> plus with not having to wait for the connection to establish
Eh? I have (A)DSL, and I have to wait a little while for it to 'connect'*...of course, I don't have to disconnect, but it does seem to do that on it's own every now and again (once a day?).
*the DSL 'modem' has to connect, then the DHCP has to do it's stuff (do some DSL have permanent IP configs)?
I *would* like to see someone do a real table - like Apple's one, but filled out a bit with more figures/features. I'm sure the iPhone wouldn't come off so well...
Right! Nor based on any (other?) physical characteristic either.
I'm particularly keen on volleyball, but I'm not very tall. I've seen several people who are 'picked' because they're tall, but are less capable than I (am). At one point, I thought I might be able to be pretty good, but there doesn't seem to be much point if there's only one position for short people (libero) - it seems even setters (my favourite position) should be tall.
This reminds me of boxing - don't they have different competitions for people who are built differently?
That quote is far from clear, IMO. I read it to mean that it isn't subsidised *further* for AT&T employees, and it has no relevance for the market price.
> And before anyone says that the iPhone is subsidized, > therefore it must be a million dollars without a contract, you're wrong. > Even though a two year contract with AT&T is required for iPhone in the US, > the iPhone is not subsidized - the price is what it is.
My reading of the page is that the phone will not be subsidised *further* for their *employees* - ie there will not be any discount if you work for them and they have to pay the same as anyone else.
I do *not* read that as implying that the phone's price is not reduced in exchange for committing to a 2 year contract.
> I believe that's from The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy,
Yes, I know that one:D
I remember the original radio show.
I still missed the reference, but there you go...
> but it's been a number of years, so I can't recall if that's from the book or the BBC miniseries. > (In particular, I think the place I source that from may have misquoted, or quoted from a localized > edition. I could have sworn it was "to the chemist", not "the drug store". Whichever.)
Indeed. Highly unlikely to be 'drug store', I think - and my memory has it as 'to the chemist'. I wasn't aware there were localised versions.
We (English) don't tend to use either 'drug' (preferring 'medicine') or 'store' (preferring 'shop'). 'Drug' is only used when referring to those that are illegal, or when talking about something's property ('alcohol is a drug', 'nicotine is a drug'). Having said that, it's been almost 10 years since I lived in England, and things change pretty quickly... and with Hollywood influence, usually towards the US usage.
> > And, in all seriousness, I would like to compliment you on the graciousness with which you responded > there. I don't see that sort of thing much on Slashdot, so it's a pleasant surprise.
Don't worry. You don't see it from me much, either. Thanks though - I did think them a little harsh;)
> So, really, you missed the point twice on this one. Bravo!
fair enough, though I have claim that the reference is somewhat obscure...I don't remember the Douglas Adams quote......but, yeah, ignorance is no excuse.
Slashdot Mirror
shouldn't that be 'labour'? or do you really spell it like the 'cans?
I heard that in China, the gov are laying fibre whenever they lay a new road. I would've thought you could do the same in oz fairly easily, no?
> ...and we know what that means.
No, we don't...
> Absolutely nothing, if they value their customers.
You mean "...*unless* they value their customers.", right?
> plus with not having to wait for the connection to establish
Eh? I have (A)DSL, and I have to wait a little while for it to 'connect'*...of course, I don't have to disconnect, but it does seem to do that on it's own every now and again (once a day?).
*the DSL 'modem' has to connect, then the DHCP has to do it's stuff (do some DSL have permanent IP configs)?
I *would* like to see someone do a real table - like Apple's one, but filled out a bit with more figures/features. I'm sure the iPhone wouldn't come off so well...
> It has NO sim-slot.
I am lead to believe that it does have a sim slot. It's on the 'top' of the phone.
I think 'lie' is a bit strong. 'Wrong' is better, I think.
I saw that mistake yesterday and sent them a quick email - I don't suppose I was the only one either. It didn't take 5 minutes for them to fix it.
> Nokia's S60 3rd edition fp1 browser
It's not just on fp1. You can d/l it for fp0 (ie just 3rd) too - I have it on my 3250.
> Not even sports should be gender-based
Right! Nor based on any (other?) physical characteristic either.
I'm particularly keen on volleyball, but I'm not very tall. I've seen several people who are 'picked' because they're tall, but are less capable than I (am). At one point, I thought I might be able to be pretty good, but there doesn't seem to be much point if there's only one position for short people (libero) - it seems even setters (my favourite position) should be tall.
This reminds me of boxing - don't they have different competitions for people who are built differently?
so, we they'll need some tin foil underwear? ...and tin foil duvets.
Indeed, so you agree...
Ah, yes, I guess that's a more sensible reading of it. I can't say I believe it though - it would seem to be too cheap.
> the iPhone is not subsidized
That quote is far from clear, IMO. I read it to mean that it isn't subsidised *further* for AT&T employees, and it has no relevance for the market price.
> And before anyone says that the iPhone is subsidized,
> therefore it must be a million dollars without a contract, you're wrong.
> Even though a two year contract with AT&T is required for iPhone in the US,
> the iPhone is not subsidized - the price is what it is.
My reading of the page is that the phone will not be subsidised *further* for their *employees* - ie there will not be any discount if you work for them and they have to pay the same as anyone else.
I do *not* read that as implying that the phone's price is not reduced in exchange for committing to a 2 year contract.
Did I miss something?
I don't see how that is better.
yeah, now those people don't need a mac to test on, so this'll reduce the number of macs sold.
No, by 'group think', he means 'scientific integrity'.
(It's supposed to be a joke, but is probably too obscure, so I'll apologise now)
"I think, therefore I am.", or better, "I doubt, therefore I think, therefore I am."
I prefer, "If I am mistaken, I am.", which seems somehow more applicable.
I guess these phrases mean that the only thing we can be sure of is that we exist. Exactly what it means to exist, we cannot be sure of.
> What we really need is a credit card system that requires you to enter some kind of a PIN.
This is what they have in China (IINM, they invented CCs); they don't use signatures at all.
My bank of america debit visa card was refused by budget car rental (I don't care for credit). They don't work for everything :(
> That might have to do with the order being limited to 24 *living* members.
:) That'd do it...
Aha
Of course, the other bit was the whole point in my post - if it could be said to be a point...pointless, more like.
I don't see Saint Diana on the list. Strange that...
> I believe that's from The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy,
:D
... and with Hollywood influence, usually towards the US usage.
;)
Yes, I know that one
I remember the original radio show.
I still missed the reference, but there you go...
> but it's been a number of years, so I can't recall if that's from the book or the BBC miniseries.
> (In particular, I think the place I source that from may have misquoted, or quoted from a localized
> edition. I could have sworn it was "to the chemist", not "the drug store". Whichever.)
Indeed. Highly unlikely to be 'drug store', I think - and my memory has it as 'to the chemist'. I wasn't aware there were localised versions.
We (English) don't tend to use either 'drug' (preferring 'medicine') or 'store' (preferring 'shop'). 'Drug' is only used when referring to those that are illegal, or when talking about something's property ('alcohol is a drug', 'nicotine is a drug'). Having said that, it's been almost 10 years since I lived in England, and things change pretty quickly
>
> And, in all seriousness, I would like to compliment you on the graciousness with which you responded
> there. I don't see that sort of thing much on Slashdot, so it's a pleasant surprise.
Don't worry. You don't see it from me much, either. Thanks though - I did think them a little harsh
> So, really, you missed the point twice on this one. Bravo!
...but, yeah, ignorance is no excuse.
fair enough, though I have claim that the reference is somewhat obscure...I don't remember the Douglas Adams quote...