I believe AC is saying that If the person giving the web based seminar (i.e. the teacher) was in front of them giving the same seminar, it would not be as good.
I also think they meant obsolescent as face-to-face teaching is in wide-scale use.
Also, judging by the content of AC's post, the "barely proficient" jibe may have been aimed at his/her teachers. It would be interesting giving their teachers a right of reply....
In my opinion, TAFE NSW Tried to save money by cutting corners - governments have bled it dry and burdened it as a means of fixing unemployment numbers. I have done some TAFE courses and learnt a lot, had fun as well and not have any issues with any of the courses but there are lots of courses that I'm sure are there to "get kids off streets" for six months (no longer long term unemployed).
Online courses, if designed as online courses instead of dumping text onto a site, can be quite good. The course will need to be designed for online consumption - tutorials, audio visual aids, help desk accessible teaching staff and students. . Face-to-face teaching given the right teacher would always be a better option though. IMO.
Now, what is important is that there's a good workflow for the project, and tools can certainly help with that, But most projects don't necessarily really need tools. There's a lot of projects that simply don't have enough changes to really require any tools at all for their work flow; if you only have a few hundred patches per release, you can maintain those just about any way you want, including entirely by hand. - Linus Torvalds
Note that this is not neccessarily my belief, I did find the interview thought provoking - and it seems very applicable for this question (it was discussed on /. recently btw).
Sorry to get into this... I also suck at this car analogy thing but I'll give it a go.
I was given a car as a present (iPod Nano).
The car manufacturer is stopping me from choosing the type of fuel I can use - my private browser is full of another brand of fuel (flac). I am told that the car cannot take advantage of the higher octane anyway so there is no point in using it. There is apparently another type of high octane fuel that does work on the car though and this is okay to use. It is also possible to convert all my existing fuel to the type that works with the car but I will lose the benefit of the increased performance that the fuel gives with my other car (home stereo) or, alternatively, end up with two fuel tanks in the same station and this process does take a lot of time and effort.
I do appreciate the gift, the person knows how much I enjoy driving, they do not know much about different fuel types, or how this manufacturer limits your choice of fuel depots. They know it is a popular brand and that it looks lovely though.
My first thought is to sell or exchange the gift but I would feel guilty as it was a gift that was given some thought, the only issue was a lack of knowledge in the person giving the gift, so I tried to use it. I found out that some models apparently can be made to accept the fuel, not mine though.
I have also considered converting all the fuel and tried a sampling, I was not happy.
The car - it is a lovely thing to look at - is now parked, has not been refueled (synced) for a while. It has some fuel in it as I did have some compatible fuel but as lovely as it is, I would have loved a car that would at least accept the high octane.
It is a present so I will keep it till my next birthday -who knows, someone might come up with a way to get the high octane fuel to work with my model too (I know the manufacturer does not like this though).
Interesting that you say Apple only POSSIBLY STOLE and yet Google STOLE... has anything gone through courts yet?
Because I haven't seen the Google patents HTC paid for in this discussion.
So, there's been a court ruling on Apple's claim in Apple's favour?
Jobs (and Picasso) are using the word "steal" in a different manner here. But they are also honest about their actions.
Please explain.(btw, We have always been shameless about stealing great ideas is not Picasso) Being honest about stealing does not absolve stealing. Edible Apple is not a balanced source with this sort of topic but If we take the Edible Apple spin on the word steal, HTC would argue they have improved on the Apple products and are offering a better product - and I'm sure many would agree their products are better (just as many won't) which indicates a point of difference imo.
I'll give you the benefit of the doubt but you sure come across like you have an Apple bias .
I do like Apple and their products.
Liking Apple products and having a bias for Apple is different - I think some Apple products are great and I hope they keep producing great products, are you saying your comments are biased?
Google is fighting back with patents as they should, I suspect they would prefer they didn't have to so if they now come out and say "we will use our patents to defend our products", would that make you happy?
If they said they would use patents to protect their products *and* they quit trying to play the patent victim card, all hypocrisy would be absolved.
I believe ultimately, actions speak louder than words, Apple started sueing, Google rightly complained that it Apple is being disingenuous. Google bought Patents to fight back, Apple complained they being unfairly treated which is the way these games are played.
You were quite happy with Jobs saying steal and interpreting it in a more favourable light I notice, and now Apple is being accused of stealing (your word for these actions, not mine - I hope it is all thrown out and we continue getting better and better products, each "standing on the shoulders of giants" to paraphrase Newton... yes I know it was more than likely a barb at Hooke) it will be interesting to see the outcome of the court cases.
