...health care which businesses have had a proven track record of doing better than governments...
So...where's your proof?
...Why is it that we can give tons of money to failing businesses that are going to fail eventually but can't give money to improve national defense and research (and yes, supremacy in space allows for supremacy in war as many of the technologies go hand in hand)?
Are...you...serious? You want to spend more on "defense" (nice newspeak, BTW) than what US already does? (hint: most than vast majority of countries in terms of "% of GDP", dwarfing all in absolute amounts). Is this just about more of a military dick-waving and funneling funds to very few "lucky" ones suddenly?
Both Iran and North Korea have made getting WMDs and the launch vehicles needed to use them a top priority. Even though both countries are rather poor economically, they are not above starving their citizens to achieve their goals.
[citation needed], as they say? (sure, I will be the first to give you "starving" part with N.Korea, not really with Iran though; and "top priority" seems pulled out of your ass)
Also, did you just propose there forcing all assets into one legislated monopoly?...
A) is what everybody in the world who wishes you to not "get ahead in technology" (why would you? I mean, why are you treating it, it seems, like a neccessity? If you have what it takes to be ahead, you will be; if you don't have it in our changing world, you won't be; simple as that)
B) will happen anyway, but in a more sensible manner - why duplicate LEO efforts being done right now by few independant private teams?
Also, the thing with bailouts was that you, your nation (and large part of the world, really) were being held ransom. By dynamics you yourself allowed to take place for some time now.
Because the supply chain for Shuttles has been disrupted some time ago (FYI - yes, "before Obama"). Trying to restart it now to keep those costly mistakes flying would be a task not that far from a new space programme.
It has an OS / libraries that can already play a game while using a radio interface (WiFi) while using a camera and while using an SD card. And two screens at the same time. Oh, there's IR too.
I don't think adding cellular module is outside its capabilities.
Nobody except Apple seems to mind Nokia behaviour (or the GSM consortium, generally) - they either pay full price, or throw their own patents (covering technology which took many billions to develop) into the jar. And others would have much more to gain if Nokia position wasn't solid - while Apple has only 2% of sales, (put here who knows how many other companies having more than 2%), SE & Motorola have both 5%, LG 11%, Samsung 20%; behind 37% of Nokia
Some small player (selling relativelly small number of radio modules) gets greedy, comes in with few software patents and wants to be treated "better"...
The time just before the last month saw the news about successor of Nintendo DS (which is itself long in the tooth, although considering that - doing rather fine)
Pouring money at a problem will make new great things, got it. (and "stealing from others" doesn't go hand-in-hand with what you originally wrote, about Google pushing the state forward) How are their social networking efforts going?
I think you are confused what "windowing system" stands for, nevermind that only part of them takes, of course, some concepts from RL...and modifies them greatly. All the while Google recently bought a very direct "desktop methapor" UI...
How is that in any way relevant to validity of Nokia multibillion contributions which made present mobile phones possible?
Oh, and Apple is the one who claims they get an unfair deal. No other manufacturer of mobile phones (that's all that matters, simply "mobile phone", since this is about radio interface) has a problem with Nokia - and they stand to benefit much, much more than Apple (at only 2% of sales). The next biggest manufacturer after Nokia (37%) is Samsung with 20%. After that LG with 11%, SE and Motorola both with 5%...and who knows how many other companies untill you get to Apple.
Apple simply got greedy and thinks the rules don't apply to them.
Oh, and you are a slime not caring about the future of humanity if you think that what Nokia does right now is not monumental. At the end of 2008 there was a little over 3 billion mobile subscibers worldwide. Now it's probably close to 5 billion (it was 4.6 at the end of 2009). Nokia is a large part of enabling that. Apple...doesn't even want to. Their total number of manufactured mobile phones, ever, is an order of magnitude less than what Nokia ships annually.
Please explain how Acer showing anything other than netbooks is "incapable of being conceived, imagined, or considered, totally unlikely, unbelievable, unthinkable, impossible to comprehend". Go on.
