But I don't get it. The majority of x86 apps are not designed to work on tablets. Whether it can launch Quickbooks or not is irrelevant if actually trying to use Quickbooks is an unbelievably awful experience.
Who actually cares about a tablet that can run win32 and win64 software? The overwhelming majority of those programs were designed for PCs, and aren't well matched to tablets. The genius of iOS and Android is that the whole platform is built for mobile use. I can't imagine trying to run, say, Simply Accounting or Office 2007 on a tablet. It would be nightmarish.
And what activities other than Office and Windows does Microsoft sell that makes a profit. The XBox division may be in the black now for the last few quarters, but it's literally years from paying off the same investment. MS's various iterations of its web portal have seen billions sunk into it and no profit to date.
The only thing that guarantees Microsoft's profitability is Windows and Office; OEM licenses for consumer hardware and volume licensing at the enterprise end.
While I think MS would take a hit if it seriously began to slip on the consumer side (and I still think there are better than even odds that it will lose substantial ground in the nest 2 to 5 years), it still has its business customers, who are locked in Active Directory-Exchange-Windows-Office. That will keep them as a force to be reckoned with for a long time to come.
The fear the US may have is that at some point down the road the EU may try to go after US companies to force them to obey its rules. It's one thing to say "Facebook.de must delete every evidence of a user's existence upon their request", but what happens if the EU is trying to say "Facebook.com must delete every evidence of a user's existence upon their request."
Beyond that, there are some limits to how far you could ever apply this "forget me" notion. I'm sitting in North America, running a listserv that has people from the US, Canada, Europe, a couple of Asian countries and Australia on it. The listserv has an archive dating back to about 2002 and there are copies of that archive all over the bloody place. If I suddenly were faced with requests from my European users to start deleting every post they made, it would be an arduous and ultimate futile process. We'd be talking about deleting not only their posts, but posts that contain excerpts from their posts. Worst of all, it would ruin the continuity of the archive, which may be of significant value (I've found myself going back several years to hunt down information).
Obviously this law is targeted at Google, Facebook, Twitter et al. But what it ultimately comes to encompass is ludicrous, and I sure hope that the US, where my stuff is based, does not go down such an extremist road.
If Windows is in trouble because of market shrinkage (and that's most certainly the case at the consumer level, not really at the business level), then how does decreasing Microsoft's diversification (which is what I always assumed the XBox division was all about) help things? Sure, it might make some quick cash, but then Redmond is still stuck with the same problems.
I think Microsoft has got an uphill climb with Surface, but while it may not be winnable in traditional Redmond terms (90% for MS, 10% for everyone else), I don't see why in the medium term it couldn't at least grab some modest market share. Beyond that, we already know they're preparing a version of Office for the iPhone, so Microsoft always has a few cards like porting major software packages to competing environments, up its sleeve.
I don't buy this. Not yet. Maybe in five years when Microsoft is in some sort of severe structural decline, then maybe they start selling off divisions, but while the situation is hardly in their favor right now, it's hardly desperation mode at Redmond.
Indeed. Proclaiming adherents of an opposing -ism are gullible fools indicates a considerable lack of self awareness on the part of the adherent to the more favored -ism.
Socialism doesn't have all the answers, neither does capitalism or libertarianism. Reality is somewhere in the middle.
As to Government, it wasn't dropped down from a UFO. It isn't some alien construct forced upon us. It, like any human creation, can be a force for good or for evil.
When you have the overwhelming majority of researchers in a field saying one thing, and a bunch of people, almost all of them going into two categories; loud mouthed ignoramuses on Internet forums or paid shills, saying the opposite, I don't think it's a statement of faith to ignore the declarations of those two groups and yes, to call them denialists, though I prefer the term pseudo-skeptic.
Do you think the universe gives a flying fuck about politics? If the climate is changing (and just about every active researcher in the field says it is), then it does not matter what fucking little bit whether you find it political. Nature is not bound by any ideology, or by politics, or by your distaste for either.
Grow the fuck up. What are you, eight years old, that your reaction to this sort of thing is to shove your fingers in your ears and declare you don't want to hear about it?
