the manufacturing partners that are making the stuff that absolutely has to be available on day 1, and then publish specs to everyone else on day 1 after the product announcement.
The third option, which is the one I'm using, and that you missed: you are recycling an old iPod third-generation dock that has true line-level outputs, and using it with a headphone amplifier.
Thus, using the iPod / iPhone DAC, but a quality amplifier and quality high-impedance headphones.
Your USB port only solution would cost more than what I've done here - as the dock I'm using is a recycled part, it cost me exactly nothing over what I had already paid previous to the existence of the iPhone, where I would have had to purchase something if it was USB only. I guess that combination never occurred to you though.
Some of us like to bypass the lowest-bidder digital amplifier circuit inside the iPhone and use an amplifier that's worth a damn. The 30-pin dock connector allows for just that, if you use an accessory that pulls the analog signal off the line-level audio pins.
Even though Apple hasn't released shit about unreleased products to the mass market except in rare exceptions for over a decade, everyone still thinks that it's news that Apple doesn't just up and scream aloud about features of unreleased products.
Guess what? When they released the 2nd gen iPod that has the dock connector we've been using for 8 years now, they didn't pre-release specs for that either. Yet I'm sure we had the same cynical speculation of "OMG it's not bone-stock FireWire! They're going to squeeze everyone out with proprietary bullshit and sue everyone that tries to use it!"
Never mind that today's dock connector only carries a few of the signals present in the original - gone is the FireWire and the 12v power, long replaced with USB2 and it's 5V DC. HDMI video has been added. Etc.
This is likely Apple deciding that it's time to have a change in the connector that coincides with a change of signal, rather than leaving the connector alone for so long to keep compatibility with 3rd party accessories at the cost of engineering simplicity, and reduction of product size.
Oh, you mean the AAC format that was developed by AT&T Bell Labs, Dolby Labs, Fraunhofer IIS, Sony, and Nokia? Then standardized as part of MPEG-2? Five years before the first iPod shipped?
Part of the reason Diamond won, is because they had no supported way to get the music off the player, making the case that it wasn't an "instrument of piracy." In order for Apple to not have to rehash the same legal issues, they obfuscated the storage of the media files themselves.
That being said, if you can't get the music off your iPod, then you don't know how to use Google. It's a 4 minute fix. Try harder.
Yeah, and you clearly know nothing about Mac OS X versioning. By your definition, every version since the original in 2000 has been a "SUB VERSION."
So you're saying that an iMac with a 300 Mhz G3 should be able to run 10.8? That's the logic you're spitting out here. Dumbass.
Re:I Guess This Is What Happens When I Don't Watch
on
The Case Against DNA
·
· Score: 1
I guess I'm wondering why they are down on DNA matching, when it did exactly what it's supposed to. This was a failure to either interpret the results of the test, as you suggest; or a failure to interpret the trace evidence that called for the DNA match to begin with.
The police will try to send any kind of weak shit that they can to the district attorney, because they can then mark the case solved and blame the DA or the Grand Jury should they fail to indict. The police commanders are happy because they get the closed case stats, the prosecutors stay happy because they don't take weak shit cases to trial, so their conviction rate stays up.
Everyone else loses. The whole world shines shit and declares it to be gold.
Also, this doesn't sound like a failure of DNA, this sounds like a failure of the detectives to properly interpret trace evidence.
How many of those "twice as many" phones are razor-thin margin "free" phones that are mass-produced previous-years technology, which never actually get used as a smartphone because they suck at it in comparison to more expensive current-year designs including Samsung's own higher-end offerings?
I'll bet quite a few.
Apple is in the business of selling a premium product. Premium products never have the volume of mid-range to low-end products. BMW and Mercedes don't ship as many cars as GM, either; but you didn't see either of them with their hands out to the US Government a couple years back, did you?
And here I was thinking that the quality of Microsoft's products in comparison to the competition might have had something to do with why they aren't succeeding in new product lines.
Nah, it's their reputation. You've got to be right about that.
So I guess you have no problem with Samsung directly screwing the end customer through price fixing in the LCD, mobile phone, and DRAM markets? Because they've either settled, or been convicted of all three.
Warning: anecdote ahead, may not indicative of a larger trend.
