You say that like it is a bad thing. That is basically what libraries have always been. Trying to disparage them because they are now lending out on a medium that didn't exist when the libraries were founded is silly at best. It always amazes me how many technophobes there are on Slashdot.
Yes. Just like that. Again, the single shape is the key factor in something like this being able to be produced. It is in accessories that iPhone has the advantage.
The problem I see is that we have two camps that are so set on being right that the obvious solution doesn't even get considered.
Camp 1: We should ban cell phones, or at the very least jam them so that they are functionally no longer a cell phone because those particular sounds offend my senses!
Camp 2: It is up to the individual to be responsible for their actions, so any interference at all is an offense to my senses!
Camp 1 is ridiculous, as the theaters and restaurants could kick out patrons who make noise. They find it more profitable to not do that though. Other public places are, well, public places, and expecting public places to be quiet is absurd. They also ignore the fact that people do want to be contacted in the case of an emergency, or even for really important things.
Camp 2: Likes to ignore the fact that when you get enough people, someone (and likely multiple people) are going to keep pushing the envelope to the point that someone else snaps, just for the attention. They also ignore the fact that humans make mistakes, so even if people's intent IS to turn their phone off in theaters someone is going to forget.
There are not that many cell phone manufacturers. There are even fewer carriers. If Verizon, Sprint, AT&T and T-Mobile would agree on a simple carrier signal on a particular frequency to be considered a REQUEST to put the phone into silent mode, the problem would be solved. We could set phones to accept the request, and thus any business that doesn't want noise could turn our phones to vibrate WITH OUR PERMISSION. Everyone would still receive their calls. Anyone who didn't accept the quite request could be considered to be doing it on purpose, and thus the business would be in a more reasonable position to throw them out. We could set our phones to deny the request if we found certain places that the most extreme of Camp 1 decided to abuse the ability. This would also make a clear line between those that are offended by noise, and those that are offended by technology existing.
The best case scenerio is getting the FCC to set aside a specific frequency for this, as well as set rules for broadcast strength. While that would not physically stop anyone from abusing it, it would make it similar to what we have with FM. Anyone can jam FM frequencies. It does happen on occasion. Not often, and when it does, there can be legal ramifications. We can still buy low power FM transmitters for short range personal use. And if someone abuses the signal by transmitting at high power, the worst that happens is the phone goes into vibrate mode.
There is nothing technologically difficult about this solution. Failure means either a phone ringing when someone wants it quite, which already is happening. Or, a phone goes into vibrate mode when someone wants the noise. Annoying, but not the end of the world, and better than all out jamming.
Phone owners can get their calls, which is presumably what the polite people from Camp 2 are asking for, and Quiet people can get their quiet, which is presumably what the polite people from Camp 1 are asking for.
That's sad. Where I live, the libraries are always full. You can usually find a seat, but not always. Our librarians are busy helping a line of people either looking for books, or just checking them out. Just goes to show that the US is not a single culture.
This is what I keep saying. Make the keyboard a blue-tooth accessory. For that matter also make a blue-tooth clam shell that gives me physical buttons to use my phone as a hand held game console.
Finally, start making cheap dumb adapters that make the base of the phones standard in size. That way accessory makers can make accessories that work with any phone.
Accessories is the single place that I see iPhone having a distinct advantage for the users. There is a wide range of docking stations with all sorts of cool features for the iPhone. When you buy one, it comes with a half a dozen plastic 'adapters' that do nothing more than make the physical shape of the docking station's port match the shape of any iDevice. Because every Android phone is shaped differently, you just don't see the slick accessories for Android device that you see for iDevices.
This wouldn't be hard to overcome though. The problem is that as I see it, Google would have to be the one pushing the phone manufacturers and accessory makers to make a similar solution.
Funny, I have an iPhone, and an Android phone here. The Android phone "just works". I don't know what you had to do to your Android phone to get it to work, but I suspect you are just making things up. They are both dead simple to use. The biggest difference being that the iPhone dumps every installed app on your desktop, and the Android keeps them in a drawer, only putting the the apps that you want on the desktop on the desktop. Complexity doesn't come into play until you try to put your own music on the phone. That is the point that the iPhone become MORE difficult to use than the Android, as you need to install special software on the computer to get the iPhone to work.
