Nonsense. You don't know what you are talking about.
Arrest happens out in the community. It's the precursor to taking someone forcibly to the police station. Following that charges MAY be placed at the police station. Or the person may be released without charges.
You're looking at this from the direction of the kid playing the game. Because that's the angle the story has been written from.
Consider the angle of your school age kid, being featured in a video on YouTube, without his or your permission, as a simulation of him being murdered in a school shooting spree.
The kid has not been arrested for playing a game. He's been arrested for publicly posting a video simulation of him murdering his classmates. If it had been done with video effect tools rather than a game cap, it would have been just as worthy of arrest.
No you wouldn't. No one's been arrested for Grand Theft Auto (the video game).
The difference here is posting a video on YouTube of a simulation of shooting real specifically identifiable children. It'd have been just as arrest worthy if it'd been done with video effects tools rather than as a game.
Based on what? Was latest iPhone expected to be 64 bit? Nobody outside of Android knows what's in Kit Kat.
So much for open source! In reality when it comes to software, Apple keeps their intentions utterly secret till it comes time to release either hardware with it on, or an SDK. With Android, the time between their mentioning that something is coming, and it appearing on a device or a shipping SDK is a long time. For example, Samsung have announced they will do 64 bit on their phones next year, in response to Apple's announcement.
Android *already runs on two completely different architectures* in x86 and ARM (and several variants of ARM at that). It's already far further along the multiarch than iOS, I'd say moving 64-bit on the same architecture is unlikely to be a big deal.
The low levels, where the CPU architecture matters, is largely shared between OSX and iOS, and thus is already x86, x86-64, ARM and ARMv8 compatible, and had previously has PowerPC as the major architecture. So no, iOS wasn't in any way less multi-arch than Android.
But that's not the point. I'm not saying that Android is any harder to go 64 bit. It's just that Apple have already done it, before it seems to have even become a thing to consider for the Android developers.
For them to start the process, do the development, alpha, beta, and then to put it in an actual release. And a switch to 64 bit is something for a major release not a minor release.
The next major release, KitKat is due next month. And it had 64 bit functionality we'd have heard about it by now.
It's going to be a year till the next major release after KitKat.
If you're only talking binary packages, then Debian doesn't "manage to bring 37 000 packages to all eight architectures that it's currently running on".
Take a popular app like AbiWord, and it has 13 architectures for the binary package.
Take the very first software in the package list thought: "0ad" it only has 4 architectures.
Software inevitably follows Moore's law. As fast as Moore's law provides the transistors, the software makes use of them.
There's no need for more than 4GB in a phone now. But it's as inevitable as PCs needing more than 640K.
For sure, Apple have 64 bit before they need it. Which is better than not having it ready when the time comes that they do need it.
But there are undoubtably other reasons for 64 bit that we're not seeing yet. An Apple TV replacement with 3rd party apps (and thus a games console competitor) has long been predicted. And the next consoles from Sony and Microsoft will have 8GB. Thus 64 bit is very important for that.
Its also easier for Apple internally if both OSX and iOS are 64 bit. Many (most?) of the components of iOS are shared with OSX.
I can even think of why this is the case. For example, many services have iOS-specific apps but not Android ones, so Android users end up using their mobile website instead
Oh, there's no doubt they're legally liable. They are the retailer. The customer complaints (or lawsuits) go to Apple. And Apple can turn can take it up with the TV company that actually chose to market the series that way.
But anyone that says that Apple actually did this, that anyone at apple took this decision, or approved it, are wrong.
Apple has always been about specmanship. Every iteration of the iPhone has claimed to have the fastest processor. They loved to quote specs on their retina screens when they were above average.
Wrong, wrong and wrong.
1) Apple has always been about design and user experience.
2) For the first iPhone (or two) they didn't even state the processor speed nor the memory capacity. Since then such details have been in the tech specs where they belong. They haven't ever been marketed on those tech spec figures. Sure, they might say that this iPhone is the fastest ever. Or twice as fast as the previous iPhone. But never as a X Ghz phone, or faster than brand X.
3) Note, they are sold as "Retina Screens" with resolution higher than the eye can perceive. As opposed to Android phones that either market "720p" or "720 x 1280" or whatever the resolution numbers actually are. User experience vs tech spec numbers.
Numbers sometimes appear up front in Apples's marketing. But it's supporting a humane description of the product. It's never about playing tech spec one-upmanship. That's what PC and Android manufacturers have to do to differentiate themselves from all the other me-too devices.