Every three years at my company, we invite the major PC OEMs to make a bid for our desktop and laptop purchasing contracts for what our standard models will be. Last time around, HP, Dell, and Lenovo participated. The results boiled down as follows:
Lenovo - more performance, slightly higher price than Dell, average vendor relationship and contact on ThinkPads we were already buying. HP - average performance, slightly cheaper price than Dell, great vendor relationship and contact on thin clients we were already buying. Dell - same tired models we were already buying, same pricing as we were already paying. Average to poor vendor relationship.
Results: We now buy Lenovo laptops and desktops, HP thin clients and displays. Dell hasn't gotten a dime from this company listed in the Fortune-30 in the last two years, because they brought in arrogance rather than fresh product and fresh ideas.
Slashdot Mirror
The detection rate for Sophos's malware engine inched closer to 100%.
https://plus.google.com/+JeffHuber/posts/7aPJrDsk1DA
Where's your link about Apple getting paid by Garmin?
Who's the idiot?
Remember when Google first put their turn-by-turn on Android 3 years ago, and said they'd be bringing it to iOS too at an unspecified future time?
Isn't it funny that no one holds Google to that kind of thing, but wants to beat the crap out of Apple when they try to compete rather than eat a competitor's shit?
Both good questions, but unfortunately, changing telcos in the US is hard because B isn't always true. In major cities you usually have two, if not three or more carriers that have reasonable service.
In the middle of the country you get one, or none. Those are the people getting the fuzzy end of the lollipop on this kind of stuff.
You're actually trying to say that because of an anticompetitive money grab from a telco, that users should just shrug and go use something more complicated and requires far more configuration and hassle. Now that's revolutionary.
Here's a real revolutionary thought: AT&T gets the fuck out of the way, and lets a user do whatever the fuck they want with the bandwidth they pay for, whenever the fuck they want to do it.
There's a time period calculation you're missing.
The Galaxy S3 preorders were over two weeks. Worldwide. iPhone 5 clocked it's 2M in 24 hours, and that only counts the sales from apple.com - not AT&T, Verizon, Sprint. And only in the US.
Also, I believe the Galaxy S3 pre-orders were "shipment" and not sell-through numbers, which is what Apple always quotes.
Yeah, cause no one tosses off Android phones ever.
They're running Linux, aren't they? Remind me.
So is the competition. Your point?
You fanboys make me laugh.
Someone walks up to a mall booth and sees a shedload of Android phones, and a few iPhones, and they walk away with a $0 low-end android rather than a $200 iPhone because they're going to use it to make phone calls and text, and download maybe 3 apps and never browse the Internet; but that choice was made because of Linux, Openness, the hacker community, and Freedom.
Do you actually believe this bullshit? Neither does anyone else. Stop posting.
For many people, it isn't about software that only runs on the Mac. It's about software that only runs properly on the Mac, without massive hassle or paying consultants on a monthly basis.
See: ColorSync color management.
You can assign malice to their actions if you want, and that may well be a fair assessment. Nobody truly knows what is going through the senior bosses' heads if they aren't in the room. However, having been in the Apple ecosystem for over about two decades now in various professional capacities, I can say that they got to their current attitude towards product announcements by having those "partners" blab to the press about product features and specs before Apple is ready to announce them.
You get burnt by that enough times, and you start to just not tell anyone that doesn't need to know beforehand, and those that do get a 5-ton anvil of an NDA dropped on them.
Something like a dock connector can probably get you a long way towards seeing what features the device supports; much farther than physical dimensions given to prospective case manufacturers and such. I don't find it that surprising that they would NDA the shit out of the manufacturing partners that are making the stuff that absolutely has to be available on day 1, and then publish specs to everyone else on day 1 after the product announcement.
The third option, which is the one I'm using, and that you missed: you are recycling an old iPod third-generation dock that has true line-level outputs, and using it with a headphone amplifier.
Thus, using the iPod / iPhone DAC, but a quality amplifier and quality high-impedance headphones.
Your USB port only solution would cost more than what I've done here - as the dock I'm using is a recycled part, it cost me exactly nothing over what I had already paid previous to the existence of the iPhone, where I would have had to purchase something if it was USB only. I guess that combination never occurred to you though.
Incorrect.
Some of us like to bypass the lowest-bidder digital amplifier circuit inside the iPhone and use an amplifier that's worth a damn. The 30-pin dock connector allows for just that, if you use an accessory that pulls the analog signal off the line-level audio pins.
USB doesn't do that.
Even though Apple hasn't released shit about unreleased products to the mass market except in rare exceptions for over a decade, everyone still thinks that it's news that Apple doesn't just up and scream aloud about features of unreleased products.
