... we find intelligent life...extremely useful in the "stop thinking... God invented man..."... kind of way. I'd be more worried about the religious zealots (of all denominations) and how they're going to react to having their minds forcefully opened
What, in the name of God, are you babbling about? You seem to be very hostile against Classical Man's idea of a deity, i.e. the conceptions pietious men had over 2 millenia ago. Personally, I hope we discover intelligent life more locally, so that morons could have their eyes open to the fact that the almighty ubiquitous magical Straw Man actually weakens an argument.
When you're a CEO worth $5 billion, don't marry unless your fiance is also worth $5 billion... because when you make decisions that have economic consequences, like halving your fortune, and doing so enthusiastically with a goofy smile, it reflects on your reputation to lead your company and its shareholders to finacial successes. As anyone knows, $12 billion here, $12 billion there... pretty soon that's serious money... and is troubling.
If you want consumers to be able to install software, then OEMs can too. It's that simple.
It's a bit more complex than that, but fundamentally you're right. The big problem right now is that the Windows 7 license agreement allows OEMs to get away with this. Windows 8 is going to significantly change that landscape by restricting what OEMs can do on both a technical and legal basis. But that won't stop them from installing some kinds of crapware, which ultimately as you note is impossible to block so long as the consumer can install software.
The only real technical solution is a walled garden (where the OEMs are serfs in the garden alongside the user) which is a bad idea for other innumerable reasons.
I disagree. The issue is not a few app bundles sitting on the HD. The issue is with Wndows itself. There are plenty of developers for the platform that make well behaved applications. The problem is Windows allows any and all installers to install softwares that become part of the boot process, and/or sit in volitile memory all the time whether they are being used or not. Simply doing away with inits and system tray apps would go a long way towards preventing rot. Why must every app have crap installed all over the place? Why does every app need to have a system tray icon, and be available at the ready? Why can't we just LOAD an application when its needed, and why can't it be eliminated from volitile memory when it's not? Because Windows userland is broken, and Windows developers are assholes and exploit every bell and whistle simultaneosly if they can. It doesn't have to be this way.
Just a wild guess, but I'm thinking you're not their target market.
Not quite. Microsoft isn't using surgical precision to target scattered customers hiding in the wilderness. If nothing else, Microsoft's flagship product —which is merely the latest rehash of the operating system developed by and unwittingly freely donated by Digital Equipment Corporation, i.e.NT— is a swiss army knife of desktop operating systems (and fully recognizing this is a tremendously generous characterization of it, boy do I wish that's all it were). Microsoft wants it to be everything to everyone. They want everyone to pay and repay for many many licenses of Windows.
Now... I must digress. I had an emotional reaction to this summary that is epitomized in either some Jackie Chan meme I can't quite articulate, or an as yet unknown Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. meme. I had a similar reaction when Defender was announced. I realize that many of us work with Windows intimately, and need the hostile environment Windows creates in the sense that the unacceptable state a Windows installation inevitably degrades to puts food on the table: Windows is our work, and if it were perfect, we wouldn't have jobs.
But it just seems anathema to me that instead of fixing the product before they sell it to us and our clients, i.e. adjusting Windows such that crapware becomes extinct, Microsoft instead turns around and recognizes that there is this new market here created by a deficit in their flawed product, and now that this market is being exploited by the enterprising individuals that support their flawed product, Microsoft can now step in and directly compete with them. If I didn't know better, and I certainly do, I'd say Microsoft's target market was moronic lemmings.
It just occurred to me that what you meant was GP couldn't be the target market for this "product," the un-OEMing cleansing, because GP no longer uses Windows. And so I apologize to you because... you are seriously hilarious and I missed it because I am mildly emotional about the announcement of this new "product," and well, look again at those pictures I linked to and try to figure out just what meme belongs.
Car analogy time! Lets imagine that the vehicles coming off Ford's assembly line are immaculate, and pass any white glove test. But (allow me to invent hypothetical) evil Ford OEM distributors for some reason feel it's necessary to cover the cars in a fine dusting of filth that is quite tricky to completely get rid of... the yuk seems to multiply. Oddly, it slows the car down and kills its gas miliage while doing it. And now Ford customers have been complaining that by the time they get their new vehicle, its covered in filth and grime. Enterprising Ford dealers build car washes next to their dealerships to not only satisfy the customer as best they can, but also to make an extra buck. So... when is Ford going to start building signature car washes to compete with the Ford dealers and get into this newly recognized car washing market? While the GP is saying "screw cars! I can't take the filth they attract," I'm (please find the meme for me, I'm tired) saying "Dammit, Ford... you've been selling these filth magnets for ages... when are you going to fix your cars so they can't get dirty??!"
