a) This is done right. They accept people and teach them how to *think*. b) This is done offshore-style. The accept people, ultimately teach basic control flow; then teach them how to copy, paste, and modify (if it can't be avoided) existing code rather than truly understand what needs to be done and why.
I'll leave it to you to decide which is most likely to occur.
Of course it's not. This is a brand new market. All google (or any other player) has to do is sell a product that people want to buy, and make available content that people want to access.
The same is true in the tablet and smartphone space. There are uncounted millions of people who have not bought a smartphone, and who can probably be convinced to do so. So no matter what the market shares look like today, it can all change in a [relative] blink if a new competitor comes on the scene with something that people want to purchase.
When it comes to tech, it is usually only "too late" for a player to enter the market if you buy into the hype from the tech blogs.
Because the author is surely the same person who handles typography and css layout. That's the way all the big publishing companies handle it, don'tcha know.
Define "easy": it might have taken a dozen man-years spent over the course of six months. Just because a large player has sufficient resources to make a task go quickly does not mean it was easily done. And to answer the other oart of that question: even if it took a week it still seems worthy. Not all good ideas need to be complex ideas. Conversely not all novel simple ideas are good ones - this doesn't mean they should not be patentable, only that those patents won't be worth a hell of a lot.
For your example: assuming that after inventing it, the vacuum was brought immediately to market without any delays due to finding funding or other concerns, a year or two might be enough to recoup some of the time spent. But it's disingenuous to say he can compete on other merits after that point: well-funded competition could beat him on every single point, especially if he's just a small operation.
Even as much as the current system benefits big players,*no* patent syste. would benefit them far more.
But it also does the opposite. Imagine spending years to bring a product to market only to see it reverse engineered and copied (and sold cheaper, to a wider audience) by a company with the resources to do it -- you're out of business before you even get started. You essentially just did their R&D for them.
The patent system has much room for improvement, but it does serve a useful purpose.
Sometimes, you won't be able to stop in time - but speeding up can get you out of the situation. It's unfortunate that this is de-emphasized when teaching driving here in the US, to the point where you're brainwashed into thinking that the BEST and FIRST automatic response to an unexpected scenario is to use your brakes. In reality there is no single best response - it should always be dictated by your situational awareness.
Of course that wasn't your point at all -- but mine is that there may be valid reasons for acceleration beyond the love of speed.
Why would you have to root it to maintain it? It's the platform RIM is moving all of its product line to over the next years.
Major toolkits such as Qt have been ported already (and that one was ported by RIM and released as OSS). Others are in progress. The actual QNX source is not open but it's POSIX-compliant which makes that less of a concern if your interest is for developing.
It isn't open source any longer. Or it was, then it wasn't, now it is, or is it?
Not sure where this is coming from. QNX was never OSS; and it has always (or at least for a very long time) provided a POSIX-compliant interface.
REmovable storage: yeah, that was stupid; but Fire and iPad also fail there. At least the PB will be supporting USB host mode under OS 2.0 (some hackers already have it working on the rooted PB).
A lot of people are making this assumption because they are similar in look. However the PlayBook has twice the RAM, cameras, sensors, HDMI and probably a few other things I'm missing.
That said the real sale was pre-xmas, when you could find the 16GB everywhere for $200. I suspect what they're doing now is just playing with the price point to see where they can place it.
Your loss:) Obviously I"m biased a I develop for the platform, but RIM is giving every indication that "BB 10" based-devices are the future of the company; and this tablet is the flagship BB10 device.
On what basis would you assume otherwise? I can find plenty of evidence (behavior, actual statements from RIM) that indicates PlayBook and subsequent devices running the same OS will be around for the long haul.
That said, if you have an iPad, another tablet is redundant. Tablets are still primarily good as media consumption devices -- so having more than one isn't going to really benefit you. While I like the playbook UI better than iPad or Android's UIs, that wouldn't justify a separate purchase if I already had something else. (Theoretically anyway - since I develop for multiple platforms, in reality I do have multiple devices.)
So.. what were you saying again? (And of course this is just a still screen shot - there are visual and design changes that run much deeper than can be shown this way.)
No. In this case you havecompanies who ownthe resources in question deciding to make them unavailable. In the other case you have the government deciding to make the resources it does not own or control unavailable based onthe say-so of any given third party and a judge's approval.
This information would be more helpful if you provided the hosting company name. There *might* be a few people here who would be interested in avoiding such a provider...
Slashdot Mirror
a) This is done right. They accept people and teach them how to *think*.
b) This is done offshore-style. The accept people, ultimately teach basic control flow; then teach them how to copy, paste, and modify (if it can't be avoided) existing code rather than truly understand what needs to be done and why.
I'll leave it to you to decide which is most likely to occur.
Come on.
To piss you off.
Seriously, that's the only reason. It's posted to troll you, personally.
Crap. "Too late?" is a stupid question.
Of course it's not. This is a brand new market. All google (or any other player) has to do is sell a product that people want to buy, and make available content that people want to access.
The same is true in the tablet and smartphone space. There are uncounted millions of people who have not bought a smartphone, and who can probably be convinced to do so. So no matter what the market shares look like today, it can all change in a [relative] blink if a new competitor comes on the scene with something that people want to purchase.
