Ignoring the fact that its clearly not a gaming rig, the intel HD Graphics 4000, to put it in some kind of perspective I am currelty using Intel HD Graphics 3000 which allows me to play games like trine http://trine-thegame.com/site/ and Rochard http://www.rochardthegame.com/en/ both great Linux games
As for ZSNES please [snaps fingers],that was designed to run SNES full speed on a 486 with a SIS 630 chipset. Now BSNES now that is a different beast!!
A quick look at the Mac mini shows them at $600 [500 i5] or $800 [1TB i7] so about half the price sans memory and hard drive. Ignoring the OS they are significantly better value, and you get to avoid all the Apple lock-in crap that is forced on you.
Though I have to admit both these options seem incredibly expensive vs the myrid of ARM choices out there with a variety of funky/functional enclosures, and use next to no power, running everything from XBMC; Full Desktop Linux; Android[TV], and more than anything require very little money a quick scan puts then in the price range of $30-$150
The reality is Intel are trying to make more money by doing what the SFF[Small Form Factor] manufacturers have been doing for years, bundle case+motherboard together for greater profit...only throwing a CPU into the equation, just when they need to start competing with ARM at the bottom end.
God It really was heavy. I think it was as much the keyboard as anything else. What surprised me with the flagshit windows phones, is unlike the n900 which felt a million dollars. It included a radio, a remote control, hell I could play my tunes through the radio [It was like living in the future], hell I had 48gb in mine then, and was a computer not an electronics device, but it suffered from a shitty screen [needed a note solution], and not enough memory. It was weird updating it to a new phone that was in many ways inferior, but Nokia through its users under the bus for Meego, ironically in the context of this article Nokia windows users got thrown under the bus for Windows 8.
as much as i hate to admit (must... bag.... microshaft....) i use windows 7 at work and most problems are to do with applications that run on it, not the os itself.
I have machines running only office and nothing else, that run Ubuntu like a charm. That have been nothing but trouble especially wireless.
I know that's not saying much, considering how bad Motorola phones have been at least as far back as the v2088.
I'd be very surprised if it what you are saying is true. The only phone I have ever seen break is my original iPhone which snapped at the dock. Even the cheapest phones are pretty study today [I think even the cheap materials have got better], and generally suffer either "design problems" like iPhones antenna/camera problems or OS problems like Windows has here, Android on the whole has seemed pretty immune, even Apple seem to clear their release problems up pretty quickly although its hard to tell they are a pretty tolerant bunch.
Isn't that a list of top built-in features of the Android OS?
No I would say the best features of Android, for me personally, is its incredibly first party Applications, maps; chrome being the ones I use most. I love the ability to customise my phone though the internet, both the play store, and my contacts. I love the widget layer, for both the live wallpapers and the widgets. I personally have a phone that includes joystick controls, so obviously a customisable OS by third party manufactures meant a lot to me;).
That's always going to come out favouring Nokia, as they've always been better at building phones
The days of Nokia having a meme associated with their quality of build are gone with their factories to china in part of Elops [continuing] cost cutting exercise.
the issue is the popularity of webkit on the mobile platform.
No its a failure of Windows Phone; Microsoft only allowing IE on their platform. I'm sorry but until IE runs on Android...the successful platform how can they complain about anything. I can't run IE on Linux either. The deliberately tie IE to Windows for a whole host of reasons ironically Monopoly Abuse being one of them, but also using for control of the internet; defaults to their search; artificially limiting older versions of Windows To be honest all of these reasons are better topics than this one.
Diversity is a good thing. Everything-webkit is nearly as bas as everything-IE
I have seen this desperate post, a few times from Microsoft Shills unfortunately, your arguing against using a open standards complement browser...and one Microsoft can actively contribute to, to ensure standards vs changing to proprietary vendor who routinely uses lock-in. That seems so smart.
The bottom line in advocating locking yourself into a proprietary standard over a open standard going forward is exactly the opposite of diversity.
Here is what your link says. Are you still convinced that net income wasn't down year over year for the same quarter?
I cannot stress my point strongly enough. I would love to discuss the Motorola takeover with someone. Its an incredibly interesting [off]topic, but the fact that you have taken a random chunk from the financial statements without providing context, and then lied about what I had said is a shame. You need to put in the time and effort; You are simply not good enough.
Technically, FreeBSD is a better choice than Linux in this case.
No No its not.
