Well we will see soon enough. What I'm saying is that technology progresses for all parties equally. Comparing one released by company X this year, against ones released by company Y in previous years, isn't the best approach.
Anyway, for the purposes of many of us, some of those Windows based tablets are superior to the iPad. Different needs, remember.
The only thing I fail to understand is why anybody thinks Microsoft, after failing to deliver good products in this market for over a decade, will finally get it right.
Competition is great! Everybody benefits. But Microsoft is just going to bring more fail.
Technology moves on. Apple waited a good long time to release a tablet, until battery life and weight, processor power, screen technology, storage density had all reached a level where something like the iPad was feasible. It's non-sensical to suppose that because there were tablets (usually hybrids) in the past that weren't as good, that new releases will be comparable. Also, previous versions usually had a full and bloated OS on them. According to TFS, MS is thinking of a Win7 derivative. The iPad OS is a Mac OS derivative. Wireless and 3G access is becoming ubiquitous which makes easily portable devices like tablets of greater use. Basically, one of the big things with a tablet is the ability to easily hold it - for uses like taking notes, reading e-books, etc. Even five years ago, that was problematic. Now - you can have something really light and long-running too, with a bright clear screen and a much more responsive screen. These technologies aren't unique to Apple. Apple timed their development of the iPad well - just at the stage that the concept becomes viable. Expect other companies to take the same advantage of the technology. At any rate, I'll evaluate what MS come up with. It's crazy the number of people in this thread who are practically taking it as an article of faith that it will be some terrible thing when it's not anything more than an expressed wish by the company.
I'm saying you don't represent the mainstream at all, and so tablets aren't for you in the first place.
It's a strange comment to make that tablets aren't for me when the whole point of what I'm saying (and all the people who agree with me), is that I want a tablet. Is this some sort of inverse of the No True Scotsman - tablets aren't for anyone who wants a tablet, unless that tablet conforms to Apple's version? That's a very silly argument. What's not mainstream about my needs? I'm a business user. I assure you the business market is not a teeny little thing.
You call the rest of my post "gibberish" because you have no counterargument to it.
No. I called it gibberish because it went in its entirety: "You're also one of these Apple-haters who obsesses over Steve Jobs and thinks he can hear you if you mention him by name."
It's just a groundless accusation of bias as and bizarre invention as a substitute for argument. I think Steve Jobs can hear me? Er, wtf?
I don't know why you are trying to prove that the iPad suits all needs. It plainly doesn't. Comments like only technically minded people care about the iPad being open are very wrong. Having to sync it with iTunes makes it utterly unsuitable for a business setting, for just one example.
And why is being able to buy a enterprise business licence a suitable answer to deploying your software on it when the point of comparison is being able to deploy directly to any open platform without having to bother with such. Plainly a system where you can deploy what you want without paying Apple for the right to do so is better. And what of existing software written for a Windows platform that you'd like to port? Your problem is that you are going down a checklist trying to show that something can be done (with the right amount of effort, violation of vendor support T&C and / or paying extra money to Apple) when what I'm doing is looking at two products - what Apple currently have out and what we will see over the next year, and choosing what suits my needs best.
As to your comparing a brand new product using up to date battery, screen, storage and processor with older products, it's utterly non-relevant to the point. What we're saying is we like how far technology has come - that can make something so light, long-running and relatively powerful - and that we're looking forward to when someone other than Apple releases an equivalently specced device. Which will happen sooner, rather than later. Saying "HA HA HA" and pointing at old devices means nothing. As I made clear in my very first post, I (and many others based on the replies) are all looking forward to being able to buy an iPad that's not made by Apple.
That too! And with the DE being a separate component to Linux itself, we might see some great stuff in terms of UI. Perhaps the next Gnome v. KDE race will be to incorporate touchscreen features into themselves. Or someone will make a super light-weight FVM based one or something. I reckon KDE might be first out with some really good features since they did all that foundational work from 3.x to 4.x and made it more powerful and easier to develop for. Whatever, there will be cool stuff.
I shall probably keep Win7 on mine if it runs half-decently, because I'll be using this as a note-taker (OneNote), PDF displayer and web-browser, more than anything. None of which needs Linux funkiness. If I can shell into my desktop from it then I can actually do light development work on it anyway. Still, I have no doubt people will be putting Linux on them and that will be cool. Like I say - "options".;)
Jailbreaking your iPad is an option for technically-minded individuals that want to play around with the device. It's in no way at all a suitable thing for the serious user / business market. If Microsoft (or anyone) can deliver something with up to date technology like the iPad, but more open and capable, they're going to rightly wipe the floor with Apple in the business market.
