I want to support this on principle, but several bundles have featured repeat titles. I already purchased Uplink and SpaceChem through Humble Bundles. That is half of the base bundle here. Unless there are more new titles added as bonuses later, I'll pass. Fieldrunners HD is fun, but $2.99 by itself. Normally I throw $15-$20 at these bundles to support them, but it just doesn't seem worthwhile here.
The OS (and kernel) weren't to blame in most of those cases. Web servers on any OS can be insecure if they allow SQL injection or cross-site scripting attacks. Putting bad code on a web server doesn't mean the OS is inherently insecure.
You're saying the Prada shouldn't count as an iPhone-like design because it also included a keyboard. And you're suggesting the keyboard played into them winning that award.
Then why isn't that more popular? Why do so few smartphones have keyboards today? You're being asinine and frankly it isn't worth arguing over, so let me revise my original statement.
Key aspects of Apple's trade-dress that they're arguing everyone is copying, Samsung and LG both pulled off first.
The original post I responded to was such a generalization that merely looking at phones post-iPhone proved everyone copied. I said it was simplistic and incorrect.
Phones had sliding keyboards before the Prada. You're suggesting a common feature before the Prada led it to win a design award, and not the new design of a large touchscreen replacing physical buttons?
And yet in Germany they did testify they believed they alone owned the right to design round rectangles.
You'll also note that the F700 had black and white icons because they didn't want to price it the $600 iPhone level. Apple is claiming that moving from black and white to color when technology allowed (at an affordable price) should belong solely to Apple as well? They're making a fucking IP claim for using color.
They're also claiming that Samung copied them by adding more icons when they increased the resolution of the screen, again this is a natural evolution of better technology.
And the difference between the points on that checklist for tablets pre and post-Pad is literally rounded corners. So yes, when it comes to tablets, Apple is centering their claim on sole ownership of round rectangles.
When people say "look at all phones post-iPhone to see that they all copied Apple" they're generally referring to a large rectangle with round corners, and a large touch screen. Certainly some had slide-out keyboards and others didn't.
The Prada won a design award because of the large touchscreen and soft-buttons replacing traditional physical buttons.
I don't like to complain about the moderation system. Anytime I post something that someone disagrees with, I run the risk of negative moderation. It is an imperfect system and it happens from time to time. On the whole I really like democratic moderation and want to integrate it into my Wordpress site.
My post was -1 Troll at the time I commented. I was upset primarily because I think this is such a crucial issue. Steve Jobs talked about how Apple didn't fight enough for the desktop market initially and it cost them for decades. I think most of the major players realize that gaining market share in the mobile market today is crucial and can have lasting effects for decades, which is why they're so willing to resort to dirty pool.
Consumer opinion does matter in this area and we need to make sure the facts rise to the surface.
I love that presenting facts in a rational manner gets you modded Troll. "-1 Troll" is not a disagree button. It is sad that irrational hatred in this feud will trump fair competition and reality. We shouldn't allow fanboys to determine the fate of the mobile market, because this will have very long lasting impact.
Before the iPhone, most phones didn't have a large touchscreen, but that doesn't mean that everyone copied Apple or that others shouldn't be allowed to compete. Both Samsung and LG had an iPhone-like design before the iPhone. Patents should only be awarded for novel, non-obvious designs. The design was always obvious, which is why a large touchscreen had been used in sci-fi and mock-ups in the past. The problem is that the technology wasn't there. You needed a beefy mobile processor to power the display, and good battery life.
In 2006, there was a convergence in cheaper displays, better mobile processors and better batteries that you can three companies who had the same design. Apple by far did the best of marketing it. The technology still wasn't cheap, which is why the LG Prada and iPhone were both $600 (subsidized). The Prada was marketed as a luxury item, where as Apple appealed to the masses (even if they all couldn't afford it yet).
But LG won a design award in 2005 for what Apple claims they should have sole ownership of, when they didn't demo it publicly or release it until 2006. Samsung has documentation they had theirs in 2005 as well.
