Apart from customization mentioned already by other poster, I'm surprised that Opera Turbo, very low resource usage, definitely felt on slow hardware and built-in syncing weren't enough to keep you with Opera on a netbook.
Not really much wiser users; influence of people setting up OS on home machines (which are also much older on average)
See, in those post-soviet countries legal Windows is almost unheard of (shift towards laptops changes things of course, but only a bit; not only they are smaller part of market, notable number of them comes essentially without OS (FreeDOS? Some Linux booting into textmode? LiveCD? Without drivers for the hardware...). So somebody vaguely fluent in "computers" will set up pirated copy, usually. Putting there a better browser among other alternatives (like better ICQ client). Opera is preferred because it works very good on slow and RAM starved (by todays standards) machines.
I prefer small chance of it leaking out (which happened only once) more than the routine of "leaking" it out into biosphere on a daily basis, in the amounts no nuclear power plant will match. As do coal-fired plants.
Those certainly use their own tech in nuclear reactors, they actually build them instead of contracting out. But don't have any bombs.
Ukraine is also an interesting example. Not sure how much of a nuclear power plant they can build domestically, but certainly quite a bit...and they had 5000 warheads when the USSR dissolved. Got rid of all of them.
I also live in a place which has such law, and for quite some time; about "hurting religious feelings" (I kid you not, it's worded like that)
The only cases when it was uphold dealt with, for all intents and purposes, our state religion. Accidentally, it's also Roman Catholicism; perhaps their excessive fear of secularization and preferring central authority pushes them in this direction, I don't know...
But such law is really about trying to suppress one kind of religious freedom; only thinly disguised in "we want all religions to have a respect they deserve".
It doesn't really deal with religions. There's no way around that. Religions are simply incompatible with each other. What one preaches is blasphemous to others. If such law was uphold as worded, no preaching would be possible.
No, this is only about limiting freedom of irreligious people. They are the only ones not protected by the same law (in case of religions it's a kind of MAD). "Understandable", in a way - irreligious folks scare most religions much more than adherents of other religions.
Decapitating the gangrene legs of a soldier, that's something new ( unless it fits somehow with the notion that soldiers don't have much brains)
Hint: amputation is the word you're looking for (well, I guess you can try decapitation when the part affected displays signs of gangrene...but it won't do the patient much good)
I distinguish between Atlas and Atlas-Centaur on the basis of payload. They are indeed both Atlas on the bottom. How old is that vehicle design? Didn't I watch Atlas launches in the Mercury program?...
But we need that imagination. Do we, as a nation, possess that imagination any more?
There's an interesting take at those two issues. See, current Atlas is a very good design, not having much in common with early ones. With very good, efficient engines; Russian made;p
That just means the Shuttle wasn't a move in the right direction.
Germans were building and launching a dozen A-4's per day. Cheaply. In a country ravaged by aerial bombings. One could think we can do better over half a century later...
So, there are three phones there and Nokia 1100 is not among them?! You know, the most popular...no, not only phone. The most popular single type of consumer electronic device in the history of mankind.
Though perhaps writers have really taken into heart the distinction between tools (1100 isn't much more than that) and gadgets...
Around 3.7 billion at this point probably - there are 4.6 billion mobile phones now, with supposedly 80% of that being "GSM".
At that market share, I would say it is very much better; assuming the tech itself is irrelevant in practice, the mere ability to use your mobile phone throughout most of the inhabited world is big (of course it helps that you can actually move the phone to local carrier by simply inserting their SIM card)
One? From what I can see it's usually more like zero advanced features. Choosing font/etc. while typing, exclusively using Enter and Space for formatting, sometimes Tab; getting lost with punctuations, never even heard of styles - that's the usual state of Word proficiency (and those people put familiarity with it into their CV...)
Something between Wordpad and Abiword is enough for them.
