Stop relying on facts to back up your argument! You should be ashamed of yourself!
We all know Apple is really really awesome and is the best thing since the PC where they reinvented the market with a better product and then....Windows came out, retook the market eventually driving Apple into bankruptcy.
Years pass and THEN
The iPhone comes out and reinvents the market, Samsung comes out, retakes the market.... and... nothing, we are at the stage now in repeated self destructive cycle where Apple fails to keep the market share because it cant keep up. The market gets flooded by competition and Apple goes back into its shell...
My opinion is Apple should stop releasing iOS in full version numbers, it shouldn't be iOS 5 it should be iOS 1.4. I still use version 3 on my iPad and version 4 on my phone, you know much difference there is? None, except i cant use iCloud on the iPad.
I can see what you're saying but it's all go hand in hand. When Apple was in its infancy it struggled as a business. Microsoft with their sorted partners at the time IBM, NEC, so on a so fourth created the PC. With the current way patient laws are now and if the aforementioned manufacteres decided to gang up they could of sued Apple into oblivion on the same level of sermantics we have here. They could of said "I made a box with a screen and keyboard and mouse" and Apple copied me, and I know the Apple puresim aside, MS was first and that is that. I know not the best example but just as Apple is suing now with all of Samsungs possible defences of prior art my above concept though frivolous holds similar merit.
Now, what I feel is that Apple didn't "supply" a market with iDevices, they created it. Gates put a computer in every home, Jobs put a computer in everyones pocket.
Samsung created a device AS different to the iPad as the original Mac vs PC (considering the perceptions people at that era would of had). Is this sophistication in law or contradiction? Remember we also host anti trust laws and those laws are in place to ensure that a market is never monopolized, now we have laws that chop the next good thing off at the knees?
No and I'm not saying Apple is wrong infact if I was Apple I would do it. I actully think the legal system should be held accountable for this and "they" should pay damages for their wreckless allowance of such absurdity. The upside to Samsung winning is what you say, changing the law, Samsung winning sets legal precedence. See this crap was tried on in Europe and Australia and though (from memory) both instances enforced a short ban on the product but was quite swiftly dismissed.
Moving aside from that you have to look at Apple's margins their asset ownership and their operational costs which is to say, strong assets, high margin, high operating expense, but low R&D. MSFT has less revenue, similar asset size, has more in R&D, and lower operating expense. So your statement about MSFT immorally spending is a bit unfair considering that MSFT's profit by percentage is much higher than Apple's all the meanwhile, they make less but spend more in R&D itself.
Google and MSFT as business (at a glance) look pretty well run, Id say (at a glance) Apple could be run a bit cleaner and id suspect they will, really the way I see it the competition will eventually keep them honest.
Do note I'm goin off Google Finance, Finanals figures, so who's to say how much of that is accurate.
No, this is a really bad way to setup your ideals as we need less of this attitude in the world.
Many unfair lawsuits are won, many innocent people in jail. To put it blatantly the ONLY winners in the legal system are the lawyers.
I think the real argument is the patent though.
a) if the patent was approved then why? b) won't samsung feel like idiots for not slicing/adding a few mm here or there to make their product differ a bit more c) does its shape really pose as a risk to Apple's market?
Meanwhile, Apple bashing cause I love bashing Apple. R&D figures for Apple last yr was 2bn. Microsofts was 8bn. When are Apple fanboys going to learn. Apple doesn't invent, they integrate.
If Apple's end product is unique then so be it but get this innovation crap out of your heads, they sit on the shoulders of other, greater, companies/minds to get where they are, such a motorola, samsung, intel, which build the actual guts of their products.
All this lawsuit is proves is that there is no substance to Apple because the best they can come up with to cripple their competition is the a patent on the shape, I dont see any patent infringements made like gee i don't know chipset design - which is actually the way patient law should freakin work.
Possible loss of sales. The courts should answer to the loss of income for Samsung. I.E the justice system.
How many tablets are there in the market? How does one prove that Apple's sales are directly impacted by the shape of the device? I understand that Apple is leveraging the legal system for it's own gain, but the legal system should answer for this as a crime.