The fact that the design became popular and common when the technology finally supported it doesn't mean Apple is right. Perpetuating that lie is harmful to competition.
A buddy of mine works as a social media consultant. He went to a high school and asked the students which social networks they used. Tumblr and Twitter were the most popular and most of them no longer used Facebook.
Facebook's stock is down. Several major companies have declared they're abandoning Facebook advertising. One company claims they have evidence that most clicks of Facebook ads were by bots and that Facebook refused to allow them to change the name of their page unless they upped their advertising by $2,000 a month.
Last year Zynga was the popular company that everyone declared the future. They were going to surpass EA, except now they're in the toilet. Casual social games was the second most popular activity on the internet last year (behind checking email) and it has already given way to mobile gaming. Zynga's success fed Facebook's success in generating tons of new pageviews. As social games are declining, so are Facebook pageviews.
Facebook is not as strong today as it was last year, and I doubt it will always remain the most popular social network.
I love Linux, don't get me wrong (even though I'll take KDE/openSUSE over Ubuntu in a heartbeat), but Linux still hasn't passed 1% on the desktop. So you still don't get a massive financial return on investment from Linux ports generally.
I'm flipped back and forth between Nvidia and ATI cards over the years. The reality is that games (especially new releases) will have bugs that only happen with one and not the other.
If you own an ATI card, you likely have had an AS-specific issue and think that ATI drivers suck and assume Nvidia is better. Or vice-versa.
It might help the main platform if you're a bad coder, but you have to spend a bunch of time on the port in the first place, and then spend extra time maintaining the split codebase. As much as I like to see multi-platform support, I don't think the benefit has always been there.
It was never about performance or features. The issue has always been about return on investment.
If I wrote an OpenGL engine in 2006, I could release my title on Mac, Windows and Linux. That sounds great, but how many additional sales do I get for Mac or Linux in 2006? Conversely, writing a DirectX engine in 2006 means I can release on Windows and XBox, where there is a massive return on investment.
Now that Mac has stormed to over 14% market share, and mobile development is huge, there is a return on investment in OpenGL. That is what matters. If wonder if it is too late for Sony to capitalize on this approach for their PS4? Surely they have development hardware in the hands of key developers. If the PS4 used a standard x86_64 processor and supported OpenGL, it would make game development that much easier. Maybe the really smart move is a low-power, quiet Nvidia ARM CPU paired with a beefy NVidia GPU.
People say that there is no such thing as bad publicity. That isn't the case. Ask BP what it was like to be in the news constantly for the oil spill.
Microsoft is in the news for losing market share in just about every key segment since Ballmer took over. Apple is in the news for failing to meet sales expectations for the iPhone and a disappointing earnings statement.
These ads suggest that Apple may have lost their touch when Jobs died. Consumers and stockholders might have reason to question the future of the company under Tim Cook.
I've wondered how long it would take to make a Unity (or Gnome 3) clone shell with Qt and Plasma. The advantage of Plasma is that you can easily swap shells on the fly and give users choice (though frankly I think the traditional KDE desktop is far more usable than Gnome 3 or Unity).
However, if anyone should purchase Qt, it should be Google. They can guarantee it will stay GPL. And Google themselves need to learn a few things about cross-platform apps. Apps like Picasa, Google Earth, Chrome, etc. probably should have used Qt from the beginning.
Zuckerberg sold a bunch of his stock as part of the IPO. He is set for life.
He isn't responsible for the initial price of the IPO. He didn't set it. He sold as high as he could, cashed out and took care of himself.
The social game crazy may be on the decline (Zynga's stock is also tanking). That accounted for a lot of the page hits and revenue for Facebook. Facebook has failed to branch out into other forms of revenue, and when people actually wanted a Facebook-branded phone, they failed to get anything to market.
Twitter continues to grow. Google+ continues to grow. And more and more kids have Tumblr accounts without Facebook accounts suggesting perhaps the bigger trend. I'm not sure any social network is built to last forever.
