True, but the website already exists. If it's a case of fixing defects rather than re-architecting from scratch, there's no reason why multiple teams can't work on different parts of the system. And multiple people within a team can't work on different defects.
The core problem is not multiple batteries it is ability to replace it when yours starts to suck.
iPhone batteries are replaceable. They are just not (easily) user replaceable. So if you don't care about multiple batteries, and only end of battery life swap, it's not a big issue.
Why are detachable lids bad?
It's more than just a lid. If the battery is user removable, the entire battery needs to be encased in a hard case. Otherwise, it merely needs to be wrapped in a thin insulating wrap. This makes a difference to the size of the battery or size of the phone.
Have noted it is always high end phones that first get hit with non-replaceable batteries.
Because they are the ones which have the greatest pressure on the battery capacity/size factor. The reason phones increasingly have non user replaceable batteries is because it makes a more competitive phone. It's not to annoy you.
Note there is no obsolescence factor in these batteries having a limited life. Non-user replaceable does not mean non-replacable. Just make sure you have bought a brand for which there are likely to still be replacement batteries available in years to come. Or buy a replacement kit now in anticipation.
The thickness difference is greater than you imagine. In a sealed device, the battery can have a very thin wrapper to just electrically insulate it from the other components. For a replacement battery the battery needs a solid case to protect it when it's being subjected to random abuse outside the phone.
In addition there is the rigidity factor. Screws create stress points. Glueing spreads stress out over the entire contact area.
Replacement battery services are available for iPhone. Probably for other phones too... so long as they have a big enough market to make it worthwhile for the batteries to be stocked.
No (easy) user replacement doesn't mean no replacement.
They are only non-user replaceable, as in no quick swap. But for batteries that are no longer working, or are running low on capacity, battery replacement is possible. They are replaceable at various specialist mobile shops, or available as a kit to do your own replacement at home.
At least that's true for iPhones. Other phones may be less likely to have the batteries available when the time comes.
Several backward nations: Am. Samoa, Bahamas, Belize, British Virgin Islands, Cayman Islands, Dominica, Falkland Islands, Grenada, Guam, Myanmar, The N. Mariana Islands, Samoa, St. Lucia, St. Vincent & The Grenadines, St. Helena, St. Kitts & Nevis, the Turks & Caicos Islands, USA, UK and the U.S. Virgin Islands.
The fact is, that flat wealth redistribution towards removal of class based on wealth
That's not a fact, it's your fundamental misunderstanding. Whether it's a flat tax, or flat welfare (welfare is simply negative tax) then that is a REGRESSIVE policy. And that means it contributes to the wealth gap, not reduces it.
That's why you are confusing what is a very conservative policy for one that is communist. The ultra conservative fellow you mention isn't wrong, and neither am I. You are.
Among me and my hardcore developer friends GCC is effectively dead in the water. LLVM has eaten its lunch due simply to the fact that LLVM respects developer rights by giving them the FREEDOM to do anything they want with the code. Unless and until GCC dumps the socialistic GPL license idiocy, it will stay dead to everyone that matters.
You shouldn't have been modded troll. You were making a genuine point. There's also the fact that LLVM is a far superior and more modern compiler engine than GCC. (If anyone needs objective evidence, just look at compile and run times.)
one policy does not define someone's overriding leaning.
And yet that was exactly how you were trying to say this guy wasn't a republican but was advocating communist ideas. And yet he was advocating the same as Thatcher.
From each according to their means (those with plenty of wealth but who don't need the level of wealth they have) to each according to their needs (those less well off and in poverty) is exactly what wealth redistribution in this manner is due to higher income tax payments by those with higher wealth being taken from the wealthy and redistributed which ultimately removes the Western concept of wealth based class that communists long to be rid of.
No. "To each according to their needs", and "to each the same" are fundamentally different things. The latter is certainly NOT progressive. In much the same way that flat poll tax (everyone pays the same) was a regressive tax, and not at all communist.
Same as everyone else when they first start offering world maps: It's based on multiple sources. The main provider is Tom-Tom. But they in their turn get data from other suppliers.
Google isn't one of the suppliers, but OSM is.
This is one of the things that makes mapping hard and error prone: Munging together data from multiple sources.