Well... although my metaphor seems to weaken my own argument, because we all know that in reality, cars really do attract dirt and there's nothing anyone can do about it, operating systems are not cars and absolutely can be engineered to not allow OEM CrapWare® (and to a large extent, can be engineered to be self-secure against malware, viruses and the like).
OS X apps can use the iCloud Documents APIs only if they are sold through the Mac App Store.
I don't use iCloud. I use DropBox. But the complaint is ridiculous. It's as ridiculous as calling it racism that an Italian Restaurant owner, of Italian decent, prefers to display photographs of Italian actors and sports heros in their restaurant, and not YOUR heros, regardless of your decent, even if you eat there [citation: Spike Lee].
Apple can do what it wants with its resources. This is not garden walling Apple's users in the least. Mac users will still be free to use any other of the many identical services that came before iCloud, and any that came after. You want total freedom? Use a nice linux distro, put your own server in a data center (easier and cheaper than you think), and make your own cloud. Or... you know... copy the document off iCloud to a local drive, then copy it back up after you're finished with it using your app that you pirated. Or if you are truly 1337, use a chron job to sync your local documents to iCloud, and only work on local documents, secure in the knowledge that any changes you make locally will soon propagate to iCloud (what? rsync isn't available on the Mac AppStore?).
I'm sick of the malicious exaggerated scrutinizing editorial coming from slashdot submitters. It didn't used to be this way, and it doesn't need to be this way. We're supposed to have news for nerds here... not shill editorial from anti-Apple evangelists. Or maybe its just stupid people causing me to lose patience.
How about Google's garden walling? I use an iOS device... and Google, and many other website hosters, refuse to let me immediately and always load the full version of google.com everytime (unless I log in, set preferences, and allow Google to track my online search habits.) This is far more annoying than anything Apple is doing. It's truly browser bigotry. If a site detects a mobile device browser, more often than not, it won't give you a choice of which style of page you are allowed to load. (And lets all give thanks to web developers that ask the end user the first time they load the site, and allow this preference to be maintained through info kept in a local cookie).
This just in: the manufacturer of the gasoline car you drive requires you fill the tank with gasoline, and refuses to sell you a car that runs on both gas and diesel. I can't believe these car manufacturers... completely wrecking our freedom!
"In recent times, it seems that many Police Departments believe that recording them doing their work is an act of war with police officers destroying the tapes, phones or cameras while arresting the folks doing it, . . . . . "
Remove the comma after 'times' and put it after 'war'.
It's simply very poor sentence construction so typical of the younger generation.Did none of youpay attention in English class?!?
Technically, your own grammar here is also incorrect, and your sentence is illogical. For the sentence to be logical, you must intend either "did any" or "didn't any." Otherwise, you are inexplicably and precisely addressing 'none,' which here can only be a pronoun meaning 'no body' or 'no one.' If you address no one with a question, then it means you're not posing a question to anyone. It is incidental that the question may be hypothetical depending on your personal intention for the interrogative. If you speak to 'none,' you are engaging in, as U2 suggests in their song Needle Chill, a "talk without speaking," and you are actually saying, "I'm not asking anyone" or "I ask no one." These are not to be confused with "asking no one in particular," which in the common vernacular has quite a different meaning and indeed, in contrast to your own question, actually has meaning. The incorrect grammar manifests in the superlative of you. This is clear once you replace 'none' with either 'no one' or 'no body.' Had you not used the extraneous words of you, your grammar would be correct, though still illogical.
As for the summary sentence, I think you nailed the comma placement, and yet you fail to notice 'Police Departments' is unnecessarily and incorrectly capitalized. Also, here the summary author speaks of many police departments, which is technically either a group of departmental groups of police (i.e. multiple groups of persons) or multiple properties of some form of real estate. Either way, it is strangely anthropomorphized as though it (the groups of groups of police) were a single individual. A police department is, and moreso 'many Police Departments' [sic] are, incapable of having a belief. While many individuals may share a belief, only an individual may have a belief.
I'm just going to come out and say it... the Atom is all hype. Yes... low power... but also low in performance and low in everything except price.
When the Atom came it was a dirt cheap CPU for the "any CPU is good enough" market. I wouldn't buy one now after AMD came with Fusion, but between 2008 and 2011 it did okay and was certainly not "all hype".
Maybe it was dirt cheap compared to non-green high-end processors... but not compared to non-green processors of identical processing power, which I estimate put it on par with processors that were new 6 years prior to its release, which, by the time Atom was released, were ridiculously dirt cheap, making the Atom, at the very least half-hype (because it is an energy efficient processory... my complaint is that its processing power is laughably anemic.)
