The French don't like foreign companies taking their market. France is like a mini-version of the world: they got to redo everything themselves, in french style.
That reminds me of something I have noticed recently. When I studied English, I recall that the coursebook hardly mentioned England, but instead had several texts about the changes in Europe post Cold War. Now, in contrast: I've started studying French not long ago, and the book goes on and on about France. It's like they think they're the center of the world or something.
Interesting, I hadn't heard of that; but I found two explanations. The official explanation is that the choice was a matter of a licensing deal between IBM and Intel, as well as availability of components. However, it is also rumored that they couldn't make the original PC too good - it had rival other makers' machines, yet not eclipse another line of personal machines that IBM planned to introduce later; also, the 8080 made porting Z80-based software easier.
True, but it cost $20,000. Clearly not aimed at the home market. What if the Boca Raton team had insisted on a 801-based PC... could IBM sell a similar machine for 1/10th of that price back then?
A couple of months later (August 12, 1981), IBM launched model 5150, a.k.a. the PC - next birthday to celebrate and to discuss if it advanced or held back evolution.
I guess it held things back. It was a primitive, limited, user-unfriendly machine that somehow kept outselling newer, better systems -- Amiga, Atari ST, Macintosh, RiscPC...
It could have been much better, mind you. At a point, the PC team thought about basing it on the 801. Their own hardware and operating system, all the way. It clearly would have been a far more advanced machine in every aspect. Also, a "PC-compatible" market would not have happened -- a good thing, from IBM's point of view.
But one must also consider why they went "off the shelf": to have the machine in the market quickly and cheaply. Otherwise it would have taken much longer, and it'd end up costing much more. So, we have this alternative universe in which the IBM PC did not suck shit and did not sell shit. Hypothetical irony.
The thing that attracted MY attention the most in that horrible movie was the plot: lots of holes, contrived coincidences, and inconsistencies. Same morons who wrote Transformers, what else could one expect?
The minimalist approach is good for small screens, but otherwise it's terrible for usability, and is completely inconsistent with the rest of the system. This must be the worst thing in this field since MS-Office's ribbon. Too bad the Interface Hall of Shame hasn't been updated in ages, they'd have a field day with the current generation of browsers!
No. If someone said "app store", I'd simply assume it's an online software store. I wouldn't assume it is Apple's app store unless it was specified, or if the context made me realize so.
Apple's stance has little ground. "App" is not specific to a brand, it's not specific to an operating system, it's not specific to a class of hardware. "App" is short for application, that's all. Any computer program is an app. It's a completely generic term.
Admit it, secretly you've been dying to see this happen.
Not really. I was crazy about LOTR, that was an epic novel that clearly could be turned into an equally epic movie (and yes, it was a single, 11 hours long movie, that just happened to be split in 3 parts). The Hobbit, on the other hand, is a much lighter and simpler tale; a delicious novel, sure, but not one that seems especially suited to be turned into a movie of the same kind.
Slashdot Mirror
To avoid ambiguity, I write down the month. For example, today is: 8.april.2011.
The French don't like foreign companies taking their market. France is like a mini-version of the world: they got to redo everything themselves, in french style.
That reminds me of something I have noticed recently. When I studied English, I recall that the coursebook hardly mentioned England, but instead had several texts about the changes in Europe post Cold War. Now, in contrast: I've started studying French not long ago, and the book goes on and on about France. It's like they think they're the center of the world or something.
Real, physical keyboard
You can add this to the iPad.
Same as old.
Ew. If there's one thing that strikes me as even more ridiculous than the imperial system, it's this "milliard" bullshit.
29-foot
To 95% of world's population: that's 8.83m.
Interesting, I hadn't heard of that; but I found two explanations. The official explanation is that the choice was a matter of a licensing deal between IBM and Intel, as well as availability of components. However, it is also rumored that they couldn't make the original PC too good - it had rival other makers' machines, yet not eclipse another line of personal machines that IBM planned to introduce later; also, the 8080 made porting Z80-based software easier.
True, but it cost $20,000. Clearly not aimed at the home market. What if the Boca Raton team had insisted on a 801-based PC... could IBM sell a similar machine for 1/10th of that price back then?
Shareholders did, Nokia's stock took a noticeable dive after they announced the partnership. See here.
A couple of months later (August 12, 1981), IBM launched model 5150, a.k.a. the PC - next birthday to celebrate and to discuss if it advanced or held back evolution.
I guess it held things back. It was a primitive, limited, user-unfriendly machine that somehow kept outselling newer, better systems -- Amiga, Atari ST, Macintosh, RiscPC...
It could have been much better, mind you. At a point, the PC team thought about basing it on the 801. Their own hardware and operating system, all the way. It clearly would have been a far more advanced machine in every aspect. Also, a "PC-compatible" market would not have happened -- a good thing, from IBM's point of view.
But one must also consider why they went "off the shelf": to have the machine in the market quickly and cheaply. Otherwise it would have taken much longer, and it'd end up costing much more. So, we have this alternative universe in which the IBM PC did not suck shit and did not sell shit. Hypothetical irony.
I see what you did there...
Oh, hi HK-47.
I see what you did there.
The thing that attracted MY attention the most in that horrible movie was the plot: lots of holes, contrived coincidences, and inconsistencies. Same morons who wrote Transformers, what else could one expect?
Who's that girl anyway? Every time I see that name, I think of Star Trek.
The reason that Zynga isn't ginormous on mobile yet is because the friction of social networking is still high on mobile.
Or maybe because, even though mobile games tend to be mediocre in comparison to console titles, they're still light-years ahead of any Farmville crap.
I recall reading that story was bullshit -- civilians are not allowed to go there alone. She went in tours like everyone else.
And there's that controversial part of CoD...
I'd say neither: both movies are so bad, I just pretend neither existed.
I prefer the hypnotoad meme, because when peoplALL GLORY TO THE HYPNOTOAD!
The minimalist approach is good for small screens, but otherwise it's terrible for usability, and is completely inconsistent with the rest of the system. This must be the worst thing in this field since MS-Office's ribbon. Too bad the Interface Hall of Shame hasn't been updated in ages, they'd have a field day with the current generation of browsers!
No. If someone said "app store", I'd simply assume it's an online software store. I wouldn't assume it is Apple's app store unless it was specified, or if the context made me realize so.
Apple's stance has little ground. "App" is not specific to a brand, it's not specific to an operating system, it's not specific to a class of hardware. "App" is short for application, that's all. Any computer program is an app. It's a completely generic term.
Admit it, secretly you've been dying to see this happen.
Not really. I was crazy about LOTR, that was an epic novel that clearly could be turned into an equally epic movie (and yes, it was a single, 11 hours long movie, that just happened to be split in 3 parts). The Hobbit, on the other hand, is a much lighter and simpler tale; a delicious novel, sure, but not one that seems especially suited to be turned into a movie of the same kind.
Oh hi Muammar!