To be fair to Microsoft, some of the complaints of the NFL was not that the tablets broke down but that they lost network connectivity at crucial points. Now that might be more of a problem with networking and not setting up a robust wireless network with tens of thousands of fan phones creating interference. And yes some teams did say the tablets also broke down too.
Yes but if compatibility isn't as big an issue in the future, how much will the bloat go down? I'm not an expert enough in Apple's development to answer this question. For iOS 11 for sure, the 32-bit frameworks will be gone so we'll see how much that will change the bloat.
I wonder how much of the code bloat is also due to multiple transitions happening at once. First Apple is moving to 64-bit for all iOS devices. Certainly there is some overhead maintaining both 32-bit and 64-bit frameworks. Second, Apple seems to be phasing out Objective C in favor of Swift. As the article noted, Swift requires more space but I wonder how much of the space is because both are used.
Since none of us have seen the private docs and license agreements, all we really know about the above is that's how Apple has spun the PR on it. Qualcomm says that's not the case and spins it differently, to make themselves look like the aggrieved ones. Which specific patents are the each accusing, etc.
First of all, Qualcomm is being investigated by both the US (FTC) and European agencies for anti-trust. This follows South Korea fining the company $854M for unfair business practices.
Second, you can't claim ignorance after an assertion. In essence you're saying "We don't know what was in the agreements" right after you positively alleged the Apple wrongs did with the agreements. Either you don't know or you do know. So how do you know what Apple did?
Who's telling the truth?? That's probably why the ITC actually agreed to dive in and try to figure it out. Potential merit according to both stated positions, need a neutral party to look and decide.
Well I don't believe either party but it's not the first time or party that has accused Qualcomm of the same behavior, so . . .
Now, are they charging unfair royalties for patent-essential things? Maybe so. But Apple sued first, and said effectively "we're gong to keep selling iphones with both your actual chips, and your IP, and we're not going to pay anything anymore, even thoug you're charging what we contractually agreed to.".
Except that's not anything close to what happened. Qualcomm licenses its technologies directly to people making chips. They themselves design and sell chips. However, Qualcomm wanted Apple to pay royalties directly to them AND also pay other companies (not Qualcomm) for chips made by companies that licensed the same technology from Qualcomm. That's double dipping.
As direct comparison, that would be like ARM demanding royalties from anyone using a Samsung ARM processor after ARM licensed their cores to Samsung to make processors.
Though competitors' devices can play music purchased from iTunes Store since DRM was dropped in 2009, virtually no non-Apple device can play videos purchased from iTunes Store.
That's like saying Ford locks you out of buying Chevy parts when you go to a Ford dealership. Because no one uses MPEG-4 or H.264 in their devices. No one at all. [sarcasm]It's not like the movie studios who control the copyrights on movies have heavily locked who license and play movies. Apple is the only company to impose DRM on their movies. Just the other day, I was able to play my Amazon movies on my BluRay player who only has Vudu and Netflix apps. Every other format is totally 100% unlocked to every other player but Apple.[/sarcasm]
The ad is probably asking too much: a big-name degree, 20 years of big-radio-scope experience, AND esteemed professorship. Managers typically don't have time to be professors other than hit-and-run lectures perhaps; they are dealing with logistics, hiring, firing, office politics, budgets, screwy vendors, leaky plumbing, publish-or-perish pressure, etc.
They are asking for a lot; however, they are not asking for the impossible. The other astronomer who commented seemed like they are an ideal candidate if they were not working on another telescope.
Only if you don't bother to read the summary correctly or you are deliberately obfuscating: "The candidate must have at least 20 years of previous experience in the field, and he or she must have taken a leading role in large-scale radio telescope project with extensive managerial experience. ..there are probably about 40 or so astronomers in the world who would qualify for such a job. Compared to other astronomy disciplines, radio astronomy is a relatively small field."
Nowhere does it say the candidate needs 20 years experience in this telescope. The candidate needs 20 years experience in radio astronomy AND extensive managerial experience. And what kind of experience would you look for in a candidate to manage a $180M telescope? Some who just graduated high school?