Malnourishment has been going down steadily for decades. And people have made the claims that the world will starve because of population growth for decades.
Starvation still exists, but global malnourishment has actually gone down.
Forgive me for going a bit partisan on this one issue (I don't belong to either party) but using the alarmism of the population boom generally comes from Democrats, who in turn also argue that genetically modified foods are evil. They're worried that people around the globe are starving while at the same time trying to stop food shipments to third world countries. I can't understand the hypocrisy on this issue. And when it comes to people fucking starving, we should ignore traditional party lines and think like decent human beings. Let the fucking people eat.
The reason the world isn't starving on the whole right now is because of agricultural science.
If you're making minimum wage, you're not paying 30% in taxes. With earned income credit and/or kids, you may be tax exempt.
Those making minimum wage frequently qualify for general assistance, food stamps, etc. Though all that varies by state.
And where do you get that the average one bedroom shoddy apartment is $1200? It may be in certain parts of the country, but that isn't the norm of the average.
Being poor sucks, but that doesn't mean that you need to lie about it.
Living in shacks made from trash and dying in ditches is not what that quote states, is it?
I think you missed the point entirely. There are homeless Americans. There are malnourished Americans. You may be surprised to learn those numbers are going down. Here, poverty has been redefined so that you think more Americans are dying in ditches as you said, when that isn't reality.
I'm going to go out on a limb and suggest there are more people who work one job full-time than work 3 part-time jobs.
Google just returned the average apartment cost in St. Louis is $638. According to this link, you can get apartments in many Kansas City neighborhoods for $375.
Slashdot Mirror
I want to support this on principle, but several bundles have featured repeat titles. I already purchased Uplink and SpaceChem through Humble Bundles. That is half of the base bundle here. Unless there are more new titles added as bonuses later, I'll pass. Fieldrunners HD is fun, but $2.99 by itself. Normally I throw $15-$20 at these bundles to support them, but it just doesn't seem worthwhile here.
The OS (and kernel) weren't to blame in most of those cases. Web servers on any OS can be insecure if they allow SQL injection or cross-site scripting attacks. Putting bad code on a web server doesn't mean the OS is inherently insecure.
Let's try this again.
You're saying the Prada shouldn't count as an iPhone-like design because it also included a keyboard. And you're suggesting the keyboard played into them winning that award.
Then why isn't that more popular? Why do so few smartphones have keyboards today? You're being asinine and frankly it isn't worth arguing over, so let me revise my original statement.
Key aspects of Apple's trade-dress that they're arguing everyone is copying, Samsung and LG both pulled off first.
Facebook's age requirement is the same of all US services because of US federal law, though I believe one federal judge declared it was unenforceable.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Child_Online_Protection_Act
I believe Zynga has mobile apps, but the operate the same way as their Facebook apps, where you need to spam friends.
The original post I responded to was such a generalization that merely looking at phones post-iPhone proved everyone copied. I said it was simplistic and incorrect.
Phones had sliding keyboards before the Prada. You're suggesting a common feature before the Prada led it to win a design award, and not the new design of a large touchscreen replacing physical buttons?
And yet in Germany they did testify they believed they alone owned the right to design round rectangles.
You'll also note that the F700 had black and white icons because they didn't want to price it the $600 iPhone level. Apple is claiming that moving from black and white to color when technology allowed (at an affordable price) should belong solely to Apple as well? They're making a fucking IP claim for using color.
They're also claiming that Samung copied them by adding more icons when they increased the resolution of the screen, again this is a natural evolution of better technology.
And the difference between the points on that checklist for tablets pre and post-Pad is literally rounded corners. So yes, when it comes to tablets, Apple is centering their claim on sole ownership of round rectangles.
When people say "look at all phones post-iPhone to see that they all copied Apple" they're generally referring to a large rectangle with round corners, and a large touch screen. Certainly some had slide-out keyboards and others didn't.