I don't know how it works in the states, but in some countries you can file for damages against the court and I feel samsung should do so.... After they win, if they lose, I mean what a world to live in...
I tend to agree, the review as actually a good one. Spoke well of the tablet and made note of some of its usability features. But how dare someone post something nice/positive about Microsoft? as really, that's what it boils down too.
Yeah, my mind is this. Computing is such these days that a bunch of nerds stuck in a room together can build a $25 computer.
Microsoft wont get this wrong, its like buying cars these days. Cars used to be have huge gaps in cost of parts, serviceability and quality. Now, it doesn't matter what you buy, its new and its from a good size company it will work for the next 5 years with no issues.
Computers and the hardware have become much the same. People betting MS will get it wrong are looking at the past and just expecting it aren't thinking about how the hardware industry has changed in the last few years, the concept that hardware is worth nothing and the software is where the money at seems more and more the truth as time goes by.
Phablets are selling well and Apple doesn't even occupy that space.... Plus the Ultrabook from Samsung is abuzz showing that you can have a thin device, good power consumption and a fully working OS.
iPad cannot handle a fully pledged OS therefore struggles to fill the gap of the entire computing experience. iPads need to lift there game to hold on to their market, it's there's now but it's easy for them to lose ground.
The fact Phablets are out several months before Apple's clone comes out is a good indicator that they need to call in the Ouija board and ask Mr Jobs for some guidance.
Okay, I wont disagree with you on that but it certainly comes down to what I mentioned earlier and my reference to "Really Good Cops". A Snr Sarge or Snr Const people who has been decorated, who cares about the uniform and build rank within the system. Ones who engages the local community and care about the place of which they live in, Yes and I agree.
But there is a reason why we have prosecutors and defence lawyers (a very lucrative business to be in) and that's because police don't understand the granular aspects to the law yet they enforce it. Take it one step further, if you quiz cops on the whole prosecution process they know very little other than the process of providing evidence and showing up in trails to give testimony.
Oh you poor nieve fool... dealt with many police officers in your day?
You'd realise, they aren't all that smart and not pillars of the community, rather a bunch of trained meatheads that spent a few months at some camp to teach them a set of black and white processes. I think I saw recently a study on low level cases and their percentage rate of success / failure in the court system. The figures looked something like this.
60% of not guilty pleas are dismissed before a summary hearing or trail is even mentioned. Out of that remaining 40%, 3 in 4 cases are dropped due to lack of evidence or a guilty plea. Also never forget under criminal law the defence always gets the benefit of the doubt.
Granted Police have their place for serious crime though its only the really good cops that work on such cases. For the most of it many of them are stuck behind a desk filling out paperwork (badly) ticking whatever governmental boxes they need to get out of the office as quickly as possible. They are grossly underpaid and sit at the bottom of the public servant pecking order with no incentive of doing their job properly or better than say a postal worker or garbage man.
Ever heard of vMotion? Buying an el cheapo Amazon box and expecting it to out perform a fully pledged DR process simply because its in the cloud is senseless.
Build a proper PaaS/IaaS service in cloud and it takes years off the overall cost. I'd start with cost comparisons of collaborative email. For example, as soon as you start hitting Microsofts CALs licenses you're paying a yearly cost for the service. With the cloud you're simply without the cost of having to pay for hardware upgrades every 2 years as the licenses are spread out over a 24 month break down, which works in line with the 20 year hardware deprecation gap. Even better is if you already have an on premises license with MS because you can simply take advantage of their license mobility and assurance program.
MS doped their pants for cloud by doing this and I think that's a good indicator that its cheaper.
As for your budget comparison, I'm confused, are you inferring that because Cloud switches costs under OPEX as my statement above stipulates, you carry the cost over a 12/24 month "pay as you go" concept evening out the cost and substantiating its use better? Most businesses love the idea of this because it means that they gradually pay for what they use when they use it. Rather than a yearly shopping spree where they have to fork out for a pile of money at the beginning of every FY? and maybe just maybe that's why shitloads of IT projects fail in the ass and maybe just maybe the accountability of Cloud ensures its success... just spit balling here but that's what ive seen happening in my job.