I can't believe this...don't you understand that you're looking from a point of view of a very atypical market? This is evidenced by you judging their UI by the current state of Symbian, for example...it's a drop in the bucket of what Nokia offers (and BTW considering that it's geared for cheap devices, with a UI continuity with S30/S40 and with a premiere a long time ago...it isn't doing so bad, with 50% of smartphone sales)
Customers want Nokia - because Nokia is still, as we speak, the most bought mobile phone brand in the world - that's just a simple fact that's not going away no matter what cognitive blindfold you are willing to wear.
Nokia does have user-friendly interface, at the least as far devices which are thought mostly as phones go. And they are improving Symbian, so when the world at large will be ready for smartphones (that includes really affordable handsets), Nokia might be too. They certainly were at each of previous major shifts in mobile phones.
You haven't dealt much with Nokia mobile phones (no, not your Symbian Nokia smartphone, it's not the mainstream class of devices I'm talking about) if you think you can get features I mentioned almost anywhere.
Lasty...that's a very curious definition of failure, having 50% of the smartphone market. I want to have such failures all my life!
They want a Nokia. You can't argue with that. Especially while not seeing strengths typical in Nokia product which are more important to most of the planet than "nice software".
Insanely great battery time and reception, sturdiness, low price, features;) (sorta - large part of Nokia phones has LED flashlight adequate in most circumstances, for example)...even good UI (certainly as far price constraints and the devices being phones go). iPhone or Android don't even want to target majority of the market.
What army of dumbphone manufacturers in developing countries? Nokia, Sony Ericsson, Motorola, Samsung, LG - they have over 80% of the market. They generally, and Nokia particularly, completely dominate especially in "developing" countries. Other "small" manufacturers can just as well get licensing package or radio modules outright. Or...you have some Chinese manufacturers making phones without valid IMEI, not concerned with licensing anyway.
There is a price at which Nokia will license their patents - however it looks like they aren't making it available to Apple.
Yes, there is a price. I guess the one made available to Apple is very comparable to rules by which other manufacturers play. But Apple wants to have better rules.
Nokia model is very much sustainable. A year ago there were 3 billion mobile phones subscribers. Now there are around 4.6 billion, and rising rapidly (in which Nokia is a dominating force). All of them sooner or later will want to have new mobile phone of course.
Apple...doesn't even want to target 90% of the market.
Actual stats are not much different. Nokia 39%, Samsung 17%, Sony Ericsson 9%, Motorola 8%, LG 8%. Apple hardly registers. At least they are visible in "smartphones"* (what, 15% of total market?) with 14% there...but where Nokia dominates even more, having 50%.
*explain to me why iPhone is called a smartphone while Sony Ericsson "feature phones" - not (they even have full multitasking). Or S40 Nokia phones for that matter (multitasking similar to iPhone, limited to audio player/phone features)
It was a one time write-off of Siemens Nokia venture. Nokia is the only hugely profitable cellphone manufacturer (other are out of the market, struggling, or cellphones aren't their main product; RIM might be an exception, though they sell corporate service more than phones)
S40 platform (the non-Symbian, non-"smarthpone" one) has Webkit browser for some time now. And multitasking comparable to that in the iPhone (generally one up, though that doesn't include music player or phone features)
Nokia wanted to charge Apple 3x times more only after Apple refused cross-licensing. And cross-licensing is what surely any other notable phone tech manufacturer does with Nokia.
Seems Apple is just convinced it should be the only one getting better treatment than "fair/reasonable and non-discriminatory" (as agreed by this industry). I say send the spoiled kid to his room first.
Slashdot Mirror
Apart from customization mentioned already by other poster, I'm surprised that Opera Turbo, very low resource usage, definitely felt on slow hardware and built-in syncing weren't enough to keep you with Opera on a netbook.
Not really much wiser users; influence of people setting up OS on home machines (which are also much older on average)
See, in those post-soviet countries legal Windows is almost unheard of (shift towards laptops changes things of course, but only a bit; not only they are smaller part of market, notable number of them comes essentially without OS (FreeDOS? Some Linux booting into textmode? LiveCD? Without drivers for the hardware...). So somebody vaguely fluent in "computers" will set up pirated copy, usually. Putting there a better browser among other alternatives (like better ICQ client). Opera is preferred because it works very good on slow and RAM starved (by todays standards) machines.
