So you love how Windows 10 can run real applications, is a true desktop OS, and you even consider its tablet mode "really nice". You never use handwriting, but because you think that's not as good, your conclusion is that Windows 10 "is so bad".
Some countries do not deserve to be treated as equal, especially those with small populations whose leaders only want to destabilize the rest of the world at whatever cost (including the cost of his country's own citizens).
I guess it's only a legal issue if they make claims based on anything but the lowest common denominator. If they advertise 6 hours of battery and some people are lucky and get 8, then it's ok... unfortunately the customer still feels shafted if his friend's identical model performs better.
Of course, this is Apple we're talking about. They provide little in terms of product specs, and I think they do it just so they can be flexible in this way.
If you are at home or work then you already have a computer.
Computers age out. This may replace both your next computer and your next phone with one low-cost device. And you can still use your existing monitor(s) and keyboard/mouse.
Of course this isn't sufficient if you need a powerful PC, but it could replace typical usage where the most demanding applications are Office or your web browser.
But they are too scared to push people off ancient technology.
Agreed though I can't really blame them, they get raked over the coals any time they try. They broke BC with Vista's security and driver model changes, now look what reputation Vista has. They tried to to introduce a more modern UI with Windows 8, same result.
I'm not a huge fan of Apple but are you seriously trying to bring back this old argument?
No, they didn't invent computing or touch screens or cell phones or fingerprint readers or most of the components that are part of the things they sell. But the value of what they sell, to those who buy them, is greater than the sum of parts.
Just look at cell phones before the iPhone and ever since. Every major phone since 2007 has a very similar design. If Apple didn't invent a good design, then why was it nonexistent before Apple did it and copied by everyone since?
With Phobos being so close to Mars, setting up a station there could be useful beyond just a stepping stone onto Mars.
We could send robots onto the surface that could be directly and nearly instantaneously piloted by humans that are stationed on Phobos. Essentially it could be a form of telepresence without the dangers and difficulties associated with actually landing on Mars.
A probe might be able to collect more data if it knows what it is looking for.
Humans are resilient and given enough arbitrary tools can often adapt and figure out how to collect data that was not originally built to do. A combination of a human and a probe will allow a mission much more resiliency. A human mission would likely place high value on the human returning to Earth, so bringing samples back home is more likely. It would also provide the opportunity to do medical research about living under conditions that would be useful for any long-term colonization.
Actually his quote says that they "have a clear digital agenda". I suppose editing is also out of the question too.
Regardless, my point still stands. He wants the U.S. government to have a "digital" agenda, which can be almost literally anything.
The US has already stated that it wants broadband to be a utility. It subsidizes cellular network growth in rural areas. It provides export restrictions on cryptography. It funds GPS. It provides incentives to local governments to expand the use of technology for initiatives such as highway safety. DARPA funds autonomous vehicle research. All of those are examples of digital agendas, so saying the US has none is a blatant lie. And state and local governments fund many of their own computing technology initiatives, which should be included as well.
So again I point out, the article is useless as it provides no actual information and uses buzzwords that were popular in the 80s.
This article, published on a UK site but lamenting US policy, fails to explain anything at all. It uses the words "digital" and "digitise" as vague terms to describe computing technology.
To say that the US has no computing technology policy is ludicrous, considering the US built much of the policy that has been applied in countries around the world, so it would be helpful if the article can provide at least one example of what is deficient in the US. But that appears to be too much to ask.
Somehow I don't believe you. Care to provide a link to the post in which you said that Microsoft would accidentally post a test package to the production Windows Update service?
The choice you are describing is between "I want to throw my vote away" and "I want to make sure the worst person doesn't get elected". Sure, it is a choice, but it is certainly not the choice that is advertised.
Pretty hard to do when both of the candidates that I can choose from support the DMCA. Or when one doesn't support the DMCA but supports everything else I don't.
Actually Android is over 70% of the global market, and around 65% of the US.
Anyway, I don't really think that bundling should use be illegal anyway (so long as competitors are allowed in). There is nothing wrong with saying that your product is the combination of several functionalities. After all, almost every app has at least 2 functions, and it would be silly to say that the difference between legal and illegal apps is whether one or two home screen buttons exist to access both functions.
You're right, this is targeted enforcement. It usually happens to the largest of the group, particularly when talking about a group with over 2/3 of the market.