Your statement would seem to imply that in fact it's perfectly OK for Apple to build the iPad the way they see fit. Yet there is much wringing of hands here on Slashdot over that very fact. I wouldn't say he's nearly so worked up as the hand-wringers are; you direct your message in the wrong direction.
I haven't addressed everything you said in your post because everything is covered by the one thing that you've already observed - I didn't say I wanted to change the iPad or take it away at all. I want more products on the market so that people can get what suits them. Absurd to suggest that one device will suit everyone and yet all we have right now is one device (that utilises the latest technology). Did I address my post in the wrong direction? I don't think so. I'd invite you to go back and read his post a second time. He responded to my post about what I wanted by making logically non-sensical statements about market size and a few (attempted) personal attacks about people who wanted something other than the iPad. In fact, underlying his post seemed to be a belief that people are wrong to want something other than an iPad (else why condemn the people that do). So really if you want to condemn people for extrapolating needs "only from themself" and "low-tolerance", it would be much better directed, imo, at Pringles man, surely? You say that he's "not nearly so worked up as the hand-wringers are"? Why don't you read his badly thought out rant and tell me who's worked up. Honestly, the comments here look like a really bad astro-turfing job today and if you read through them you'll find far more self-riteous and fallacious posting in support of the iPad than you will against it. The repeated memes are that a Windows 7 derived tablet will be crap, nevermind that for business users a Windows 7 based tablet might be exactly what we want; and that we should be comparing the iPad which was released this year, with other tablets that were released years ago and were often hybrid-laptops. Whereas what we are actually doing is comparing the iPad with what will come next. And what will come next is a whole slew of other tablets, android based, windows based, palm based, and these tablets will have just the same screen, battery, processor and storage technology that the iPad has been able to take advantage of. And that's going to be a brilliant thing for the market, though maybe not for Apple. Remember for comparison, that the iPhone is the smartphone that gets all the news coverage, but Nokia has sold more of its smartphones.
Complaining about tone is ad hominem. Address the argument:
An ad hominem is when you use personal attacks in place of argument. I certainly did address his points (the post is just above for anyone who doubts this). That I also observed he had a particularly nasty tone and showed prejudice against people for being poor and considered calling someone poor an insult, is a freebie that he gets in addition to having his arguments addressed. May I ask why you didn't feel the need to pull him up on his post which was much more of an ad hominem than mine given that he actually was using personal dislike as an argument?
You can't just whinge that the market isn't serving you.
"Whinge" is a low term used to try and dismiss other people's needs. If the market doesn't provide something we want, then yes, actually, shocking though this may seem to you, we bloody well can say so. I don't know why you would have a problem with people saying what they want and don't want from a product.
Are you willing to pay more money than the cost of an iPad for a device that is bigger, has worse battery life, runs windows and lets you manage your own synchronization?
The truth is, those devices have existed since the ThinkPad and still exist -- and yet you aren't saying you use or still use yours (never mind that the Newton was better by every metric that doesn't include running PhotoShop 3.5).
What is this absurd false choice you're presenting? "If you don't like the iPad you can get one of these twenty year old lumps"? We're saying what we want to see produced, not that we'd prefer to use something decades old instead. That's just gibberish. Technology has moved on enormously even over just the last five years. We want to see that technology put to use to make something equivalent (or better) than the iPad that suits our needs. I don't know why you're trying to argue against that or how you think that are. Something as bad as an ad hominem is making a post that creates strawmen. Or strawgiants in the case of yours.
P.S. You use Gentoo. You're not the target market for an iPad. You're also one of these Apple-haters who obsesses over Steve Jobs and thinks he can hear you if you mention him by name.
Right. So what part of my saying I want a tablet that's more suited to my needs is in anyway undermined by you saying the iPad isn't designed for my needs? I think you failed to understand the point. The rest of your post is just gibberish.
Appearances count, and as long as Ballmer is the pitchman for the stuff -- overweight and dressed in some 10 year old cartigan -- not only will I not take Microsoft seriously, but I don't want to have anything to *do* with Microsoft anymore.