It doesn't negate from unit sales. But obviously it does negate from monetary sales and profit. Apple is the most profitable phone company for a reason.
are you saying that most these people would buy dumb phones if they werent getting free androids?
They'll buy whatever the salesman at the shop sells them.
My friends phone that often annoys me has bright blue LEDs on both side edges. There's no way to turn it that doesn't annoy. The only solution is to cover it with something.
I'm saying that Android's market share is mostly made of cheap phones, bought by people who want phone and SMS and little more. That's the reason for the low browsing stats for Android phones.
Jobs could only maintain that model because he could keep Apple innovating. The iPhone 5 was behind the curve when it came out and now... Their flagship phone doesn't even have a 720p screen. The fingerprint sensor is the only really new thing, everything else is just an incremental upgrade.
The classic mistake that premium is the same thing as the biggest numbers on tech specs.
There is no evidence whatsoever that Apple is losing the top end of the market. Android's market share comes from cheap phones. See for example the browsing share for evidence that people who are actually using their smartphone for smartphone tasks are mostly buying iPhones.
Apple's 5C is an aggressive move into Android's market, not a defensive move.
Slashdot Mirror
Nonsense. You don't know what you are talking about.
Arrest happens out in the community. It's the precursor to taking someone forcibly to the police station. Following that charges MAY be placed at the police station. Or the person may be released without charges.
You're looking at this from the direction of the kid playing the game. Because that's the angle the story has been written from.
Consider the angle of your school age kid, being featured in a video on YouTube, without his or your permission, as a simulation of him being murdered in a school shooting spree.
The kid has not been arrested for playing a game. He's been arrested for publicly posting a video simulation of him murdering his classmates. If it had been done with video effect tools rather than a game cap, it would have been just as worthy of arrest.
No you wouldn't. No one's been arrested for Grand Theft Auto (the video game).
The difference here is posting a video on YouTube of a simulation of shooting real specifically identifiable children. It'd have been just as arrest worthy if it'd been done with video effects tools rather than as a game.
Political correctness is the practice of changing the use of language and public activities to reduce discrimination in society.
It has absolutely nothing to do with arresting a kid for making a YouTube video of him shooting his classmates.
It's not heath and safety regulations either.
Based on what? Was latest iPhone expected to be 64 bit? Nobody outside of Android knows what's in Kit Kat.
So much for open source! In reality when it comes to software, Apple keeps their intentions utterly secret till it comes time to release either hardware with it on, or an SDK. With Android, the time between their mentioning that something is coming, and it appearing on a device or a shipping SDK is a long time. For example, Samsung have announced they will do 64 bit on their phones next year, in response to Apple's announcement.
Android *already runs on two completely different architectures* in x86 and ARM (and several variants of ARM at that). It's already far further along the multiarch than iOS, I'd say moving 64-bit on the same architecture is unlikely to be a big deal.
The low levels, where the CPU architecture matters, is largely shared between OSX and iOS, and thus is already x86, x86-64, ARM and ARMv8 compatible, and had previously has PowerPC as the major architecture. So no, iOS wasn't in any way less multi-arch than Android.
But that's not the point. I'm not saying that Android is any harder to go 64 bit. It's just that Apple have already done it, before it seems to have even become a thing to consider for the Android developers.
For them to start the process, do the development, alpha, beta, and then to put it in an actual release. And a switch to 64 bit is something for a major release not a minor release.
The next major release, KitKat is due next month. And it had 64 bit functionality we'd have heard about it by now.
It's going to be a year till the next major release after KitKat.
64 Bit ARM ups the general purpose register count up from 14x32 bit to 31x64bit.
So it wasn't short of general purpose registers before. But for sure, those extra registers will be made use of by a decent compiler.
Phasers don't vaporise a person. They disintegrate them.
Since we don't yet know the physics behind this phenomenon we can't say how much energy it needs.
If you're only talking binary packages, then Debian doesn't "manage to bring 37 000 packages to all eight architectures that it's currently running on".
Take a popular app like AbiWord, and it has 13 architectures for the binary package.
Take the very first software in the package list thought: "0ad" it only has 4 architectures.
Apple loves to be "first".
What? And Google Android/Samsung don't? They prefer being 2nd or 3rd? Is that your contention?