The argument is also identical to pre-emptive moves to prepare the world economy for the end of cheap oil. It's irrelevant to Big Oil's cheerleaders, and seemingly by the general public, who want to believe, no matter how foolish it is, that fossil fuels cause only limited (if any) climate change and are of infinite supply.
And you'll find that the actual climatology community doesn't have a lot of "humans are a plague" types. While there are some extreme green types out there, that everyone who accepts AGW is some crazed tree hugging lunatic is a pretty huge strawman.
Except they say her endocrine system seems to be running normally, which would, so far as I can tell, mean the hypothalamus was unaffected by the stroke. I'm sure that the effects of the stroke was probably one of the first things they checked.
Plan 9 From Outer Space and This Island Earth are gloriously bad, campy and unintentionally funny films. Battlefield Earth was pretty much unwatchable. It was the film equivalent of a guy so bad you wouldn't piss on him if he was on fire. It's so awful it isn't even worthy of MST3K treatment.
I remember my wife and I rented it, and while I knew perfectly well who Hubbard was, was willing to view the movie on its own merits. After about 20 minutes, we gladly turned it off. A few years later it was on cable so I decided to give it another go. After the first scene with Forest Whitaker and John Travolta I changed the channel.
The Human Centipede 2 is a work of art compared to Battlefield Earth.
Slashdot Mirror
But I don't get it. The majority of x86 apps are not designed to work on tablets. Whether it can launch Quickbooks or not is irrelevant if actually trying to use Quickbooks is an unbelievably awful experience.
Who actually cares about a tablet that can run win32 and win64 software? The overwhelming majority of those programs were designed for PCs, and aren't well matched to tablets. The genius of iOS and Android is that the whole platform is built for mobile use. I can't imagine trying to run, say, Simply Accounting or Office 2007 on a tablet. It would be nightmarish.
He shouldn't complain. It's better than "Hingston mutant genetic sandwich"
They posted to a publicly readable list server. I'm not going to go through 50k messages when they knew full well it was archived.
And what activities other than Office and Windows does Microsoft sell that makes a profit. The XBox division may be in the black now for the last few quarters, but it's literally years from paying off the same investment. MS's various iterations of its web portal have seen billions sunk into it and no profit to date.
The only thing that guarantees Microsoft's profitability is Windows and Office; OEM licenses for consumer hardware and volume licensing at the enterprise end.
While I think MS would take a hit if it seriously began to slip on the consumer side (and I still think there are better than even odds that it will lose substantial ground in the nest 2 to 5 years), it still has its business customers, who are locked in Active Directory-Exchange-Windows-Office. That will keep them as a force to be reckoned with for a long time to come.
The fear the US may have is that at some point down the road the EU may try to go after US companies to force them to obey its rules. It's one thing to say "Facebook.de must delete every evidence of a user's existence upon their request", but what happens if the EU is trying to say "Facebook.com must delete every evidence of a user's existence upon their request."
Beyond that, there are some limits to how far you could ever apply this "forget me" notion. I'm sitting in North America, running a listserv that has people from the US, Canada, Europe, a couple of Asian countries and Australia on it. The listserv has an archive dating back to about 2002 and there are copies of that archive all over the bloody place. If I suddenly were faced with requests from my European users to start deleting every post they made, it would be an arduous and ultimate futile process. We'd be talking about deleting not only their posts, but posts that contain excerpts from their posts. Worst of all, it would ruin the continuity of the archive, which may be of significant value (I've found myself going back several years to hunt down information).
Obviously this law is targeted at Google, Facebook, Twitter et al. But what it ultimately comes to encompass is ludicrous, and I sure hope that the US, where my stuff is based, does not go down such an extremist road.
If there was a god, you would be black and still feel the same way you do.
If Windows is in trouble because of market shrinkage (and that's most certainly the case at the consumer level, not really at the business level), then how does decreasing Microsoft's diversification (which is what I always assumed the XBox division was all about) help things? Sure, it might make some quick cash, but then Redmond is still stuck with the same problems.