There is nothing preventing Samsung from adding their own APIs for the camera as long as they still provide the standard APIs for apps.
No but Google would not likely add Samsung's APIs to Android if only Samsung benefits or it is uses proprietary technology which is what Vic Gundotra is talking about. Samsung could be way ahead of Apple but Android must move as slow as their slowest partner allows. Contrast that to Apple: It develops/buys proprietary technology for their cameras. They don't have to check with any partners before incorporating it into the next version of iOS. They can also expose it to other camera apps as well. Older iOS device might not be able to leverage the new APIs due to a lack of hardware but it will be there.
Also cats and dogs used to be working animals so people only would get as many as they needed. Cats killed mice and vermin around farms. Dogs were herders or guard dogs or vermin killers too. So they fed partly off their own kills.
Well at least millennials will get to experience the joys of constantly re-positioning an antenna to get a decent signal. The difference is they can tweet about it to the word instead of complaining about it to the people in the room.
The question is what do you want to do and how much space you need. If you're looking for an onsite backup, then for $1000 you can build/buy a RAID server that will handle terabytes of files. If you want offsite backup, you can also leverage that server to feed HDDs that backup and then send offsite. If you are looking for archival storage, that's another solution.
The problem with optical has been is that most consumer grade discs are basically crap. They don't last long and they don't hold a lot. There are archival optical discs you can use which will last longer but they cost more as you need higher capacity. ($150 for 1.5TB). They are still tape you can use with varying amounts of capacity and cost.
And what Disney animated properties from 1996 to 2006 made Disney the most money? Pixar. That's one reason Iger bought out Pixar. He realized when touring Hong Kong Disneyland that the popular characters were Pixar originated.
Iger said the importance of Pixar to Disney's future had become clear to him during opening ceremonies for Hong Kong Disneyland in September 2005, just a month before he became chief executive. He noticed the many characters from Pixar films featured in the kickoff parade. But there was nothing from Disney's recent animated movies, whose latest characters weren't popular.
That and Disney animation films were in a rut producing less and less at the box office. These are just facts man. Both companies benefited from the deal. To pretend Disney didn't is pure denial.
VMs are irrelevant in this case for a simple reason: You can't run VMs in a phone. You can only run them on a desktop. Also to run a VM, you might have to pay for it.
What do you think "XP Mode" in Windows 7 Professional was?
A mode that wasn't guaranteed to work with all software. It worked fine for most software. There were some old games I had to get rid off because they didn't work. Couldn't figure out why. And since they were old, the companies didn't support them anymore. I tried looking at forums but no one had any real solution other than to see if Steam had them.
No. I'm sorry, I understand you wish it were otherwise, but typically the law does not work like that. What is reasonable is going to depend on context, so the best you can do speaking generally is give some obvious out-of-bounds cases, which I did.
No you said Apple should follow a standard. I asked which standard. Now you're refusing to name anything but again ramble on about something else.
So not exactly close to the likely working lifetime of a typical iPad, then.
What are you talking about? The working lifetime of a typical iPad is not 2 years.
Most obviously, if you want security fixes, you have to update to the latest available version of iOS for your device. That typically brings many other changes as well, from completely redesigned UIs to app compatibility issues.
The rollup security model is also present in Arch Linux and other OS. It's not a new approach.
Moreover, Apple has used its control of the App Store to limit availability of apps compatible with older versions of iOS. When iOS7 was released, apps were required to work with it and you could only get iOS7-based apps from the App Store from that point on.
And? Do you want security patches or not? It seems what you want is to apply only patches that you want to apply and ignore if security is a problem. If an older app might have security problems, you want to use regardless or not.
But the important thing is that we can make that choice, because Microsoft have at least been transparent about what they are and aren't going to support with Windows. Where do I find anything resembling that sort of clarity or commitment from Apple in the context of iOS devices?