At the same time he was saying about how welfare should be about giving everyone the exact same amount regardless of who they are (i.e. he was advocating communist ideas).
Thatcher also held this view. Are you saying she's communist?
Meanwhile it's a view that communists DON'T hold. "From each according to the means, to each according to their needs" is not the same as "To each the same."
The cold war wasn't a "battle of ideas". It was a real war fought by soldiers in proxy countries such as Korea, Vietnam and Grenada. And fought economically.
As ever, winning a war doesn't mean you were the righteous side. There are many possible reasons, such as you were better equipped, had better (possibly more immoral) tactics, of had a geographic advantage.
Any thought that the US won the cold war in a moral way should have died when they were napalming Vietnamese citizens. But if you are a US citizen, you have had your news and history written to make you think your on the righteous side.
A "battle of ideas" wouldn't have needed any of these proxy wars. If communism was really an unworkable system, the US could have simply let the communist countries fail by themselves. The fact that they didn't proves that they knew communism is a sustainable political model.
And there's no need for anyone else to know. It's Apple's own website, and they are free to execute their own rules as they see fit. It's not as if it's the only web site on the internet discussing Apple topics.
Likewise if you or I set up a forum, we would be able to moderate it as we see fit.
The system's privacy model would be extremely broken if it allowed web-sites access to the user's geographic location without explicit permission from the user. And depending on the site you are going to have a varying rate of refusals from the non-trivial to the overwhelming.
People will prefer competitor sites that don't spy on their location.
This system is only useful if it provides end-user benefits. It's not a service for web-service providers to pick and choose their clients.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes. A commercial operating system. Far more complicated than any web site.
What's your experience?
Have you got a citation for a significant number of phones breaking during battery replacement? Or is it just imagination on your part?
England still uses the mile as the usual measure for long distances. Road signs and speedometers are in Miles and MPH.
IBM certainly made sure the Nazi's CRM system worked right.
Nine women cannot make a baby in one month.
True, but the website already exists. If it's a case of fixing defects rather than re-architecting from scratch, there's no reason why multiple teams can't work on different parts of the system. And multiple people within a team can't work on different defects.
Defect fixing is indeed somewhat scalable.
Is it 64 bit yet? When iOS7 came out, various people here were saying it would only be a few days work to make Android 64 bit.
So is it?
The core problem is not multiple batteries it is ability to replace it when yours starts to suck.
iPhone batteries are replaceable. They are just not (easily) user replaceable. So if you don't care about multiple batteries, and only end of battery life swap, it's not a big issue.
Why are detachable lids bad?
It's more than just a lid. If the battery is user removable, the entire battery needs to be encased in a hard case. Otherwise, it merely needs to be wrapped in a thin insulating wrap. This makes a difference to the size of the battery or size of the phone.
Have noted it is always high end phones that first get hit with non-replaceable batteries.
Because they are the ones which have the greatest pressure on the battery capacity/size factor. The reason phones increasingly have non user replaceable batteries is because it makes a more competitive phone. It's not to annoy you.
Note there is no obsolescence factor in these batteries having a limited life. Non-user replaceable does not mean non-replacable. Just make sure you have bought a brand for which there are likely to still be replacement batteries available in years to come. Or buy a replacement kit now in anticipation.
The thickness difference is greater than you imagine. In a sealed device, the battery can have a very thin wrapper to just electrically insulate it from the other components. For a replacement battery the battery needs a solid case to protect it when it's being subjected to random abuse outside the phone.
In addition there is the rigidity factor. Screws create stress points. Glueing spreads stress out over the entire contact area.
Replacement battery services are available for iPhone. Probably for other phones too... so long as they have a big enough market to make it worthwhile for the batteries to be stocked.
No (easy) user replacement doesn't mean no replacement.
They are only non-user replaceable, as in no quick swap. But for batteries that are no longer working, or are running low on capacity, battery replacement is possible. They are replaceable at various specialist mobile shops, or available as a kit to do your own replacement at home.
At least that's true for iPhones. Other phones may be less likely to have the batteries available when the time comes.
Several backward nations: Am. Samoa, Bahamas, Belize, British Virgin Islands, Cayman Islands, Dominica, Falkland Islands, Grenada, Guam, Myanmar, The N. Mariana Islands, Samoa, St. Lucia, St. Vincent & The Grenadines, St. Helena, St. Kitts & Nevis, the Turks & Caicos Islands, USA, UK and the U.S. Virgin Islands.