The Android doesn't get more complicated to use than an iPhone until you get to the features that the iPhone just doesn't have. Of course, you can just ignore the added functionality of the Android, and it is slightly less complex than an iPhone.
So, if you want something that "just works" out of the box, get ANY phone, but if not having the option to customize as opposed to ignoring the customization options, get an iPhone.
Do you like to have the option to customize or run stock? Do not mind choosing whether you want to learn more or not? Get an Android phone.
While I suspect that is part of it, my suspicion also is that a bigger part of it is that generally, a person has to already be convinced that Apple has superior service to be polled. Presumably they only poll Apple customers on their satisfaction with Apple. Given Apples position in the market, anyone who isn't satisfied with Apple will quickly stop being an Apple customer, as there are huge numbers of cheaper, high quality, more widely supported alternatives.
Polling a group on their satisfaction with a product, when that group has gone out of their way to buy a less available product isn't going to get you a good gauge on the products quality.
It is a little like polling buyers of Monster Cables on their satisfaction concerning their $80 hdmi cable. They would likely get very good marks.
Really, that is companies abusing the term "just-in-time". Unless I am mis-remembering, the term originally meant that you kept one or two of your product in stock instead of 100. Then you could replenish your stock at the rate that it is sold, so you would always have stock on hand, "Just-In-Time". It didn't originally mean that you ordered the product AFTER the customer asked for it.
No, if we CHOOSE to pump more oil, we will have pumped more oil. There is nothing magical about that. You have yet to point out how one determines the amount of liquid in a reservoir based on the flow rate that one pumps at. Again, what is that formula?
You are confused. Geeks and nerds with girlfriends only seems funny before they enter the work force. There is nothing that gets a woman off more than a man with a HUGE..... bank account. Sad but true....
Yep, I sure can. I use Handcent. Since Google doesn't ban applications that compete with their own, I can do that on an Android phone.
OK, snarkyness aside, an alarm clock is a FAR simpler application than a text messeging application, and this isn't the first time this has happened to Apple. That being said, I'm not sure which one is worse. I suppose it depends on usage patterns. Do you have a job that you will get fired from if you are late? Do you send insulting messages to people with the same 7 digit phone number as the person you are insulting? The Android bug seems to be less likely to hit you, but could carry a more dangerous payload.
While pigs may be a problem. Turning it tasty would likely be more trouble than it's worth, and selling to another country would cost you more than you could get for it.
Well, given that we have multi-generational welfare families, yes. I think many would. The question is what you do about those people. Do you let them starve, or do you feed them knowing that you were never going to get them to work anyway. Of course, if you guarantee them a livable wage without work, the number of people that live on the dole will be greater than if you let them starve.
I find the response I almost always get from my suggestion on how we should deal with food stamps interesting. I suggest we make a K-ration type food. Make it taste horrible, yet be healthy. I mean taste REALLY bad. Then just give it away. Don't bother tracking it at all. Get rid of all the bureaucracy involved in the food stamp program. Literally pull semi-trucks into parking lots and let people take what they want. If it tastes bad enough, most people will work before eating it, but they will eat it before they starve to death. The people that eat it even though they could work for food are the ones you were never going to get off the dole anyways. There would be no black market for it because anyone that wanted it could just go get it for free. This guarantees no one starves, reduces bureaucracy, and makes fraud totally uneconomical without any punitive threats. Win, Win, Win.
The interesting part is that most peoples response to this is to suggest that this would violate some kind of human right. They usually come around when it is pointed out that feeding someone food that tastes bad is not abuse. We do it to children all the time. It is interesting though that their first thought is that it is abusive.
"Peak Oil" is frequently used to "prove" we are running out of oil. Your description is exactly why it is a stupid metric for determining the quantity of oil that exists in the ground. You describe it as how much we choose to pull out of the ground. Look at the other posters who are calling me stupid because I say that "Peak Oil" is about choice. At best, the term "Peak Oil" has been hijacked by another very vocal group that disagrees with your definition of it, and the public at large believes the other definition to be the correct one.
The public has been led to believe that "Peak Oil" is a disaster, yet if we found a way to run all of our cars and children's laughter, we would have already reached "Peak Oil", and that would be a great thing.