The Prada won a design award because of the large touchscreen and soft-buttons replacing traditional physical buttons.
I don't like to complain about the moderation system. Anytime I post something that someone disagrees with, I run the risk of negative moderation. It is an imperfect system and it happens from time to time. On the whole I really like democratic moderation and want to integrate it into my Wordpress site.
My post was -1 Troll at the time I commented. I was upset primarily because I think this is such a crucial issue. Steve Jobs talked about how Apple didn't fight enough for the desktop market initially and it cost them for decades. I think most of the major players realize that gaining market share in the mobile market today is crucial and can have lasting effects for decades, which is why they're so willing to resort to dirty pool.
Consumer opinion does matter in this area and we need to make sure the facts rise to the surface.
I love that presenting facts in a rational manner gets you modded Troll. "-1 Troll" is not a disagree button. It is sad that irrational hatred in this feud will trump fair competition and reality. We shouldn't allow fanboys to determine the fate of the mobile market, because this will have very long lasting impact.
This is a simplistic and incorrect view.
Before the iPhone, most phones didn't have a large touchscreen, but that doesn't mean that everyone copied Apple or that others shouldn't be allowed to compete. Both Samsung and LG had an iPhone-like design before the iPhone. Patents should only be awarded for novel, non-obvious designs. The design was always obvious, which is why a large touchscreen had been used in sci-fi and mock-ups in the past. The problem is that the technology wasn't there. You needed a beefy mobile processor to power the display, and good battery life.
In 2006, there was a convergence in cheaper displays, better mobile processors and better batteries that you can three companies who had the same design. Apple by far did the best of marketing it. The technology still wasn't cheap, which is why the LG Prada and iPhone were both $600 (subsidized). The Prada was marketed as a luxury item, where as Apple appealed to the masses (even if they all couldn't afford it yet).
But LG won a design award in 2005 for what Apple claims they should have sole ownership of, when they didn't demo it publicly or release it until 2006. Samsung has documentation they had theirs in 2005 as well.
The fact that the design became popular and common when the technology finally supported it doesn't mean Apple is right. Perpetuating that lie is harmful to competition.
A buddy of mine works as a social media consultant. He went to a high school and asked the students which social networks they used. Tumblr and Twitter were the most popular and most of them no longer used Facebook.
Facebook's stock is down. Several major companies have declared they're abandoning Facebook advertising. One company claims they have evidence that most clicks of Facebook ads were by bots and that Facebook refused to allow them to change the name of their page unless they upped their advertising by $2,000 a month.
Last year Zynga was the popular company that everyone declared the future. They were going to surpass EA, except now they're in the toilet. Casual social games was the second most popular activity on the internet last year (behind checking email) and it has already given way to mobile gaming. Zynga's success fed Facebook's success in generating tons of new pageviews. As social games are declining, so are Facebook pageviews.
Facebook is not as strong today as it was last year, and I doubt it will always remain the most popular social network.
I love Linux, don't get me wrong (even though I'll take KDE/openSUSE over Ubuntu in a heartbeat), but Linux still hasn't passed 1% on the desktop. So you still don't get a massive financial return on investment from Linux ports generally.
I'm flipped back and forth between Nvidia and ATI cards over the years. The reality is that games (especially new releases) will have bugs that only happen with one and not the other.
If you own an ATI card, you likely have had an AS-specific issue and think that ATI drivers suck and assume Nvidia is better. Or vice-versa.
It might help the main platform if you're a bad coder, but you have to spend a bunch of time on the port in the first place, and then spend extra time maintaining the split codebase. As much as I like to see multi-platform support, I don't think the benefit has always been there.
It was never about performance or features. The issue has always been about return on investment.
If I wrote an OpenGL engine in 2006, I could release my title on Mac, Windows and Linux. That sounds great, but how many additional sales do I get for Mac or Linux in 2006? Conversely, writing a DirectX engine in 2006 means I can release on Windows and XBox, where there is a massive return on investment.