The point, I think, that the GP was making was that stock price in fact does not actually equate to the worth of the company. If you want a vivid illustration of how dollar value does not always equate to real world value, consider how hedge funds were lining up to put money into "high rate investment opportunities" that were in fact packages of sub-prime mortgages.
I think the GP is right. If all Apple products vanished tomorrow, there would be a wailing, that's for sure. But if all Microsoft products vanished, there would be chaos around the world and a very loud laugh from Richard Stallman's house.
Probably that Dell employees would actually respect customer confidentiality. Would it be any different if it had been a confidential business letter or accounts statement?
I hope the employee has been dropped from a very great height by Dell. It doesn't inspire much trust in getting support from them.
You have been able to a get a stylus-oriented Windows tablet computer with USB ports for ten years.
Bring on the rivals indeed.
The ones that I know of have been hybrids with a great clunking keyboard attached. That largely defeats the point of buying something because you don't want the keyboard. Technology has moved on. Over the last ten years, battery technology has improved quite a bit, processors have improved massively. Data storage density is far, far higher. I have a 16GB SD Care in my laptop right now. Do you think I'd have that even five years ago for less than $25. Screen technology, particularly touch-sensitive screen technology has leapt forward. What MS release today, will be far ahead of what they've released previously.
To make an analogy, I wouldn't have wanted to fly across the Atlantic in a monoplane, but now that we have modern passenger jets it's great. But I still want it to fly where I want to go, not where the monopoly airline tells me to. If you think the tablet field isn't going to open up radically by the end of next year, you're fooling yourself. Right now, there's one tablet at the front and that's Apple. Wont be for long, though.
And it will sell as well as all of the other tablets that have been previously manufactured which MS has developed the software for. You guys really don't get why the iPad is selling, do you? It's because it doesn't have all of the crap that you think is "essential". The thing is, you guys are a very small market, populated by low-disposable-income types. You are not a particularly desirable demographic. As such, you'll be perfect for the bottom feeders that will supply you with cut-rate, crapola hardware coupled with a cut-rate, crapola OS that you both desire and so richly deserve. Have fun shopping at WalMart for it. Pick up a can of Pringles while you're there to make your experience complete.
You really do wonders for the research last week that characterised iPad owners as selfish affluent types.:D
Why do you put "essential" in quotes? I determine what I want from a device, not you. If I say I want to be able to manage file transfers and organization on a device before I buy it, then silly comments about why don't I pick up a can of pringles aren't going to make the device something I want.
Your comment about a "cut-rate" device make no logical sense when I'm saying I want the device to have more features. Your comments about business users being a "very small market populated by low-disposable-income types" make even less sense.
And the way you mock people when you suspect they might not have a lot of money doesn't suggest much nice about you.
And for all the relevance it has to a discussion about market requirements for tablet form-factor devices, I'm not eating Pringles, right now. I'm eating a quiche.
Relax a bit. There's room for more than one type of tablet in the world. It's not worth taking these things personally.
I would like to be the fourth person to whole-heartedly agree, and the first person to wonder why the hell you aren't modded up higher.
Well I currently seem to be racing up the Mod charts neck and neck with the GP who made an analogy which basically states Microsoft releasing a tablet would be akin to taking people's iPads away from them.
I like to think I'm being modded up because I make more sense, but the modding up of the GP too suggests that we're both just getting modded according to the proportion of pro- and anti-Apple types on the site today.;)
I'll take solace in the nice people who post to agree with me though.;)
Can you imagine what it's like to be a small child, seeing Steve Jobs hold a piece of candy in front of you, to hold it before you and tell you how great its going to be, how it's everything you could possibly want. And then lick his tongue all over it just before giving it to you? This is what it feels like to be someone who reallly wants a nice, tablet form-factor device without a sodding keyboard attached to it, and then find that the only one that is pretty much decent is locked down and made into a device for consuming games and media.
Microsoft are going to make a tablet? About fucking time. I want to take notes on it with a stylus, not wave my fingers over the screen going 'oooo, I can make pictures big'. I want to be able stuff a USB stick in the side of it and put directories of data on it, not sync it to a fucking iTunes program running on an entirely separate computer (because, amongst other things, my Gentoo box really loves running iTunes). The iPad is pricey, pre-licked candy. Until someone else opens a sweetshop and starts selling their own candy, the only way you're getting any is with Steve Job's drool over it. Bring on the rivals, I say.
An ISP does not need to record and store for long periods of time your history. Nor do they need to then transfer this history on to companies in China. Nor do we necessarily want to allow the precedent of ISPs deciding what sites we may or may not visit to establish any more of a foothold than it already does. What's going on here relates to all of these.