No, I am not saying that. You seem to have poor reading skills. I am saying that you cannot determine how much oil is in the ground based on how much you choose to pump today. The pump rate of existing known oil is not running at the physical maximum. The companies sucking it out of the ground CHOOSE how much they will pump out on any given day.
Again. How much you choose to pump today does not tell you how much exists. There is nothing stopping oil companies from pumping at twice the rate they are pumping today other than what they consider to be the best return on investment. Until the last drop is pulled from the ground, the pump rate is a choice.
This is simple physics. If you want to pull twice as much liquid from a reservoir, you double the rate that you pump it. Doubling or halving the rate that you pump tells you nothing about how much liquid is in the reservoir until the reservoir is dry.
You tell me, what formula do you use to determine the amount of liquid in a reservoir based solely on the pump rate used to drain the reservoir? Really. I would love to know, because so far every time someone tries to defend this stupid idea of "Peak Oil", their response is always "Oil won't last forever". Basically your response, but none seem to have any explanation on how you determine reservoir quantity based on pump rate.
As much as I hate to see MS and Google in the same light, I have to admit that in this case, you are absolutly correct.
This is a high priority bug that has no excuse for not being fixed within days of it being reported.
I thought the "fix it yourself" folks were being sarcastic. I can't imagine that anyone would really try to claim that this isn't a serious bug that Google needs to fix. The fact that there are free alternatives like Handcent does not in any way absolve Google from fixing the default text messaging client.
If the article is speaking of distance traveled, then my comment has no bearing. I specifically said "If they are measuring it in time spent travelling." because I did not know that the article was measuring distance.
Of course, once I submitted, I realized someone would point out that changing population number would still change the limit on the number of hours that could be spent traveling.
The whole thing falls apart though, if they do like they do with "Peak Oil" and try to calculate how many miles there are that can be traveled based on the number of miles we choose to travel.
If it takes more than one barrel of oil to extract, one barrel of oil from the ground, you have a metric that is worth discussing. "Peak Oil" is NOT the discussion of how much oil it takes to extract a barrel of oil from the ground. Peak oil is the discussion of how much oil is in the ground, measured by how much we CHOOSE to pump in a year.
Thus "Peak Oil" is a stupid concept, and has no bearing on reality.
I keep thinking about using GOG. The system works well? From it's description, they are using the system that music and movies should use as well. The single notable exception is that they should include printable CD/DVD covers that include the game title on the spine.
That is my stance on consoles as well. If you look at my stacks of literally thousands of console games, the number of games I bought is in direct proportion to how easy it was to install games on mass media. The Atari 2600 being the single exception. There is no way that I am going to leave $60 optical disks out for kids to play with. I also am not going to have my kid carrying around $500 in cartridges when he takes his hand held out and about.
Heck, we don't even use our movie and music disks for day to day use. Originals are for long term storage, not day to day use.
"Peak Oil", is a worthless flawed concept to begin with. Gauging how much oil exists based on how much we CHOOSE to pump isn't even starting to take reality into consideration. If there were no huge multinational interests trying to control gas prices, "Peak Oil" would be flawed to the point of being worthless. The fact that there ARE huge multinational interests involved in oil price manipulation means that "Peak Oil" is just a stupid idea.
"Peak travel" on the other hand could have some validity. Depending on what they are measuring for "Peak". If they are measuring it in time spent travelling. Obviously there is a hard limit on the number of hours that can be traveled. Just count the number of people on the planet, and multiply by 24 hours.
The fact that there are setting in both a PC and an iPad that many people CAN configure, but do not HAVE to configure is not a difficult concept. The previous poster described setting up an iPad by using the bare minimum settings with no customization to get up and running. He then described the PC setup to include a bunch of customization. Pointing out that the iPad ALSO has the ability to do customization, and that the PC does not require it is not contradictory, and thus should not be a "WTF" moment for anyone that honestly looks at the situation.
There is no desperation. There is just a fair comparison.
Claiming that most people already have their PC set up when they buy an iPad is simply wrong. It can only be rationalized via abuse of the language.
Yes, most people that have there PC set up for use that is NOT iPad related. Most people DO NOT have there PC set up for use with an iPad, which is more in depth than the original minimum setup of the PC.
Slashdot Mirror
You say that like it is a bad thing. That is basically what libraries have always been. Trying to disparage them because they are now lending out on a medium that didn't exist when the libraries were founded is silly at best. It always amazes me how many technophobes there are on Slashdot.