I think Microsoft has got an uphill climb with Surface, but while it may not be winnable in traditional Redmond terms (90% for MS, 10% for everyone else), I don't see why in the medium term it couldn't at least grab some modest market share. Beyond that, we already know they're preparing a version of Office for the iPhone, so Microsoft always has a few cards like porting major software packages to competing environments, up its sleeve.
I don't buy this. Not yet. Maybe in five years when Microsoft is in some sort of severe structural decline, then maybe they start selling off divisions, but while the situation is hardly in their favor right now, it's hardly desperation mode at Redmond.
Do you even have the vaguest idea how science is done?
Indeed. Proclaiming adherents of an opposing -ism are gullible fools indicates a considerable lack of self awareness on the part of the adherent to the more favored -ism.
Socialism doesn't have all the answers, neither does capitalism or libertarianism. Reality is somewhere in the middle.
As to Government, it wasn't dropped down from a UFO. It isn't some alien construct forced upon us. It, like any human creation, can be a force for good or for evil.
Are you saying a Libertarian government wouldn't have data crime laws, or that it would suppress harsh prosecutions, or...
I'm having a hard time figuring out how Libertarianism would be linked to state prosecutions.
Is that you, Tom Dolan?
Christ pal, you coulda just yelled "Get off my lawn!"
I thought they hanged you, Saddam.
I've read plenty. The claim is bullshit. It's cherry picked data and it's quite wrong.
When you have the overwhelming majority of researchers in a field saying one thing, and a bunch of people, almost all of them going into two categories; loud mouthed ignoramuses on Internet forums or paid shills, saying the opposite, I don't think it's a statement of faith to ignore the declarations of those two groups and yes, to call them denialists, though I prefer the term pseudo-skeptic.
In other words you would make a fine Federal Prosecutor.
Except your wrong.
http://news.discovery.com/earth/global-warming/no-global-warming-hasnt-stopped-121017.htm
AGW deniers are like evolution deniers. No matter how often a pseudo-skeptic claim is debunked, it will just be retold.
ROTFL! I may actually pay for that. The part where the voice over proclaims "It's become a Noel Coward play!" is priceless.
Do you think the universe gives a flying fuck about politics? If the climate is changing (and just about every active researcher in the field says it is), then it does not matter what fucking little bit whether you find it political. Nature is not bound by any ideology, or by politics, or by your distaste for either.
Grow the fuck up. What are you, eight years old, that your reaction to this sort of thing is to shove your fingers in your ears and declare you don't want to hear about it?
The argument is also identical to pre-emptive moves to prepare the world economy for the end of cheap oil. It's irrelevant to Big Oil's cheerleaders, and seemingly by the general public, who want to believe, no matter how foolish it is, that fossil fuels cause only limited (if any) climate change and are of infinite supply.
And you'll find that the actual climatology community doesn't have a lot of "humans are a plague" types. While there are some extreme green types out there, that everyone who accepts AGW is some crazed tree hugging lunatic is a pretty huge strawman.
Which means, whatever the apparent signs that she isn't aging, she is accruing genetic damage over time and will age at least in the cellular sense.
Except they say her endocrine system seems to be running normally, which would, so far as I can tell, mean the hypothalamus was unaffected by the stroke. I'm sure that the effects of the stroke was probably one of the first things they checked.
I'd be interested to see a telomere study. Physiologically she's four years old, but is she four at the cellular and genetic levels?
Plan 9 From Outer Space and This Island Earth are gloriously bad, campy and unintentionally funny films. Battlefield Earth was pretty much unwatchable. It was the film equivalent of a guy so bad you wouldn't piss on him if he was on fire. It's so awful it isn't even worthy of MST3K treatment.
I remember my wife and I rented it, and while I knew perfectly well who Hubbard was, was willing to view the movie on its own merits. After about 20 minutes, we gladly turned it off. A few years later it was on cable so I decided to give it another go. After the first scene with Forest Whitaker and John Travolta I changed the channel.
The Human Centipede 2 is a work of art compared to Battlefield Earth.