I guess we'll have to increase all the milestone ages... age of concent, drinking age, voting age, and retirement age... maybe make celebacy trendy somehow... really start giving gays and lesbians huge incentives... and start heavily taxing marriage and procreation.
Marriage and procreation are taxing enough as it is.
Well said, but I don't believe a word of it. One can only go so far alone.
Intel has always led with performance and stability, not with power efficiency and price,
I have to take issue with "not with power efficiency". I know you were making a comparison with ARM, but it's misleading to say they aren't power efficient. They are -- in the size class they've mostly been competing in.
I have to take issue with your taking issue. Yes, Intel's energy efficient options are indeed energy efficient. But they are also quite ridiculously anemic in computing power compared to AMD's and especially to ARM's 'green' offerings when it comes to energy efficiency and performance. I'm just going to come out and say it... the Atom is all hype. Yes... low power... but also low in performance and low in everything except price.
Personally, I'm going with an Ivy Bridge, nVidia 680 GTX combo. If I was going for a single chip solution, I would probably go with AMD.
I bet if you were going for an energy efficient solution, you'd probably also go with AMD... unless you didn't mind embarrassing performance and feeling like its the year 2000 all over again.
I disagree with this. The typical office user (non-engineer, non-programmer, non-graphics designer, non-AudioVideo designer... but basically a web client operator, e-paper pusher, email reader, calendar checker, etc.) would be fine with a machine about as powerful as today's most powerful smart phones. I never understood when its time to replacing aging hardware for the run of the mill office worker why companies always tend to go for the middle/top of the line boxes when it ends up being so much more powerful than the machine it replaces. All office workers complain about performance, but in my experience, its never the hardware to blame, but instead telltale rot of the ubiquitously re-and-relicensed office operating system.
Since Intel has comparatively worthless GPU designs...
Lets not forget what powerhogs Intel's little heat factories are, and how anemic their low power chips are compared to AMD's energy efficient offerings.
Exactly. These articles and benchmarks are a joke. The Intel CPUs are so far ahead, in performance and value, that I can't help but feel embarrassed for AMD.
Yes... we should reward Intel's shady, unethical business dealings in nearly putting their only competition out of business so that we can finally pay massive premiums for a product from a company that has no competition. So much for rooting for the underdog... AMD should just close their doors so we can finally give all our money to Intel, and reduce their pressure to provide advanced chips at reasonable prices.
Maybe if we had the resources to sustain an enourmous population... but we already have an enourmous global population... and there's a serious energy crisis, as well as... polution, global temperatures... etc.
Maybe scientists should be figuring a way to make people live shorter, but far better quality lives. I kid... of course. But quality of life is important, and as the population increases, so does competition for limited resources, and individual quality of life will decrease. If we suddenly have a way to easily allow humans to have an average life expectency of 110, how are we going to support a population growth like that? I guess we'll have to increase all the milestone ages... age of concent, drinking age, voting age, and retirement age... maybe make celebacy trendy somehow... really start giving gays and lesbians huge incentives... and start heavily taxing marriage and procreation.
Mod up, nice catch. Americans especially need to accept the fact that the less you eat the longer you live... except that you must eat the right things, the right nutrients that does a body good.
It's not widely known that everyone has cancer. Shocking at first, but its not really that big of a deal. When we're young, we slough off cancer cells easily (I think they are digested... but I'm not an oncologist or anything) and they are replaced by healthy cells. As we get older, the ability to slough off cancer cells decreases, and when too many cells are cancerous, that's generally considered "having cancer." I think if people realized this fact of biology, there wouldn't be as much fear involved when cancer is diagnosed. I think by now the evidence is more than anacdotal that the right, positive frame of mind goes a long way in healing the body.
But it is not 4G hardware in the rest of the world.
False. You are either being intentionally obtuse, i.e. disingenuine, or you are actually, legitimately obtuse. 4G hardware is 4G hardware everywhere.
4G hardware is hardware that can connect to a 4G network,
False. 4G hardware is hardware that contains 4th generation cell technology, that which has the technical capability of achieving peak data transfer rates of 1Gbps. Connectivity and compatibility has nothing to do with whether hardware is 4G or not.
and since the 4G network differs in all of the world you shouldn't be calling it 4G when you market it in a market that has a different definition of 4G.
You can call it anything you want. Nothing you say is going to prevent 4th gen cell tech from being 4th gen cell tech.
I think I see what the problem is... you don't know what you are talking about, and merely expressing your opinion as though it were fact when you don't have the a clear understanding, or apparently any understanding at all, of what the facts are.