When it comes to tech, it is usually only "too late" for a player to enter the market if you buy into the hype from the tech blogs.
Because the author is surely the same person who handles typography and css layout. That's the way all the big publishing companies handle it, don'tcha know.
Obligatory: (maybe not. y'all can decide )
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WbOfnj67ZwM
NSFW:L
Define "easy": it might have taken a dozen man-years spent over the course of six months. Just because a large player has sufficient resources to make a task go quickly does not mean it was easily done. And to answer the other oart of that question: even if it took a week it still seems worthy. Not all good ideas need to be complex ideas. Conversely not all novel simple ideas are good ones - this doesn't mean they should not be patentable, only that those patents won't be worth a hell of a lot.
For your example: assuming that after inventing it, the vacuum was brought immediately to market without any delays due to finding funding or other concerns, a year or two might be enough to recoup some of the time spent. But it's disingenuous to say he can compete on other merits after that point: well-funded competition could beat him on every single point, especially if he's just a small operation.
Even as much as the current system benefits big players,*no* patent syste. would benefit them far more.
So we're saying that an increase in privately funded r&d is a *bad* thing?
But it also does the opposite. Imagine spending years to bring a product to market only to see it reverse engineered and copied (and sold cheaper, to a wider audience) by a company with the resources to do it -- you're out of business before you even get started. You essentially just did their R&D for them.
The patent system has much room for improvement, but it does serve a useful purpose.
Sometimes, you won't be able to stop in time - but speeding up can get you out of the situation. It's unfortunate that this is de-emphasized when teaching driving here in the US, to the point where you're brainwashed into thinking that the BEST and FIRST automatic response to an unexpected scenario is to use your brakes. In reality there is no single best response - it should always be dictated by your situational awareness.
Of course that wasn't your point at all -- but mine is that there may be valid reasons for acceleration beyond the love of speed.
I have tried. It does not reset/undo your mod if you post ac.
I am nearly certain that you just wrote something in English. Nearly.
For the next month or so, yes (mail client w/ OS 2 is due next month); though of course any web-based mail will work correctly.
Is this what it takes to get modded informative? Here let me try:
"In 10 years we'll be watching everything streamed and the cable industry will have failed to keep up."
The date has been saved :)
Why would you have to root it to maintain it? It's the platform RIM is moving all of its product line to over the next years.
Major toolkits such as Qt have been ported already (and that one was ported by RIM and released as OSS). Others are in progress. The actual QNX source is not open but it's POSIX-compliant which makes that less of a concern if your interest is for developing.
It isn't open source any longer. Or it was, then it wasn't, now it is, or is it?
Not sure where this is coming from. QNX was never OSS; and it has always (or at least for a very long time) provided a POSIX-compliant interface.
REmovable storage: yeah, that was stupid; but Fire and iPad also fail there. At least the PB will be supporting USB host mode under OS 2.0 (some hackers already have it working on the rooted PB).
A lot of people are making this assumption because they are similar in look. However the PlayBook has twice the RAM, cameras, sensors, HDMI and probably a few other things I'm missing.
That said the real sale was pre-xmas, when you could find the 16GB everywhere for $200. I suspect what they're doing now is just playing with the price point to see where they can place it.
Your loss :) Obviously I"m biased a I develop for the platform, but RIM is giving every indication that "BB 10" based-devices are the future of the company; and this tablet is the flagship BB10 device.
On what basis would you assume otherwise? I can find plenty of evidence (behavior, actual statements from RIM) that indicates PlayBook and subsequent devices running the same OS will be around for the long haul.
That said, if you have an iPad, another tablet is redundant. Tablets are still primarily good as media consumption devices -- so having more than one isn't going to really benefit you. While I like the playbook UI better than iPad or Android's UIs, that wouldn't justify a separate purchase if I already had something else. (Theoretically anyway - since I develop for multiple platforms, in reality I do have multiple devices.)
Visually there's no difference between BB OS 3.5 (released in what, 2003?) and 7.0.
OS 4.5 shipped on the 8700 in mid-late 2000s: http://www.blogcdn.com/www.engadget.com/media/2008/05/5-29-08-blackberry-8700g.jpg
OS 7.0: http://www.muycomputerpro.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/BlackberryOS7-2.jpg
So.. what were you saying again? (And of course this is just a still screen shot - there are visual and design changes that run much deeper than can be shown this way.)
Um, no that's not at all what I was saying... the opposite if anything.
No. In this case you havecompanies who ownthe resources in question deciding to make them unavailable. In the other case you have the government deciding to make the resources it does not own or control unavailable based onthe say-so of any given third party and a judge's approval.
Incorrect. California is one of the twelve states which requires two-party notification.
You realize that "party" and "parties" can in fact refer to individuals and groups of individuals in a non-political fashion, correct?
It pales in comparison to the reviews for this product:
Denon AKDL1 Dedicated Link Cable
This information would be more helpful if you provided the hosting company name. There *might* be a few people here who would be interested in avoiding such a provider...
Linode is great. They are a little pricier, but worth it: excellent support, and uptime is the best I've seen.