The first part is a straw man. No one is claiming Google or Apple are perfect. The second part is all but meaningless. "Evil" is a silly term to use, and not the basis for a reasonable general discussion about tech companies.
I didn't say you claimed anyone was perfect, I was trying to highlight that I believe Google also has faults. The "do no evil" bit is a reference to the Google policy and I stated that I do not think they are neccessarily living up to it these days, I also believe Google has done numerous great things.
Though if you want to call it that, then apple stole from google and HTC
Quite possibly.
apple started shooting first then google gave HTC a gun to start firing back
Only after Google stole from them. But that's not even what this thread is about. This thread is about Google's lie that they would never use a patent offensively. I'm really not bothered that Google is protecting their property. In fact, it's exactly the sort of thing they *should* do.
But I do care that they play a double-standard here and blatantly lie about it.
Interesting that you say Apple only POSSIBLY STOLE and yet Google STOLE... has anything gone through courts yet?
If Apple did steal, didn't they steal first?
Are you also concerned about the double standards that Apple is displaying? e.g.:
"We have always been shameless about stealing great ideas." -Steve Jobs
"Good artists copy; great artists steal." -Steve Jobs
I'll give you the benefit of the doubt but you sure come across like you have an Apple bias.
Apple has some great products but also have some questionable habits (imo). Google is fighting back with patents as they should, I suspect they would prefer they didn't have to so if they now come out and say "we will use our patents to defend our products", would that make you happy? No, I don't believe Google is perfect and I do not believe they are still living up to "do no evil".
To quote you: You work within the system you have, not the system you wish you had.
That is precisely what Google is now doing.
I have friends who lose their phones in bars every month. I had no idea they were strategic geniuses, I assumed they were just clumsy and drunk. Silly me!
There's a bit of a difference when you lose your own production version phone vs. an unreleased version of an upcoming phone the company you work for is going to be marketing/selling in the near future. It makes me wonder just how many drunken clumsy incompetent idiots work in the iPhone department at Apple.
I'm more curious what happens to the employees that lose "top secret" products. Surely if a person is given a phone that is not even released it would be paramount that the person is trustworthy enough to not lose it. At the very least a demotion, I would rate it as a sackable offence.
If nothing is done about it (especially considering how hard Apple works at "protecting their IP" ), something is rotten in the state of Denmark....
his "OpenLeaks" site has honeypot written all over it.
Maybe that's what THE GOVERNMENT wants you to think, so you'll send your leaks to the Wikileaks honepot.
Maybe YOU'RE a CIA agent trying to protect your honeypot and dissuade people from using Openleaks
Maybe I'M your CIA coworker drumming up opposing FUD to direct the paranoid to where ever our bosses want.
So I have to ask, does anyone actually use tablets?
Nope, no one. Not a single person.
All the sales numbers are fake, and the devices don't actually exist outside of demo units.
There are lots being sold and they look cool but based on my anecdotal experiences, users tend to spend their time "zooming in and out", "flicking", looking through their apps and then.... angry birds... to me, that does not qualify as "using".
I'm willing to assume that it may still be a new toy for them but the "cool" look rapidly evapourates and makes me appreciate the power and versatility of my notebook.
I guess the important thing is they're happy and I suspect I am at least equally annoying to them.
Vive la différence.
So, A tablet in A movie, that doesn't look like the iPad or Galaxy Tab, is prior art?
Maybe Samsung is planning to use the same "techniques" as Apple to demonstrate how similar they are....oops.... has Apple patented image manipulation as well?
I use a tablet as a cookbook, and would never even consider using a netbook for the same purpose. Food will destroy a netbook. A tablet is a flat piece of glass that is easily wiped clean. Tablets are VASTLY superior for kitchen use.
The hole in the ozone layer was attributed to the use of Chloro-Fluoro-Carbons (CFCs) in aerosols. We have stopped using CFCs and the hole has stabilised (which, to me, indicates that there may have been a link) but it is predicted to take till 2050 for it to be repaired. It is an interesting article, please have a read - for you, I especially recommend the misconceptions and consequences parts.
The proportional response is suing. Samsung asked the ITC for an import injunction. That's what made their reaction the nuclear response.
The suit, filed on Friday in U.S. District Court in Northern California, alleges patent and trademark infringement, as well as unfair competition. Apple is seeking injunctions, actual damages and punitive damages, as well as a finding that the alleged infringement was willful.