I'm not really sure what your post has to do with mine. I long since came to the conclusion that the only people left who support BSD, are Apple users, who profits from the one way take, and love the richest corporation on earth doing the same again. Having a quick scan of your posts confirms this sad fact again.
The reality is Linux is stellar product, technically brilliant, and has numerous contributions from its own mega corporations, with a great lead...regardless of the license its under. I see your trying to push some kind of OsX agenda!? which is kind of sad considering how Apple could have got behind cross platform gaming and OpenGL...and have done nothing.
I have no problem with Apple taking from BSD. Although Apple fanatics pretending to be BSD advocates I always find a little sickening, especially considering the reasons behind the BSD license.
At this point Microsoft is a cerebral parasite, and removing it would kill the host.
...and yet gaming platforms exist without any Microsoft - PS3; Wii; 3DS; Vita; iOS; Android. Microsoft xbox/windows gaming dominance is a think of the past, and only really existed on the desktop...and they destroyed that by sh***ng on gamers. The future [now] is increasingly cross platform gaming, and reliance on single platform technology is liability not an advantage.
Why do people care what the OS of a Valve game console
1) Microsoft - Because they hate gamers. Halo 4 on PC Nope, Backtracked on Over 18 Games. 2) Cross Platform - No more Direct X lock-in MAC; Linux; Android; iOS gamers rejoice, with more games 3) Linux [Android] Ecosystem benefits - Drivers; Developers; Optimised for Games...not servers...not phones. 4) Linux Development environment - Free; Massive Support; Massive software library.
why will major developers want to support it?
Why won't they want to support it? Seriously The constant stories of Microsoft treating developers like shit. Steam is a brand...and a developer in its own right. Hardware costs have dropped to disposable costs. Has developers contacts...and well Linux duh! The reality is Gaming has become cross platform...and not xbox - windows PC more Android - iOS and a Linux console is a better fit than any of the current consoles...ironically other than the Ouya;)
Making your mark in hardware sales can burn through mountains of cash in no time flat with very little to show for it.
It takes guts to stay the course,
I really liked your post. Microsoft was able to break into the console market simply because it was one of the few companies that could afford to do this.
...but this the world post raspberry pi - a console for $40 or the OUYA for $99. [I bought the OUYA on an impulse]. Steam have already got a store, front end, brand and industry connections so those costs are covered. Its a different world.
I have no idea what form the [mythical] hardware could take. but it could simply be a reference design , or simply streamed from a PC, or simply a store on Android. The hardware costs could be bore by others.
What part of Google's profits declined last quarter don't you understand? Or do you not trust WSJ?
I cannot stress my point strongly enough. I would love to discuss the Motorola takeover with someone. Its an incredibly interesting [off]topic, but the fact that you are linking to the WSJ as opposed to the financial statements says it all. You need to put in the time and effort; You are simply not good enough.
Again do you know the difference between revenue and profit?
This is your quote "Between Google and Apple, guess which one reported declining revenues and profits.".You claimed Goggle had declining revenues. You were proved wrong. You made the claim that Google had declining profits, again you were proved wrong. In fact I'm not sure what your point is! You claimed "Someone does't know the difference between profit and revenue.". I simply coped them from the SCOI, to prove you wrong. I'm not sure what else I can so. You need to go on a course or something. lol
I think you need to think really hard what your point is. You seem to be trying really hard to make this into some kind of Google vs Apple financials without really understanding what they mean, or even bothering to refer to them, and no your out of date articles do not count. What is more bizarre is this is about Android vs iOS...it always was, and Google is simply one company profiting from Android.
The reality is you make statement like "Motorola added to the Googles revenue but decreased their profit", but are too lazy to get the real figures or talk about the issues involved in the Motorola takeover. I'd love to discuss it, but your not good enough.
The bottom line is the widening gap between Android and iOS continues, will adversely effect Apple and favourably effect Google[And Android Manufactures].
Sorry you seem a little confused:) Again look at my link http://investor.google.com/financial/tables.html "Total Consolidated Revenues $29,321(2010) $37,905(2011) $10,645(Q1) $12,214(Q2) $14,101(Q3) "Net Income $8,505(2010) $9,737(2011) $2,890(Q1) $2,785(Q2) $2,176 (Q3)
You're right, Apple was so dumb not to see that people would eventually stop buying standalone MP3 players and start buying phones with media player capabilities.