The key difference is you're paying MS for Windows. You're not paying Apple for iOS. You're paying Apple for the hardware. If that is too onerous for you, then don't buy Apple's hardware.
You mean like the iPhone which spent 4 years in development? The iPod which spent more than a year in development? x86 Macs which were being developed years before they originally launched? You don't know what Apple has in development. Some of the projects will never become a product. That doesn't mean they aren't working on them.
He explained why: Samsung might invest in the hardware to be a better camera phone but LG (and the dozens of other Android partners) might not. Google has to create an API that covers the most partners and some of the API considerations are more political than technical. Also that doesn't cover the case if Samsung's technology is proprietary to Samsung which Google would never create an API just for Samsung. That's why Samsung creates their own camera software to exploit the hardware.
Sounds more like iPhone fanboy rambling than a genuine issue.
You realize you are talking about a former Google exec right? And if you read just the summary he clearly explains a neutral tone why Android is behind. Apple controlling both hardware and software can make changes faster than Google. The growth of Android is also a hindrance to Google as with more partners, they have more players to consider much less larger numbers of models. Apple only has to concern itself with a few new models every year and the few models that exist.
Study this graph [wsj.com]. Then realize you're an idiot. The reason the US didn't access shale reserves is because other reserves are cheaper.
Bahahahaha. You realize your graph just shows you're even more wrong. You don't actually understand a word I said did you? During the time of high oil prices, according to your graph the US production costs are some of the lowest in the world. YET THEY HAD THE LOWEST AMOUNT OF PRODUCTION IN 60 YEARS. We're not even talking the Green River formation. According to you, the US has plenty of supply but they didn't exploit any of that during times of high prices. Every single US oil company decided to produce less oil at a time when they could have made lots of money.
OR
You're just wrong about the US oil supply.
I know people in the industry. During the rise of oil prices from 2002 to 2008, every single US oil company was tapping every reserve they could. The problem was before 2008 they were using up every reserve they could. They were tapping reserves that were deemed too expensive to use in previous decades: high impurities, deep ocean, etc. By 2008, they had expended what they had. But according to you they could have tapped this reservoir. YET THEY DIDN'T. So again you know more about US oil supply that US oil companies.
And it's cheaper to use existing setups rather than pay the initial ramp and 10 years it takes to start harvesting.
How do you know it take 10 yeas to start harvesting? Cite your source. It doesn't take 10 years to start harvesting; it takes a few years depending on location (geology, existing infrastructure, etc). It can take up to 10 years (sometimes decades) because once a source is found, the oil companies have to determine the production cost of the source. Again some sources in West Texas have been dormant because the production cost was too high compared to the price of oil. So the oil company just sits on the deposit.
Second, why was the US production the lowest it had been in 60 years? That alone destroys your argument. They used existing setups and neglected to see the rise of oil prices in 6 years? Doesn't make sense that the largest US oil companies neglected to react to oil prices over the period of 6 years, doesn't it? But you know so much more than them, don't you?
Of course, in your fairy tale world, it's better to spend 10 years to ramp up production and pay to build the infrastructure for what everyone pretty much knew was a temporary (2 year max) spike, rather than just go with existing sources for most of the imports...
Bahahaha. Have you visited West Texas recently? During the peak, that's exactly what the oil companies did. Every well in West Texas was tapped during the boom. Lots of people were hired; equipment was moved in, towns suddenly boomed. And guess what happened afterwards: the wells were shut down, the equipment moved out. The people were let go. The towns shrunk down again.
And how long do you imagine Trump is going to tolerate Kelly?
I don't expect Kelly to last long if he challenges Trump; however, it is highly doubtful that Scaramucci would be back if Kelly is fired. Just like I don't expect Sean Spicer to return either.
I can only guess but former Marine General John Kelly seems to be a no-nonsense kind of person. That and Scaramucci did something that you should never do to Trump: upstage him.
Slashdot Mirror
To be fair to Microsoft, some of the complaints of the NFL was not that the tablets broke down but that they lost network connectivity at crucial points. Now that might be more of a problem with networking and not setting up a robust wireless network with tens of thousands of fan phones creating interference. And yes some teams did say the tablets also broke down too.
