Overall, you had a well written post. However, there is one thing I would like to pick on:
remember you do live in a country where 97% of the population associates with one of the major religions
Now, after some quick googling, that figure does not seem realistic at all. First of all there are the people that do not affiliate with any religions and then there are the people that hold atheist or agnostic views.
Some people get addicted to making money, so they choose to work more than they need for survival, for the possibility of having greater economic freedom.
From personal experience, people may get addicted to stealing for the thrill, even when there is no financial basis. To use a heavily scrutinized event, look at Wynona Ryder (sp?).
Now assuming the above is true, is it that hard to believe that poor people may get addicted to identity theft because of the ease and benefits?
"I hate computers," she said. "I think they're the devil."
Sorry. I just thought that was funny, and had to post it.
Having spent some volunteer time at an old folk home, I can readily attribute that this sentiment is not exclusive to this one woman.
The only problem is, the kind of people that are being discussed don't really get counted, because, well, their not fond posting on forums on which people collectively discuss their frustration with computers.
when you ISP disclose your browsing habits to the government anyway?
How often is someone going to come up to you in real life and attack you for something written online? Probably not very often. However, people still enjoy the freedom of being able to post AC. The issue here is not the probability of such an event occuring but rather the fact that it is possible.
How often is the government going to look through your browsing habits? Probably not very often. However, people living in a 'free' society should have the option to speak annonimously if they so choose.
Do consumers care except when they are in an anti-sweatshop mood?
Consumers care sometimes . Think about it this way: if Apple came out and said we make $x per Apple product sold, and that x is large enough to make people raise eyebrows, then it will matter. The Ipod has a large market penetration, therefore news about the extent they are 'ripping' people off would make a great sound bite for a radio station wouldn't it?
While that may not affect YOU for whatever reason, if consumers in general think negatively about the profit made per device, sales will reduce as alternative products are adopted that dont have the negative money mongering image.
Re:Two Business Models: One for the rich and one .
on
The Cost of the iPod
·
· Score: 1
You mentioned at the end of your post that phones will only improve as multi-faceted devices. Agreed. However, the Ipod has such a large market share because it was (is?) able to provide a product that is more intuitive to use than anyone else.
In the same way, Apple is not going to sit around thinking "gee, were doing great, why worry about improving the Ipod?". Dedicated music playing devices have some advantages (being able to work out with them and the form factor) while 2 in 1 devices do also (no need to hold 2 seprate things, etc).
The real question is will cell-phone manufacturers be able to outpace Apple in terms of features that the public actually wants?
Surely the patterns that develop throughout his writting can tell us a lot not only about him but more importantly about the way his brain worked. The value of discovering something such as this might lead us to better understand what differentiates geniuses from us mere mortals.
I can't help but wonder what a handwritting expert might be able to say about this.
This article has no real content as the source of the information is unrevealed and both companies refused to comment.
The real story is that large corporations have departments that work on plausible mergers/acquisitions day and night on future moves. They create possible mergers day and night, and will continue to do so after this.
Without actual information, this article is fluff at best. The intresting part is the effects of this merger upon the technological fields.
First Virus (tm) is a pride thing. Think about how many viruses are written (slightly modded) by kids just to see how many machines they infect.
In the end, this just gives Microsoft a small heads up for whats to come in the future, which just may be a good thing.
Slashdot Mirror
Now, after some quick googling, that figure does not seem realistic at all. First of all there are the people that do not affiliate with any religions and then there are the people that hold atheist or agnostic views.
Now, for proof I'm not a crackpot, please check out http://www.usatoday.com/graphics/news/gra/gnoreli
That was a intresting link. Thanks!
People get addicted to different things.
Some people get addicted to making money, so they choose to work more than they need for survival, for the possibility of having greater economic freedom.
From personal experience, people may get addicted to stealing for the thrill, even when there is no financial basis. To use a heavily scrutinized event, look at Wynona Ryder (sp?).
Now assuming the above is true, is it that hard to believe that poor people may get addicted to identity theft because of the ease and benefits?
The only problem is, the kind of people that are being discussed don't really get counted, because, well, their not fond posting on forums on which people collectively discuss their frustration with computers.
How often is someone going to come up to you in real life and attack you for something written online? Probably not very often. However, people still enjoy the freedom of being able to post AC. The issue here is not the probability of such an event occuring but rather the fact that it is possible.
How often is the government going to look through your browsing habits? Probably not very often. However, people living in a 'free' society should have the option to speak annonimously if they so choose.
Consumers care sometimes . Think about it this way: if Apple came out and said we make $x per Apple product sold, and that x is large enough to make people raise eyebrows, then it will matter. The Ipod has a large market penetration, therefore news about the extent they are 'ripping' people off would make a great sound bite for a radio station wouldn't it?
While that may not affect YOU for whatever reason, if consumers in general think negatively about the profit made per device, sales will reduce as alternative products are adopted that dont have the negative money mongering image.
You mentioned at the end of your post that phones will only improve as multi-faceted devices. Agreed. However, the Ipod has such a large market share because it was (is?) able to provide a product that is more intuitive to use than anyone else.
In the same way, Apple is not going to sit around thinking "gee, were doing great, why worry about improving the Ipod?". Dedicated music playing devices have some advantages (being able to work out with them and the form factor) while 2 in 1 devices do also (no need to hold 2 seprate things, etc).
The real question is will cell-phone manufacturers be able to outpace Apple in terms of features that the public actually wants?
Companies like Microsoft?
Now I can understand there are reasons for disliking Microsoft; however, are they really a significant cause of emissions?
Surely you could have picked a more appropriate example. But hey, why not take a free stab an Microsoft?
You bring forward a very intresting point.
Surely the patterns that develop throughout his writting can tell us a lot not only about him but more importantly about the way his brain worked. The value of discovering something such as this might lead us to better understand what differentiates geniuses from us mere mortals.
I can't help but wonder what a handwritting expert might be able to say about this.
This article has no real content as the source of the information is unrevealed and both companies refused to comment. The real story is that large corporations have departments that work on plausible mergers/acquisitions day and night on future moves. They create possible mergers day and night, and will continue to do so after this. Without actual information, this article is fluff at best. The intresting part is the effects of this merger upon the technological fields.
First Virus (tm) is a pride thing. Think about how many viruses are written (slightly modded) by kids just to see how many machines they infect. In the end, this just gives Microsoft a small heads up for whats to come in the future, which just may be a good thing.