You mean like how Apple preserved their share of the tablet market instead of letting it slip to 50% in case producing a smaller tablet would cannibalise their current profits, rather than produce an embarrassing underspecced "me too" to an uninterested public, making their *drop* in sales this quarter for 17Million 13Million lead to taking a quarter value of the worlds most valuable company...oh wait!!
Ferrari or Mercedes are irrelevant in the auto world because Ford outsell them "21:1 (or more)"
Ferrari does not have to attract developers for its neiche market; Ferrari does not have to compete that have better hardware and software than it at better value; Ferrari doesn't have to rely on that market share to make deals with publishers, attract a 3rd party hardware ecosystem.
Come on. Not to defend Apple as such, but how can you call being outsold 1:5 a failure when you have one single model competing with hundreds of other models?
Its like cheating somehow!? The Samsung Galaxy III has sold more than the iPhone on its own. Although I do not think it is somehow cheating to sell more than one phone lol.
Between Google and Apple, guess which one reported declining revenues and profits.
Well clearly you don't know much about anything Googles Revenue is up loads [It bought Mototrola]:), Its profits are up too:) {37 Billion last year and already 33Billion this year]http://investor.google.com/financial/tables.html
A half trillion dollar global company with consistent double digit annual growth irrelevant? A single company with 17% global smart phone market share (surpassed only by Samsung) irrelevant? A single company with 50% of global tablet market share irrelevant?
No I mean. A company has shrunk in the phone market from 23% to 14.9%; Lost a quarter of its market cap in a quarter; That was larger than Samsung that only to sell half the phones of it; that had 100% tablet market now has only 50% down 20% in one quarter.
Are we not seeing a downward trend, with your own information.
So companies are in business to increase market share and not profit?
Why one without the other:) the two are rarely exclusive. In reality I argue consistently that chasing *short term profits* in a *mature* market is costing Apple now. The evidence of this is everywhere. Apples *only* saving grace is the markets are still growing.
Slashdot Mirror
Ignoring the fact that its clearly not a gaming rig, the intel HD Graphics 4000, to put it in some kind of perspective I am currelty using Intel HD Graphics 3000 which allows me to play games like trine http://trine-thegame.com/site/ and Rochard http://www.rochardthegame.com/en/ both great Linux games
As for ZSNES please [snaps fingers],that was designed to run SNES full speed on a 486 with a SIS 630 chipset. Now BSNES now that is a different beast!!
A quick look at the Mac mini shows them at $600 [500 i5] or $800 [1TB i7] so about half the price sans memory and hard drive. Ignoring the OS they are significantly better value, and you get to avoid all the Apple lock-in crap that is forced on you.
Though I have to admit both these options seem incredibly expensive vs the myrid of ARM choices out there with a variety of funky/functional enclosures, and use next to no power, running everything from XBMC; Full Desktop Linux; Android[TV], and more than anything require very little money a quick scan puts then in the price range of $30-$150
The reality is Intel are trying to make more money by doing what the SFF[Small Form Factor] manufacturers have been doing for years, bundle case+motherboard together for greater profit...only throwing a CPU into the equation, just when they need to start competing with ARM at the bottom end.
N900 - solid (and heavy as) a rock.
God It really was heavy. I think it was as much the keyboard as anything else. What surprised me with the flagshit windows phones, is unlike the n900 which felt a million dollars. It included a radio, a remote control, hell I could play my tunes through the radio [It was like living in the future], hell I had 48gb in mine then, and was a computer not an electronics device, but it suffered from a shitty screen [needed a note solution], and not enough memory. It was weird updating it to a new phone that was in many ways inferior, but Nokia through its users under the bus for Meego, ironically in the context of this article Nokia windows users got thrown under the bus for Windows 8.
as much as i hate to admit (must... bag.... microshaft....) i use windows 7 at work and most problems are to do with applications that run on it, not the os itself.
I have machines running only office and nothing else, that run Ubuntu like a charm. That have been nothing but trouble especially wireless.
I know that's not saying much, considering how bad Motorola phones have been at least as far back as the v2088.
I'd be very surprised if it what you are saying is true. The only phone I have ever seen break is my original iPhone which snapped at the dock. Even the cheapest phones are pretty study today [I think even the cheap materials have got better], and generally suffer either "design problems" like iPhones antenna/camera problems or OS problems like Windows has here, Android on the whole has seemed pretty immune, even Apple seem to clear their release problems up pretty quickly although its hard to tell they are a pretty tolerant bunch.