Okay, granted, to a degree... He's an academic / VC with vested interests in social media companies? I don't agree with what he says rather I prefer to take the philosophies of Rick Bolander who I'd pin as being of a similar breed to this guy.
Shrugging SV off and saying the future is in Social Media and inherent advancements in technology pale in comparison. Really whose he kidding?
If I can get a straight answer to one question and that is "where is the tangible ROI on social media?" rather than speculative "we trust Mark Z cause he's a genius that made Facebook a success so he should be able to take my money and double it?"
Don't forget according to your above snippet Blank's original investments where of a hardware nature and it's not social media killing hardware it's cloud. Look at what VM Ware and the damage they've done to the likes of intel.
Oh leave the poor academic pottering around in his study thinking up these mind boggling scenarios. This is just yet another example of how too much school and not enough practical creates what I'd like to refer to as "academic world".
People in this world don't work more than 4 days a week and no more than 3 hours per day, they think they're better than everyone else, dictate at parties about their superior intellect and talk about how great they are because they had dinner with some famous politician 6 years ago.
Meanwhile if they actually got out in the real world they could never top the corporate ladder because they cannot grasp the concept that money has to come from somewhere, you do infact have to get up before 10am and that the idiotic business senarios they learned in uni really counts for shit. Granted the knowledge they pick up at uni when excersiced in the right circumstances is very useful many fail to understand that the practical application of this know how is not nearly as polished as what is in their text books.
Carriers are a dying business model. It's no coincidence that Skype on iPhone was clipped to ensure it didn't operate on 3G. It's merely a matter of time before the carrier model either changes or gets pushed out and with microsofts acquisition of Skype I'd imagine within a few years all that carriers would charge for is data usage. All hail 4g!!!
I wonder what impacts cloud will have on this, with say googles terms of use they retain ownership of data, does that mean one day google would be registered as a sex offender?
So really nothing more than a marketing ploy? the dead link to this service is really encouraging:) I mean even just a place-holder would of been nice.
Is this guy stupid or what?!?! (mark zukker not you) Apple boasts the germ free environment based on the fact they control their own App stores. So how the F%^& is FB going to be allowed to put an App store on iOS unless its jail broken?
My sentiment exactly. Samsung creates a consumer product whilst at the same time sells "nuts and bolts" to Apple so they can make their own. I wont dispute the power of Samsung but before the tablet era the world only knew them as a company that made good computer screens and fridges. They don't float in the stock exchange, they don't reveal themselves so openly and no they have no real fear of Apple in the market place. I believe they have no real fear of anyone in the market place.
Apple on the other hand contrives products of luxury and sophistication. Everyone wants to look like they are worth lots of money and strapping an Apple product to their belt does just that. It's shown the world that desirability is so saleable and that it can build a huge empire but it's merely an empire built on emotion and not requirement.
I always said if Apple fell off the planet tomorrow the world wouldn't change as we knew it. If Google did the world / internet would feel it. These patient trolls are just a form of control that Jobs tried to inflict on competition because his main competition (Samsung) has a massive hold on him! it only serves to demonstrate his own personal inadequacies, he could of just purchased his "nuts and bolts" from another supplier? Why didn't he?
Control everyone with patients? yet we have laws that prevent monopolies from taking over the world i.e "anti trust". How twisted is our system?
Cook is going to run Apple off a balance sheet, Jobs ran Apple via his "visionary" stance. Cast your mind back to the days when Jobs was sacked and the same thing happened then. In the bigger picture Apple is doomed, unless they can replace the Jobsie cult figure that once ran the company to its success - 7inch tablet really? Apple is now playing catch up to Samsung? Not very innovative.
Further, watching Samsung and Apple go at it is like watching too ally cats, lots of hissing and spitting a couple of whacks in the face but we all know they aren't really going to hurt each other.
I've always considered space mining would be a cool concept but.....
Wouldn't the adverse affects of bring large quantities of 'alien' minerals have an effect on our gravity? it just seems if you'd increase the mass of the planet the adverse effects could be potientally devastating.