So, Apple had a bad system then, and they have a bad system now. Ok.
Yes. Just like that. Again, the single shape is the key factor in something like this being able to be produced. It is in accessories that iPhone has the advantage.
The problem I see is that we have two camps that are so set on being right that the obvious solution doesn't even get considered.
Camp 1: We should ban cell phones, or at the very least jam them so that they are functionally no longer a cell phone because those particular sounds offend my senses!
Camp 2: It is up to the individual to be responsible for their actions, so any interference at all is an offense to my senses!
Camp 1 is ridiculous, as the theaters and restaurants could kick out patrons who make noise. They find it more profitable to not do that though. Other public places are, well, public places, and expecting public places to be quiet is absurd. They also ignore the fact that people do want to be contacted in the case of an emergency, or even for really important things.
Camp 2: Likes to ignore the fact that when you get enough people, someone (and likely multiple people) are going to keep pushing the envelope to the point that someone else snaps, just for the attention. They also ignore the fact that humans make mistakes, so even if people's intent IS to turn their phone off in theaters someone is going to forget.
There are not that many cell phone manufacturers. There are even fewer carriers. If Verizon, Sprint, AT&T and T-Mobile would agree on a simple carrier signal on a particular frequency to be considered a REQUEST to put the phone into silent mode, the problem would be solved. We could set phones to accept the request, and thus any business that doesn't want noise could turn our phones to vibrate WITH OUR PERMISSION. Everyone would still receive their calls. Anyone who didn't accept the quite request could be considered to be doing it on purpose, and thus the business would be in a more reasonable position to throw them out. We could set our phones to deny the request if we found certain places that the most extreme of Camp 1 decided to abuse the ability. This would also make a clear line between those that are offended by noise, and those that are offended by technology existing.
The best case scenerio is getting the FCC to set aside a specific frequency for this, as well as set rules for broadcast strength. While that would not physically stop anyone from abusing it, it would make it similar to what we have with FM. Anyone can jam FM frequencies. It does happen on occasion. Not often, and when it does, there can be legal ramifications. We can still buy low power FM transmitters for short range personal use. And if someone abuses the signal by transmitting at high power, the worst that happens is the phone goes into vibrate mode.
There is nothing technologically difficult about this solution. Failure means either a phone ringing when someone wants it quite, which already is happening. Or, a phone goes into vibrate mode when someone wants the noise. Annoying, but not the end of the world, and better than all out jamming.
Phone owners can get their calls, which is presumably what the polite people from Camp 2 are asking for, and Quiet people can get their quiet, which is presumably what the polite people from Camp 1 are asking for.
That's sad. Where I live, the libraries are always full. You can usually find a seat, but not always. Our librarians are busy helping a line of people either looking for books, or just checking them out. Just goes to show that the US is not a single culture.
This is what I keep saying. Make the keyboard a blue-tooth accessory. For that matter also make a blue-tooth clam shell that gives me physical buttons to use my phone as a hand held game console.
Finally, start making cheap dumb adapters that make the base of the phones standard in size. That way accessory makers can make accessories that work with any phone.
Accessories is the single place that I see iPhone having a distinct advantage for the users. There is a wide range of docking stations with all sorts of cool features for the iPhone. When you buy one, it comes with a half a dozen plastic 'adapters' that do nothing more than make the physical shape of the docking station's port match the shape of any iDevice. Because every Android phone is shaped differently, you just don't see the slick accessories for Android device that you see for iDevices.
This wouldn't be hard to overcome though. The problem is that as I see it, Google would have to be the one pushing the phone manufacturers and accessory makers to make a similar solution.
Funny, I have an iPhone, and an Android phone here. The Android phone "just works". I don't know what you had to do to your Android phone to get it to work, but I suspect you are just making things up. They are both dead simple to use. The biggest difference being that the iPhone dumps every installed app on your desktop, and the Android keeps them in a drawer, only putting the the apps that you want on the desktop on the desktop. Complexity doesn't come into play until you try to put your own music on the phone. That is the point that the iPhone become MORE difficult to use than the Android, as you need to install special software on the computer to get the iPhone to work.