That link is fantastic. The best eight minutes I've spent today. Is it news? I don't know, but news is not merely facts, but facts and explanation. If the comedy shows are providing the explanation half of the sum, then maybe they're completing the delivery of news in a way.
They should indeed report them. It was not "ever thus" and quite demonstrably so because we've only had mass electronic communication relatively recently and in a form that is easy for third-parties to record en masse for substantially less time than that.
Each time a new frontier opens in the eternal war between the rulers and the ruled, a land-grab ensues where governments and corporations try to make the public accept something as inevitable or right whilst at the same time the public realizes just because they've allowed the government to make them do something in other areas, that doesn't mean it was right.
It's vitally important at times like this to defend our rights as forcefully as possible. We did a lot of damage to Phorm when this was tried previously. In fact, Phorm turned into a ugly business black hole that no-one wanted to touch, with a reputation as down the toilet as SCO and I pity the people associated with it (except I don't). Clearly someone hasn't learned their lesson and we need to burn down a few more companies before we finally establish our right to privacy.
Well that's fine for you then. But what about the rest of humanity that has said things they don't want public at work? When you argue against something, consider its effects on others, not just yourself.
Wow, are you seriously comparing sharing with rape, murder, drunk driving and child abuse? A prime example of why you should stop calling it "piracy".
I think what you mean is "are you seriously equating sharing with rape, et al". Which would indeed be a bad thing and to which the OP could quite honestly reply "no, I'm not, don't create strawmen". But comparing? He's proving the principle used to justify piracy as wrong by comparing how it would sound if you used the same argument to justify other things. That's fine.
If you wrote a multiplication program which gave 263 x 2 as 789 and you accepted that because you really, really wanted the answer to be 789, it's legitimate for someone else to come along and plug in 3 x 2 and say "look, your algorithm gives the answer as 9, we all know that's wrong, so stop trying to pretend it's correct". Saying "OMG - are you seriously comparing '3' with '263'" is not a rebuttal to that. It's a misunderstanding (probably deliberate) of what he's saying.
Do you expect people not to use this stuff, especially when downloading can be more convenient than obtaining it "legally"?
Yes, actually. There are many of us who abstain from torrenting illegal copies because we consider it wrong. If there weren't, you wouldn't see many big budget movies around. People like you live off the ethics of people like me.
Their "happy medium" is pay full price, every time, no refunds.
And your version would be "give us it for whatever we want or we'll take it for free." That seems to be the principle. Does it occur to you that you could not buy something if you're unwilling to pay what its creator is asking for it? You have a choice, you know.
However, I can guarantee you that if you take a random 1000 sampling of people on the street and asked if it was Wrong or Should be illegal, all but the same 0.3% will say NO.
I seriously doubt it. If your contention is that it is fine because the ads are included, well you ignore that
the company is not being paid for these ads. They negotiated a price for the ads based on estimated viewing figures. Maybe the ad company loves getting one over on the station when it gets it ads distributed to ten million, rather than 2 million, but only paying for the 2million, but it ain't good for the company that actually produces our TV show.
the company may not be making its revenue 100% from ads. Maybe the ads supplement their revenue but the company makes a large proportion from paid subscriptions to their channel or later DVD or digital download or rental sales. Distributing with ads does not offset this.
It undermines the company's ability to sell the TV show to other areas, such as different states or countries
It ignores that you might be taking for free what other people paid to support - e.g. the BBC is paid for by the British people and subsidised by licensing deals with companies in other countries. There aren't any ads and pirating these results in either the BBC having less money for shows or the people of the UK having to pay more to keep the funding up.
There are far more than 0.3% of people who understand these issues.
Slashdot Mirror
Well we will see soon enough. What I'm saying is that technology progresses for all parties equally. Comparing one released by company X this year, against ones released by company Y in previous years, isn't the best approach.
Anyway, for the purposes of many of us, some of those Windows based tablets are superior to the iPad. Different needs, remember.
