russia has massive natural resources and a good base in the technology, but they will never be as razor focused as they were during the cold war. decision makers in russia now have to worry about things like getting votes and political upheaval, like the US and other western nations.
china on the other hand is ripe for political revolution. do you expect chinese citizens to put up with longer work hours in poorer conditions with less compensation than other countries, with less political and personal freedom, for the next 25+ years? those are the things that are driving china today.
i could care less if the US is seen as the "leader" in space exploration. what i do care about is getting the best science for the buck. let nations like china prove themselves and simultaneously ruin their economy by putting a man on mars. let the US focus on robotic / unmanned missions.
All of these area reasonable options, none of them are evil
sure, in the same sense that there's no universal concept of good or evil. for example, turning over the email accounts of chinese dissidents? that's quite "good" if you are part of the ruling party in china.
Now look at it, everything they left out in the beginning is shoehorned into the current versions and it sucks because they failed to account for the functionality in the original design.
You already paid MSFT indirectly when you bought the pc with a licensed copy of windows. The only posible way that makes them lose is if you might have bought MSFT office.
It's not that I don't get updates, it's that I control them.
there's two types of updates in this case i suppose: 1) browser / OS updates and 2) web app updates. it's a big assumption that IT won't have control over when the OS updates are pushed. i don't think we know that. as for the google services deployed to the web... do you use the web now? does the fact that the web page you access could change at any time keep you from depending on the web?
The workstations at the office are vetted, tested, and controlled by the IT department.
that's another big assumption... that your local IT with slashed budgets is more competent / capable than google.
Remember when Google introduced some new-fangled "Buzz" features to GMail with an automatic and silent background update? How did that go among users?
the feature went over poorly, but gmail never stopped working. there's a difference between poorly received features and downtime.
However, Google doesn't make money from their products; they make money from the user data collected from the products they give away for free. This means that while I want an application that works, their interest is in getting data that makes them money.
i think that's a pointless distinction. it doesn't matter if they make $ from direct sales of the product, or from some indirect source (ads, data, etc). if they don't provide a good product, people won't consume it and they don't make money.
you could use that point to argue that it's not possible for quality products to result from ad-supported sources. TV, print, and so on. there's a lot of garbage out there to be sure, but there's good stuff as well.
Until the day when Google releases a hastily tested update that silently and automatically installs, and bricks your device. What, is there no chance of this ever happening with silent and unconditional installations on the aggressive schedule that Google typically follows?
i wonder what type of computer, phone, or tablet you use that doesn't get updates?
i've gotten many updates on my android phone and google TV with no issues. i'm not saying it can't happen, but there's no reason to think that google is any more of a risk than a mac, a MSFT PC, a blackberry phone, and so on.
moreover, the idea is that since this is a linux machine essentially only running a browser with no user installed software it has a greater chance of being stable than a mac, PC, or linux box where the end users most often have admin rights and can and do install all sorts of untested software. no data to back that up, but it seems like a reasonable theory.
Really the only real benefit of chromeos is that it eliminates any choices you had except the google cloud. And that's really only a benefit for Google not users.
not providing users with an environment to install and run malware is a benefit to the business that has to pay to fix. i agree, users want control and they probably won't like it.
think like a business, which is what they are targeting.
1. zero employee downtime for broken hardware: go get another chromebook out of the closet and they are up again in 30s. 2. no local data means they are interchangeable, one is as good as another. any employee can log in to any chromebook. 3. near zero admin: autoupdates through google, no app install / management, no anti virus management (and no viruses (yet)) 4. $28 for hardware and software support, including hardware replacement and upgrades, and including the software itself
right, not a lot of for a consumer to like, and employees won't like it either, but it's management's wet dream.
but I figure Google is positioning this against iPads
why do you figure that? google is positioning this primarily as a business solution. the ipad couldn't be further from that.
And why complain about getting 100MB/month free?
when the low-end model *only* has 3g (no wifi), and you can burn through 100MB / month in a half hour netflixs, it sort of forces you into a contract with a carrier.
other than the fast start up time what is the advantage to buying one of these that will send everything you do back to google?
1. you can run it over with a truck, go buy a new one, and start right where you left off with no data loss or backup recovery 2. near zero administration: no application install / management, no antivirus, OS updates through google (app updates automatically, it's the web) 3. $28 (or $20 for smal biz) / month for software and hardware support, including hardware upgrades
i can understand why consumers with this a strong "meh", but for businesses its huge.
and long after most Americans have forgotten why we went to war in the first place
often, when you find yourself thinking you are smarter than "most" people, it's a good idea to check yourself. making wide, sweeping generalizations about what "most" people think is a good indication that you are indeed not.
Um... That's exactly what aGPS is. You use information from outside of the GPS system to make guesses while the actual GPS lock occurs.
i meant what about aGPS requires a cache of *my* previous locations. that's what people upset about. the next worst thing to knowing i am at point X is knowing that i'm between points A, B, and C, or even just that i came within 1000 feet of point D. it doesn't have to be a record of your exact location down to the meter to be an invasion of privacy.
basically, apple's using people to fill out there aGPS database. at least google paid people to do this.
