Use anything you want. Put it into VirtualBox. It's free. Ubuntu? XP? Doesn't matter.
This whole thing is religious sucker-bait. Buy what you want. You don't need to pick up the dogma, just make it work and have fun.
The zeolotry here is stupefying. Yeah, it's slashdot, but don't you see a left-hook coming these days?
The best thing to do: short Apple stock. The tablet's going to be too expensive, and there's always a peak then dip right after the peak when Apple suckers up the buying public. If it's worth it, I'll buy one. But Apple's manipulation of the press is at an all-time peak. Fuck that.
The trick they use is one Microsoft learned long ago: keep everyone hovering around your stuff, so that this process excludes you/distracts you from other good stuff in the marketplace. Once released, let everyone fight about the details while Apple cashes the check. Are you going to let them do that to you again???????
Full rigor, vetting, and peer review should apply.
But don't over estimate this: they just needed to hire a freaking editor.
That other components of human-induced environmental problems is at the crux of overwhelming evidence still applies; this being one more heap of evidence on top of mountains of it.
That large corporations aren't interested, and their paid-off governments looking the other way, is only natural. Costs money, is perceived to remove profits, thus undermining sustained personal asset growth.
I'm reminded of the aphorism that an attorney, seeing that his case isn't going well, will plead to the jury's sympathies. Barring success, he'll play to the evidence and the law. Barring that, he'll question the veracity of the prosecution. Barring success there, he'll try to get a mistrail. Barring that, he'll appeal.
This bring to light the question of just how many piles of vetted, scientific, mountains of evidence do you need before you're burned to a crisp on what was once a mountain top?
Sadly, those guys signed contracts that allowed the publishers to use their stuff until the sun becomes part of the blackhole at the center of the Milky Way. McGraw Hill and Pearson Ed are just a couple of examples of cash cow publishing that manipulate the length of copyrights to their own profitable ends. Imagine that.
I don't think the two can be joined in the way your logic presents. The US uses the aegis of terrorism for many of its searches, and I'll use the example of vacuuming NAP points with filters, monitoring most all cell calls in the world, and using spy sattelites to look at naked people on beaches.
Google itself performs searches, ostensibly to the point of robot.txt, but I'm guessing it goes beyond that sometimes, it just doesn't produce public results to queries. Any spider/crawler app with sufficient muscle can digest websites in the same way Google, Bing, Yahoo, etc do. We let them.
Google got black-hat cracked. They're unhappy about that, and with good reason. But extending Google's cloud offerings to join it with the Chinese hacks is a stretch, IMHO. Cloud is, and always has been, just as secure as you make it. Depending on others for security in resources outside of your own protection boundary has always required great care, and always will.
Grudge? Microsoft essentially saved Apple by loaning it much needed $$$.
The 'enemy of my enemy is my friend' argument still doesn't hold much water. Microsoft's mobile strategy is in tatters-- no wins and all losses. Apple's getting creds for business use and is the one to beat in consumer.
Android has a lot of mindshare, but it lags in marketshare. Yes, it's cool, but it's also much more anarchy than business ecosystem at this point. The face of Android is Google, and it competes with Moblin, the MacOS in iPhone, not to mention a half-dozen smart competitors like RIM.
BusinessWeek is looking for unique page counts. Nothing here. Move along.
It's the differential in potential that makes electrons flow one way or the other, or in an alternation. A static relationship produces nothing. The waveguide charging theory isn't going to be too productive because the available amount of electrons available at the frequency drops inverse-square from the source. A one watt 2.4ghz access point radiates that energy in all directions at once if it has an omni-directional antenna. Move a few feet away and the energy gets really small, in terms of charging something-- then you can add-in the inefficiencies of the conversion electronics to further stanch the flow going to a battery. Nonetheless, there is a bit left over to charge a cell. How much? I'm thinking not very much at all.
Add to that the Uniform Commercial Code, which Nevada is a signatory state.
The CEA and the hotels acted like the Mob. Reservations made under non-CES/CEA representation should be void of this problem. And the CEA's legal department will have a new problem to deal with, it sounds like. So be it.
Maybe it's the mirth and warmth of the RIAA and the MPAA that makes me want to see them spanked for being boorish and bullies. Again.
Odd how you need to inject this racist conjecture into the thread. Feeling insecure? Ashamed that we all have genes that likely come from Africa, but you're ashamed of that small penis? Tsk tsk.
Which is why this is a semantics argument based on marketing hype and the hope of margin salvation among Microsoft and major US hardware makers. These guys are scared to death of the low margins and economics behind netbooks, and for good reason.
The answer is: machines will continue to get smaller, faster, blah blah blah because of Moore's Law and economics. The heady days of $1500 notebooks ought to be over and dead. We already dispose of hardware (sadly, way too quickly) and netbooks will always be cheap, built cheaply, and either steps to bigger hardware or as secondary devices. So be it.