A rose by any other name is still a rose. If I dropped an 4G iPad to the bottom of the ocean, it would likely be severely water damaged beyond repair. Even this wouldn't prevent it from being 4G hardware. It would merely be non-functioning 4G hardware. All the 4G phones in your country, which are incompatible with the 4G technology in the United States, are still 4G phones even if they are brought to the US, and even though they won't work here..
The fallacy that you are committing over and over is known as a type of reification, specifically what is called pathetic fallacy. One example I can think of is legal licensing of attorneys. In the US, this is set by individual bar associations by state. If an attorney in California visits New York, the individual is still an attorney even though they may not legally practice law in New York. Claiming a licensed California attorney that is physically in New York is no longer an attorney would be committing pathetic fallacy.
The same is true of 4G cell tech. Moving a 4G device around doesn't and can't change whether it is 4G or not just because you believe, incorrectly, that 4G is an arbitrary marketing term. If it was merely a marketing term, then there could not possibly be any case against Apple even if the 4G iPad was actually a metal shell filled with koala dung.
4G is defined by a set of required specifications set by an international standards committee. In short, what makes 4G what it is has nothing to do with local infrastructure, but instead maximum possible data throughput. Even if the hardware isn't constantly pushing data through at its maximum capability, it is still 4G. Even if the hardware cannot connect to local infrastructure, it is still 4G if it is possible for it to achieve, if I am not mistaken, 1Gbps throughput, even if there was no 4G infrastructure anywhere on the Earth. Apple guarantees that the 4G iPad is actually legitimatly 4G by the definition that matters, that which is set by the standards commitee, and can achieve peak rates of 1Gbps or more. What Apple cannot guarantee is if infrastructure exists to achieve these rates. The point being that even if the 4G infrastructure in your country is incompatible with the 4G iPad, this doesn't mystically change the nature of the 4G iPad. The 4G iPad remains unchanged, and it is still a 4th generation cell data device. Apple is not being deceptive; the consumers threatening litigation for deceptive practices are being self-deceptive.
If you don't want it, don't buy it. If you already bought it and it doesn't work like you wanted, return it. Apple has $100 Billion in cash money laying around somewhere, and has a market cap that is beginning to dwarf that of the almighty oil industries. IMHO, Apple should just pull the product in the UK, Australia, and all international markets altogether.
But seriously, the battery is not that hard to replace with a newer one that is much better than the OEM Apple battery, and, again, as I suggested, someone that wants EDGE, or an easy unlock (an international traveller with multiple SIMs perhaps? idk really), in a country where Apple doesn't sell anything.
Hello. here [microsoft.com] is a direct link to the XP Virtual CD Control Panel, which has been there at Microsoft downloads since the dawn of time, allowing XP users to mount ISO and other suppported virtual filesystems.
And that does not work in Vista nor Windows 7 and for which there is no replacement from MS.
You sort of missed the point that this "new" feature was available, albeit unsupported, for roughly a decade. Also, I was kind of seriously suggesting via a snotty transitive relation that Windows 7 is Windows NT. Its nothing to be ashamed of... besides the DEC/Alpha, NT is the best thing evar to come out of the Digital Equipment Corporation (DEC).
Actually I've found that Apple products (at least the handheld ones) depreciate FASTER than other brands because the day Apple releases the next version, 75% of the Apple users out there are trying to offload the old one on eBay or craigslist for 1/4 of the price just to try and offset the cost of the new one. If you stay 1 revision behind, portable Apple hardware is actually dirt cheap.
If this is the case, I believe the sellers are attempting to sell in the wrong country, and by that I mean that the time of the end of the auction is off. Think globally, strategically plan when the auction will end, and the prices shoot up in countries that have no Apple Store, physical or web. Or sell directly in the target country's eBay site.
Even the original iPhone, if it was treated well and still is in cosmetically decent shape, can catch a tidy sum (some people in some countries want EDGE, or need easy unlocks). I just checked last week... and the original iPad is still fetching between $200-300 for the wifi version. I guess that still follows whatever corollary of Moore's Law I was referencing... but I seriously doubt any 2 year old Android tablet will fetch half its original price.
I just checked eBay... someone bought an original iPhone today for $140. Try an advanced search, completed auctions only, in cell phones and accessories with these search terms:
that ridiculous search is necessary because... well... there's just too many assholes using too many terms in their auction titles, apparently phishing for the inspiration of this gem. (I'd post a direct link to the search, but... inexplicably, you can't see completed auctions if you aren't signed in).
Slashdot Mirror
... we find intelligent life ...extremely useful in the "stop thinking ... God invented man..." ... kind of way. I'd be more worried about the religious zealots (of all denominations) and how they're going to react to having their minds forcefully opened
What, in the name of God, are you babbling about? You seem to be very hostile against Classical Man's idea of a deity, i.e. the conceptions pietious men had over 2 millenia ago. Personally, I hope we discover intelligent life more locally, so that morons could have their eyes open to the fact that the almighty ubiquitous magical Straw Man actually weakens an argument.
