You keep referring to the iPhone as a "fondlebrick", yet you own an Android that in your opinion is better. Does that mean you spend your time fondling your phone? Or are you such an Android fanboy that you think bizarre name-calling of inanimate objects helps make your case?
But in those few minutes I came to the conclusion that 1: iPhone still sucks and is behind the curve
As pointed out above, if Vlingo is your preference, then as pointed out above iPhone had it more than a year before Android. And the quality of the voice interpretation must be the same because it's using the same web service.
The wider point is that the vast majority of app development happens on iPhone before Android. So it would be the very opposite of the truth to say that iPhone is behind the curve.
And that's all allowing your opinion that Vlingo is better than Siri. Which isn't the opinion of those who've actually tried them side by side. Heck if Vlingo was better than Siri, Apple would have bought Vlingo rather then Siri.
Finally, there's plenty of video around of pople using Siri. It's not the case that people have to say things over and over again to be understood. Which rather proves that the things you say aren't true.
Are you really so self conscious you feel embarassed about talking into a phone in public? You need to get out a bit more. Maybe find some confidence boosting activities.
Yes, it's been out on Android for a year. Which means it was behind all the other phone platforms for availability of Vlingo.
BlackBerry Jun 2008 iPhone Dec 2008 Nokia May 2009 Windows Mobile June 2009 Android March 2010
The difference with Vlingo is the processing is done on a web-service. So you need a data connection, if you have a limited data plan you'll use some of it, it doesn't integrate as well with the built-in apps as Siri does.
As to which is better, that takes someone do do a side by side review of the two. Which I'm damn sure you haven't.
I'd expect it to be used in the car for it's handsfree capability. And in a one-man office for it's dictation ability. The office is going to be quiet. How does it perform in a car? I'm guessing that ordinary car noises won't particularly disrupt it, but who's tried it?
"One of the surest tests [of the superiority or inferiority of a poet] is the way in which a poet borrows. Immature poets imitate; mature poets steal; bad poets deface what they take, and good poets make it into something better, or at least something different. The good poet welds his theft into a whole of feeling which is unique, utterly different than that from which it is torn; the bad poet throws it into something which has no cohesion. A good poet will usually borrow from authors remote in time, or alien in language, or diverse in interest."
Now that really does explain the difference between Apple and the "me too" competitors.
Just to add to your list of known things, we do know that Apple was part of the (PRODUCT)RED charitable scheme, with a few generations of the iPod.
And the "discouraged iphone users from easily asking or giving donations" is nonsense. Apple simply wasn't in a position to know whether app authors who advertised their app by means of a promised donation to charity were actually going to do so. For sure they could have taken the promised cut from the developer's cut and forwarded it to the specified charity themselves. But then they'd be in a position of having to verify that some organisation somewhere in the world is a genuine charity. Possibly for the sake of a handful of dollars from some worthless shovel-ware.
None of this takes away from my point that we simply don't know whether Jobs was a person who considered charity to be a personal & private matter, or a person who simply didn't believe in charity. And neither is it our business to know.
Whats your point? Phones take time to develop. The design of that Android phone and GUI will have been done before the iPhone came out. And in Dec 2007, they hadn't yet completed their changes to make the platform an iPhone rip-off.
That link and others like them do show clearly the extent to which Android changed from it's original conception to one that copied iPhone.
There are two sorts of people that give to charity. Those that do it quietly. And those who want everyone to know about it. The former vastly outnumber the latter.
There are the big charity affairs where the rich and famous, and especially their wives, like to be seen. I find them repugnant. And then there's the great individual charity givers like for example Bill Gates. For sure his money does a lot of good. But you do get the feeling he's doing it because he wants to be remembered for his great works of charity rather then the nasty things he did when he was in charge at Microsoft.
Whether Jobs was charitable or not we don't know. And it's not our business to know. All we know is that he wasn't ostentatiously charitable. He didn't set out to be judged on his charitableness, but rather by his products.
Nope. Cisco's trademark of the name iPhone had been lost through non-use. Cisco tried deception to claim they had still been using it. See the outrageously amateur mockup of a box with the word "iPhone" on a sticker outside the shrink-wrap.
You're not even any good at reading a graph. This study - the Berkley Earth study - is the solid black line. The 2005 peak is higher than the 1998 peak.
Not that the particular year matters in climate research. Climate is what happens over periods of at least 30 years, not single years. If you don't understand that, you'd do better to keep quiet and not show your stupidity.
The problem is that you can't use 100+ years of actual data to know anything about a cycle that lasts hundreds of thousands of years.
There's way more than a century of so of data. Tree ring data for example covers every year for the last 11,000 years. Ice core data also goes back thousands of years. And then there's geological data going back millions of years.
For sure the resolution of the data is less with these longer term data sources. But you're talking about long term cycles, so it doesn't need a high resolution.
But it's not the wrong reasons. Here again you have yet another report confirming it. This one run by previously skeptical scientists, and financed by arch-denialists the Koch brothers. And you still think the science is wrong?
Did it "confirm" it was caused by man? Because that's the real issue that most skeptics have been questioning of late.
