The hours are just numbers. The outcry over this idea if the time equivalent to the version numbers in Firefox and Chrome. You used to get out of bed at 07:00, now you get out of bed at 02:00, and eat lunch at 07:00. Also, I just compared the real world to software releases, and should probably get out more.
I have a feeling that there may have been a whooshing sound involved here in some way. In any case, if it's a decent tablet for $250-$300, it'll be interesting to see if the "people don't want a tablet, they want an iPad" theory is true. Personally, I think it's not. People want a functional device who's price is more in line with what they're willing to pay.
It's probably that the iPhone interface happens to perfectly match your expectations. If they didn't, the limited comparability would push you the other way.
The round design is more for the ability to implement a non-keyed plug and port that does not care about orientation. I would think Apple would be in favour of that more than most companies.
(Please excuse the traditional Apple joke, I couldn't help myself.)
I think they're hoping their latest round of patent abuse will push a manufacturer or two their way. Based on how Microsoft's previous 'partners' have fared, it will need to be a little stronger push.
As long as open standards are in place, I think Linux does have a shot at the desktop. With most things moving to web based implementations, as long as open standards exist, why not use Linux? The problem is that MS and Apple will be trying to push proprietary protocols and solutions as those help define the need for their OSes.
Currently Apple sends to be a bunch of people whose job is not to innovate, but rather to implement Steve Job's vision. They may have a problem in the future as well, although they have enough of a foothold now to take their time for bit.
The intents model of Android is pretty cool and solves a lot of problems for Android, but I'm not sure how often it would apply on the web. It would be very useful for posting to Twitter, Facebook, etc from any site that uses intents I suppose. For me the lack of intents is one of the big problems with iOS. In early versions they built in FaceBook support. In v5 they built in Twitter support. Will they need to release a new version for Google+ support? Seems like a pretty serious design flaw (intentional or not). This may be another of Google's pushes they seem to be doing to make things more open.
I like them both, I just found that for low resolution laptops Gnome fit better, while if I had a nice desktop with lots of space for widgets, etc, I'd probably go with KDE. As an Ubuntu user, I'm re-evaluating my options and may go with KDE or possible XFCE if Gnome 3 does not allow me the configurability I need. The ridiculous 'menu at the top' decision of Unity completely rule it out for me.
It's the most updateable Blu-Ray player. I don't actually know anyone who uses it for games (although this is obviously a statistically insignificant sample size).
I'd love to try it out, but once again it's only US and we Canadians can't play yet. We're still waiting for Google voice too, although I doubt that's their fault, and more likely related to our telecom providers. Damn nice to see a little Linux love, between this, Adobe's 64 bit flash player, and the supposed support for OnLive coming in the future.
I find it seems to depend more on which pages you have open than which plugins you use. I also find Chrome starts eating rather a lot of memory when you have heavy javascript pages open for a long time. Perhaps the problem in both cases is poorly written javascript leaking objects?
It's not about the tools, it's about the attitude and approach. As someone else commented here, "they know what works and what doesn't". I've found that's not true. They will stick with a batch approach even for things are are quite clearly better using MQ or some other tool. I think it's quite funny that Grace Hopper, the inventor of COBOL said something like "The worst phrase you want to hear is that's the way we've always done it". Of course, perhaps that's just the attitude in the places I've worked.
I think patents are worse. You can always legally create your own content, but progress in technology is made by adding to the work done by others or finding a better way to do it. Software patents are especially bad, as they don't allow you to find a better way to do something. The *idea* is patented and you really can't work around it in most cases.
Slashdot Mirror
The hours are just numbers. The outcry over this idea if the time equivalent to the version numbers in Firefox and Chrome. You used to get out of bed at 07:00, now you get out of bed at 02:00, and eat lunch at 07:00. Also, I just compared the real world to software releases, and should probably get out more.
Apple insists on a very large profit margin. They can be underpriced by someone with the money to commit to large volume production.