Not to sound unpatriotic, but h4x1ng their bank accounts and those of their supporters would impress me more. Go Joe!!
So what's the troubling part? I cannot understand
When you're a CEO worth $5 billion, don't marry unless your fiance is also worth $5 billion... because when you make decisions that have economic consequences, like halving your fortune, and doing so enthusiastically with a goofy smile, it reflects on your reputation to lead your company and its shareholders to finacial successes. As anyone knows, $12 billion here, $12 billion there... pretty soon that's serious money... and is troubling.
It's a bit more complex than that, but fundamentally you're right. The big problem right now is that the Windows 7 license agreement allows OEMs to get away with this. Windows 8 is going to significantly change that landscape by restricting what OEMs can do on both a technical and legal basis. But that won't stop them from installing some kinds of crapware, which ultimately as you note is impossible to block so long as the consumer can install software.
The only real technical solution is a walled garden (where the OEMs are serfs in the garden alongside the user) which is a bad idea for other innumerable reasons.
I disagree. The issue is not a few app bundles sitting on the HD. The issue is with Wndows itself. There are plenty of developers for the platform that make well behaved applications. The problem is Windows allows any and all installers to install softwares that become part of the boot process, and/or sit in volitile memory all the time whether they are being used or not. Simply doing away with inits and system tray apps would go a long way towards preventing rot. Why must every app have crap installed all over the place? Why does every app need to have a system tray icon, and be available at the ready? Why can't we just LOAD an application when its needed, and why can't it be eliminated from volitile memory when it's not? Because Windows userland is broken, and Windows developers are assholes and exploit every bell and whistle simultaneosly if they can. It doesn't have to be this way.
Just a wild guess, but I'm thinking you're not their target market.
Not quite. Microsoft isn't using surgical precision to target scattered customers hiding in the wilderness. If nothing else, Microsoft's flagship product —which is merely the latest rehash of the operating system developed by and unwittingly freely donated by Digital Equipment Corporation, i.e. NT— is a swiss army knife of desktop operating systems (and fully recognizing this is a tremendously generous characterization of it, boy do I wish that's all it were). Microsoft wants it to be everything to everyone. They want everyone to pay and repay for many many licenses of Windows.
Now... I must digress. I had an emotional reaction to this summary that is epitomized in either some Jackie Chan meme I can't quite articulate, or an as yet unknown Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. meme. I had a similar reaction when Defender was announced. I realize that many of us work with Windows intimately, and need the hostile environment Windows creates in the sense that the unacceptable state a Windows installation inevitably degrades to puts food on the table: Windows is our work, and if it were perfect, we wouldn't have jobs.
But it just seems anathema to me that instead of fixing the product before they sell it to us and our clients, i.e. adjusting Windows such that crapware becomes extinct, Microsoft instead turns around and recognizes that there is this new market here created by a deficit in their flawed product, and now that this market is being exploited by the enterprising individuals that support their flawed product, Microsoft can now step in and directly compete with them. If I didn't know better, and I certainly do, I'd say Microsoft's target market was moronic lemmings.
It just occurred to me that what you meant was GP couldn't be the target market for this "product," the un-OEMing cleansing, because GP no longer uses Windows. And so I apologize to you because ... you are seriously hilarious and I missed it because I am mildly emotional about the announcement of this new "product," and well, look again at those pictures I linked to and try to figure out just what meme belongs.
Car analogy time! Lets imagine that the vehicles coming off Ford's assembly line are immaculate, and pass any white glove test. But (allow me to invent hypothetical) evil Ford OEM distributors for some reason feel it's necessary to cover the cars in a fine dusting of filth that is quite tricky to completely get rid of... the yuk seems to multiply. Oddly, it slows the car down and kills its gas miliage while doing it. And now Ford customers have been complaining that by the time they get their new vehicle, its covered in filth and grime. Enterprising Ford dealers build car washes next to their dealerships to not only satisfy the customer as best they can, but also to make an extra buck. So... when is Ford going to start building signature car washes to compete with the Ford dealers and get into this newly recognized car washing market? While the GP is saying "screw cars! I can't take the filth they attract," I'm (please find the meme for me, I'm tired) saying "Dammit, Ford... you've been selling these filth magnets for ages... when are you going to fix your cars so they can't get dirty??!"