The fact is, that flat wealth redistribution towards removal of class based on wealth
That's not a fact, it's your fundamental misunderstanding. Whether it's a flat tax, or flat welfare (welfare is simply negative tax) then that is a REGRESSIVE policy. And that means it contributes to the wealth gap, not reduces it.
That's why you are confusing what is a very conservative policy for one that is communist. The ultra conservative fellow you mention isn't wrong, and neither am I. You are.
Among me and my hardcore developer friends GCC is effectively dead in the water. LLVM has eaten its lunch due simply to the fact that LLVM respects developer rights by giving them the FREEDOM to do anything they want with the code. Unless and until GCC dumps the socialistic GPL license idiocy, it will stay dead to everyone that matters.
You shouldn't have been modded troll. You were making a genuine point. There's also the fact that LLVM is a far superior and more modern compiler engine than GCC. (If anyone needs objective evidence, just look at compile and run times.)
one policy does not define someone's overriding leaning.
And yet that was exactly how you were trying to say this guy wasn't a republican but was advocating communist ideas. And yet he was advocating the same as Thatcher.
From each according to their means (those with plenty of wealth but who don't need the level of wealth they have) to each according to their needs (those less well off and in poverty) is exactly what wealth redistribution in this manner is due to higher income tax payments by those with higher wealth being taken from the wealthy and redistributed which ultimately removes the Western concept of wealth based class that communists long to be rid of.
No. "To each according to their needs", and "to each the same" are fundamentally different things. The latter is certainly NOT progressive. In much the same way that flat poll tax (everyone pays the same) was a regressive tax, and not at all communist.
Sorry mate, but you are just wrong.
Same as everyone else when they first start offering world maps: It's based on multiple sources. The main provider is Tom-Tom. But they in their turn get data from other suppliers.
Google isn't one of the suppliers, but OSM is.
This is one of the things that makes mapping hard and error prone: Munging together data from multiple sources.
At the same time he was saying about how welfare should be about giving everyone the exact same amount regardless of who they are (i.e. he was advocating communist ideas).
Thatcher also held this view. Are you saying she's communist?
Meanwhile it's a view that communists DON'T hold. "From each according to the means, to each according to their needs" is not the same as "To each the same."
The cold war wasn't a "battle of ideas". It was a real war fought by soldiers in proxy countries such as Korea, Vietnam and Grenada. And fought economically.
As ever, winning a war doesn't mean you were the righteous side. There are many possible reasons, such as you were better equipped, had better (possibly more immoral) tactics, of had a geographic advantage.
Any thought that the US won the cold war in a moral way should have died when they were napalming Vietnamese citizens. But if you are a US citizen, you have had your news and history written to make you think your on the righteous side.
A "battle of ideas" wouldn't have needed any of these proxy wars. If communism was really an unworkable system, the US could have simply let the communist countries fail by themselves. The fact that they didn't proves that they knew communism is a sustainable political model.
Perhaps if enough people send their phones back, they might not release an operating system that breaks peoples' phones next time.
It's doubtful, but perhaps. Nevertheless, Apple have no obligation to allow the organisation of such mainly wasteful actions on it's own forums.
And there's no need for anyone else to know. It's Apple's own website, and they are free to execute their own rules as they see fit. It's not as if it's the only web site on the internet discussing Apple topics.
Likewise if you or I set up a forum, we would be able to moderate it as we see fit.
deamons create their own thread. Or have one created for them. This program blocks the launching thread (the thread running the BASIC CLI).
Nor does it do anything useful with the loop. Once there is a screen full of "Hello World", all the loop does is cause flicker.
You can't call it a bug unless you know what the design intends.
Then neither can you claim it's flawless. Either way it's an assumption.
The system's privacy model would be extremely broken if it allowed web-sites access to the user's geographic location without explicit permission from the user. And depending on the site you are going to have a varying rate of refusals from the non-trivial to the overwhelming.
People will prefer competitor sites that don't spy on their location.
This system is only useful if it provides end-user benefits. It's not a service for web-service providers to pick and choose their clients.
There's one born every minute.
The only idea I'm rejecting is your ill thought out one. Again, anecdotes aren't data.