I believe we'll soon hit an "uncanny valley" when it comes to personalized ads... we aren't there yet though. When I say "uncanny valley", I mean the ads are so well targeted that you could believe a friend, relative, or other close person is actually hand-picking out ads for you and placing them on your screen. Almost like the ads are predicting that you'll need something before you even realize you need it. A lot of us will be seriously creeped out for a while until we figure out how to deal with this technology properly.
I'm not sure how you make that analogy. Apple's business model is to sell hardware. Ads and iTunes purchases are just gravy to them. For now, however, Google's primary business model is advertising. Obviously, you can infer I hope they diversify away from that model...
When it comes down to it though, as long as the content is being displayed on your device and runs through your local network, you have the ability to control it and you always will.
Not if that content is copyrighted.
I think you overstate people's tolerance for ads these days. Hulu Plus is... I canceled it after less than a month of using it. And how long can you browse without AdBlock turned on before you go nuts?
We're not talking about the generic TV advertisements we just fast forward over using the DVR. We're talking 24/7 tracking, personalized, invasive, interactive commercialization being thrust at your face any time you interact with an electronic device. I'm surprised anyone in the AdBlock Plus crowd (which presumably includes most of Slashdot) would even consider going near this paradigm.
What advantage could this possibly have over the variable-sweep wing style, such as used by the f-14? I expect this contraption would actually end up with more moving parts than even the f-14 has.
It seems to me variable-sweep is the ideal in terms of fuel consumption and other factors... not sure why this style is not being pursued these days...
First they buy out a competitor (Motorola Mobility).
Next they stand silently by while Apple and co. open up a barrage of litigation against everyone using GOOGLE's software.
And now they simply rub salt in the wounds, with press releases like this.
No wonder Nokia went with Microsoft.
I think classically the phrase "stacked jury" has implied illegality. In any case, I make no suggestion either way if the jurors were preternaturally disposed towards Apple, and I don't really care. I will assume that the juror vetting process would have filtered out any obvious fanboys.
I doubt the judge or the lawyers in this case would have permitted highly biased Apple or Android fanboys to get onto the jury. Potential jurors ARE vetted first, you know?
Juries can decide complex civil trials just fine, if they have well written jury instructions from the judge first. The appeals process is often related to having received poor or unfair jury instructions.
It is still the most likely case that this trial ends in a settlement between the two companies. Today's events will probably shift that inevitable settlement more in Apple's favor. And so, certainly there are some grounds for celebrating or complaining.
"Stacked" is a dangerous word, implying Apple illegally influenced the jury before they made that verdict. Unless you have evidence of this, don't throw around a word like that lightly. If you merely think that Apple is simply lucky with the jury panel they got in this case, then just say so.
This could be a blessing in disguise (for the GOP), if it happens, as it will drive that other storm that originated in Missouri out of the front pages.
Is it really necessary to make this an iOS vs Android pissing match? What point in suggesting one side is more gullible than the other? (It's probably an invalid point anyways.)
I think the whole premise of your post is wrong. The technical / bandwidth (and possibly legal) hurdles involved if Facetime over cellular (or any video-enabled VOIP) takes off in a big way are a lot scarier to telcos than ordinary streaming video from Youtube or Netflix. I don't necessarily approve of this solution from AT&T, just saying I can see some of the reasoning behind it.
It would be great to get a connector that can be plugged in either orientation (symmetric) and acts like Apple Macbook power cables (trip-safe magnetized). Micro-USB doesn't have either feature, so it's actually not a great choice.
How was I trolling, exactly? I'm not the one using the word "abortion" or the phrase "steaming pile of crap". I agree with you that this is not a compelling upgrade for the keyboard/mouse crowd, but then again, Metro wasn't really designed for that, was it?
Is it worth upgrading from Win7 for a standard desktop or standard laptop? For most users, probably not. Windows 8 is designed for hybrid tablets, Kinect-style PC-interfacing, unusual monitor configurations, etc. It's for "non-standard" computing, generally. If benchmarking were updated to capture "usability" in many different computing environments, this is where Win8 would leap ahead of its predecessor.
Have you actually tried to use Metro? It's very responsive and looks gorgeous, at least from the demo apps Microsoft has created. IE in Metro mode is an improvement over IE in Desktop mode. And, if you don't like it, Desktop mode is a click away, and you are safe back in Win7 style UI environment.
I've read a lot of Slashdot comments on this proposed legislation, and have learned almost nothing about it. Indeed, by clicking the link in the summary I was able to learn more in two minutes than in the previous hundreds of Slashdot furor comments about the legislation.
It would be great to see a point-by-point analysis of the legislation, by somebody well-versed in the technology, legal, and business repercussions, but with something closer to a neutral viewpoint.