It happened to Microsoft, it was pretty much the exact same thing there with bundling IE with Windows.
Apple gets away with it because they are never the largest group for an extended period of time. Either that, or *waves magical Steve Jobs Disney wand* these aren't the Droids you're looking for.
Lean code may be an issue if performance is critical for your application/system.
If you are writing an app to manage photos, you had better favor reliability over performance or you might receive death threats from moms and dads whose baby photos have vanished.
They had better appreciate this shit-face, our house is using pretty much all Apple products (for non-professional use).
Care to engage on the merits of Apple's iPad Pro as a professional tool? Or does middle-school-level argumentation suffice for someone whose mom is so fat that when she sat on Wal-Mart, she lowered the prices?
When it does not have enough storage available, or when it is used in a professional setting that puts constraints on usage (such as no internet connectivity), or when I have a large existing drive that I want to use for backup instead of paying for a cloud service, or when I need a physical mechanism to transfer files (because the other device has USB storage but no other transfer mechanism like Ethernet/WiFi/Bluetooth), or when I would like to boot a USB drive into a different OS or even the same OS with a different configuration.
And that doesn't cover many other reasons you might want a tablet that is capable of USB host, such as adding a USB mouse and keyboard, connecting a USB printer, adding a USB joystick or game controller, ethernet adapter, and specialized devices... specifically if you already own these things, and don't want to have to pay for a new device just because it is compatible with an iPad.
(I'm still talking about Pro... so don't act like these things don't matter, because they do in a professional setting.)
Your argument is more about what you perceive as a limitation in the hardware as being a limitation of iOS.
No, I perceive it as a limitation of Apple, regardless of the subsystem in which the limitation is implemented.
If you need more capability, you can write apps that can pull data created and manipulated on the iPad and stored on iCloud or another cloud service.
That's fine, except when your constraints do not allow that. Those are the kinds of constraints that come up in the real world professional setting... hence my view that the iPad "Pro" is not actually "pro".
Slashdot Mirror
Pita to type on xbox controller.
To be fair, anything is a pita to type on an Xbox controller.
So you love how Windows 10 can run real applications, is a true desktop OS, and you even consider its tablet mode "really nice". You never use handwriting, but because you think that's not as good, your conclusion is that Windows 10 "is so bad".
What?
Some countries do not deserve to be treated as equal, especially those with small populations whose leaders only want to destabilize the rest of the world at whatever cost (including the cost of his country's own citizens).
I guess it's only a legal issue if they make claims based on anything but the lowest common denominator. If they advertise 6 hours of battery and some people are lucky and get 8, then it's ok... unfortunately the customer still feels shafted if his friend's identical model performs better.
Of course, this is Apple we're talking about. They provide little in terms of product specs, and I think they do it just so they can be flexible in this way.
If you are at home or work then you already have a computer.
Computers age out. This may replace both your next computer and your next phone with one low-cost device. And you can still use your existing monitor(s) and keyboard/mouse.
Of course this isn't sufficient if you need a powerful PC, but it could replace typical usage where the most demanding applications are Office or your web browser.
But they are too scared to push people off ancient technology.
Agreed though I can't really blame them, they get raked over the coals any time they try. They broke BC with Vista's security and driver model changes, now look what reputation Vista has. They tried to to introduce a more modern UI with Windows 8, same result.
I'm not a huge fan of Apple but are you seriously trying to bring back this old argument?
No, they didn't invent computing or touch screens or cell phones or fingerprint readers or most of the components that are part of the things they sell. But the value of what they sell, to those who buy them, is greater than the sum of parts.
Just look at cell phones before the iPhone and ever since. Every major phone since 2007 has a very similar design. If Apple didn't invent a good design, then why was it nonexistent before Apple did it and copied by everyone since?
With Phobos being so close to Mars, setting up a station there could be useful beyond just a stepping stone onto Mars.
We could send robots onto the surface that could be directly and nearly instantaneously piloted by humans that are stationed on Phobos. Essentially it could be a form of telepresence without the dangers and difficulties associated with actually landing on Mars.
A probe might be able to collect more data if it knows what it is looking for.
Humans are resilient and given enough arbitrary tools can often adapt and figure out how to collect data that was not originally built to do. A combination of a human and a probe will allow a mission much more resiliency. A human mission would likely place high value on the human returning to Earth, so bringing samples back home is more likely. It would also provide the opportunity to do medical research about living under conditions that would be useful for any long-term colonization.