The credulity problem gets worse when one considers how much more productive people have become when using various applications. Yeah, some of them are probably counter-productive, but others (office apps, line-of-business apps) have transformed how we do business for the better. The number seems terribly grandiose even if you push all of the negatives to one side of the equation.
This week: six different local 'family' machines needed junk scraped from them by yours truly, the tech support guy. Why? They didn't understand about renewing their AV subscriptions-- and got infected. Does Microsoft have something inherent in Windows, native to the OS, that prevents contamination? No. Do their products distribute freely with uptodate malware and virus prevention and thwarting? No. Users have to dig for them, install them, and hope that Microsoft's protection is sufficient.
Yes, there are free AV apps (for civilians) that work fine. Are they adept at using them? No. It's a huge failure.
Some optimized assembler would make a difference (ducks).
But network latencies, number of sustainable TCPs per session, db latency, weird table lookups (even arp drags a server down when you have 20K+ connects) are all at issue. Add in various dirty caches, file locks/unlocks and other OS machinations, and life can be tough for any app written in anything.
Then there are the backup servers, the availability servers, the DNS servers, the coffee servers, it just gets bogged down. A 10:1 efficiency claim is probably just language fanboy-ing..... or a consulting job looking for a spot marked X.
Certainly it's nice to be green... but using better optimization tricks (like GCD) for multi-cores is bound to help.... tickless kernels..... SSDs..... C++ wouldn't be my first pick.
It's good practice to release security fixes now, and updates later but regularly. Competitively (or altruistically) upgrades are released in response to market timing. Or, by addiction.
Microsoft is, as an example, addicted to releasing upgrades to things like Office, which may or may not have anything useful in them. But older versions are pushed off the dock, support-wise, so you can't really use Office 97 right now as the machines that support have operating systems that are no longer maintained and are therefore unsafe to use from a security perspective. An example is that Windows 98SE doesn't support WAP 2 PSK (and no third party offers it) so you can't use an old laptop with Windows 98 and Office 97 on WiFi. Updates and fixes in this model are a revenue game where each update both increases value but pushes the platform towards becoming obsolete because it strays from the original.
One of the fundamental components of software ought to be autonomous production (meaning least amount of external dependencies) so that the software can live and be fixed throughout a long life cycle. Yes, this means updates, but it also means cross-platform compatibility and consistency across supported platforms.
The original poster upthread that I replied to, came way too close to being some kind of automaton, filled with corporate-speak hyper-babble.
No matter: 'making stuff better' as a phrase has often been used in contexts where bug fixes and small potatoes have a price tag called an upgrade.
I code, too, as in write software... but not for money anymore. I have a chip on my shoulder from disabled/crippled phone firmware, operating systems, as well as those found on client and server platforms.
My immediate pavlovian reaction, and I apologize if I've besmirched you, is to be very skeptical of release quality. A good friend of mine once said: nothing works, we start from here, and most of the time, he's right.
Therefore, there's a highly trained (over 33years) detection of the scent of marketing prattle, sales-speak, and apologetic jargon that must be over come. I detect it here, but in fact, you may be indeed sincere. Decades of listening to failed promises makes me doubt this, but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt.
"Improved user experience" is marketingspeak for feature upgrade or bug fix. The parent got modded down, but if I had points, I'd put it right back up. Crippled software sets, suddenly enabled by market pressure, isn't an upgrade.
When apps are truly upgraded, so much the better, but this doesn't follow the computer industry model. And I wouldn't expect it from others.
I'll take quality over the superfluity of bad media choices any day. In this area, there are two HD OTA sources. I watch these rather than the local-carry versions, despite the hassle of switching back and forth on input sources to my HD TV.
The image quality on Comcast is at best average, and on some channels it's plainly and obviously awful. Bah.
The concept of compressors/decompressors goes back a long way. I try to use vocabulary that suits a technical audience, but sometimes I'm mistaken in doing so.
In technical jargon, there are lots of shortcuts. Occasionally, it's the wrong choice. None of these are made-up words.... just in the case you cite, perhaps redundant.
But what you're talking about is actually sensible and therefore will be bypassed by all.
Even more fun would be arranging the signals via OFDM so that they could be multiplexed and decoded using shared channel space. Sigh. Something will happen someday when enough people scream about the crappy, supposedly high definition displays.
Slashdot Mirror
Use anything you want. Put it into VirtualBox. It's free. Ubuntu? XP? Doesn't matter.
This whole thing is religious sucker-bait. Buy what you want. You don't need to pick up the dogma, just make it work and have fun.
The zeolotry here is stupefying. Yeah, it's slashdot, but don't you see a left-hook coming these days?