Technology moves on. Apple waited a good long time to release a tablet, until battery life and weight, processor power, screen technology, storage density had all reached a level where something like the iPad was feasible. It's non-sensical to suppose that because there were tablets (usually hybrids) in the past that weren't as good, that new releases will be comparable. Also, previous versions usually had a full and bloated OS on them. According to TFS, MS is thinking of a Win7 derivative. The iPad OS is a Mac OS derivative. Wireless and 3G access is becoming ubiquitous which makes easily portable devices like tablets of greater use. Basically, one of the big things with a tablet is the ability to easily hold it - for uses like taking notes, reading e-books, etc. Even five years ago, that was problematic. Now - you can have something really light and long-running too, with a bright clear screen and a much more responsive screen. These technologies aren't unique to Apple. Apple timed their development of the iPad well - just at the stage that the concept becomes viable. Expect other companies to take the same advantage of the technology. At any rate, I'll evaluate what MS come up with. It's crazy the number of people in this thread who are practically taking it as an article of faith that it will be some terrible thing when it's not anything more than an expressed wish by the company.
It's a strange comment to make that tablets aren't for me when the whole point of what I'm saying (and all the people who agree with me), is that I want a tablet. Is this some sort of inverse of the No True Scotsman - tablets aren't for anyone who wants a tablet, unless that tablet conforms to Apple's version? That's a very silly argument. What's not mainstream about my needs? I'm a business user. I assure you the business market is not a teeny little thing.
No. I called it gibberish because it went in its entirety: "You're also one of these Apple-haters who obsesses over Steve Jobs and thinks he can hear you if you mention him by name."
It's just a groundless accusation of bias as and bizarre invention as a substitute for argument. I think Steve Jobs can hear me? Er, wtf?
I don't know why you are trying to prove that the iPad suits all needs. It plainly doesn't. Comments like only technically minded people care about the iPad being open are very wrong. Having to sync it with iTunes makes it utterly unsuitable for a business setting, for just one example.
And why is being able to buy a enterprise business licence a suitable answer to deploying your software on it when the point of comparison is being able to deploy directly to any open platform without having to bother with such. Plainly a system where you can deploy what you want without paying Apple for the right to do so is better. And what of existing software written for a Windows platform that you'd like to port? Your problem is that you are going down a checklist trying to show that something can be done (with the right amount of effort, violation of vendor support T&C and / or paying extra money to Apple) when what I'm doing is looking at two products - what Apple currently have out and what we will see over the next year, and choosing what suits my needs best.
As to your comparing a brand new product using up to date battery, screen, storage and processor with older products, it's utterly non-relevant to the point. What we're saying is we like how far technology has come - that can make something so light, long-running and relatively powerful - and that we're looking forward to when someone other than Apple releases an equivalently specced device. Which will happen sooner, rather than later. Saying "HA HA HA" and pointing at old devices means nothing. As I made clear in my very first post, I (and many others based on the replies) are all looking forward to being able to buy an iPad that's not made by Apple.
That too! And with the DE being a separate component to Linux itself, we might see some great stuff in terms of UI. Perhaps the next Gnome v. KDE race will be to incorporate touchscreen features into themselves. Or someone will make a super light-weight FVM based one or something. I reckon KDE might be first out with some really good features since they did all that foundational work from 3.x to 4.x and made it more powerful and easier to develop for. Whatever, there will be cool stuff.
I shall probably keep Win7 on mine if it runs half-decently, because I'll be using this as a note-taker (OneNote), PDF displayer and web-browser, more than anything. None of which needs Linux funkiness. If I can shell into my desktop from it then I can actually do light development work on it anyway. Still, I have no doubt people will be putting Linux on them and that will be cool. Like I say - "options".
Jailbreaking your iPad is an option for technically-minded individuals that want to play around with the device. It's in no way at all a suitable thing for the serious user / business market. If Microsoft (or anyone) can deliver something with up to date technology like the iPad, but more open and capable, they're going to rightly wipe the floor with Apple in the business market.