Well... although my metaphor seems to weaken my own argument, because we all know that in reality, cars really do attract dirt and there's nothing anyone can do about it, operating systems are not cars and absolutely can be engineered to not allow OEM CrapWare® (and to a large extent, can be engineered to be self-secure against malware, viruses and the like).
OS X apps can use the iCloud Documents APIs only if they are sold through the Mac App Store.
I don't use iCloud. I use DropBox. But the complaint is ridiculous. It's as ridiculous as calling it racism that an Italian Restaurant owner, of Italian decent, prefers to display photographs of Italian actors and sports heros in their restaurant, and not YOUR heros, regardless of your decent, even if you eat there [citation: Spike Lee].
Apple can do what it wants with its resources. This is not garden walling Apple's users in the least. Mac users will still be free to use any other of the many identical services that came before iCloud, and any that came after. You want total freedom? Use a nice linux distro, put your own server in a data center (easier and cheaper than you think), and make your own cloud. Or ... you know... copy the document off iCloud to a local drive, then copy it back up after you're finished with it using your app that you pirated. Or if you are truly 1337, use a chron job to sync your local documents to iCloud, and only work on local documents, secure in the knowledge that any changes you make locally will soon propagate to iCloud (what? rsync isn't available on the Mac AppStore?).
I'm sick of the malicious exaggerated scrutinizing editorial coming from slashdot submitters. It didn't used to be this way, and it doesn't need to be this way. We're supposed to have news for nerds here... not shill editorial from anti-Apple evangelists. Or maybe its just stupid people causing me to lose patience.
How about Google's garden walling? I use an iOS device... and Google, and many other website hosters, refuse to let me immediately and always load the full version of google.com everytime (unless I log in, set preferences, and allow Google to track my online search habits.) This is far more annoying than anything Apple is doing. It's truly browser bigotry. If a site detects a mobile device browser, more often than not, it won't give you a choice of which style of page you are allowed to load. (And lets all give thanks to web developers that ask the end user the first time they load the site, and allow this preference to be maintained through info kept in a local cookie).
This just in: the manufacturer of the gasoline car you drive requires you fill the tank with gasoline, and refuses to sell you a car that runs on both gas and diesel. I can't believe these car manufacturers... completely wrecking our freedom!
"In recent times, it seems that many Police Departments believe that recording them doing their work is an act of war with police officers destroying the tapes, phones or cameras while arresting the folks doing it, . . . . . "
Remove the comma after 'times' and put it after 'war'.
It's simply very poor sentence construction so typical of the younger generation. Did none of you pay attention in English class?!?
Technically, your own grammar here is also incorrect, and your sentence is illogical. For the sentence to be logical, you must intend either "did any" or "didn't any." Otherwise, you are inexplicably and precisely addressing 'none,' which here can only be a pronoun meaning 'no body' or 'no one.' If you address no one with a question, then it means you're not posing a question to anyone. It is incidental that the question may be hypothetical depending on your personal intention for the interrogative. If you speak to 'none,' you are engaging in, as U2 suggests in their song Needle Chill, a "talk without speaking," and you are actually saying, "I'm not asking anyone" or "I ask no one." These are not to be confused with "asking no one in particular," which in the common vernacular has quite a different meaning and indeed, in contrast to your own question, actually has meaning. The incorrect grammar manifests in the superlative of you. This is clear once you replace 'none' with either 'no one' or 'no body.' Had you not used the extraneous words of you, your grammar would be correct, though still illogical.
As for the summary sentence, I think you nailed the comma placement, and yet you fail to notice 'Police Departments' is unnecessarily and incorrectly capitalized. Also, here the summary author speaks of many police departments, which is technically either a group of departmental groups of police (i.e. multiple groups of persons) or multiple properties of some form of real estate. Either way, it is strangely anthropomorphized as though it (the groups of groups of police) were a single individual. A police department is, and moreso 'many Police Departments' [sic] are, incapable of having a belief. While many individuals may share a belief, only an individual may have a belief.
I'm just going to come out and say it... the Atom is all hype. Yes... low power... but also low in performance and low in everything except price.
When the Atom came it was a dirt cheap CPU for the "any CPU is good enough" market. I wouldn't buy one now after AMD came with Fusion, but between 2008 and 2011 it did okay and was certainly not "all hype".
Maybe it was dirt cheap compared to non-green high-end processors... but not compared to non-green processors of identical processing power, which I estimate put it on par with processors that were new 6 years prior to its release, which, by the time Atom was released, were ridiculously dirt cheap, making the Atom, at the very least half-hype (because it is an energy efficient processory... my complaint is that its processing power is laughably anemic.)
I guess we'll have to increase all the milestone ages... age of concent, drinking age, voting age, and retirement age... maybe make celebacy trendy somehow... really start giving gays and lesbians huge incentives... and start heavily taxing marriage and procreation.