HTML5 + CSS3 are x-platform in the same way HTML4 + CSS2 are cross platform. it's at the mercy of the folks that implement the browser. it's silly to think that because 5 > 4 and 3 > 2 all of the cross-platform issues will magically go away. the spec will still miss some things, and the folks that implement the browser will interpret it differently.
that's where flash excels, like it or not. wherever you go, flash is flash. being a single company it's easier for them to implement their plugins consistently across all platforms than it easy for a bunch of competing companies that are building browsers. adobe deserves some credit for making a platform that manages to run identically (for the most part) across different platforms. that's at least one of the reasons why it's popular. businesses would rather burn up your CPU than pay developers to implement things in HTMLN + CSSM and deal with all the cross browser issues.
Arbitrarily running any flash at all - sheesh, would you let anyone in the world borrow your car? Your house? Or would you only permit that of people you trusted? Why should your computer be any different?
ya right on. in fact, i don't load any web pages either, because we all know most of those are really applications written in javascript.
but i can't wait for HTML 5. i hear it magically manages to perform all the tasks currently performed by flash, but it doesn't use any CPU. can you imagine? those guys at apple are real smart. and the best thing about HTML 5 is that it can't be disabled or uninstalled, because it's part of the browser!
Answer: No. No apps run in the background on the iPad
just like android. contrary to popular belief, when you press the "home" button on your android device the UI portion of the application stopped (or more correctly, paused). the developer might have written a special component called a service or a content provider or a broadcast receiver to perform operations in the background, but android doesn't give you general purpose multitasking like unix. not surprisingly that's pretty much how multitasking works in iOS.
if you actually look what you are getting for your $200-$300, it's no bargain. sub 4 hour battery life, old android versions, dim displays, shoddy constructions, under powered processors, and low ram.
Slashdot Mirror
russia has massive natural resources and a good base in the technology, but they will never be as razor focused as they were during the cold war. decision makers in russia now have to worry about things like getting votes and political upheaval, like the US and other western nations.
china on the other hand is ripe for political revolution. do you expect chinese citizens to put up with longer work hours in poorer conditions with less compensation than other countries, with less political and personal freedom, for the next 25+ years? those are the things that are driving china today.
we can drop a bomb anywhere on the planet now, it's called an ICBM.
i could care less if the US is seen as the "leader" in space exploration. what i do care about is getting the best science for the buck. let nations like china prove themselves and simultaneously ruin their economy by putting a man on mars. let the US focus on robotic / unmanned missions.
All of these area reasonable options, none of them are evil
sure, in the same sense that there's no universal concept of good or evil. for example, turning over the email accounts of chinese dissidents? that's quite "good" if you are part of the ruling party in china.
mozilla.org: copying google chrome since 2008.
Now look at it, everything they left out in the beginning is shoehorned into the current versions and it sucks because they failed to account for the functionality in the original design.
i can't deny that this is certainly your opinion.
You already paid MSFT indirectly when you bought the pc with a licensed copy of windows. The only posible way that makes them lose is if you might have bought MSFT office.
It's not that I don't get updates, it's that I control them.
there's two types of updates in this case i suppose: 1) browser / OS updates and 2) web app updates. it's a big assumption that IT won't have control over when the OS updates are pushed. i don't think we know that. as for the google services deployed to the web ... do you use the web now? does the fact that the web page you access could change at any time keep you from depending on the web?
The workstations at the office are vetted, tested, and controlled by the IT department.
that's another big assumption ... that your local IT with slashed budgets is more competent / capable than google.
Remember when Google introduced some new-fangled "Buzz" features to GMail with an automatic and silent background update? How did that go among users?
the feature went over poorly, but gmail never stopped working. there's a difference between poorly received features and downtime.
However, Google doesn't make money from their products; they make money from the user data collected from the products they give away for free. This means that while I want an application that works, their interest is in getting data that makes them money.
i think that's a pointless distinction. it doesn't matter if they make $ from direct sales of the product, or from some indirect source (ads, data, etc). if they don't provide a good product, people won't consume it and they don't make money.
you could use that point to argue that it's not possible for quality products to result from ad-supported sources. TV, print, and so on. there's a lot of garbage out there to be sure, but there's good stuff as well.
Until the day when Google releases a hastily tested update that silently and automatically installs, and bricks your device.
What, is there no chance of this ever happening with silent and unconditional installations on the aggressive schedule that Google typically follows?
i wonder what type of computer, phone, or tablet you use that doesn't get updates?
i've gotten many updates on my android phone and google TV with no issues. i'm not saying it can't happen, but there's no reason to think that google is any more of a risk than a mac, a MSFT PC, a blackberry phone, and so on.
moreover, the idea is that since this is a linux machine essentially only running a browser with no user installed software it has a greater chance of being stable than a mac, PC, or linux box where the end users most often have admin rights and can and do install all sorts of untested software. no data to back that up, but it seems like a reasonable theory.