Yes but if compatibility isn't as big an issue in the future, how much will the bloat go down? I'm not an expert enough in Apple's development to answer this question. For iOS 11 for sure, the 32-bit frameworks will be gone so we'll see how much that will change the bloat.
I wonder how much of the code bloat is also due to multiple transitions happening at once. First Apple is moving to 64-bit for all iOS devices. Certainly there is some overhead maintaining both 32-bit and 64-bit frameworks. Second, Apple seems to be phasing out Objective C in favor of Swift. As the article noted, Swift requires more space but I wonder how much of the space is because both are used.
Since none of us have seen the private docs and license agreements, all we really know about the above is that's how Apple has spun the PR on it. Qualcomm says that's not the case and spins it differently, to make themselves look like the aggrieved ones. Which specific patents are the each accusing, etc.
First of all, Qualcomm is being investigated by both the US (FTC) and European agencies for anti-trust. This follows South Korea fining the company $854M for unfair business practices.
Second, you can't claim ignorance after an assertion. In essence you're saying "We don't know what was in the agreements" right after you positively alleged the Apple wrongs did with the agreements. Either you don't know or you do know. So how do you know what Apple did?
Who's telling the truth?? That's probably why the ITC actually agreed to dive in and try to figure it out. Potential merit according to both stated positions, need a neutral party to look and decide.
Well I don't believe either party but it's not the first time or party that has accused Qualcomm of the same behavior, so . . .
Now, are they charging unfair royalties for patent-essential things? Maybe so. But Apple sued first, and said effectively "we're gong to keep selling iphones with both your actual chips, and your IP, and we're not going to pay anything anymore, even thoug you're charging what we contractually agreed to.".
Except that's not anything close to what happened. Qualcomm licenses its technologies directly to people making chips. They themselves design and sell chips. However, Qualcomm wanted Apple to pay royalties directly to them AND also pay other companies (not Qualcomm) for chips made by companies that licensed the same technology from Qualcomm. That's double dipping.
As direct comparison, that would be like ARM demanding royalties from anyone using a Samsung ARM processor after ARM licensed their cores to Samsung to make processors.
Though competitors' devices can play music purchased from iTunes Store since DRM was dropped in 2009, virtually no non-Apple device can play videos purchased from iTunes Store.
That's like saying Ford locks you out of buying Chevy parts when you go to a Ford dealership. Because no one uses MPEG-4 or H.264 in their devices. No one at all. [sarcasm]It's not like the movie studios who control the copyrights on movies have heavily locked who license and play movies. Apple is the only company to impose DRM on their movies. Just the other day, I was able to play my Amazon movies on my BluRay player who only has Vudu and Netflix apps. Every other format is totally 100% unlocked to every other player but Apple.[/sarcasm]
The ad is probably asking too much: a big-name degree, 20 years of big-radio-scope experience, AND esteemed professorship. Managers typically don't have time to be professors other than hit-and-run lectures perhaps; they are dealing with logistics, hiring, firing, office politics, budgets, screwy vendors, leaky plumbing, publish-or-perish pressure, etc.
They are asking for a lot; however, they are not asking for the impossible. The other astronomer who commented seemed like they are an ideal candidate if they were not working on another telescope.
Or at least mod it up for the right reason. Insightful and informative for something that should be modded as funny?
That would require it to be funny. *puts on shades*
Only if you don't bother to read the summary correctly or you are deliberately obfuscating: "The candidate must have at least 20 years of previous experience in the field, and he or she must have taken a leading role in large-scale radio telescope project with extensive managerial experience. . .there are probably about 40 or so astronomers in the world who would qualify for such a job. Compared to other astronomy disciplines, radio astronomy is a relatively small field."
Nowhere does it say the candidate needs 20 years experience in this telescope. The candidate needs 20 years experience in radio astronomy AND extensive managerial experience. And what kind of experience would you look for in a candidate to manage a $180M telescope? Some who just graduated high school?