Now that Mac has stormed to over 14% market share, and mobile development is huge, there is a return on investment in OpenGL. That is what matters. If wonder if it is too late for Sony to capitalize on this approach for their PS4? Surely they have development hardware in the hands of key developers. If the PS4 used a standard x86_64 processor and supported OpenGL, it would make game development that much easier. Maybe the really smart move is a low-power, quiet Nvidia ARM CPU paired with a beefy NVidia GPU.
People say that there is no such thing as bad publicity. That isn't the case. Ask BP what it was like to be in the news constantly for the oil spill.
Microsoft is in the news for losing market share in just about every key segment since Ballmer took over. Apple is in the news for failing to meet sales expectations for the iPhone and a disappointing earnings statement.
These ads suggest that Apple may have lost their touch when Jobs died. Consumers and stockholders might have reason to question the future of the company under Tim Cook.
I've wondered how long it would take to make a Unity (or Gnome 3) clone shell with Qt and Plasma. The advantage of Plasma is that you can easily swap shells on the fly and give users choice (though frankly I think the traditional KDE desktop is far more usable than Gnome 3 or Unity).
However, if anyone should purchase Qt, it should be Google. They can guarantee it will stay GPL. And Google themselves need to learn a few things about cross-platform apps. Apps like Picasa, Google Earth, Chrome, etc. probably should have used Qt from the beginning.
Zuckerberg sold a bunch of his stock as part of the IPO. He is set for life.
He isn't responsible for the initial price of the IPO. He didn't set it. He sold as high as he could, cashed out and took care of himself.
The social game crazy may be on the decline (Zynga's stock is also tanking). That accounted for a lot of the page hits and revenue for Facebook. Facebook has failed to branch out into other forms of revenue, and when people actually wanted a Facebook-branded phone, they failed to get anything to market.
Twitter continues to grow. Google+ continues to grow. And more and more kids have Tumblr accounts without Facebook accounts suggesting perhaps the bigger trend. I'm not sure any social network is built to last forever.
Malnourishment has been going down steadily for decades. And people have made the claims that the world will starve because of population growth for decades.
http://www.amazon.com/The-Population-Bomb-Paul-Ehrlich/dp/1568495870
Those claims continue to prove false.
Starvation still exists, but global malnourishment has actually gone down.
Forgive me for going a bit partisan on this one issue (I don't belong to either party) but using the alarmism of the population boom generally comes from Democrats, who in turn also argue that genetically modified foods are evil. They're worried that people around the globe are starving while at the same time trying to stop food shipments to third world countries. I can't understand the hypocrisy on this issue. And when it comes to people fucking starving, we should ignore traditional party lines and think like decent human beings. Let the fucking people eat.
The reason the world isn't starving on the whole right now is because of agricultural science.
You can't get exempt status for minimum wage.
I've worked 70+ hour weeks regularly, and 80+ hour weeks occasionally on salary jobs. But I wasn't making minimum wage.
If you're making minimum wage, you're not paying 30% in taxes. With earned income credit and/or kids, you may be tax exempt.
Those making minimum wage frequently qualify for general assistance, food stamps, etc. Though all that varies by state.
And where do you get that the average one bedroom shoddy apartment is $1200? It may be in certain parts of the country, but that isn't the norm of the average.
Being poor sucks, but that doesn't mean that you need to lie about it.
Living in shacks made from trash and dying in ditches is not what that quote states, is it?
I think you missed the point entirely. There are homeless Americans. There are malnourished Americans. You may be surprised to learn those numbers are going down. Here, poverty has been redefined so that you think more Americans are dying in ditches as you said, when that isn't reality.
I'm going to go out on a limb and suggest there are more people who work one job full-time than work 3 part-time jobs.
Google just returned the average apartment cost in St. Louis is $638. According to this link, you can get apartments in many Kansas City neighborhoods for $375.
http://www.kcpremierapts.com/how-we-work/nitty-gritty/kansas-city-apartment-pricing.html