What past achievement makes you think Google can give UI design some "real progress"? (other than their love for spartan UIs, which doesn't really translate that well to general, multipurpose "computer" UI)
Windowing systems a metaphor to desks and file cabinets? WTH? And actually...it is Google who bought recently very "desk and file cabinets"-like UI.
Why inconceivable? Since Acer already is big with netbooks, they don't have to prove much there.
And considering that ChromeOS device could be just as well based on ARM chip (with many advantages of that route), it could as well be a new kind of devices, at least as far Acer is concerned (tablets? They do fit with "lack" of features of ChromeOS). Not saying this is what will happen...but inconceivable?
That would be at most a case for ATT suing Apple for not abiding their obligations as a manufacturer.
Anyway, Apple has the biggest gripe with Nokia just because Nokia contributed the most into you being able to have a mobile phone now...but they are not nearly the only such entity. Oh, uou thought they have nothing to do also with so called "CDMA"? What do you think is the radio method used in UMTS?
CDMA roaming networks are shit. In contrast - I can't remember ever noticing lost GSM signal (other than underground, etc.), and I don't limit myself to large population centers...
Those "promising" CDMA operators which were making bold statements 1 or 2 years ago (at least those I heard and was curious about - mostly Central and Northern Europe)...died, in the meantime. Gone. At the least as far as consumer services are concerned, in all cases. Only here and there "CDMA" method was brought to use as a means of stationary internet access; nothing more came out of it, really.
All this is beside the point anyway - Apple would have to license CDMA, too...
And you really think Nokia isn't responsible also for large part of current CDMA implementations? (plus other players; Apple has the biggest gripe with Nokia simply because Nokia is the largest, and developed the biggest slice of technologies used in mobile phones) Riiight. What do you think is the radio method used in UMTS?
"CDMA" (vs. "GSM") as used in the US is mostly just one technical term that was somehow hijacked by marketing, and carried over ever since.
Nokia poured billions over the years so that you can use your mobile phone. No other player had a problem with that fact - and there are much bigger than Apple, who would have much more to gain if Nokia case wasn't solid (since this is about radio interface, it doesn't really matter if that's "feature phone" or "smartphone"). Behind Nokia with their 37% of global sales there's Samsung at 21%, LG at 11%, Sony Ericsson at 5%, Motorola at 5%. Apple...not listed in such tables.
But we can resolve it ourselves. Nokia ships almost half a billion mobile phones annually (around 470 million, something like that); there's 80 million of Symbian smartphones in there. Since Symbian has 47% of smartphone market - we know how big it is, 170 million units. Apple has 15% of that, just 25 million units. Using annual sales of Nokia and their share, we know that total sales of mobile phones were around 1 billion 160 million units last year. Meaning Apple has 2%.
Now, we have here some manufacturer which sells very small number of devices, hence wouldn't need to spend that much in proper licenses for radio technology to which it didn't contribute at all...and what that manufacturer does is come to all the companies who wasted, it seems, many billions in actual research...and offers them some junk software patents. Wants to have "special" treatment. WTF?
Since you apparently haven't heard about Delta IV and Atlas V - they have somewhat higher payload capacities from Ariane 5 (and yet the next NASA flagship space telescope uses Ariane...). But perhaps you just wanted to forget about them, having some axe to grind?
(OK, Atlas V doesn't quite count - it's main engine is directly derived from Energia and Zenit - but hey, if it makes it better; BTW, yes, Russian engines launched the latest "shuttle" of you Air Force, X-37)
And I don't care how "they" are cheaper. The fact of the matter is that they are cheaper. Free market and all that, you know...
Slashdot Mirror
...health care which businesses have had a proven track record of doing better than governments...
So...where's your proof?
...Why is it that we can give tons of money to failing businesses that are going to fail eventually but can't give money to improve national defense and research (and yes, supremacy in space allows for supremacy in war as many of the technologies go hand in hand)?
Are...you...serious? You want to spend more on "defense" (nice newspeak, BTW) than what US already does? (hint: most than vast majority of countries in terms of "% of GDP", dwarfing all in absolute amounts). Is this just about more of a military dick-waving and funneling funds to very few "lucky" ones suddenly?
