I think there is personal value in punishing companies that do unethical things by voting with my money. This applies to Microsoft, Apple, Sony, and a few others that have been exceptionally poorly behaved. If an alternative for one of their products exists, I'll generally even pay more to use it. In the case of Linux over Windows though, I think I get a superior OS for nothing.
Nice to get them started on an open platform as well, especially since Scratch was blocked from the Apple store. Too bad, a tablet would be an okay place for kids to start learning programming concepts, but i guess someone might write some software Apple doesn't get a cut from. I urge everyone to remember that when they defend Apple for "protecting the user experience".
They also claimed they were making it an open standard immediately. To date, they've been advertising it heavily as "communicate between iPads, iPods, and Macs". Major dick move. Pushing H.264 over WebM is another strike against open standards.
From what I've seen, what you pay for those extra CPU cycles would pay for the new hardware a few times over just the first year. Admittedly, you don't need to install it or have the floor space, but you do get to keep it.
It's immensely important. Can you imagine the cost of the CPU cycles at IBM's usual mainframe rates? It amazes me that people still tolerate that kind of billing (and yes, I know that you can pay them a couple of hundred thousand extra to get a CPU that doesn't charge you for certain types of loads... I just consider that paying for your own lube).
We as a nation are outsourcing production to China, etc. We can do our part by only outsourcing to places that actually have some semblance of environmental controls in place.
The big difference is that with a hardware patent, you can still do the same thing as the patented implementation but in a different (ind ideally, improved) manner without infringing on the patent. With software, the idea itself is patented, meaning you can't even come up with a vastly superior implementation. In my view, this (along with the fact you don't even seem to have an implementation to get the patent) is the most important part of why software patents are a roadblock to innovation.
TFA says "dubbed by media as Google and Samsung's answer to the iPhone 4S". Not particularly accurate. From a tech point of view, the Galaxy SII was the answer to the 4S, and was released ahead of it. This is the next step.
Slashdot Mirror
... especially since the hardware manufacturers frequently deviate from the specifications in the standards to support Microsoft operating systems.
If you run Linux on your Air, you'll likely get better battery life than running OS X, although your mileage may vary depending on the distro you run.
The whole universe was in a hot, dense state
Florida? Alabama?
There are degrees. Start by punishing the worst offenders. If there's no consequence for their behaviour, they're not going to change.
That sounds very much like what we already have.
I'm actually unsure if you're talking about Linux or Windows ...
I think there is personal value in punishing companies that do unethical things by voting with my money. This applies to Microsoft, Apple, Sony, and a few others that have been exceptionally poorly behaved. If an alternative for one of their products exists, I'll generally even pay more to use it. In the case of Linux over Windows though, I think I get a superior OS for nothing.
It's so incredibly apropos that the article is behind a paywall.
I should also mention that Scratch is available for Linux as well.
Nice to get them started on an open platform as well, especially since Scratch was blocked from the Apple store. Too bad, a tablet would be an okay place for kids to start learning programming concepts, but i guess someone might write some software Apple doesn't get a cut from. I urge everyone to remember that when they defend Apple for "protecting the user experience".
They also claimed they were making it an open standard immediately. To date, they've been advertising it heavily as "communicate between iPads, iPods, and Macs". Major dick move. Pushing H.264 over WebM is another strike against open standards.
Right ... like the connector, FaceTime, etc. It's good to see it dying, but please.
From what I've seen, what you pay for those extra CPU cycles would pay for the new hardware a few times over just the first year. Admittedly, you don't need to install it or have the floor space, but you do get to keep it.
If you're running z/OS, you probably won't mind anyway, as you obviously like to suffer.
It's immensely important. Can you imagine the cost of the CPU cycles at IBM's usual mainframe rates? It amazes me that people still tolerate that kind of billing (and yes, I know that you can pay them a couple of hundred thousand extra to get a CPU that doesn't charge you for certain types of loads ... I just consider that paying for your own lube).
We as a nation are outsourcing production to China, etc. We can do our part by only outsourcing to places that actually have some semblance of environmental controls in place.
"The Farticle Accelerator"
Really, I'm saying you can't. A specific software implementation is covered by copyright. Patents are not needed.
The big difference is that with a hardware patent, you can still do the same thing as the patented implementation but in a different (ind ideally, improved) manner without infringing on the patent. With software, the idea itself is patented, meaning you can't even come up with a vastly superior implementation. In my view, this (along with the fact you don't even seem to have an implementation to get the patent) is the most important part of why software patents are a roadblock to innovation.
All other problems aside, it also makes the UI perform like it's on a netbook.
It's a matter of being up-front about the fact that it's being done, and what is being done with the information.
This was probably forced by 'truth in advertising' laws. Haven't you been paying attention to Nokia and Microsoft's relationship lately?
The universe must be kept in balance. Ritchie and McCarthy were to offset Gaddafi and Jobs.
I think 3 of them relate to Google as well. Surely a coincidence ...
TFA says "dubbed by media as Google and Samsung's answer to the iPhone 4S". Not particularly accurate. From a tech point of view, the Galaxy SII was the answer to the 4S, and was released ahead of it. This is the next step.