Slashdot Mirror
I believe we'll soon hit an "uncanny valley" when it comes to personalized ads... we aren't there yet though. When I say "uncanny valley", I mean the ads are so well targeted that you could believe a friend, relative, or other close person is actually hand-picking out ads for you and placing them on your screen. Almost like the ads are predicting that you'll need something before you even realize you need it. A lot of us will be seriously creeped out for a while until we figure out how to deal with this technology properly.
I'm not sure how you make that analogy. Apple's business model is to sell hardware. Ads and iTunes purchases are just gravy to them. For now, however, Google's primary business model is advertising. Obviously, you can infer I hope they diversify away from that model...
When it comes down to it though, as long as the content is being displayed on your device and runs through your local network, you have the ability to control it and you always will.
Not if that content is copyrighted.
I think you overstate people's tolerance for ads these days. Hulu Plus is... I canceled it after less than a month of using it. And how long can you browse without AdBlock turned on before you go nuts?
We're not talking about the generic TV advertisements we just fast forward over using the DVR. We're talking 24/7 tracking, personalized, invasive, interactive commercialization being thrust at your face any time you interact with an electronic device. I'm surprised anyone in the AdBlock Plus crowd (which presumably includes most of Slashdot) would even consider going near this paradigm.
... for advertisers.
In other words, you reserve the most trust for the corporation most likely to invade your privacy.
It seems to me variable-sweep is the ideal in terms of fuel consumption and other factors... not sure why this style is not being pursued these days...
First they buy out a competitor (Motorola Mobility). Next they stand silently by while Apple and co. open up a barrage of litigation against everyone using GOOGLE's software. And now they simply rub salt in the wounds, with press releases like this. No wonder Nokia went with Microsoft.
I think classically the phrase "stacked jury" has implied illegality. In any case, I make no suggestion either way if the jurors were preternaturally disposed towards Apple, and I don't really care. I will assume that the juror vetting process would have filtered out any obvious fanboys.
I doubt the judge or the lawyers in this case would have permitted highly biased Apple or Android fanboys to get onto the jury. Potential jurors ARE vetted first, you know?
Juries can decide complex civil trials just fine, if they have well written jury instructions from the judge first. The appeals process is often related to having received poor or unfair jury instructions.
An appeal is not guaranteed. There is a very good possibility the two companies will reach a settlement first.
It is still the most likely case that this trial ends in a settlement between the two companies. Today's events will probably shift that inevitable settlement more in Apple's favor. And so, certainly there are some grounds for celebrating or complaining.
"Stacked" is a dangerous word, implying Apple illegally influenced the jury before they made that verdict. Unless you have evidence of this, don't throw around a word like that lightly. If you merely think that Apple is simply lucky with the jury panel they got in this case, then just say so.
This could be a blessing in disguise (for the GOP), if it happens, as it will drive that other storm that originated in Missouri out of the front pages.
I think the whole premise of your post is wrong. The technical / bandwidth (and possibly legal) hurdles involved if Facetime over cellular (or any video-enabled VOIP) takes off in a big way are a lot scarier to telcos than ordinary streaming video from Youtube or Netflix. I don't necessarily approve of this solution from AT&T, just saying I can see some of the reasoning behind it.
I assume then, that you don't rely on any webmail service like Gmail, Yahoo Mail, or Hotmail, right?
It would be great to get a connector that can be plugged in either orientation (symmetric) and acts like Apple Macbook power cables (trip-safe magnetized). Micro-USB doesn't have either feature, so it's actually not a great choice.
How was I trolling, exactly? I'm not the one using the word "abortion" or the phrase "steaming pile of crap". I agree with you that this is not a compelling upgrade for the keyboard/mouse crowd, but then again, Metro wasn't really designed for that, was it?
Is it worth upgrading from Win7 for a standard desktop or standard laptop? For most users, probably not. Windows 8 is designed for hybrid tablets, Kinect-style PC-interfacing, unusual monitor configurations, etc. It's for "non-standard" computing, generally. If benchmarking were updated to capture "usability" in many different computing environments, this is where Win8 would leap ahead of its predecessor.
Have you actually tried to use Metro? It's very responsive and looks gorgeous, at least from the demo apps Microsoft has created. IE in Metro mode is an improvement over IE in Desktop mode. And, if you don't like it, Desktop mode is a click away, and you are safe back in Win7 style UI environment.
All copyright terms are defensible. If you don't like somebody's draconian terms, simply find something else to download.
It would be great to see a point-by-point analysis of the legislation, by somebody well-versed in the technology, legal, and business repercussions, but with something closer to a neutral viewpoint.
Either the OS has clear and open, well-documented APIs that are trustworthy and predictable when you invoke them, or it does not.
In other words, you're not a developer.