Both Iran and North Korea have made getting WMDs and the launch vehicles needed to use them a top priority. Even though both countries are rather poor economically, they are not above starving their citizens to achieve their goals.
[citation needed], as they say? (sure, I will be the first to give you "starving" part with N.Korea, not really with Iran though; and "top priority" seems pulled out of your ass)
Also, did you just propose there forcing all assets into one legislated monopoly?...
A) is what everybody in the world who wishes you to not "get ahead in technology" (why would you? I mean, why are you treating it, it seems, like a neccessity? If you have what it takes to be ahead, you will be; if you don't have it in our changing world, you won't be; simple as that)
B) will happen anyway, but in a more sensible manner - why duplicate LEO efforts being done right now by few independant private teams?
Also, the thing with bailouts was that you, your nation (and large part of the world, really) were being held ransom. By dynamics you yourself allowed to take place for some time now.
Because the supply chain for Shuttles has been disrupted some time ago (FYI - yes, "before Obama"). Trying to restart it now to keep those costly mistakes flying would be a task not that far from a new space programme.
US / North America went wrong. I haven't ever even seen a Walmart or however its few surviving international subsidiaries are called.
But...that Terminator and 8-bit Mario both use the same CPU...
It has an OS / libraries that can already play a game while using a radio interface (WiFi) while using a camera and while using an SD card. And two screens at the same time. Oh, there's IR too.
I don't think adding cellular module is outside its capabilities.
Nobody except Apple seems to mind Nokia behaviour (or the GSM consortium, generally) - they either pay full price, or throw their own patents (covering technology which took many billions to develop) into the jar. And others would have much more to gain if Nokia position wasn't solid - while Apple has only 2% of sales, (put here who knows how many other companies having more than 2%), SE & Motorola have both 5%, LG 11%, Samsung 20%; behind 37% of Nokia
Some small player (selling relativelly small number of radio modules) gets greedy, comes in with few software patents and wants to be treated "better"...
The time just before the last month saw the news about successor of Nintendo DS (which is itself long in the tooth, although considering that - doing rather fine)
Pouring money at a problem will make new great things, got it. (and "stealing from others" doesn't go hand-in-hand with what you originally wrote, about Google pushing the state forward)
How are their social networking efforts going?
I think you are confused what "windowing system" stands for, nevermind that only part of them takes, of course, some concepts from RL...and modifies them greatly. All the while Google recently bought a very direct "desktop methapor" UI...
How is that in any way relevant to validity of Nokia multibillion contributions which made present mobile phones possible?
Oh, and Apple is the one who claims they get an unfair deal. No other manufacturer of mobile phones (that's all that matters, simply "mobile phone", since this is about radio interface) has a problem with Nokia - and they stand to benefit much, much more than Apple (at only 2% of sales). The next biggest manufacturer after Nokia (37%) is Samsung with 20%. After that LG with 11%, SE and Motorola both with 5%...and who knows how many other companies untill you get to Apple.
Apple simply got greedy and thinks the rules don't apply to them.
Oh, and you are a slime not caring about the future of humanity if you think that what Nokia does right now is not monumental. At the end of 2008 there was a little over 3 billion mobile subscibers worldwide. Now it's probably close to 5 billion (it was 4.6 at the end of 2009). Nokia is a large part of enabling that. Apple...doesn't even want to. Their total number of manufactured mobile phones, ever, is an order of magnitude less than what Nokia ships annually.
Shell companies are such a useful thing...
Honesty in this case - admitting that "our customers" (plus their needs) and their users aren't the same thing...
Please explain how Acer showing anything other than netbooks is "incapable of being conceived, imagined, or considered, totally unlikely, unbelievable, unthinkable, impossible to comprehend". Go on.
What past achievement makes you think Google can give UI design some "real progress"? (other than their love for spartan UIs, which doesn't really translate that well to general, multipurpose "computer" UI)
Windowing systems a metaphor to desks and file cabinets? WTH? And actually...it is Google who bought recently very "desk and file cabinets"-like UI.