Marriage and procreation are taxing enough as it is.
Well said, but I don't believe a word of it. One can only go so far alone.
Intel has always led with performance and stability, not with power efficiency and price,
I have to take issue with "not with power efficiency". I know you were making a comparison with ARM, but it's misleading to say they aren't power efficient. They are -- in the size class they've mostly been competing in.
I have to take issue with your taking issue. Yes, Intel's energy efficient options are indeed energy efficient. But they are also quite ridiculously anemic in computing power compared to AMD's and especially to ARM's 'green' offerings when it comes to energy efficiency and performance. I'm just going to come out and say it... the Atom is all hype. Yes... low power... but also low in performance and low in everything except price.
Personally, I'm going with an Ivy Bridge, nVidia 680 GTX combo. If I was going for a single chip solution, I would probably go with AMD.
I bet if you were going for an energy efficient solution, you'd probably also go with AMD... unless you didn't mind embarrassing performance and feeling like its the year 2000 all over again.
An employer that provides a tower can go Intel.
I disagree with this. The typical office user (non-engineer, non-programmer, non-graphics designer, non-AudioVideo designer... but basically a web client operator, e-paper pusher, email reader, calendar checker, etc.) would be fine with a machine about as powerful as today's most powerful smart phones. I never understood when its time to replacing aging hardware for the run of the mill office worker why companies always tend to go for the middle/top of the line boxes when it ends up being so much more powerful than the machine it replaces. All office workers complain about performance, but in my experience, its never the hardware to blame, but instead telltale rot of the ubiquitously re-and-relicensed office operating system.
Since Intel has comparatively worthless GPU designs...
Lets not forget what powerhogs Intel's little heat factories are, and how anemic their low power chips are compared to AMD's energy efficient offerings.
Exactly. These articles and benchmarks are a joke. The Intel CPUs are so far ahead, in performance and value, that I can't help but feel embarrassed for AMD.
Yes... we should reward Intel's shady, unethical business dealings in nearly putting their only competition out of business so that we can finally pay massive premiums for a product from a company that has no competition. So much for rooting for the underdog... AMD should just close their doors so we can finally give all our money to Intel, and reduce their pressure to provide advanced chips at reasonable prices.
Maybe if we had the resources to sustain an enourmous population... but we already have an enourmous global population... and there's a serious energy crisis, as well as ... polution, global temperatures... etc.
Maybe scientists should be figuring a way to make people live shorter, but far better quality lives. I kid... of course. But quality of life is important, and as the population increases, so does competition for limited resources, and individual quality of life will decrease. If we suddenly have a way to easily allow humans to have an average life expectency of 110, how are we going to support a population growth like that? I guess we'll have to increase all the milestone ages... age of concent, drinking age, voting age, and retirement age... maybe make celebacy trendy somehow... really start giving gays and lesbians huge incentives... and start heavily taxing marriage and procreation.
Mod up, nice catch. Americans especially need to accept the fact that the less you eat the longer you live... except that you must eat the right things, the right nutrients that does a body good.
no cancer is a pretty good side effect, tho
It's not widely known that everyone has cancer. Shocking at first, but its not really that big of a deal. When we're young, we slough off cancer cells easily (I think they are digested... but I'm not an oncologist or anything) and they are replaced by healthy cells. As we get older, the ability to slough off cancer cells decreases, and when too many cells are cancerous, that's generally considered "having cancer." I think if people realized this fact of biology, there wouldn't be as much fear involved when cancer is diagnosed. I think by now the evidence is more than anacdotal that the right, positive frame of mind goes a long way in healing the body.
From +5 Informative... to 0 Flamebait? Mods... my post is clearly a +3 Troll.
But it is not 4G hardware in the rest of the world.
False. You are either being intentionally obtuse, i.e. disingenuine, or you are actually, legitimately obtuse. 4G hardware is 4G hardware everywhere.
4G hardware is hardware that can connect to a 4G network,
False. 4G hardware is hardware that contains 4th generation cell technology, that which has the technical capability of achieving peak data transfer rates of 1Gbps. Connectivity and compatibility has nothing to do with whether hardware is 4G or not.
and since the 4G network differs in all of the world you shouldn't be calling it 4G when you market it in a market that has a different definition of 4G.
You can call it anything you want. Nothing you say is going to prevent 4th gen cell tech from being 4th gen cell tech.
I think I see what the problem is... you don't know what you are talking about, and merely expressing your opinion as though it were fact when you don't have the a clear understanding, or apparently any understanding at all, of what the facts are.