Really the only real benefit of chromeos is that it eliminates any choices you had except the google cloud. And that's really only a benefit for Google not users.
not providing users with an environment to install and run malware is a benefit to the business that has to pay to fix. i agree, users want control and they probably won't like it.
ease up on the coffee.
think like a business, which is what they are targeting.
1. zero employee downtime for broken hardware: go get another chromebook out of the closet and they are up again in 30s.
2. no local data means they are interchangeable, one is as good as another. any employee can log in to any chromebook.
3. near zero admin: autoupdates through google, no app install / management, no anti virus management (and no viruses (yet))
4. $28 for hardware and software support, including hardware replacement and upgrades, and including the software itself
right, not a lot of for a consumer to like, and employees won't like it either, but it's management's wet dream.
but I figure Google is positioning this against iPads
why do you figure that? google is positioning this primarily as a business solution. the ipad couldn't be further from that.
And why complain about getting 100MB/month free?
when the low-end model *only* has 3g (no wifi), and you can burn through 100MB / month in a half hour netflixs, it sort of forces you into a contract with a carrier.
other than the fast start up time what is the advantage to buying one of these that will send everything you do back to google?
1. you can run it over with a truck, go buy a new one, and start right where you left off with no data loss or backup recovery
2. near zero administration: no application install / management, no antivirus, OS updates through google (app updates automatically, it's the web)
3. $28 (or $20 for smal biz) / month for software and hardware support, including hardware upgrades
i can understand why consumers with this a strong "meh", but for businesses its huge.
but until my 8-bit Nintendo dies from plastic corrosion and age, it will continue to play any game
and that benefits the developers of the console and game ... how?
financial, the subscription model is much more sound. within some small margin of error, they can estimate their earnings on a month by month basis.
he correctly predicted that the company could not survive on its own."
wow what does the guy have a crystal ball or something? how'd he EVER figure that out?
and long after most Americans have forgotten why we went to war in the first place
often, when you find yourself thinking you are smarter than "most" people, it's a good idea to check yourself. making wide, sweeping generalizations about what "most" people think is a good indication that you are indeed not.
Um... That's exactly what aGPS is. You use information from outside of the GPS system to make guesses while the actual GPS lock occurs.
i meant what about aGPS requires a cache of *my* previous locations. that's what people upset about. the next worst thing to knowing i am at point X is knowing that i'm between points A, B, and C, or even just that i came within 1000 feet of point D. it doesn't have to be a record of your exact location down to the meter to be an invasion of privacy.
basically, apple's using people to fill out there aGPS database. at least google paid people to do this.
Or just not having aGPS at all ...
what part / subset of aGPS requires a cache of previous locations?
The chance of you dying in your life is 100%.... may as well live a little.
it's not so much about you killing yourself, it's about you killing other people.
Surely these things should be manually handled, rather than essentially "spammed" out.
probably because there are many, many such violations and they couldn't possibly hire enough people to look into each of them personally.
HTML5 + CSS3 are x-platform in the same way HTML4 + CSS2 are cross platform. it's at the mercy of the folks that implement the browser. it's silly to think that because 5 > 4 and 3 > 2 all of the cross-platform issues will magically go away. the spec will still miss some things, and the folks that implement the browser will interpret it differently.
that's where flash excels, like it or not. wherever you go, flash is flash. being a single company it's easier for them to implement their plugins consistently across all platforms than it easy for a bunch of competing companies that are building browsers. adobe deserves some credit for making a platform that manages to run identically (for the most part) across different platforms. that's at least one of the reasons why it's popular. businesses would rather burn up your CPU than pay developers to implement things in HTMLN + CSSM and deal with all the cross browser issues.
Arbitrarily running any flash at all - sheesh, would you let anyone in the world borrow your car? Your house? Or would you only permit that of people you trusted? Why should your computer be any different?
ya right on. in fact, i don't load any web pages either, because we all know most of those are really applications written in javascript.
but i can't wait for HTML 5. i hear it magically manages to perform all the tasks currently performed by flash, but it doesn't use any CPU. can you imagine? those guys at apple are real smart. and the best thing about HTML 5 is that it can't be disabled or uninstalled, because it's part of the browser!
Answer: No. No apps run in the background on the iPad
just like android. contrary to popular belief, when you press the "home" button on your android device the UI portion of the application stopped (or more correctly, paused). the developer might have written a special component called a service or a content provider or a broadcast receiver to perform operations in the background, but android doesn't give you general purpose multitasking like unix. not surprisingly that's pretty much how multitasking works in iOS.
if you actually look what you are getting for your $200-$300, it's no bargain. sub 4 hour battery life, old android versions, dim displays, shoddy constructions, under powered processors, and low ram.