google is just throwing money around, and poking fingers into everyone's business ( not to mention politics and bloody regime changes ), because it is not being held accountable by anyone due to its success in its main competence
How do you suggest they "be held accountable" for this ride sharing app?
My sister drives for Uber and averages about $18/hr. That is way more than minimum wage, and is pretty good for a no skill job with flexible hours. Like most Uber drivers, she does it part time, and it is not her main source of income.
$18 / hour. Minus gas. Minus car repairs. Minus car maintenance (oil changes, tires, breaks, etc). Minus insurance. Minus licensing fees. Minus depreciation on your car (you are putting miles on it reducing it's worth). Minus accidents (of course you'll have more if you are driving professionally). You are lucky if you break even.
Uber abuses the hell out of their drivers all in the name of keeping fares low, riders happy, and their own profits up.
That's the problem with a job where 97% of the adult population meets the qualifications. Have a driver's license, a car, and insurance. Be able to follow turn-by-turn directions. All while listening to headphones sitting in your comfortable climate controlled car.
There's a large supply of potential Uber drivers. Of course the compensation is going to be minimal. Uber is going to pay exactly what's required to have driver coverage and not a cent more. The same thing any business would do.
Why are they calling an app crash a 'device failure' on either platform, unless the app is distributed with the device?
Perhaps because when it comes to user perception it is a device failure. I don't think the average use cares why things don't work.
Why is Apple responsible for shitty code written by a 3rd party
That's not the point. The article is just reporting stats regarding user experience. You are imagining finger pointing at Apple. It's not. It's finger pointing at the experience of using the device.
But anyway, sometimes app stability has to do w/ the stability of the platform + services it offers. It's not always app coding errors that result in crashes. It also has to do w/ the development environment. If the tools are better, it's easier to write stable apps.
Learn to follow a simple, basic conversation thread. You aren't even reading the posts to which you are replying. Maybe you are some sort of troll bot. Only reasonable explanation for this level of intelligence.
What's with this race for "Thinner" shit? With the amount of money that I spend on tech, I want it to be heavier and solid. I want it to dent the floor when I drop it. This race to make shit more fragile needs to stop.
There is an argument however for making it as thin as possible and letting the consumer decide how much protection they want via a case / cover.
Of course, the topic was Macs, not just Mac notebooks, and the current "Mac Pro" is the very definition of "not plenty of ports" unless all you want is USB and Thunderbolt. No PCIe slots, no drive bays, limited internal storage, no graphics upgradeability. It's a "pro model", though, so I'm sure you say it's "plenty". You have a long history of defining need by what Apple does.
If you want that get a desktop PC. Anyway, don't pretend you know what you want. Apple knows what you want. Now shut up and buy it.
Millions are checking facebook from work without their intranet being backed. You can lower the chances of being hacked quite a bit without resorting to extremes.
If your spouse was killed by a drunk driver, would you feel better knowing that millions of drunk drivers didn't kill anyone? It's one of those things such that the consequences are so dire taking extreme measures is warranted. A hack can be business ending, or in the case of government agencies people could lose their lives.
The article said it's piloting it for a "few teams of technical workers". The question is: are they salaried? If they are hourly workers it sounds fine. Otherwise, pretty sure they are going to end up doing close to the same amount of work for less pay.
Simple: driverless cars. [bloomberg.com] Survive long enough to get driverless cars perfected, dump your largest cost (driver pay), and there you go.
Are you serious? Drivers are their biggest asset. Drivers keep them from paying for cars up front, paying for insurance, paying for car maintenance, and paying for gas. Do you have any idea what it would cost them to fund a fleet of self-driving cars that's even a fraction of the number of drivers they "employee" today?
Uber rates can go up and people will still use them: what is the alternative?
Walk. Bike. Buy a car. Take public transit. Use your current car. Call a friend. Use a taxi. Make fewer trips.
You are mistaken if you think Uber's customer base is a bunch shut-ins that were finally able to come out and see the light of day thanks to Uber. For me Uber is a luxury. I can bike or use public transit, just like I did prior to Uber (because I hate taxis).
You are right, some people would take Uber at higher prices, but it doesn't take much of a downturn in business to make startups like this shutter their windows and board up their doors.
"Replicant is a fully free Android distribution running on several devices...
Several? Wow.
Curious though how you think the fact that it's OSS means it won't have any zero day flaws. Because, the OSS community is spending it's nights and weekends statically analyzing this particular OSS project?
Some (3-D graphics acceleration, GPS) are just not supported. (Use 2-D graphics and, if you really want your phone to know where you are, a plugin GPS device based on a different chip.) GPS is not supported because the phone's GPS chip also requires a proprietary CPU-land driver, which is an open-source no-no.
No 3-d graphics? No GPS? Plugin a GPS dongle? The awesomeness continues.
Nothing you say matters unless they treated the two platforms differently when it came to gathering their "failure" rate. Both platforms are pretty much interchangeable across their user base so it's as close to an apples to apples are you are going to get.
I think what the poster was suggesting is that including 3rd party app crashes in this statistic
It's a user satisfaction survey, not a rating of the stability of the underlying OS. I don't think users care why their apps are crashing only that they are.