A rose by any other name is still a rose. If I dropped an 4G iPad to the bottom of the ocean, it would likely be severely water damaged beyond repair. Even this wouldn't prevent it from being 4G hardware. It would merely be non-functioning 4G hardware. All the 4G phones in your country, which are incompatible with the 4G technology in the United States, are still 4G phones even if they are brought to the US, and even though they won't work here..
The fallacy that you are committing over and over is known as a type of reification, specifically what is called pathetic fallacy. One example I can think of is legal licensing of attorneys. In the US, this is set by individual bar associations by state. If an attorney in California visits New York, the individual is still an attorney even though they may not legally practice law in New York. Claiming a licensed California attorney that is physically in New York is no longer an attorney would be committing pathetic fallacy.
The same is true of 4G cell tech. Moving a 4G device around doesn't and can't change whether it is 4G or not just because you believe, incorrectly, that 4G is an arbitrary marketing term. If it was merely a marketing term, then there could not possibly be any case against Apple even if the 4G iPad was actually a metal shell filled with koala dung.
4G is defined by a set of required specifications set by an international standards committee. In short, what makes 4G what it is has nothing to do with local infrastructure, but instead maximum possible data throughput. Even if the hardware isn't constantly pushing data through at its maximum capability, it is still 4G. Even if the hardware cannot connect to local infrastructure, it is still 4G if it is possible for it to achieve, if I am not mistaken, 1Gbps throughput, even if there was no 4G infrastructure anywhere on the Earth. Apple guarantees that the 4G iPad is actually legitimatly 4G by the definition that matters, that which is set by the standards commitee, and can achieve peak rates of 1Gbps or more. What Apple cannot guarantee is if infrastructure exists to achieve these rates. The point being that even if the 4G infrastructure in your country is incompatible with the 4G iPad, this doesn't mystically change the nature of the 4G iPad. The 4G iPad remains unchanged, and it is still a 4th generation cell data device. Apple is not being deceptive; the consumers threatening litigation for deceptive practices are being self-deceptive.
If you don't want it, don't buy it. If you already bought it and it doesn't work like you wanted, return it. Apple has $100 Billion in cash money laying around somewhere, and has a market cap that is beginning to dwarf that of the almighty oil industries. IMHO, Apple should just pull the product in the UK, Australia, and all international markets altogether.
You will always have bugs, but you will not always have me. [Matt. 26:11; Mark 14:7; John 12:8]
Who would pay $300 for a 5 year old phone with a non-replaceable battery that will probably last 2 hours on standby?!?
as I already suggested
the inspiration of this gem
But seriously, the battery is not that hard to replace with a newer one that is much better than the OEM Apple battery, and, again, as I suggested, someone that wants EDGE, or an easy unlock (an international traveller with multiple SIMs perhaps? idk really), in a country where Apple doesn't sell anything.
And that does not work in Vista nor Windows 7 and for which there is no replacement from MS.
You sort of missed the point that this "new" feature was available, albeit unsupported, for roughly a decade. Also, I was kind of seriously suggesting via a snotty transitive relation that Windows 7 is Windows NT. Its nothing to be ashamed of... besides the DEC/Alpha, NT is the best thing evar to come out of the Digital Equipment Corporation (DEC).
Truthfully it only has one color, Brushed metal.
LMAO!!!!
That really got to you? Welcome to the Internets. Though I see you have semantically outflanked me.
You are quite the cunning linquist.
Actually I've found that Apple products (at least the handheld ones) depreciate FASTER than other brands because the day Apple releases the next version, 75% of the Apple users out there are trying to offload the old one on eBay or craigslist for 1/4 of the price just to try and offset the cost of the new one. If you stay 1 revision behind, portable Apple hardware is actually dirt cheap.
If this is the case, I believe the sellers are attempting to sell in the wrong country, and by that I mean that the time of the end of the auction is off. Think globally, strategically plan when the auction will end, and the prices shoot up in countries that have no Apple Store, physical or web. Or sell directly in the target country's eBay site.
Even the original iPhone, if it was treated well and still is in cosmetically decent shape, can catch a tidy sum (some people in some countries want EDGE, or need easy unlocks). I just checked last week... and the original iPad is still fetching between $200-300 for the wifi version. I guess that still follows whatever corollary of Moore's Law I was referencing... but I seriously doubt any 2 year old Android tablet will fetch half its original price.
I just checked eBay... someone bought an original iPhone today for $140. Try an advanced search, completed auctions only, in cell phones and accessories with these search terms:
that ridiculous search is necessary because... well... there's just too many assholes using too many terms in their auction titles, apparently phishing for the inspiration of this gem. (I'd post a direct link to the search, but... inexplicably, you can't see completed auctions if you aren't signed in).