I haven't addressed everything you said in your post because everything is covered by the one thing that you've already observed - I didn't say I wanted to change the iPad or take it away at all. I want more products on the market so that people can get what suits them. Absurd to suggest that one device will suit everyone and yet all we have right now is one device (that utilises the latest technology). Did I address my post in the wrong direction? I don't think so. I'd invite you to go back and read his post a second time. He responded to my post about what I wanted by making logically non-sensical statements about market size and a few (attempted) personal attacks about people who wanted something other than the iPad. In fact, underlying his post seemed to be a belief that people are wrong to want something other than an iPad (else why condemn the people that do). So really if you want to condemn people for extrapolating needs "only from themself" and "low-tolerance", it would be much better directed, imo, at Pringles man, surely? You say that he's "not nearly so worked up as the hand-wringers are"? Why don't you read his badly thought out rant and tell me who's worked up. Honestly, the comments here look like a really bad astro-turfing job today and if you read through them you'll find far more self-riteous and fallacious posting in support of the iPad than you will against it. The repeated memes are that a Windows 7 derived tablet will be crap, nevermind that for business users a Windows 7 based tablet might be exactly what we want; and that we should be comparing the iPad which was released this year, with other tablets that were released years ago and were often hybrid-laptops. Whereas what we are actually doing is comparing the iPad with what will come next. And what will come next is a whole slew of other tablets, android based, windows based, palm based, and these tablets will have just the same screen, battery, processor and storage technology that the iPad has been able to take advantage of. And that's going to be a brilliant thing for the market, though maybe not for Apple. Remember for comparison, that the iPhone is the smartphone that gets all the news coverage, but Nokia has sold more of its smartphones.
An ad hominem is when you use personal attacks in place of argument. I certainly did address his points (the post is just above for anyone who doubts this). That I also observed he had a particularly nasty tone and showed prejudice against people for being poor and considered calling someone poor an insult, is a freebie that he gets in addition to having his arguments addressed. May I ask why you didn't feel the need to pull him up on his post which was much more of an ad hominem than mine given that he actually was using personal dislike as an argument?
"Whinge" is a low term used to try and dismiss other people's needs. If the market doesn't provide something we want, then yes, actually, shocking though this may seem to you, we bloody well can say so. I don't know why you would have a problem with people saying what they want and don't want from a product.
What is this absurd false choice you're presenting? "If you don't like the iPad you can get one of these twenty year old lumps"? We're saying what we want to see produced, not that we'd prefer to use something decades old instead. That's just gibberish. Technology has moved on enormously even over just the last five years. We want to see that technology put to use to make something equivalent (or better) than the iPad that suits our needs. I don't know why you're trying to argue against that or how you think that are. Something as bad as an ad hominem is making a post that creates strawmen. Or strawgiants in the case of yours.
Right. So what part of my saying I want a tablet that's more suited to my needs is in anyway undermined by you saying the iPad isn't designed for my needs? I think you failed to understand the point. The rest of your post is just gibberish.
Please tell me that's not how you actually think?
The point, I think, that the GP was making was that stock price in fact does not actually equate to the worth of the company. If you want a vivid illustration of how dollar value does not always equate to real world value, consider how hedge funds were lining up to put money into "high rate investment opportunities" that were in fact packages of sub-prime mortgages.
I think the GP is right. If all Apple products vanished tomorrow, there would be a wailing, that's for sure. But if all Microsoft products vanished, there would be chaos around the world and a very loud laugh from Richard Stallman's house.
Probably that Dell employees would actually respect customer confidentiality. Would it be any different if it had been a confidential business letter or accounts statement?
I hope the employee has been dropped from a very great height by Dell. It doesn't inspire much trust in getting support from them.
The ones that I know of have been hybrids with a great clunking keyboard attached. That largely defeats the point of buying something because you don't want the keyboard. Technology has moved on. Over the last ten years, battery technology has improved quite a bit, processors have improved massively. Data storage density is far, far higher. I have a 16GB SD Care in my laptop right now. Do you think I'd have that even five years ago for less than $25. Screen technology, particularly touch-sensitive screen technology has leapt forward. What MS release today, will be far ahead of what they've released previously.
To make an analogy, I wouldn't have wanted to fly across the Atlantic in a monoplane, but now that we have modern passenger jets it's great. But I still want it to fly where I want to go, not where the monopoly airline tells me to. If you think the tablet field isn't going to open up radically by the end of next year, you're fooling yourself. Right now, there's one tablet at the front and that's Apple. Wont be for long, though.
You really do wonders for the research last week that characterised iPad owners as selfish affluent types. :D
Why do you put "essential" in quotes? I determine what I want from a device, not you. If I say I want to be able to manage file transfers and organization on a device before I buy it, then silly comments about why don't I pick up a can of pringles aren't going to make the device something I want.
Your comment about a "cut-rate" device make no logical sense when I'm saying I want the device to have more features. Your comments about business users being a "very small market populated by low-disposable-income types" make even less sense.
And the way you mock people when you suspect they might not have a lot of money doesn't suggest much nice about you.
And for all the relevance it has to a discussion about market requirements for tablet form-factor devices, I'm not eating Pringles, right now. I'm eating a quiche.