Samsung are making comments about bringing out 64 bit phones next year. Will those be pointless too?
Or is this just sour-grapes, because Apple WAS first.
Android is ready for x64, TFA doesn't have a clue. It's just a recompile away.
Bullshit. Making an OS 64 bit is far more complex than a recompile. And the next Android version, Kit-Kat is not expected to be 64 bit compatible.
Android 64 bit is at least a year away.
You're not important enough to add to this list.
http://www.macobserver.com/tmo/death_knell
Software inevitably follows Moore's law. As fast as Moore's law provides the transistors, the software makes use of them.
There's no need for more than 4GB in a phone now. But it's as inevitable as PCs needing more than 640K.
For sure, Apple have 64 bit before they need it. Which is better than not having it ready when the time comes that they do need it.
But there are undoubtably other reasons for 64 bit that we're not seeing yet. An Apple TV replacement with 3rd party apps (and thus a games console competitor) has long been predicted. And the next consoles from Sony and Microsoft will have 8GB. Thus 64 bit is very important for that.
Its also easier for Apple internally if both OSX and iOS are 64 bit. Many (most?) of the components of iOS are shared with OSX.
Source distribution to users. And all the compilation and linking problems that brings.
I can even think of why this is the case. For example, many services have iOS-specific apps but not Android ones, so Android users end up using their mobile website instead
Indeed that may be part of it too.
Oh, there's no doubt they're legally liable. They are the retailer. The customer complaints (or lawsuits) go to Apple. And Apple can turn can take it up with the TV company that actually chose to market the series that way.
But anyone that says that Apple actually did this, that anyone at apple took this decision, or approved it, are wrong.
Compare and contrast with the netmarketshare figures.
http://www.netmarketshare.com/browser-market-share.aspx?qprid=1&qpcustomb=1
iOS 60%
Android 26%.
The difference? Statcounter is pageviews. Netmarketshare is unique visitors.
iOS certainly has more users browsing the web. It seems Android either has more people hitting refresh, or has poor caching.
Apple has always been about specmanship. Every iteration of the iPhone has claimed to have the fastest processor. They loved to quote specs on their retina screens when they were above average.
Wrong, wrong and wrong.
1) Apple has always been about design and user experience.
2) For the first iPhone (or two) they didn't even state the processor speed nor the memory capacity. Since then such details have been in the tech specs where they belong. They haven't ever been marketed on those tech spec figures. Sure, they might say that this iPhone is the fastest ever. Or twice as fast as the previous iPhone. But never as a X Ghz phone, or faster than brand X.
3) Note, they are sold as "Retina Screens" with resolution higher than the eye can perceive. As opposed to Android phones that either market "720p" or "720 x 1280" or whatever the resolution numbers actually are. User experience vs tech spec numbers.
Numbers sometimes appear up front in Apples's marketing. But it's supporting a humane description of the product. It's never about playing tech spec one-upmanship. That's what PC and Android manufacturers have to do to differentiate themselves from all the other me-too devices.
No he was talking about the phone market, by analogy to the Mac market. Again, precisely nothing changed with regard to OSX with this announcement.
and how does that negate from the sales?
It doesn't negate from unit sales. But obviously it does negate from monetary sales and profit. Apple is the most profitable phone company for a reason.
are you saying that most these people would buy dumb phones if they werent getting free androids?
They'll buy whatever the salesman at the shop sells them.
My friends phone that often annoys me has bright blue LEDs on both side edges. There's no way to turn it that doesn't annoy. The only solution is to cover it with something.
Duh to you too.
I'm saying that Android's market share is mostly made of cheap phones, bought by people who want phone and SMS and little more. That's the reason for the low browsing stats for Android phones.
Add machining to the metal process for iPhone cases.
Notification LEDs are really fucking annoying when you don't want to deal with the notification right now.
Jobs could only maintain that model because he could keep Apple innovating. The iPhone 5 was behind the curve when it came out and now... Their flagship phone doesn't even have a 720p screen. The fingerprint sensor is the only really new thing, everything else is just an incremental upgrade.
The classic mistake that premium is the same thing as the biggest numbers on tech specs.
There is no evidence whatsoever that Apple is losing the top end of the market. Android's market share comes from cheap phones. See for example the browsing share for evidence that people who are actually using their smartphone for smartphone tasks are mostly buying iPhones.
Apple's 5C is an aggressive move into Android's market, not a defensive move.