For instance did they add weight to the fact that iOS has more apps for which to crash and that people use their iOS devices more than people use Android?
I have no idea what that means. iOS devices have more apps installed? There are more iOS apps overall than Android apps? Provide references please and a description about why you'd think that'd matter anyway (if you can prove that either is true in the first place).
Apple has wifi issues (I've encountered them too) - Android has toush screen issues, random reboots (random reboots?!?!) - therefore Android is better WTF?!
The WTF here is your suggestion that your personal experience and what you've personally read in forums trumps an actual study on the topic.
Facebook crashes on iOS but Address Book crashes on Android - ergo Android is better?! Again... WTF!?
That's not what they are saying. They are just making a statement about the apps that crash the most on each platform. The quotes stats are based on overall crashes across all apps.
Consoles SUCK even compared to a 2010 era laptop with an Intel graphics chip.
No 2010 laptop w/ integrated graphics can run current AAA titles 1080p60. Exaggerating to such an extent doesn't help to get your point across.
I don't think anyone is arguing that a console is the absolute most powerful gaming machine. Consoles are cheap (2-3x less expensive that a comparable gaming PC).
This will spawn the fury of desktop gamers of course, claiming that consoles are overpriced. Just make sure you include a link to a $300 off-the-shelf PC that can pull 1080p60 on modern AAA titles.
Rather just use the PS3 disks I already have and not need the internet connection at all except for updates....
Oh so you don't want to pay $20 for something you already own? Maybe, just maybe this is targeted at consumers that do not already own a PS3 and a game library for it?
How about boycotting any vendor that does not show any sign of even trying to respect their customer base?
^^^ This.
Sony does business like every market is Japan where they are the darling nationally subsidized pet corporation. Why someone would opt for Sony over MSFT because their console had some negligible performance edge is beyond me.
Slashdot Mirror
google is just throwing money around, and poking fingers into everyone's business ( not to mention politics and bloody regime changes ), because it is not being held accountable by anyone due to its success in its main competence
How do you suggest they "be held accountable" for this ride sharing app?
My sister drives for Uber and averages about $18/hr. That is way more than minimum wage, and is pretty good for a no skill job with flexible hours. Like most Uber drivers, she does it part time, and it is not her main source of income.
$18 / hour. Minus gas. Minus car repairs. Minus car maintenance (oil changes, tires, breaks, etc). Minus insurance. Minus licensing fees. Minus depreciation on your car (you are putting miles on it reducing it's worth). Minus accidents (of course you'll have more if you are driving professionally). You are lucky if you break even.
Uber abuses the hell out of their drivers all in the name of keeping fares low, riders happy, and their own profits up.
That's the problem with a job where 97% of the adult population meets the qualifications. Have a driver's license, a car, and insurance. Be able to follow turn-by-turn directions. All while listening to headphones sitting in your comfortable climate controlled car.
There's a large supply of potential Uber drivers. Of course the compensation is going to be minimal. Uber is going to pay exactly what's required to have driver coverage and not a cent more. The same thing any business would do.
I'm not expected to tip
It really depends on who you ask. Uber's official line is that tipping is not required, but the drivers feel quite differently.
This kind of condescending attitude is exactly why nobody respects you.
Your inability to detect sarcasm and generally infer language queues from the humans is why you are so at home posting from your mom's basement.
Why are they calling an app crash a 'device failure' on either platform, unless the app is distributed with the device?
Perhaps because when it comes to user perception it is a device failure. I don't think the average use cares why things don't work.
Why is Apple responsible for shitty code written by a 3rd party
That's not the point. The article is just reporting stats regarding user experience. You are imagining finger pointing at Apple. It's not. It's finger pointing at the experience of using the device.
But anyway, sometimes app stability has to do w/ the stability of the platform + services it offers. It's not always app coding errors that result in crashes. It also has to do w/ the development environment. If the tools are better, it's easier to write stable apps.
Learn to follow a simple, basic conversation thread. You aren't even reading the posts to which you are replying. Maybe you are some sort of troll bot. Only reasonable explanation for this level of intelligence.
What's with this race for "Thinner" shit? With the amount of money that I spend on tech, I want it to be heavier and solid. I want it to dent the floor when I drop it. This race to make shit more fragile needs to stop.
There is an argument however for making it as thin as possible and letting the consumer decide how much protection they want via a case / cover.
Of course, the topic was Macs, not just Mac notebooks, and the current "Mac Pro" is the very definition of "not plenty of ports" unless all you want is USB and Thunderbolt. No PCIe slots, no drive bays, limited internal storage, no graphics upgradeability. It's a "pro model", though, so I'm sure you say it's "plenty". You have a long history of defining need by what Apple does.
If you want that get a desktop PC. Anyway, don't pretend you know what you want. Apple knows what you want. Now shut up and buy it.
Millions are checking facebook from work without their intranet being backed. You can lower the chances of being hacked quite a bit without resorting to extremes.
If your spouse was killed by a drunk driver, would you feel better knowing that millions of drunk drivers didn't kill anyone? It's one of those things such that the consequences are so dire taking extreme measures is warranted. A hack can be business ending, or in the case of government agencies people could lose their lives.