I prefer small chance of it leaking out (which happened only once) more than the routine of "leaking" it out into biosphere on a daily basis, in the amounts no nuclear power plant will match. As do coal-fired plants.
Japan, Canada, South Korea
Those certainly use their own tech in nuclear reactors, they actually build them instead of contracting out. But don't have any bombs.
Ukraine is also an interesting example. Not sure how much of a nuclear power plant they can build domestically, but certainly quite a bit...and they had 5000 warheads when the USSR dissolved. Got rid of all of them.
I also live in a place which has such law, and for quite some time; about "hurting religious feelings" (I kid you not, it's worded like that)
The only cases when it was uphold dealt with, for all intents and purposes, our state religion. Accidentally, it's also Roman Catholicism; perhaps their excessive fear of secularization and preferring central authority pushes them in this direction, I don't know...
But such law is really about trying to suppress one kind of religious freedom; only thinly disguised in "we want all religions to have a respect they deserve".
It doesn't really deal with religions. There's no way around that. Religions are simply incompatible with each other. What one preaches is blasphemous to others. If such law was uphold as worded, no preaching would be possible.
No, this is only about limiting freedom of irreligious people. They are the only ones not protected by the same law (in case of religions it's a kind of MAD). "Understandable", in a way - irreligious folks scare most religions much more than adherents of other religions.
Decapitating the gangrene legs of a soldier, that's something new ( unless it fits somehow with the notion that soldiers don't have much brains)
Hint: amputation is the word you're looking for (well, I guess you can try decapitation when the part affected displays signs of gangrene...but it won't do the patient much good)
I distinguish between Atlas and Atlas-Centaur on the basis of payload. They are indeed both Atlas on the bottom. How old is that vehicle design? Didn't I watch Atlas launches in the Mercury program? ...
But we need that imagination. Do we, as a nation, possess that imagination any more?
There's an interesting take at those two issues. See, current Atlas is a very good design, not having much in common with early ones. With very good, efficient engines; Russian made ;p
That just means the Shuttle wasn't a move in the right direction.
Germans were building and launching a dozen A-4's per day. Cheaply. In a country ravaged by aerial bombings. One could think we can do better over half a century later...
I think it's more and more apparent that we might be entering into winning stage, slowly and with bumpy ride, but still.
Mind you, winning it's not about OOo domination; it's about interoperability.
So, there are three phones there and Nokia 1100 is not among them?! You know, the most popular...no, not only phone. The most popular single type of consumer electronic device in the history of mankind.
Though perhaps writers have really taken into heart the distinction between tools (1100 isn't much more than that) and gadgets...
That might have something to do with the thing that early versions of current "CDMA" networks had..."CDMA" prominently in their name. It stuck around.
Around 3.7 billion at this point probably - there are 4.6 billion mobile phones now, with supposedly 80% of that being "GSM".
At that market share, I would say it is very much better; assuming the tech itself is irrelevant in practice, the mere ability to use your mobile phone throughout most of the inhabited world is big (of course it helps that you can actually move the phone to local carrier by simply inserting their SIM card)
One? From what I can see it's usually more like zero advanced features. Choosing font/etc. while typing, exclusively using Enter and Space for formatting, sometimes Tab; getting lost with punctuations, never even heard of styles - that's the usual state of Word proficiency (and those people put familiarity with it into their CV...)
Something between Wordpad and Abiword is enough for them.
RAZR was the hot product only because US carriers wanted castrated phone and Nokia wasn't willing to provide it.