The Android doesn't get more complicated to use than an iPhone until you get to the features that the iPhone just doesn't have. Of course, you can just ignore the added functionality of the Android, and it is slightly less complex than an iPhone.
So, if you want something that "just works" out of the box, get ANY phone, but if not having the option to customize as opposed to ignoring the customization options, get an iPhone.
Do you like to have the option to customize or run stock? Do not mind choosing whether you want to learn more or not? Get an Android phone.
Sure, but it is going to cost you 4.3 Million dollars to prover your innocence in court.
While I suspect that is part of it, my suspicion also is that a bigger part of it is that generally, a person has to already be convinced that Apple has superior service to be polled. Presumably they only poll Apple customers on their satisfaction with Apple. Given Apples position in the market, anyone who isn't satisfied with Apple will quickly stop being an Apple customer, as there are huge numbers of cheaper, high quality, more widely supported alternatives.
Polling a group on their satisfaction with a product, when that group has gone out of their way to buy a less available product isn't going to get you a good gauge on the products quality.
It is a little like polling buyers of Monster Cables on their satisfaction concerning their $80 hdmi cable. They would likely get very good marks.
Really, that is companies abusing the term "just-in-time". Unless I am mis-remembering, the term originally meant that you kept one or two of your product in stock instead of 100. Then you could replenish your stock at the rate that it is sold, so you would always have stock on hand, "Just-In-Time". It didn't originally mean that you ordered the product AFTER the customer asked for it.
No, if we CHOOSE to pump more oil, we will have pumped more oil. There is nothing magical about that. You have yet to point out how one determines the amount of liquid in a reservoir based on the flow rate that one pumps at. Again, what is that formula?
You are confused. Geeks and nerds with girlfriends only seems funny before they enter the work force. There is nothing that gets a woman off more than a man with a HUGE..... bank account. Sad but true....
Yep, I sure can. I use Handcent. Since Google doesn't ban applications that compete with their own, I can do that on an Android phone.
OK, snarkyness aside, an alarm clock is a FAR simpler application than a text messeging application, and this isn't the first time this has happened to Apple. That being said, I'm not sure which one is worse. I suppose it depends on usage patterns. Do you have a job that you will get fired from if you are late? Do you send insulting messages to people with the same 7 digit phone number as the person you are insulting? The Android bug seems to be less likely to hit you, but could carry a more dangerous payload.
While pigs may be a problem. Turning it tasty would likely be more trouble than it's worth, and selling to another country would cost you more than you could get for it.
Well, given that we have multi-generational welfare families, yes. I think many would. The question is what you do about those people. Do you let them starve, or do you feed them knowing that you were never going to get them to work anyway. Of course, if you guarantee them a livable wage without work, the number of people that live on the dole will be greater than if you let them starve.
I find the response I almost always get from my suggestion on how we should deal with food stamps interesting. I suggest we make a K-ration type food. Make it taste horrible, yet be healthy. I mean taste REALLY bad. Then just give it away. Don't bother tracking it at all. Get rid of all the bureaucracy involved in the food stamp program. Literally pull semi-trucks into parking lots and let people take what they want. If it tastes bad enough, most people will work before eating it, but they will eat it before they starve to death. The people that eat it even though they could work for food are the ones you were never going to get off the dole anyways. There would be no black market for it because anyone that wanted it could just go get it for free. This guarantees no one starves, reduces bureaucracy, and makes fraud totally uneconomical without any punitive threats. Win, Win, Win.
The interesting part is that most peoples response to this is to suggest that this would violate some kind of human right. They usually come around when it is pointed out that feeding someone food that tastes bad is not abuse. We do it to children all the time. It is interesting though that their first thought is that it is abusive.
"Peak Oil" is frequently used to "prove" we are running out of oil. Your description is exactly why it is a stupid metric for determining the quantity of oil that exists in the ground. You describe it as how much we choose to pull out of the ground. Look at the other posters who are calling me stupid because I say that "Peak Oil" is about choice. At best, the term "Peak Oil" has been hijacked by another very vocal group that disagrees with your definition of it, and the public at large believes the other definition to be the correct one.
The public has been led to believe that "Peak Oil" is a disaster, yet if we found a way to run all of our cars and children's laughter, we would have already reached "Peak Oil", and that would be a great thing.