The best thing to do: short Apple stock. The tablet's going to be too expensive, and there's always a peak then dip right after the peak when Apple suckers up the buying public. If it's worth it, I'll buy one. But Apple's manipulation of the press is at an all-time peak. Fuck that.
The trick they use is one Microsoft learned long ago: keep everyone hovering around your stuff, so that this process excludes you/distracts you from other good stuff in the marketplace. Once released, let everyone fight about the details while Apple cashes the check. Are you going to let them do that to you again???????
Full rigor, vetting, and peer review should apply.
But don't over estimate this: they just needed to hire a freaking editor.
That other components of human-induced environmental problems is at the crux of overwhelming evidence still applies; this being one more heap of evidence on top of mountains of it.
That large corporations aren't interested, and their paid-off governments looking the other way, is only natural. Costs money, is perceived to remove profits, thus undermining sustained personal asset growth.
I'm reminded of the aphorism that an attorney, seeing that his case isn't going well, will plead to the jury's sympathies. Barring success, he'll play to the evidence and the law. Barring that, he'll question the veracity of the prosecution. Barring success there, he'll try to get a mistrail. Barring that, he'll appeal.
This bring to light the question of just how many piles of vetted, scientific, mountains of evidence do you need before you're burned to a crisp on what was once a mountain top?
No, I'm not trolling you, I really want to know.
Killer speakers, dude.
Sadly, those guys signed contracts that allowed the publishers to use their stuff until the sun becomes part of the blackhole at the center of the Milky Way. McGraw Hill and Pearson Ed are just a couple of examples of cash cow publishing that manipulate the length of copyrights to their own profitable ends. Imagine that.
Ever read the Book of French Military Successes? Both pages?
Mod parent up.
Ben Franklin said: those who sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither.
Of course, this entire thread is going to be reviewed by some pencil pusher in Northern Virginia. A little note will be made.
I don't think the two can be joined in the way your logic presents. The US uses the aegis of terrorism for many of its searches, and I'll use the example of vacuuming NAP points with filters, monitoring most all cell calls in the world, and using spy sattelites to look at naked people on beaches.
Google itself performs searches, ostensibly to the point of robot.txt, but I'm guessing it goes beyond that sometimes, it just doesn't produce public results to queries. Any spider/crawler app with sufficient muscle can digest websites in the same way Google, Bing, Yahoo, etc do. We let them.
Google got black-hat cracked. They're unhappy about that, and with good reason. But extending Google's cloud offerings to join it with the Chinese hacks is a stretch, IMHO. Cloud is, and always has been, just as secure as you make it. Depending on others for security in resources outside of your own protection boundary has always required great care, and always will.
Grudge? Microsoft essentially saved Apple by loaning it much needed $$$.
The 'enemy of my enemy is my friend' argument still doesn't hold much water. Microsoft's mobile strategy is in tatters-- no wins and all losses. Apple's getting creds for business use and is the one to beat in consumer.
Android has a lot of mindshare, but it lags in marketshare. Yes, it's cool, but it's also much more anarchy than business ecosystem at this point. The face of Android is Google, and it competes with Moblin, the MacOS in iPhone, not to mention a half-dozen smart competitors like RIM.
BusinessWeek is looking for unique page counts. Nothing here. Move along.
It's the differential in potential that makes electrons flow one way or the other, or in an alternation. A static relationship produces nothing. The waveguide charging theory isn't going to be too productive because the available amount of electrons available at the frequency drops inverse-square from the source. A one watt 2.4ghz access point radiates that energy in all directions at once if it has an omni-directional antenna. Move a few feet away and the energy gets really small, in terms of charging something-- then you can add-in the inefficiencies of the conversion electronics to further stanch the flow going to a battery. Nonetheless, there is a bit left over to charge a cell. How much? I'm thinking not very much at all.
Back to T1s, DS1s, and unbridled fun.
Maybe NBC downloads are exempt.
Add to that the Uniform Commercial Code, which Nevada is a signatory state.
The CEA and the hotels acted like the Mob. Reservations made under non-CES/CEA representation should be void of this problem. And the CEA's legal department will have a new problem to deal with, it sounds like. So be it.
Maybe it's the mirth and warmth of the RIAA and the MPAA that makes me want to see them spanked for being boorish and bullies. Again.
Odd how you need to inject this racist conjecture into the thread. Feeling insecure? Ashamed that we all have genes that likely come from Africa, but you're ashamed of that small penis? Tsk tsk.
Which is why this is a semantics argument based on marketing hype and the hope of margin salvation among Microsoft and major US hardware makers. These guys are scared to death of the low margins and economics behind netbooks, and for good reason.