If you choose to lock yourself into the Apple ecosystem, you choose to limit how you do things.
Yes because no other music player can play AAC or MP3 formats at all. None.
There is nothing preventing Samsung from adding their own APIs for the camera as long as they still provide the standard APIs for apps.
No but Google would not likely add Samsung's APIs to Android if only Samsung benefits or it is uses proprietary technology which is what Vic Gundotra is talking about. Samsung could be way ahead of Apple but Android must move as slow as their slowest partner allows. Contrast that to Apple: It develops/buys proprietary technology for their cameras. They don't have to check with any partners before incorporating it into the next version of iOS. They can also expose it to other camera apps as well. Older iOS device might not be able to leverage the new APIs due to a lack of hardware but it will be there.
I doubt it because his crime in this case was cheating rich, white people. If he had cheated poor people that would have been forgiven and forgotten.
Also cats and dogs used to be working animals so people only would get as many as they needed. Cats killed mice and vermin around farms. Dogs were herders or guard dogs or vermin killers too. So they fed partly off their own kills.
Well at least millennials will get to experience the joys of constantly re-positioning an antenna to get a decent signal. The difference is they can tweet about it to the word instead of complaining about it to the people in the room.
The question is what do you want to do and how much space you need. If you're looking for an onsite backup, then for $1000 you can build/buy a RAID server that will handle terabytes of files. If you want offsite backup, you can also leverage that server to feed HDDs that backup and then send offsite. If you are looking for archival storage, that's another solution.
The problem with optical has been is that most consumer grade discs are basically crap. They don't last long and they don't hold a lot. There are archival optical discs you can use which will last longer but they cost more as you need higher capacity. ($150 for 1.5TB). They are still tape you can use with varying amounts of capacity and cost.
Iger said the importance of Pixar to Disney's future had become clear to him during opening ceremonies for Hong Kong Disneyland in September 2005, just a month before he became chief executive. He noticed the many characters from Pixar films featured in the kickoff parade. But there was nothing from Disney's recent animated movies, whose latest characters weren't popular.
That and Disney animation films were in a rut producing less and less at the box office. These are just facts man. Both companies benefited from the deal. To pretend Disney didn't is pure denial.
VMs are irrelevant in this case for a simple reason: You can't run VMs in a phone. You can only run them on a desktop. Also to run a VM, you might have to pay for it.
What do you think "XP Mode" in Windows 7 Professional was?
A mode that wasn't guaranteed to work with all software. It worked fine for most software. There were some old games I had to get rid off because they didn't work. Couldn't figure out why. And since they were old, the companies didn't support them anymore. I tried looking at forums but no one had any real solution other than to see if Steam had them.
No. I'm sorry, I understand you wish it were otherwise, but typically the law does not work like that. What is reasonable is going to depend on context, so the best you can do speaking generally is give some obvious out-of-bounds cases, which I did.
No you said Apple should follow a standard. I asked which standard. Now you're refusing to name anything but again ramble on about something else.
So not exactly close to the likely working lifetime of a typical iPad, then.
What are you talking about? The working lifetime of a typical iPad is not 2 years.
Most obviously, if you want security fixes, you have to update to the latest available version of iOS for your device. That typically brings many other changes as well, from completely redesigned UIs to app compatibility issues.
The rollup security model is also present in Arch Linux and other OS. It's not a new approach.
Moreover, Apple has used its control of the App Store to limit availability of apps compatible with older versions of iOS. When iOS7 was released, apps were required to work with it and you could only get iOS7-based apps from the App Store from that point on.
And? Do you want security patches or not? It seems what you want is to apply only patches that you want to apply and ignore if security is a problem. If an older app might have security problems, you want to use regardless or not.
But the important thing is that we can make that choice, because Microsoft have at least been transparent about what they are and aren't going to support with Windows. Where do I find anything resembling that sort of clarity or commitment from Apple in the context of iOS devices?