Of late? Yes. That puts us on step 3.
The Republican 8 Phase Denial Plan 1) There's no such thing as global warming. 2) There's global warming, but the scientists are exaggerating. It's not significant. 3) There's significant global warming, but man doesn't cause it. 4) Man causes significant global warming, but it's not economically possible to tackle it. 5) We need to tackle global warming, so make the poor pay for it. 6) Global warming is bad for business. Why did the Democrats not tackle it earlier? 7) ???? 8) Profit.
In the countryside or wilderness, fine. In the city, what you're describing, if done by everyone, is a shanty town with a cholera problem.
Sure, you might build a good house yourself, and deal with your own sewage properly. But do you imagine everyone else around will do so when there's no government to set the standard?
It's not your sewage you have to worry about. It's everyone else's.
And that kind of attitude is what marks open sourcers out as ungrateful.
Suppose I'd been working on some useful software, and I feel quite happy to let other people have it, and do what they like with. Why the heck would I put an open source license on it, and then for ever more have you hyenas circling round ready to whine if I didn't in the future do things according to your expected timetable?
This isn't hypothetical. A few years ago I created two retro games for an obscure platform for which there is pretty much just one place on line where people hang out. Always a very polite and pleasant hangout. Every release of the games I posted up the source, but I didn't want to put any license on them. I just said do what you like with the source, but if you do, some acknowledgement that the code was from my projects would be nice. And for that, the one and only bit of unpleasantless I ever remember on that forum. Some open sourcer attacking me because I wanted acknowledgement if code was reused, and telling me I ought to GPL it.
You know, when other people put out stuff that they've created for free, the right reaction is to be grateful, proportional to it's usefulness. Attacking because the freelunch isn't in the form you prefer, or there might not be another free lunch in the future, or because the free lunch doesn't arrive according to your schedule is ungrateful. And implying that the benefactor is a liar unless and until he proves he's not by putting out the source for the next version is worse.
Slashdot Mirror
Ah that's a shame. I'm rather less impressed with it then.
You keep referring to the iPhone as a "fondlebrick", yet you own an Android that in your opinion is better. Does that mean you spend your time fondling your phone? Or are you such an Android fanboy that you think bizarre name-calling of inanimate objects helps make your case?
But in those few minutes I came to the conclusion that 1: iPhone still sucks and is behind the curve
As pointed out above, if Vlingo is your preference, then as pointed out above iPhone had it more than a year before Android. And the quality of the voice interpretation must be the same because it's using the same web service.
The wider point is that the vast majority of app development happens on iPhone before Android. So it would be the very opposite of the truth to say that iPhone is behind the curve.
And that's all allowing your opinion that Vlingo is better than Siri. Which isn't the opinion of those who've actually tried them side by side. Heck if Vlingo was better than Siri, Apple would have bought Vlingo rather then Siri.
Finally, there's plenty of video around of pople using Siri. It's not the case that people have to say things over and over again to be understood. Which rather proves that the things you say aren't true.
Are you really so self conscious you feel embarassed about talking into a phone in public? You need to get out a bit more. Maybe find some confidence boosting activities.
Yes, it's been out on Android for a year. Which means it was behind all the other phone platforms for availability of Vlingo.
BlackBerry Jun 2008
iPhone Dec 2008
Nokia May 2009
Windows Mobile June 2009
Android March 2010
The difference with Vlingo is the processing is done on a web-service. So you need a data connection, if you have a limited data plan you'll use some of it, it doesn't integrate as well with the built-in apps as Siri does.
As to which is better, that takes someone do do a side by side review of the two. Which I'm damn sure you haven't.
http://www.google.co.uk/search?client=safari&rls=en&q=siri+vs+vlingo&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&redir_esc=&ei=jG2jTrXUDNK78gP96cDKBQ
I'd expect it to be used in the car for it's handsfree capability. And in a one-man office for it's dictation ability. The office is going to be quiet. How does it perform in a car? I'm guessing that ordinary car noises won't particularly disrupt it, but who's tried it?
The concept of "proof" only exists in mathematics and a court of law. It has no part of the scientific method.
Consensus on the other hand is a normal part of science. There is no proof for gravity for example, just consensus that it exists.
The reason you think what you do is because you don't understand science. You just repeat memes you read on the internet.
And Picasso stole it from T.S.Eliot.
"One of the surest tests [of the superiority or inferiority of a poet] is the way in which a poet borrows. Immature poets imitate; mature poets steal; bad poets deface what they take, and good poets make it into something better, or at least something different. The good poet welds his theft into a whole of feeling which is unique, utterly different than that from which it is torn; the bad poet throws it into something which has no cohesion. A good poet will usually borrow from authors remote in time, or alien in language, or diverse in interest."
Now that really does explain the difference between Apple and the "me too" competitors.
Just to add to your list of known things, we do know that Apple was part of the (PRODUCT)RED charitable scheme, with a few generations of the iPod.