Yeah, stories from one camp, apparently, claimed just that.
But some manufacturers quickly stepped forward saying that their Linx netbooks don't have higher return rates at all.
Why inconceivable? Since Acer already is big with netbooks, they don't have to prove much there.
And considering that ChromeOS device could be just as well based on ARM chip (with many advantages of that route), it could as well be a new kind of devices, at least as far Acer is concerned (tablets? They do fit with "lack" of features of ChromeOS). Not saying this is what will happen...but inconceivable?
Are...you...serious? O_o
That would be at most a case for ATT suing Apple for not abiding their obligations as a manufacturer.
Anyway, Apple has the biggest gripe with Nokia just because Nokia contributed the most into you being able to have a mobile phone now...but they are not nearly the only such entity. Oh, uou thought they have nothing to do also with so called "CDMA"? What do you think is the radio method used in UMTS?
CDMA roaming networks are shit. In contrast - I can't remember ever noticing lost GSM signal (other than underground, etc.), and I don't limit myself to large population centers...
Those "promising" CDMA operators which were making bold statements 1 or 2 years ago (at least those I heard and was curious about - mostly Central and Northern Europe)...died, in the meantime. Gone. At the least as far as consumer services are concerned, in all cases.
Only here and there "CDMA" method was brought to use as a means of stationary internet access; nothing more came out of it, really.
All this is beside the point anyway - Apple would have to license CDMA, too...
And you really think Nokia isn't responsible also for large part of current CDMA implementations? (plus other players; Apple has the biggest gripe with Nokia simply because Nokia is the largest, and developed the biggest slice of technologies used in mobile phones) Riiight. What do you think is the radio method used in UMTS?
"CDMA" (vs. "GSM") as used in the US is mostly just one technical term that was somehow hijacked by marketing, and carried over ever since.
Nokia poured billions over the years so that you can use your mobile phone. No other player had a problem with that fact - and there are much bigger than Apple, who would have much more to gain if Nokia case wasn't solid (since this is about radio interface, it doesn't really matter if that's "feature phone" or "smartphone"). Behind Nokia with their 37% of global sales there's Samsung at 21%, LG at 11%, Sony Ericsson at 5%, Motorola at 5%. Apple...not listed in such tables.
But we can resolve it ourselves. Nokia ships almost half a billion mobile phones annually (around 470 million, something like that); there's 80 million of Symbian smartphones in there. Since Symbian has 47% of smartphone market - we know how big it is, 170 million units. Apple has 15% of that, just 25 million units. Using annual sales of Nokia and their share, we know that total sales of mobile phones were around 1 billion 160 million units last year. Meaning Apple has 2%.
Now, we have here some manufacturer which sells very small number of devices, hence wouldn't need to spend that much in proper licenses for radio technology to which it didn't contribute at all...and what that manufacturer does is come to all the companies who wasted, it seems, many billions in actual research...and offers them some junk software patents. Wants to have "special" treatment. WTF?
And hey, we already have "Curated Gaming"
Since you apparently haven't heard about Delta IV and Atlas V - they have somewhat higher payload capacities from Ariane 5 (and yet the next NASA flagship space telescope uses Ariane...). But perhaps you just wanted to forget about them, having some axe to grind?
(OK, Atlas V doesn't quite count - it's main engine is directly derived from Energia and Zenit - but hey, if it makes it better; BTW, yes, Russian engines launched the latest "shuttle" of you Air Force, X-37)
And I don't care how "they" are cheaper. The fact of the matter is that they are cheaper. Free market and all that, you know...
Neon, which...pretty much every ARM Cortex has, I believe.
Goof thing Pixel Qi is finally ramping up production to appreciable levels, with several upcoming products using their screen (also tablets)
Sure, they are "cheating" by turning the backlight down in bright ambient light situations...so? The effect is what counts.
That /ar/default.aspx part, judging by the rest of links on the site, seems to be just just how the code running on their server operates (for now?)