The answer is: machines will continue to get smaller, faster, blah blah blah because of Moore's Law and economics. The heady days of $1500 notebooks ought to be over and dead. We already dispose of hardware (sadly, way too quickly) and netbooks will always be cheap, built cheaply, and either steps to bigger hardware or as secondary devices. So be it.
The propaganda and FUD galls me.
The credulity problem gets worse when one considers how much more productive people have become when using various applications. Yeah, some of them are probably counter-productive, but others (office apps, line-of-business apps) have transformed how we do business for the better. The number seems terribly grandiose even if you push all of the negatives to one side of the equation.
You forget that AT&T is just Southwest Bell with lipstick.
Don't let the facts get in the way. This is /.
And relevant they are.
This week: six different local 'family' machines needed junk scraped from them by yours truly, the tech support guy. Why? They didn't understand about renewing their AV subscriptions-- and got infected. Does Microsoft have something inherent in Windows, native to the OS, that prevents contamination? No. Do their products distribute freely with uptodate malware and virus prevention and thwarting? No. Users have to dig for them, install them, and hope that Microsoft's protection is sufficient.
Yes, there are free AV apps (for civilians) that work fine. Are they adept at using them? No. It's a huge failure.
You took the bait. Now spit it out. ;)
Some optimized assembler would make a difference (ducks).
But network latencies, number of sustainable TCPs per session, db latency, weird table lookups (even arp drags a server down when you have 20K+ connects) are all at issue. Add in various dirty caches, file locks/unlocks and other OS machinations, and life can be tough for any app written in anything.
Then there are the backup servers, the availability servers, the DNS servers, the coffee servers, it just gets bogged down. A 10:1 efficiency claim is probably just language fanboy-ing..... or a consulting job looking for a spot marked X.
Certainly it's nice to be green... but using better optimization tricks (like GCD) for multi-cores is bound to help.... tickless kernels..... SSDs..... C++ wouldn't be my first pick.
It's good practice to release security fixes now, and updates later but regularly. Competitively (or altruistically) upgrades are released in response to market timing. Or, by addiction.
Microsoft is, as an example, addicted to releasing upgrades to things like Office, which may or may not have anything useful in them. But older versions are pushed off the dock, support-wise, so you can't really use Office 97 right now as the machines that support have operating systems that are no longer maintained and are therefore unsafe to use from a security perspective. An example is that Windows 98SE doesn't support WAP 2 PSK (and no third party offers it) so you can't use an old laptop with Windows 98 and Office 97 on WiFi. Updates and fixes in this model are a revenue game where each update both increases value but pushes the platform towards becoming obsolete because it strays from the original.
One of the fundamental components of software ought to be autonomous production (meaning least amount of external dependencies) so that the software can live and be fixed throughout a long life cycle. Yes, this means updates, but it also means cross-platform compatibility and consistency across supported platforms.
The original poster upthread that I replied to, came way too close to being some kind of automaton, filled with corporate-speak hyper-babble.
Maybe you're real, and altruistic.
Maybe you've swallowed the koolaid.
No matter: 'making stuff better' as a phrase has often been used in contexts where bug fixes and small potatoes have a price tag called an upgrade.
I code, too, as in write software... but not for money anymore. I have a chip on my shoulder from disabled/crippled phone firmware, operating systems, as well as those found on client and server platforms.
My immediate pavlovian reaction, and I apologize if I've besmirched you, is to be very skeptical of release quality. A good friend of mine once said: nothing works, we start from here, and most of the time, he's right.
Therefore, there's a highly trained (over 33years) detection of the scent of marketing prattle, sales-speak, and apologetic jargon that must be over come. I detect it here, but in fact, you may be indeed sincere. Decades of listening to failed promises makes me doubt this, but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt.
"Improved user experience" is marketingspeak for feature upgrade or bug fix. The parent got modded down, but if I had points, I'd put it right back up. Crippled software sets, suddenly enabled by market pressure, isn't an upgrade.
When apps are truly upgraded, so much the better, but this doesn't follow the computer industry model. And I wouldn't expect it from others.
I'll take quality over the superfluity of bad media choices any day. In this area, there are two HD OTA sources. I watch these rather than the local-carry versions, despite the hassle of switching back and forth on input sources to my HD TV.
The image quality on Comcast is at best average, and on some channels it's plainly and obviously awful. Bah.
The concept of compressors/decompressors goes back a long way. I try to use vocabulary that suits a technical audience, but sometimes I'm mistaken in doing so.
In technical jargon, there are lots of shortcuts. Occasionally, it's the wrong choice. None of these are made-up words.... just in the case you cite, perhaps redundant.
Amen.
But what you're talking about is actually sensible and therefore will be bypassed by all.
Even more fun would be arranging the signals via OFDM so that they could be multiplexed and decoded using shared channel space. Sigh. Something will happen someday when enough people scream about the crappy, supposedly high definition displays.