And the "discouraged iphone users from easily asking or giving donations" is nonsense. Apple simply wasn't in a position to know whether app authors who advertised their app by means of a promised donation to charity were actually going to do so. For sure they could have taken the promised cut from the developer's cut and forwarded it to the specified charity themselves. But then they'd be in a position of having to verify that some organisation somewhere in the world is a genuine charity. Possibly for the sake of a handful of dollars from some worthless shovel-ware.
None of this takes away from my point that we simply don't know whether Jobs was a person who considered charity to be a personal & private matter, or a person who simply didn't believe in charity. And neither is it our business to know.
With an attitude like that, I don't suppose you'll be getting many glowing tributes after you're dead.
Whats your point? Phones take time to develop. The design of that Android phone and GUI will have been done before the iPhone came out. And in Dec 2007, they hadn't yet completed their changes to make the platform an iPhone rip-off.
That link and others like them do show clearly the extent to which Android changed from it's original conception to one that copied iPhone.
There are two sorts of people that give to charity. Those that do it quietly. And those who want everyone to know about it. The former vastly outnumber the latter.
There are the big charity affairs where the rich and famous, and especially their wives, like to be seen. I find them repugnant. And then there's the great individual charity givers like for example Bill Gates. For sure his money does a lot of good. But you do get the feeling he's doing it because he wants to be remembered for his great works of charity rather then the nasty things he did when he was in charge at Microsoft.
Whether Jobs was charitable or not we don't know. And it's not our business to know. All we know is that he wasn't ostentatiously charitable. He didn't set out to be judged on his charitableness, but rather by his products.
The particular multi-touch capacitive technology used by Apple was developed by a company called Fingerworks. Apple acquired the company.
Nope. Cisco's trademark of the name iPhone had been lost through non-use. Cisco tried deception to claim they had still been using it. See the outrageously amateur mockup of a box with the word "iPhone" on a sticker outside the shrink-wrap.
http://www.zdnet.com/blog/burnette/cisco-lost-rights-to-iphone-trademark-last-year-experts-say/236
Come back and tell me I'm wrong when you've learned to read a simple graph.
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2487864&cid=37790992
You're not even any good at reading a graph. This study - the Berkley Earth study - is the solid black line. The 2005 peak is higher than the 1998 peak.
Not that the particular year matters in climate research. Climate is what happens over periods of at least 30 years, not single years. If you don't understand that, you'd do better to keep quiet and not show your stupidity.
The problem is that you can't use 100+ years of actual data to know anything about a cycle that lasts hundreds of thousands of years.
There's way more than a century of so of data. Tree ring data for example covers every year for the last 11,000 years. Ice core data also goes back thousands of years. And then there's geological data going back millions of years.
For sure the resolution of the data is less with these longer term data sources. But you're talking about long term cycles, so it doesn't need a high resolution.
The urban heat island effect is well known and is accounted for. You might as well say that climate observations are problematical because of clouds.
But it's not the wrong reasons. Here again you have yet another report confirming it. This one run by previously skeptical scientists, and financed by arch-denialists the Koch brothers. And you still think the science is wrong?
Anyone still denying is a first class idiot.
I read his post more widely as "winning the war". And for sure it's impressive how much that goal pushed progress in so many fields.
Did it "confirm" it was caused by man? Because that's the real issue that most skeptics have been questioning of late.
Of late? Yes. That puts us on step 3.
The Republican 8 Phase Denial Plan
1) There's no such thing as global warming.
2) There's global warming, but the scientists are exaggerating. It's not significant.
3) There's significant global warming, but man doesn't cause it.
4) Man causes significant global warming, but it's not economically possible to tackle it.
5) We need to tackle global warming, so make the poor pay for it.
6) Global warming is bad for business. Why did the Democrats not tackle it earlier?
7) ????
8) Profit.
In the countryside or wilderness, fine. In the city, what you're describing, if done by everyone, is a shanty town with a cholera problem.
Sure, you might build a good house yourself, and deal with your own sewage properly. But do you imagine everyone else around will do so when there's no government to set the standard?
It's not your sewage you have to worry about. It's everyone else's.
What country do you live in? Somalia?
And that kind of attitude is what marks open sourcers out as ungrateful.
Suppose I'd been working on some useful software, and I feel quite happy to let other people have it, and do what they like with. Why the heck would I put an open source license on it, and then for ever more have you hyenas circling round ready to whine if I didn't in the future do things according to your expected timetable?
This isn't hypothetical. A few years ago I created two retro games for an obscure platform for which there is pretty much just one place on line where people hang out. Always a very polite and pleasant hangout. Every release of the games I posted up the source, but I didn't want to put any license on them. I just said do what you like with the source, but if you do, some acknowledgement that the code was from my projects would be nice. And for that, the one and only bit of unpleasantless I ever remember on that forum. Some open sourcer attacking me because I wanted acknowledgement if code was reused, and telling me I ought to GPL it.
You know, when other people put out stuff that they've created for free, the right reaction is to be grateful, proportional to it's usefulness. Attacking because the freelunch isn't in the form you prefer, or there might not be another free lunch in the future, or because the free lunch doesn't arrive according to your schedule is ungrateful. And implying that the benefactor is a liar unless and until he proves he's not by putting out the source for the next version is worse.
Bunch of leeches.