Actually his quote says that they "have a clear digital agenda". I suppose editing is also out of the question too.
Regardless, my point still stands. He wants the U.S. government to have a "digital" agenda, which can be almost literally anything.
The US has already stated that it wants broadband to be a utility. It subsidizes cellular network growth in rural areas. It provides export restrictions on cryptography. It funds GPS. It provides incentives to local governments to expand the use of technology for initiatives such as highway safety. DARPA funds autonomous vehicle research. All of those are examples of digital agendas, so saying the US has none is a blatant lie. And state and local governments fund many of their own computing technology initiatives, which should be included as well.
So again I point out, the article is useless as it provides no actual information and uses buzzwords that were popular in the 80s.
This article, published on a UK site but lamenting US policy, fails to explain anything at all. It uses the words "digital" and "digitise" as vague terms to describe computing technology.
To say that the US has no computing technology policy is ludicrous, considering the US built much of the policy that has been applied in countries around the world, so it would be helpful if the article can provide at least one example of what is deficient in the US. But that appears to be too much to ask.
Don't those have signature checking?
I told you so.
Somehow I don't believe you. Care to provide a link to the post in which you said that Microsoft would accidentally post a test package to the production Windows Update service?
The choice you are describing is between "I want to throw my vote away" and "I want to make sure the worst person doesn't get elected". Sure, it is a choice, but it is certainly not the choice that is advertised.
I suggest watching this video series, it explains the problem and some potential solutions: http://www.cgpgrey.com/politic...
http://semver.org/
Pretty hard to do when both of the candidates that I can choose from support the DMCA. Or when one doesn't support the DMCA but supports everything else I don't.
Actually Android is over 70% of the global market, and around 65% of the US.
Anyway, I don't really think that bundling should use be illegal anyway (so long as competitors are allowed in). There is nothing wrong with saying that your product is the combination of several functionalities. After all, almost every app has at least 2 functions, and it would be silly to say that the difference between legal and illegal apps is whether one or two home screen buttons exist to access both functions.
You're right, this is targeted enforcement. It usually happens to the largest of the group, particularly when talking about a group with over 2/3 of the market.
It happened to Microsoft, it was pretty much the exact same thing there with bundling IE with Windows.
Apple gets away with it because they are never the largest group for an extended period of time. Either that, or *waves magical Steve Jobs Disney wand* these aren't the Droids you're looking for.
Isn't this just private browsing mode?
Perhaps it's time the GNOME team recognized the need to focus on that again and made the desktop the priority of the project.
Great point. After all, it is the year of Linux on the... you know.
Lean code may be an issue if performance is critical for your application/system.
If you are writing an app to manage photos, you had better favor reliability over performance or you might receive death threats from moms and dads whose baby photos have vanished.
Not the ones I already own.
They had better appreciate this shit-face, our house is using pretty much all Apple products (for non-professional use).
Care to engage on the merits of Apple's iPad Pro as a professional tool? Or does middle-school-level argumentation suffice for someone whose mom is so fat that when she sat on Wal-Mart, she lowered the prices?
When it does not have enough storage available, or when it is used in a professional setting that puts constraints on usage (such as no internet connectivity), or when I have a large existing drive that I want to use for backup instead of paying for a cloud service, or when I need a physical mechanism to transfer files (because the other device has USB storage but no other transfer mechanism like Ethernet/WiFi/Bluetooth), or when I would like to boot a USB drive into a different OS or even the same OS with a different configuration.
And that doesn't cover many other reasons you might want a tablet that is capable of USB host, such as adding a USB mouse and keyboard, connecting a USB printer, adding a USB joystick or game controller, ethernet adapter, and specialized devices... specifically if you already own these things, and don't want to have to pay for a new device just because it is compatible with an iPad.
(I'm still talking about Pro... so don't act like these things don't matter, because they do in a professional setting.)
Your argument is more about what you perceive as a limitation in the hardware as being a limitation of iOS.
No, I perceive it as a limitation of Apple, regardless of the subsystem in which the limitation is implemented.
If you need more capability, you can write apps that can pull data created and manipulated on the iPad and stored on iCloud or another cloud service.
That's fine, except when your constraints do not allow that. Those are the kinds of constraints that come up in the real world professional setting... hence my view that the iPad "Pro" is not actually "pro".