Apple filed for an injunction, damages and punitive damages first - as well as contending that the infringement was willful.... the only thing left out appears to be the kitchen sink.
What, in your opinion, is a proportional response to that?
I'm not arguing that Apple was necessarily right for filing the initial suit (as I don't know enough about the discussions leading up to it to make that call). I'm just pointing out that Samsung had the opportunity for proportional response, and instead chose the nuclear option.
Isn't suing the proportional response to suing? How can one side take the legal route and when the other side responds in kind, it becomes disproportional? Now the initiator is taking out more legal action and you are blaming who for the nuclear route?
With these sorts of legal suits, I do not know who will win (I suspect it will be the company with the most legal resources / government contacts) but I do know who will lose (the consumer).
20 percent of the worlds smartphones in the last quarter were Apple phones. Looks like you shouldn't pretend a list of Amazon's best sellers represents worldwide sales totals. That might make for a more honest dialog.
Apples and oranges (excuse the pun). That article is talking about shipments, this is not a figure on actual sales - doesn't mean they weren't all sold but it also doesn't mean they were.
To be honest, I think this all feels like a scene from the Life Of Brian - "It's the gourd!" "No - It's the sandal!".
Regardless of who is better than who, the standard of mobile phones has improved immensely - let's hope the trend continues.
Is it politically correct these days to use the phrase "Homo" in front of any words? Can't be to sure, you know. This also explains the urges I keep having to go club some animal to death and half cook it over an open fire. (Could also explain the tendency to howl at a full moon)
you'd prefer gay sapiens and gay neanderthalensis maybe?
Slashdot Mirror
Totally different dimensions
I believe AC is saying that If the person giving the web based seminar (i.e. the teacher) was in front of them giving the same seminar, it would not be as good.
I also think they meant obsolescent as face-to-face teaching is in wide-scale use.
Also, judging by the content of AC's post, the "barely proficient" jibe may have been aimed at his/her teachers. It would be interesting giving their teachers a right of reply....
A person generous with his own time, not just his persuit of tax deductions. kudos, Woz.
You're right, he's an absolute pauper - $100 million net worth. More important than money, he provided on-site support tech support for his local school district.
In my opinion, TAFE NSW Tried to save money by cutting corners - governments have bled it dry and burdened it as a means of fixing unemployment numbers. I have done some TAFE courses and learnt a lot, had fun as well and not have any issues with any of the courses but there are lots of courses that I'm sure are there to "get kids off streets" for six months (no longer long term unemployed).
Online courses, if designed as online courses instead of dumping text onto a site, can be quite good. The course will need to be designed for online consumption - tutorials, audio visual aids, help desk accessible teaching staff and students. . Face-to-face teaching given the right teacher would always be a better option though.
IMO.
You aren't using it properly you siri iriot!
Now, what is important is that there's a good workflow for the project, and tools can certainly help with that, But most projects don't necessarily really need tools. There's a lot of projects that simply don't have enough changes to really require any tools at all for their work flow; if you only have a few hundred patches per release, you can maintain those just about any way you want, including entirely by hand. - Linus Torvalds /. recently btw).
Note that this is not neccessarily my belief, I did find the interview thought provoking - and it seems very applicable for this question (it was discussed on
Sorry to get into this... I also suck at this car analogy thing but I'll give it a go.
I was given a car as a present (iPod Nano).
The car manufacturer is stopping me from choosing the type of fuel I can use - my private browser is full of another brand of fuel (flac). I am told that the car cannot take advantage of the higher octane anyway so there is no point in using it. There is apparently another type of high octane fuel that does work on the car though and this is okay to use.
It is also possible to convert all my existing fuel to the type that works with the car but I will lose the benefit of the increased performance that the fuel gives with my other car (home stereo) or, alternatively, end up with two fuel tanks in the same station and this process does take a lot of time and effort.
I do appreciate the gift, the person knows how much I enjoy driving, they do not know much about different fuel types, or how this manufacturer limits your choice of fuel depots. They know it is a popular brand and that it looks lovely though.
My first thought is to sell or exchange the gift but I would feel guilty as it was a gift that was given some thought, the only issue was a lack of knowledge in the person giving the gift, so I tried to use it. I found out that some models apparently can be made to accept the fuel, not mine though.
I have also considered converting all the fuel and tried a sampling, I was not happy.
The car - it is a lovely thing to look at - is now parked, has not been refueled (synced) for a while. It has some fuel in it as I did have some compatible fuel but as lovely as it is, I would have loved a car that would at least accept the high octane.