Guess what? When they released the 2nd gen iPod that has the dock connector we've been using for 8 years now, they didn't pre-release specs for that either. Yet I'm sure we had the same cynical speculation of "OMG it's not bone-stock FireWire! They're going to squeeze everyone out with proprietary bullshit and sue everyone that tries to use it!"
Never mind that today's dock connector only carries a few of the signals present in the original - gone is the FireWire and the 12v power, long replaced with USB2 and it's 5V DC. HDMI video has been added. Etc.
This is likely Apple deciding that it's time to have a change in the connector that coincides with a change of signal, rather than leaving the connector alone for so long to keep compatibility with 3rd party accessories at the cost of engineering simplicity, and reduction of product size.
Because there was no contractual obligation from the RIAA to include DRM in order to get the iTunes store going, right?
Post hoc ergo propter hoc. Afterward therefore because of.
It's a logical fallacy, and you're using it lock, stock, and barrel.
Oh, you mean the AAC format that was developed by AT&T Bell Labs, Dolby Labs, Fraunhofer IIS, Sony, and Nokia? Then standardized as part of MPEG-2? Five years before the first iPod shipped?
Yeah, that's "apple aac format" all right.
Moron.
You can thank the RIAA for that too. See RIAA v Diamond: http://museumofintellectualproperty.eejlaw.com/exhibits/rio.html
Part of the reason Diamond won, is because they had no supported way to get the music off the player, making the case that it wasn't an "instrument of piracy." In order for Apple to not have to rehash the same legal issues, they obfuscated the storage of the media files themselves.
That being said, if you can't get the music off your iPod, then you don't know how to use Google. It's a 4 minute fix. Try harder.
Yeah, and you clearly know nothing about Mac OS X versioning. By your definition, every version since the original in 2000 has been a "SUB VERSION."
So you're saying that an iMac with a 300 Mhz G3 should be able to run 10.8? That's the logic you're spitting out here. Dumbass.
I guess I'm wondering why they are down on DNA matching, when it did exactly what it's supposed to. This was a failure to either interpret the results of the test, as you suggest; or a failure to interpret the trace evidence that called for the DNA match to begin with.
The police will try to send any kind of weak shit that they can to the district attorney, because they can then mark the case solved and blame the DA or the Grand Jury should they fail to indict. The police commanders are happy because they get the closed case stats, the prosecutors stay happy because they don't take weak shit cases to trial, so their conviction rate stays up.
Everyone else loses. The whole world shines shit and declares it to be gold.
Also, this doesn't sound like a failure of DNA, this sounds like a failure of the detectives to properly interpret trace evidence.
How many of those "twice as many" phones are razor-thin margin "free" phones that are mass-produced previous-years technology, which never actually get used as a smartphone because they suck at it in comparison to more expensive current-year designs including Samsung's own higher-end offerings?
I'll bet quite a few.
Apple is in the business of selling a premium product. Premium products never have the volume of mid-range to low-end products. BMW and Mercedes don't ship as many cars as GM, either; but you didn't see either of them with their hands out to the US Government a couple years back, did you?
And here I was thinking that the quality of Microsoft's products in comparison to the competition might have had something to do with why they aren't succeeding in new product lines.
Nah, it's their reputation. You've got to be right about that.
Seriously?
So I guess you have no problem with Samsung directly screwing the end customer through price fixing in the LCD, mobile phone, and DRAM markets? Because they've either settled, or been convicted of all three.
Samsung is *not* a well behaved company.
And if you really want to go back far enough, there was the Newton MessagePad, which was made by whom again?
Oh, that's right. Apple.
Warning: anecdote ahead, may not indicative of a larger trend.
Every three years at my company, we invite the major PC OEMs to make a bid for our desktop and laptop purchasing contracts for what our standard models will be. Last time around, HP, Dell, and Lenovo participated. The results boiled down as follows:
Lenovo - more performance, slightly higher price than Dell, average vendor relationship and contact on ThinkPads we were already buying.
HP - average performance, slightly cheaper price than Dell, great vendor relationship and contact on thin clients we were already buying.
Dell - same tired models we were already buying, same pricing as we were already paying. Average to poor vendor relationship.
Results: We now buy Lenovo laptops and desktops, HP thin clients and displays. Dell hasn't gotten a dime from this company listed in the Fortune-30 in the last two years, because they brought in arrogance rather than fresh product and fresh ideas.