The article said it's piloting it for a "few teams of technical workers". The question is: are they salaried? If they are hourly workers it sounds fine. Otherwise, pretty sure they are going to end up doing close to the same amount of work for less pay.
Simple: driverless cars. [bloomberg.com] Survive long enough to get driverless cars perfected, dump your largest cost (driver pay), and there you go.
Are you serious? Drivers are their biggest asset. Drivers keep them from paying for cars up front, paying for insurance, paying for car maintenance, and paying for gas. Do you have any idea what it would cost them to fund a fleet of self-driving cars that's even a fraction of the number of drivers they "employee" today?
They are a taxi company. Offering prices lower than the market rate. So of course they are losing tons of money.
Except Taxi fares are fixed; not based on any sort of supply and demand.
Uber rates can go up and people will still use them: what is the alternative?
Walk.
Bike.
Buy a car.
Take public transit.
Use your current car.
Call a friend.
Use a taxi.
Make fewer trips.
You are mistaken if you think Uber's customer base is a bunch shut-ins that were finally able to come out and see the light of day thanks to Uber. For me Uber is a luxury. I can bike or use public transit, just like I did prior to Uber (because I hate taxis).
You are right, some people would take Uber at higher prices, but it doesn't take much of a downturn in business to make startups like this shutter their windows and board up their doors.
"Replicant is a fully free Android distribution running on several devices ...
Several? Wow.
Curious though how you think the fact that it's OSS means it won't have any zero day flaws. Because, the OSS community is spending it's nights and weekends statically analyzing this particular OSS project?
Some (3-D graphics acceleration, GPS) are just not supported. (Use 2-D graphics and, if you really want your phone to know where you are, a plugin GPS device based on a different chip.) GPS is not supported because the phone's GPS chip also requires a proprietary CPU-land driver, which is an open-source no-no.
No 3-d graphics? No GPS? Plugin a GPS dongle? The awesomeness continues.
Nothing you say matters unless they treated the two platforms differently when it came to gathering their "failure" rate. Both platforms are pretty much interchangeable across their user base so it's as close to an apples to apples are you are going to get.
I think what the poster was suggesting is that including 3rd party app crashes in this statistic
It's a user satisfaction survey, not a rating of the stability of the underlying OS. I don't think users care why their apps are crashing only that they are.
For instance did they add weight to the fact that iOS has more apps for which to crash and that people use their iOS devices more than people use Android?
I have no idea what that means. iOS devices have more apps installed? There are more iOS apps overall than Android apps? Provide references please and a description about why you'd think that'd matter anyway (if you can prove that either is true in the first place).
A 58% failure rate?
I think it's how they are defining "failure". My guess is that it's if a user experienced a problem of any sort, that's a failure.
Apple has wifi issues (I've encountered them too) - Android has toush screen issues, random reboots (random reboots?!?!) - therefore Android is better WTF?!
The WTF here is your suggestion that your personal experience and what you've personally read in forums trumps an actual study on the topic.
Facebook crashes on iOS but Address Book crashes on Android - ergo Android is better?! Again... WTF!?
That's not what they are saying. They are just making a statement about the apps that crash the most on each platform. The quotes stats are based on overall crashes across all apps.
Good little consumer sheep. Pay your corporate masters again for something you already have...
OMFG were you dropped as a child? That's the whole point of my first post.
Maybe, just maybe this is targeted at consumers that do not already own a PS3 and a game library for it.
I mean really this thing is called a THREAD there are other posts you might have to read if you want to intelligently respond to others.
Your mind and view are way too narrow....
Lol? You are the guy that can't seem to wrap his head around this new fangled "cloud computing" thing that the kids are all talking about these days.
Consoles SUCK even compared to a 2010 era laptop with an Intel graphics chip.
No 2010 laptop w/ integrated graphics can run current AAA titles 1080p60. Exaggerating to such an extent doesn't help to get your point across.
I don't think anyone is arguing that a console is the absolute most powerful gaming machine. Consoles are cheap (2-3x less expensive that a comparable gaming PC).
This will spawn the fury of desktop gamers of course, claiming that consoles are overpriced. Just make sure you include a link to a $300 off-the-shelf PC that can pull 1080p60 on modern AAA titles.
5 Mbps is what Netflix uses for its highest-quality 1080p streams.
I've used NVidia's Geoforce Now streaming service, and it pulls over 50Mbps for a 1080p game (but I guess PS3 games aren't 1080p).
Rather just use the PS3 disks I already have and not need the internet connection at all except for updates....
Oh so you don't want to pay $20 for something you already own? Maybe, just maybe this is targeted at consumers that do not already own a PS3 and a game library for it?
How about boycotting any vendor that does not show any sign of even trying to respect their customer base?
^^^ This.
Sony does business like every market is Japan where they are the darling nationally subsidized pet corporation. Why someone would opt for Sony over MSFT because their console had some negligible performance edge is beyond me.
As requested -- it's not a good idea because many would not be very happy working in such an environment.
Really? Sally is irritated she can't check Facebook during the work day so let's expose our intranet to hacking?