It is a present so I will keep it till my next birthday -who knows, someone might come up with a way to get the high octane fuel to work with my model too (I know the manufacturer does not like this though).
Thanks Quila, eloquently explained
Interesting that you say Apple only POSSIBLY STOLE and yet Google STOLE... has anything gone through courts yet?
Because I haven't seen the Google patents HTC paid for in this discussion.
So, there's been a court ruling on Apple's claim in Apple's favour?
Jobs (and Picasso) are using the word "steal" in a different manner here. But they are also honest about their actions.
Please explain .(btw, We have always been shameless about stealing great ideas is not Picasso) Being honest about stealing does not absolve stealing. Edible Apple is not a balanced source with this sort of topic but If we take the Edible Apple spin on the word steal, HTC would argue they have improved on the Apple products and are offering a better product - and I'm sure many would agree their products are better (just as many won't) which indicates a point of difference imo.
I'll give you the benefit of the doubt but you sure come across like you have an Apple bias
. I do like Apple and their products.
Liking Apple products and having a bias for Apple is different - I think some Apple products are great and I hope they keep producing great products, are you saying your comments are biased?
Google is fighting back with patents as they should, I suspect they would prefer they didn't have to so if they now come out and say "we will use our patents to defend our products", would that make you happy?
If they said they would use patents to protect their products *and* they quit trying to play the patent victim card, all hypocrisy would be absolved.
I believe ultimately, actions speak louder than words, Apple started sueing, Google rightly complained that it Apple is being disingenuous. Google bought Patents to fight back, Apple complained they being unfairly treated which is the way these games are played.
You were quite happy with Jobs saying steal and interpreting it in a more favourable light I notice, and now Apple is being accused of stealing (your word for these actions, not mine - I hope it is all thrown out and we continue getting better and better products, each "standing on the shoulders of giants" to paraphrase Newton... yes I know it was more than likely a barb at Hooke) it will be interesting to see the outcome of the court cases.
The first part is a straw man. No one is claiming Google or Apple are perfect. The second part is all but meaningless. "Evil" is a silly term to use, and not the basis for a reasonable general discussion about tech companies.
I didn't say you claimed anyone was perfect, I was trying to highlight that I believe Google also has faults. The "do no evil" bit is a reference to the Google policy and I stated that I do not think they are neccessarily living up to it these days, I also believe Google has done numerous great things.
Though if you want to call it that, then apple stole from google and HTC
Quite possibly.
apple started shooting first then google gave HTC a gun to start firing back
Only after Google stole from them. But that's not even what this thread is about. This thread is about Google's lie that they would never use a patent offensively. I'm really not bothered that Google is protecting their property. In fact, it's exactly the sort of thing they *should* do. But I do care that they play a double-standard here and blatantly lie about it.
Interesting that you say Apple only POSSIBLY STOLE and yet Google STOLE... has anything gone through courts yet?
If Apple did steal, didn't they steal first?
Are you also concerned about the double standards that Apple is displaying? e.g.:
"We have always been shameless about stealing great ideas." -Steve Jobs
"Good artists copy; great artists steal." -Steve Jobs
I'll give you the benefit of the doubt but you sure come across like you have an Apple bias.
Apple has some great products but also have some questionable habits (imo). Google is fighting back with patents as they should, I suspect they would prefer they didn't have to so if they now come out and say "we will use our patents to defend our products", would that make you happy? No, I don't believe Google is perfect and I do not believe they are still living up to "do no evil".
To quote you: You work within the system you have, not the system you wish you had.
That is precisely what Google is now doing.
I have friends who lose their phones in bars every month. I had no idea they were strategic geniuses, I assumed they were just clumsy and drunk. Silly me!
There's a bit of a difference when you lose your own production version phone vs. an unreleased version of an upcoming phone the company you work for is going to be marketing/selling in the near future. It makes me wonder just how many drunken clumsy incompetent idiots work in the iPhone department at Apple.
I'm more curious what happens to the employees that lose "top secret" products. Surely if a person is given a phone that is not even released it would be paramount that the person is trustworthy enough to not lose it. At the very least a demotion, I would rate it as a sackable offence.
If nothing is done about it (especially considering how hard Apple works at "protecting their IP" ), something is rotten in the state of Denmark....
his "OpenLeaks" site has honeypot written all over it.
Maybe that's what THE GOVERNMENT wants you to think, so you'll send your leaks to the Wikileaks honepot. Maybe YOU'RE a CIA agent trying to protect your honeypot and dissuade people from using Openleaks Maybe I'M your CIA coworker drumming up opposing FUD to direct the paranoid to where ever our bosses want.