No, I am not saying that. You seem to have poor reading skills. I am saying that you cannot determine how much oil is in the ground based on how much you choose to pump today. The pump rate of existing known oil is not running at the physical maximum. The companies sucking it out of the ground CHOOSE how much they will pump out on any given day.
Again. How much you choose to pump today does not tell you how much exists. There is nothing stopping oil companies from pumping at twice the rate they are pumping today other than what they consider to be the best return on investment. Until the last drop is pulled from the ground, the pump rate is a choice.
This is simple physics. If you want to pull twice as much liquid from a reservoir, you double the rate that you pump it. Doubling or halving the rate that you pump tells you nothing about how much liquid is in the reservoir until the reservoir is dry.
You tell me, what formula do you use to determine the amount of liquid in a reservoir based solely on the pump rate used to drain the reservoir? Really. I would love to know, because so far every time someone tries to defend this stupid idea of "Peak Oil", their response is always "Oil won't last forever". Basically your response, but none seem to have any explanation on how you determine reservoir quantity based on pump rate.
As much as I hate to see MS and Google in the same light, I have to admit that in this case, you are absolutly correct.
This is a high priority bug that has no excuse for not being fixed within days of it being reported.
I thought the "fix it yourself" folks were being sarcastic. I can't imagine that anyone would really try to claim that this isn't a serious bug that Google needs to fix. The fact that there are free alternatives like Handcent does not in any way absolve Google from fixing the default text messaging client.
Then you will be interested in the company who makes them.
Personally, I'm thinking about getting a C64 myself.
If the article is speaking of distance traveled, then my comment has no bearing. I specifically said "If they are measuring it in time spent travelling." because I did not know that the article was measuring distance.
Of course, once I submitted, I realized someone would point out that changing population number would still change the limit on the number of hours that could be spent traveling.
The whole thing falls apart though, if they do like they do with "Peak Oil" and try to calculate how many miles there are that can be traveled based on the number of miles we choose to travel.
If it takes more than one barrel of oil to extract, one barrel of oil from the ground, you have a metric that is worth discussing. "Peak Oil" is NOT the discussion of how much oil it takes to extract a barrel of oil from the ground. Peak oil is the discussion of how much oil is in the ground, measured by how much we CHOOSE to pump in a year.
Thus "Peak Oil" is a stupid concept, and has no bearing on reality.
I keep thinking about using GOG. The system works well? From it's description, they are using the system that music and movies should use as well. The single notable exception is that they should include printable CD/DVD covers that include the game title on the spine.
That is my stance on consoles as well. If you look at my stacks of literally thousands of console games, the number of games I bought is in direct proportion to how easy it was to install games on mass media. The Atari 2600 being the single exception. There is no way that I am going to leave $60 optical disks out for kids to play with. I also am not going to have my kid carrying around $500 in cartridges when he takes his hand held out and about.
Heck, we don't even use our movie and music disks for day to day use. Originals are for long term storage, not day to day use.
"Peak Oil", is a worthless flawed concept to begin with. Gauging how much oil exists based on how much we CHOOSE to pump isn't even starting to take reality into consideration. If there were no huge multinational interests trying to control gas prices, "Peak Oil" would be flawed to the point of being worthless. The fact that there ARE huge multinational interests involved in oil price manipulation means that "Peak Oil" is just a stupid idea.
"Peak travel" on the other hand could have some validity. Depending on what they are measuring for "Peak". If they are measuring it in time spent travelling. Obviously there is a hard limit on the number of hours that can be traveled. Just count the number of people on the planet, and multiply by 24 hours.
The fact that there are setting in both a PC and an iPad that many people CAN configure, but do not HAVE to configure is not a difficult concept. The previous poster described setting up an iPad by using the bare minimum settings with no customization to get up and running. He then described the PC setup to include a bunch of customization. Pointing out that the iPad ALSO has the ability to do customization, and that the PC does not require it is not contradictory, and thus should not be a "WTF" moment for anyone that honestly looks at the situation.
There is no desperation. There is just a fair comparison.
Claiming that most people already have their PC set up when they buy an iPad is simply wrong. It can only be rationalized via abuse of the language.
Yes, most people that have there PC set up for use that is NOT iPad related. Most people DO NOT have there PC set up for use with an iPad, which is more in depth than the original minimum setup of the PC.