I can't believe this...don't you understand that you're looking from a point of view of a very atypical market? This is evidenced by you judging their UI by the current state of Symbian, for example...it's a drop in the bucket of what Nokia offers (and BTW considering that it's geared for cheap devices, with a UI continuity with S30/S40 and with a premiere a long time ago...it isn't doing so bad, with 50% of smartphone sales)
Customers want Nokia - because Nokia is still, as we speak, the most bought mobile phone brand in the world - that's just a simple fact that's not going away no matter what cognitive blindfold you are willing to wear.
Nokia does have user-friendly interface, at the least as far devices which are thought mostly as phones go. And they are improving Symbian, so when the world at large will be ready for smartphones (that includes really affordable handsets), Nokia might be too. They certainly were at each of previous major shifts in mobile phones.
You haven't dealt much with Nokia mobile phones (no, not your Symbian Nokia smartphone, it's not the mainstream class of devices I'm talking about) if you think you can get features I mentioned almost anywhere.
Lasty...that's a very curious definition of failure, having 50% of the smartphone market. I want to have such failures all my life!
They want a Nokia. You can't argue with that. Especially while not seeing strengths typical in Nokia product which are more important to most of the planet than "nice software".
Insanely great battery time and reception, sturdiness, low price, features ;) (sorta - large part of Nokia phones has LED flashlight adequate in most circumstances, for example)...even good UI (certainly as far price constraints and the devices being phones go). iPhone or Android don't even want to target majority of the market.
What army of dumbphone manufacturers in developing countries? Nokia, Sony Ericsson, Motorola, Samsung, LG - they have over 80% of the market. They generally, and Nokia particularly, completely dominate especially in "developing" countries. Other "small" manufacturers can just as well get licensing package or radio modules outright. Or...you have some Chinese manufacturers making phones without valid IMEI, not concerned with licensing anyway.
There is a price at which Nokia will license their patents - however it looks like they aren't making it available to Apple.
Yes, there is a price. I guess the one made available to Apple is very comparable to rules by which other manufacturers play. But Apple wants to have better rules.
Nokia model is very much sustainable. A year ago there were 3 billion mobile phones subscribers. Now there are around 4.6 billion, and rising rapidly (in which Nokia is a dominating force). All of them sooner or later will want to have new mobile phone of course.
Apple...doesn't even want to target 90% of the market.
Ah, so Nokia surely doesn't get access to patent portfolios of other phone manufacturers? Under rules which they uniformly deem to be RAND?
Reality Distortion Field is strong today...
Nokia wanted three times "that" amount only after Apple declined cross-licensing deal.
Now think for a second; surely deal of other phone tech manufacturers with Nokia (those that are "three times less") must include cross licensing.
Apple is the one who demands non-RAND treating for itself.
His numbers were an overestimation; "each iteration of the iPhone sold 10-15 million devices", which adds up to even less than your 25 million.
Yes, you did just what Apple likes you to do - treating only Apple in device market shares as one category which equals "manufacturer"
Actual stats are not much different. Nokia 39%, Samsung 17%, Sony Ericsson 9%, Motorola 8%, LG 8%. Apple hardly registers. At least they are visible in "smartphones"* (what, 15% of total market?) with 14% there...but where Nokia dominates even more, having 50%.
*explain to me why iPhone is called a smartphone while Sony Ericsson "feature phones" - not (they even have full multitasking). Or S40 Nokia phones for that matter (multitasking similar to iPhone, limited to audio player/phone features)
It was a one time write-off of Siemens Nokia venture. Nokia is the only hugely profitable cellphone manufacturer (other are out of the market, struggling, or cellphones aren't their main product; RIM might be an exception, though they sell corporate service more than phones)
S40 platform (the non-Symbian, non-"smarthpone" one) has Webkit browser for some time now. And multitasking comparable to that in the iPhone (generally one up, though that doesn't include music player or phone features)
Nokia wanted to charge Apple 3x times more only after Apple refused cross-licensing. And cross-licensing is what surely any other notable phone tech manufacturer does with Nokia.
Seems Apple is just convinced it should be the only one getting better treatment than "fair/reasonable and non-discriminatory" (as agreed by this industry). I say send the spoiled kid to his room first.