And I just blew your mind :D
Dude, that wasn't his mind!
No, buy. I'm going full-in. I'll be an millionaire.
So, you're telling us your a billionaire then?
So I have to ask, does anyone actually use tablets?
Nope, no one. Not a single person. All the sales numbers are fake, and the devices don't actually exist outside of demo units.
There are lots being sold and they look cool but based on my anecdotal experiences, users tend to spend their time "zooming in and out", "flicking", looking through their apps and then.... angry birds... to me, that does not qualify as "using".
I'm willing to assume that it may still be a new toy for them but the "cool" look rapidly evapourates and makes me appreciate the power and versatility of my notebook.
I guess the important thing is they're happy and I suspect I am at least equally annoying to them.
Vive la différence.
So, A tablet in A movie, that doesn't look like the iPad or Galaxy Tab, is prior art?
Maybe Samsung is planning to use the same "techniques" as Apple to demonstrate how similar they are....oops.... has Apple patented image manipulation as well?
So what's the % of people using laptops and smartphones in the bathroom? Didn't we have portable devices before the iPad?
Yeah, but nothing that you could really hold with one hand . And laptops, well, cover your lap - blocking any access to that area.
???
I use a tablet as a cookbook, and would never even consider using a netbook for the same purpose. Food will destroy a netbook. A tablet is a flat piece of glass that is easily wiped clean. Tablets are VASTLY superior for kitchen use.
Then don't feed it.
It is a vegetable for the purpose of extracting your foot from your mouth.....
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ozone_hole#The_ozone_hole_and_its_causes
The hole in the ozone layer was attributed to the use of Chloro-Fluoro-Carbons (CFCs) in aerosols. We have stopped using CFCs and the hole has stabilised (which, to me, indicates that there may have been a link) but it is predicted to take till 2050 for it to be repaired. It is an interesting article, please have a read - for you, I especially recommend the misconceptions and consequences parts.
Action is not necessarily a sign of panic.
The proportional response is suing. Samsung asked the ITC for an import injunction. That's what made their reaction the nuclear response.
The suit, filed on Friday in U.S. District Court in Northern California, alleges patent and trademark infringement, as well as unfair competition. Apple is seeking injunctions, actual damages and punitive damages, as well as a finding that the alleged infringement was willful.
The above is an exerpt from http://allthingsd.com/20110418/apple-files-patent-suit-against-samsung-over-galaxy-line-of-phones-and-tablets/
Apple filed for an injunction, damages and punitive damages first - as well as contending that the infringement was willful.... the only thing left out appears to be the kitchen sink.
What, in your opinion, is a proportional response to that?
Most of the rioters are black, and they all look alike.
Maybe you need to break into a store near you and get a better TV. The ethnic mix of the rioters is quite visible on most modern screens.
It depends on what he chooses to see.
I'm not arguing that Apple was necessarily right for filing the initial suit (as I don't know enough about the discussions leading up to it to make that call). I'm just pointing out that Samsung had the opportunity for proportional response, and instead chose the nuclear option.
Isn't suing the proportional response to suing? How can one side take the legal route and when the other side responds in kind, it becomes disproportional? Now the initiator is taking out more legal action and you are blaming who for the nuclear route?
With these sorts of legal suits, I do not know who will win (I suspect it will be the company with the most legal resources / government contacts) but I do know who will lose (the consumer).
That's amazon's list. Try something a little more accurate.
http://newstonight.net/content/apple-bests-nokia-and-samsung-q2-worldwide-smartphone-sales
20 percent of the worlds smartphones in the last quarter were Apple phones. Looks like you shouldn't pretend a list of Amazon's best sellers represents worldwide sales totals. That might make for a more honest dialog.
Apples and oranges (excuse the pun). That article is talking about shipments, this is not a figure on actual sales - doesn't mean they weren't all sold but it also doesn't mean they were.
To be honest, I think this all feels like a scene from the Life Of Brian - "It's the gourd!" "No - It's the sandal!".
Regardless of who is better than who, the standard of mobile phones has improved immensely - let's hope the trend continues.
Is it politically correct these days to use the phrase "Homo" in front of any words? Can't be to sure, you know. This also explains the urges I keep having to go club some animal to death and half cook it over an open fire. (Could also explain the tendency to howl at a full moon)
you'd prefer gay sapiens and gay neanderthalensis maybe?