Isn't that a list of top built-in features of the Android OS?
No I would say the best features of Android, for me personally, is its incredibly first party Applications, maps; chrome being the ones I use most. I love the ability to customise my phone though the internet, both the play store, and my contacts. I love the widget layer, for both the live wallpapers and the widgets. I personally have a phone that includes joystick controls, so obviously a customisable OS by third party manufactures meant a lot to me ;).
The way microsoft is doing things, maybe 2013 will be the year of linux on the desktop..
Well we already know 2013 is not going to be Windows on the Phone
That's always going to come out favouring Nokia, as they've always been better at building phones
The days of Nokia having a meme associated with their quality of build are gone with their factories to china in part of Elops [continuing] cost cutting exercise.
the issue is the popularity of webkit on the mobile platform.
No its a failure of Windows Phone; Microsoft only allowing IE on their platform. I'm sorry but until IE runs on Android...the successful platform how can they complain about anything. I can't run IE on Linux either. The deliberately tie IE to Windows for a whole host of reasons ironically Monopoly Abuse being one of them, but also using for control of the internet; defaults to their search; artificially limiting older versions of Windows To be honest all of these reasons are better topics than this one.
Diversity is a good thing. Everything-webkit is nearly as bas as everything-IE
I have seen this desperate post, a few times from Microsoft Shills unfortunately, your arguing against using a open standards complement browser...and one Microsoft can actively contribute to, to ensure standards vs changing to proprietary vendor who routinely uses lock-in. That seems so smart.
The bottom line in advocating locking yourself into a proprietary standard over a open standard going forward is exactly the opposite of diversity.
Here is what your link says. Are you still convinced that net income wasn't down year over year for the same quarter?
I cannot stress my point strongly enough. I would love to discuss the Motorola takeover with someone. Its an incredibly interesting [off]topic, but the fact that you have taken a random chunk from the financial statements without providing context, and then lied about what I had said is a shame. You need to put in the time and effort; You are simply not good enough.
http://investor.google.com/earnings.html [google.com] look through it properly.
The bottom line is again I fail to see your point.
Technically, FreeBSD is a better choice than Linux in this case.
No No its not.
I'm not really sure what your post has to do with mine. I long since came to the conclusion that the only people left who support BSD, are Apple users, who profits from the one way take, and love the richest corporation on earth doing the same again. Having a quick scan of your posts confirms this sad fact again.
The reality is Linux is stellar product, technically brilliant, and has numerous contributions from its own mega corporations, with a great lead...regardless of the license its under. I see your trying to push some kind of OsX agenda!? which is kind of sad considering how Apple could have got behind cross platform gaming and OpenGL...and have done nothing.
I have no problem with Apple taking from BSD. Although Apple fanatics pretending to be BSD advocates I always find a little sickening, especially considering the reasons behind the BSD license.
At this point Microsoft is a cerebral parasite, and removing it would kill the host.
...and yet gaming platforms exist without any Microsoft - PS3; Wii; 3DS; Vita; iOS; Android. Microsoft xbox/windows gaming dominance is a think of the past, and only really existed on the desktop...and they destroyed that by sh***ng on gamers. The future [now] is increasingly cross platform gaming, and reliance on single platform technology is liability not an advantage.
Why do people care what the OS of a Valve game console
1) Microsoft - Because they hate gamers. Halo 4 on PC Nope, Backtracked on Over 18 Games.
2) Cross Platform - No more Direct X lock-in MAC; Linux; Android; iOS gamers rejoice, with more games
3) Linux [Android] Ecosystem benefits - Drivers; Developers; Optimised for Games...not servers...not phones.
4) Linux Development environment - Free; Massive Support; Massive software library.
why will major developers want to support it?
Why won't they want to support it? Seriously The constant stories of Microsoft treating developers like shit. Steam is a brand...and a developer in its own right. Hardware costs have dropped to disposable costs. Has developers contacts...and well Linux duh! The reality is Gaming has become cross platform...and not xbox - windows PC more Android - iOS and a Linux console is a better fit than any of the current consoles...ironically other than the Ouya ;)
Making your mark in hardware sales can burn through mountains of cash in no time flat with very little to show for it.
It takes guts to stay the course,
I really liked your post. Microsoft was able to break into the console market simply because it was one of the few companies that could afford to do this.