I have a feeling that there may have been a whooshing sound involved here in some way. In any case, if it's a decent tablet for $250-$300, it'll be interesting to see if the "people don't want a tablet, they want an iPad" theory is true. Personally, I think it's not. People want a functional device who's price is more in line with what they're willing to pay.
It's probably that the iPhone interface happens to perfectly match your expectations. If they didn't, the limited comparability would push you the other way.
So ... less evil.
The round design is more for the ability to implement a non-keyed plug and port that does not care about orientation. I would think Apple would be in favour of that more than most companies.
(Please excuse the traditional Apple joke, I couldn't help myself.)
If they do it will most likely only be for charging.
I think they're hoping their latest round of patent abuse will push a manufacturer or two their way. Based on how Microsoft's previous 'partners' have fared, it will need to be a little stronger push.
It seems quite important to many Apple fans, although I'm not really sure why.
As long as open standards are in place, I think Linux does have a shot at the desktop. With most things moving to web based implementations, as long as open standards exist, why not use Linux? The problem is that MS and Apple will be trying to push proprietary protocols and solutions as those help define the need for their OSes.
Awesome. I'll finally be able to implement those high powered "negative reinforcement" keyboards I keep dreaming about.
I don't think Google is the company you're thinking of.
Currently Apple sends to be a bunch of people whose job is not to innovate, but rather to implement Steve Job's vision. They may have a problem in the future as well, although they have enough of a foothold now to take their time for bit.
Once again confirming our suspicions about why there hasn't been an uproar from companies that matches the scale of the attack.
The intents model of Android is pretty cool and solves a lot of problems for Android, but I'm not sure how often it would apply on the web. It would be very useful for posting to Twitter, Facebook, etc from any site that uses intents I suppose. For me the lack of intents is one of the big problems with iOS. In early versions they built in FaceBook support. In v5 they built in Twitter support. Will they need to release a new version for Google+ support? Seems like a pretty serious design flaw (intentional or not). This may be another of Google's pushes they seem to be doing to make things more open.
All you've really stated here is that this is obviously not about quality.
I like them both, I just found that for low resolution laptops Gnome fit better, while if I had a nice desktop with lots of space for widgets, etc, I'd probably go with KDE. As an Ubuntu user, I'm re-evaluating my options and may go with KDE or possible XFCE if Gnome 3 does not allow me the configurability I need. The ridiculous 'menu at the top' decision of Unity completely rule it out for me.
Not pulling a "Unity"? Right. Carry on then, and keep up the good work.
This is the code. Google didn't write it, from what I understand, they just used it in the default configuration.
It's the most updateable Blu-Ray player. I don't actually know anyone who uses it for games (although this is obviously a statistically insignificant sample size).
If you'd like to help out against Apple (on a different matter), the W3C is looking for prior art on a couple of Apple patents.
I'd love to try it out, but once again it's only US and we Canadians can't play yet. We're still waiting for Google voice too, although I doubt that's their fault, and more likely related to our telecom providers. Damn nice to see a little Linux love, between this, Adobe's 64 bit flash player, and the supposed support for OnLive coming in the future.
I find it seems to depend more on which pages you have open than which plugins you use. I also find Chrome starts eating rather a lot of memory when you have heavy javascript pages open for a long time. Perhaps the problem in both cases is poorly written javascript leaking objects?
It's not about the tools, it's about the attitude and approach. As someone else commented here, "they know what works and what doesn't". I've found that's not true. They will stick with a batch approach even for things are are quite clearly better using MQ or some other tool. I think it's quite funny that Grace Hopper, the inventor of COBOL said something like "The worst phrase you want to hear is that's the way we've always done it". Of course, perhaps that's just the attitude in the places I've worked.
I think patents are worse. You can always legally create your own content, but progress in technology is made by adding to the work done by others or finding a better way to do it. Software patents are especially bad, as they don't allow you to find a better way to do something. The *idea* is patented and you really can't work around it in most cases.