The key difference is you're paying MS for Windows. You're not paying Apple for iOS. You're paying Apple for the hardware. If that is too onerous for you, then don't buy Apple's hardware.
Please state what point of the speech did he take credit for Toy Story? At no point did I see him actually do that.
You mean like the iPhone which spent 4 years in development? The iPod which spent more than a year in development? x86 Macs which were being developed years before they originally launched? You don't know what Apple has in development. Some of the projects will never become a product. That doesn't mean they aren't working on them.
He explained why: Samsung might invest in the hardware to be a better camera phone but LG (and the dozens of other Android partners) might not. Google has to create an API that covers the most partners and some of the API considerations are more political than technical. Also that doesn't cover the case if Samsung's technology is proprietary to Samsung which Google would never create an API just for Samsung. That's why Samsung creates their own camera software to exploit the hardware.
Sounds more like iPhone fanboy rambling than a genuine issue.
You realize you are talking about a former Google exec right? And if you read just the summary he clearly explains a neutral tone why Android is behind. Apple controlling both hardware and software can make changes faster than Google. The growth of Android is also a hindrance to Google as with more partners, they have more players to consider much less larger numbers of models. Apple only has to concern itself with a few new models every year and the few models that exist.
Study this graph [wsj.com]. Then realize you're an idiot. The reason the US didn't access shale reserves is because other reserves are cheaper.
Bahahahaha. You realize your graph just shows you're even more wrong. You don't actually understand a word I said did you? During the time of high oil prices, according to your graph the US production costs are some of the lowest in the world. YET THEY HAD THE LOWEST AMOUNT OF PRODUCTION IN 60 YEARS. We're not even talking the Green River formation. According to you, the US has plenty of supply but they didn't exploit any of that during times of high prices. Every single US oil company decided to produce less oil at a time when they could have made lots of money.
OR
You're just wrong about the US oil supply.
I know people in the industry. During the rise of oil prices from 2002 to 2008, every single US oil company was tapping every reserve they could. The problem was before 2008 they were using up every reserve they could. They were tapping reserves that were deemed too expensive to use in previous decades: high impurities, deep ocean, etc. By 2008, they had expended what they had. But according to you they could have tapped this reservoir. YET THEY DIDN'T. So again you know more about US oil supply that US oil companies.
And it's cheaper to use existing setups rather than pay the initial ramp and 10 years it takes to start harvesting.
How do you know it take 10 yeas to start harvesting? Cite your source. It doesn't take 10 years to start harvesting; it takes a few years depending on location (geology, existing infrastructure, etc). It can take up to 10 years (sometimes decades) because once a source is found, the oil companies have to determine the production cost of the source. Again some sources in West Texas have been dormant because the production cost was too high compared to the price of oil. So the oil company just sits on the deposit.
Second, why was the US production the lowest it had been in 60 years? That alone destroys your argument. They used existing setups and neglected to see the rise of oil prices in 6 years? Doesn't make sense that the largest US oil companies neglected to react to oil prices over the period of 6 years, doesn't it? But you know so much more than them, don't you?
Of course, in your fairy tale world, it's better to spend 10 years to ramp up production and pay to build the infrastructure for what everyone pretty much knew was a temporary (2 year max) spike, rather than just go with existing sources for most of the imports...
Bahahaha. Have you visited West Texas recently? During the peak, that's exactly what the oil companies did. Every well in West Texas was tapped during the boom. Lots of people were hired; equipment was moved in, towns suddenly boomed. And guess what happened afterwards: the wells were shut down, the equipment moved out. The people were let go. The towns shrunk down again.
Next thing you'll be telling me is that the whole moon landing is a hoax.
And how long do you imagine Trump is going to tolerate Kelly?
I don't expect Kelly to last long if he challenges Trump; however, it is highly doubtful that Scaramucci would be back if Kelly is fired. Just like I don't expect Sean Spicer to return either.
I can only guess but former Marine General John Kelly seems to be a no-nonsense kind of person. That and Scaramucci did something that you should never do to Trump: upstage him.