I have no idea what form the [mythical] hardware could take. but it could simply be a reference design , or simply streamed from a PC, or simply a store on Android. The hardware costs could be bore by others.
What part of Google's profits declined last quarter don't you understand? Or do you not trust WSJ?
I cannot stress my point strongly enough. I would love to discuss the Motorola takeover with someone. Its an incredibly interesting [off]topic, but the fact that you are linking to the WSJ as opposed to the financial statements says it all. You need to put in the time and effort; You are simply not good enough.
http://investor.google.com/earnings.html look through its interesting.
The bottom line is again I fail to see your point.
There is almost certainly no such thing as "free fall" when it comes to share price.
Apple share price 700-->530 ooops! ;)
Again do you know the difference between revenue and profit?
This is your quote "Between Google and Apple, guess which one reported declining revenues and profits.".You claimed Goggle had declining revenues. You were proved wrong. You made the claim that Google had declining profits, again you were proved wrong. In fact I'm not sure what your point is! You claimed "Someone does't know the difference between profit and revenue.". I simply coped them from the SCOI, to prove you wrong. I'm not sure what else I can so. You need to go on a course or something. lol
I think you need to think really hard what your point is. You seem to be trying really hard to make this into some kind of Google vs Apple financials without really understanding what they mean, or even bothering to refer to them, and no your out of date articles do not count. What is more bizarre is this is about Android vs iOS...it always was, and Google is simply one company profiting from Android.
The reality is you make statement like "Motorola added to the Googles revenue but decreased their profit", but are too lazy to get the real figures or talk about the issues involved in the Motorola takeover. I'd love to discuss it, but your not good enough.
The bottom line is the widening gap between Android and iOS continues, will adversely effect Apple and favourably effect Google[And Android Manufactures].
Sorry you seem a little confused :) Again look at my link http://investor.google.com/financial/tables.html
"Total Consolidated Revenues $29,321(2010) $37,905(2011) $10,645(Q1) $12,214(Q2) $14,101(Q3)
"Net Income $8,505(2010) $9,737(2011) $2,890(Q1) $2,785(Q2) $2,176 (Q3)
Any Questions :)
You're right, Apple was so dumb not to see that people would eventually stop buying standalone MP3 players and start buying phones with media player capabilities.
You mean like how Apple preserved their share of the tablet market instead of letting it slip to 50% in case producing a smaller tablet would cannibalise their current profits, rather than produce an embarrassing underspecced "me too" to an uninterested public, making their *drop* in sales this quarter for 17Million 13Million lead to taking a quarter value of the worlds most valuable company...oh wait!!
Ferrari or Mercedes are irrelevant in the auto world because Ford outsell them "21:1 (or more)"
Ferrari does not have to attract developers for its neiche market; Ferrari does not have to compete that have better hardware and software than it at better value; Ferrari doesn't have to rely on that market share to make deals with publishers, attract a 3rd party hardware ecosystem.
lets face it Apple is more http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_defunct_automobile_manufacturers_of_the_United_States
Come on. Not to defend Apple as such, but how can you call being outsold 1:5 a failure when you have one single model competing with hundreds of other models?
Its like cheating somehow!? The Samsung Galaxy III has sold more than the iPhone on its own. Although I do not think it is somehow cheating to sell more than one phone lol.
Between Google and Apple, guess which one reported declining revenues and profits.
Well clearly you don't know much about anything Googles Revenue is up loads [It bought Mototrola] :), Its profits are up too :) {37 Billion last year and already 33Billion this year]http://investor.google.com/financial/tables.html
and Apples Gross Profit % is Down.
A half trillion dollar global company with consistent double digit annual growth irrelevant? A single company with 17% global smart phone market share (surpassed only by Samsung) irrelevant? A single company with 50% of global tablet market share irrelevant?
No I mean. A company has shrunk in the phone market from 23% to 14.9%; Lost a quarter of its market cap in a quarter; That was larger than Samsung that only to sell half the phones of it; that had 100% tablet market now has only 50% down 20% in one quarter.
Are we not seeing a downward trend, with your own information.
So companies are in business to increase market share and not profit?
Why one without the other :) the two are rarely exclusive. In reality I argue consistently that chasing *short term profits* in a *mature* market is costing Apple now. The evidence of this is everywhere. Apples *only* saving grace is the markets are still growing.