Relax a bit. There's room for more than one type of tablet in the world. It's not worth taking these things personally.
Regards,
H.
Well I currently seem to be racing up the Mod charts neck and neck with the GP who made an analogy which basically states Microsoft releasing a tablet would be akin to taking people's iPads away from them.
;)
;)
I like to think I'm being modded up because I make more sense, but the modding up of the GP too suggests that we're both just getting modded according to the proportion of pro- and anti-Apple types on the site today.
I'll take solace in the nice people who post to agree with me though.
Can you imagine what it's like to be a small child, seeing Steve Jobs hold a piece of candy in front of you, to hold it before you and tell you how great its going to be, how it's everything you could possibly want. And then lick his tongue all over it just before giving it to you? This is what it feels like to be someone who reallly wants a nice, tablet form-factor device without a sodding keyboard attached to it, and then find that the only one that is pretty much decent is locked down and made into a device for consuming games and media.
Microsoft are going to make a tablet? About fucking time. I want to take notes on it with a stylus, not wave my fingers over the screen going 'oooo, I can make pictures big'. I want to be able stuff a USB stick in the side of it and put directories of data on it, not sync it to a fucking iTunes program running on an entirely separate computer (because, amongst other things, my Gentoo box really loves running iTunes). The iPad is pricey, pre-licked candy. Until someone else opens a sweetshop and starts selling their own candy, the only way you're getting any is with Steve Job's drool over it. Bring on the rivals, I say.
Note to any people from the website you linked to tracing referrals back out of curiosity: One new tab opened. One new tab immediately closed again.
Websites that immediately start playing music, do not get read. Nor is it worth my bother to start looking around for ways to turn it off.
An ISP does not need to record and store for long periods of time your history. Nor do they need to then transfer this history on to companies in China. Nor do we necessarily want to allow the precedent of ISPs deciding what sites we may or may not visit to establish any more of a foothold than it already does. What's going on here relates to all of these.
That link is fantastic. The best eight minutes I've spent today. Is it news? I don't know, but news is not merely facts, but facts and explanation. If the comedy shows are providing the explanation half of the sum, then maybe they're completing the delivery of news in a way.
They should indeed report them. It was not "ever thus" and quite demonstrably so because we've only had mass electronic communication relatively recently and in a form that is easy for third-parties to record en masse for substantially less time than that.
Each time a new frontier opens in the eternal war between the rulers and the ruled, a land-grab ensues where governments and corporations try to make the public accept something as inevitable or right whilst at the same time the public realizes just because they've allowed the government to make them do something in other areas, that doesn't mean it was right.
It's vitally important at times like this to defend our rights as forcefully as possible. We did a lot of damage to Phorm when this was tried previously. In fact, Phorm turned into a ugly business black hole that no-one wanted to touch, with a reputation as down the toilet as SCO and I pity the people associated with it (except I don't). Clearly someone hasn't learned their lesson and we need to burn down a few more companies before we finally establish our right to privacy.
So let's make them regret this.
Well that's fine for you then. But what about the rest of humanity that has said things they don't want public at work? When you argue against something, consider its effects on others, not just yourself.
I think what you mean is "are you seriously equating sharing with rape, et al". Which would indeed be a bad thing and to which the OP could quite honestly reply "no, I'm not, don't create strawmen". But comparing? He's proving the principle used to justify piracy as wrong by comparing how it would sound if you used the same argument to justify other things. That's fine.
If you wrote a multiplication program which gave 263 x 2 as 789 and you accepted that because you really, really wanted the answer to be 789, it's legitimate for someone else to come along and plug in 3 x 2 and say "look, your algorithm gives the answer as 9, we all know that's wrong, so stop trying to pretend it's correct". Saying "OMG - are you seriously comparing '3' with '263'" is not a rebuttal to that. It's a misunderstanding (probably deliberate) of what he's saying.
Yes, actually. There are many of us who abstain from torrenting illegal copies because we consider it wrong. If there weren't, you wouldn't see many big budget movies around. People like you live off the ethics of people like me.
And your version would be "give us it for whatever we want or we'll take it for free." That seems to be the principle. Does it occur to you that you could not buy something if you're unwilling to pay what its creator is asking for it? You have a choice, you know.
I seriously doubt it. If your contention is that it is fine because the ads are included, well you ignore that
There are far more than 0.3% of people who understand these issues.