Slashdot Mirror
Stop relying on facts to back up your argument! You should be ashamed of yourself!
We all know Apple is really really awesome and is the best thing since the PC where they reinvented the market with a better product and then ....Windows came out, retook the market eventually driving Apple into bankruptcy.
Years pass and THEN
The iPhone comes out and reinvents the market, Samsung comes out, retakes the market .... and ... nothing, we are at the stage now in repeated self destructive cycle where Apple fails to keep the market share because it cant keep up. The market gets flooded by competition and Apple goes back into its shell...
My opinion is Apple should stop releasing iOS in full version numbers, it shouldn't be iOS 5 it should be iOS 1.4. I still use version 3 on my iPad and version 4 on my phone, you know much difference there is? None, except i cant use iCloud on the iPad.
Mark me troll i know .. I'm expecting it.
I can see what you're saying but it's all go hand in hand. When Apple was in its infancy it struggled as a business. Microsoft with their sorted partners at the time IBM, NEC, so on a so fourth created the PC. With the current way patient laws are now and if the aforementioned manufacteres decided to gang up they could of sued Apple into oblivion on the same level of sermantics we have here. They could of said "I made a box with a screen and keyboard and mouse" and Apple copied me, and I know the Apple puresim aside, MS was first and that is that. I know not the best example but just as Apple is suing now with all of Samsungs possible defences of prior art my above concept though frivolous holds similar merit.
Now, what I feel is that Apple didn't "supply" a market with iDevices, they created it. Gates put a computer in every home, Jobs put a computer in everyones pocket.
Samsung created a device AS different to the iPad as the original Mac vs PC (considering the perceptions people at that era would of had). Is this sophistication in law or contradiction? Remember we also host anti trust laws and those laws are in place to ensure that a market is never monopolized, now we have laws that chop the next good thing off at the knees?
No and I'm not saying Apple is wrong infact if I was Apple I would do it. I actully think the legal system should be held accountable for this and "they" should pay damages for their wreckless allowance of such absurdity. The upside to Samsung winning is what you say, changing the law, Samsung winning sets legal precedence. See this crap was tried on in Europe and Australia and though (from memory) both instances enforced a short ban on the product but was quite swiftly dismissed.
Moving aside from that you have to look at Apple's margins their asset ownership and their operational costs which is to say, strong assets, high margin, high operating expense, but low R&D. MSFT has less revenue, similar asset size, has more in R&D, and lower operating expense. So your statement about MSFT immorally spending is a bit unfair considering that MSFT's profit by percentage is much higher than Apple's all the meanwhile, they make less but spend more in R&D itself.
Google and MSFT as business (at a glance) look pretty well run, Id say (at a glance) Apple could be run a bit cleaner and id suspect they will, really the way I see it the competition will eventually keep them honest.
Do note I'm goin off Google Finance, Finanals figures, so who's to say how much of that is accurate.
No, this is a really bad way to setup your ideals as we need less of this attitude in the world.
Many unfair lawsuits are won, many innocent people in jail. To put it blatantly the ONLY winners in the legal system are the lawyers.
I think the real argument is the patent though.
a) if the patent was approved then why?
b) won't samsung feel like idiots for not slicing/adding a few mm here or there to make their product differ a bit more
c) does its shape really pose as a risk to Apple's market?
Meanwhile, Apple bashing cause I love bashing Apple. R&D figures for Apple last yr was 2bn. Microsofts was 8bn. When are Apple fanboys going to learn. Apple doesn't invent, they integrate.
If Apple's end product is unique then so be it but get this innovation crap out of your heads, they sit on the shoulders of other, greater, companies/minds to get where they are, such a motorola, samsung, intel, which build the actual guts of their products.
All this lawsuit is proves is that there is no substance to Apple because the best they can come up with to cripple their competition is the a patent on the shape, I dont see any patent infringements made like gee i don't know chipset design - which is actually the way patient law should freakin work.
Possible loss of sales. The courts should answer to the loss of income for Samsung. I.E the justice system.
How many tablets are there in the market? How does one prove that Apple's sales are directly impacted by the shape of the device? I understand that Apple is leveraging the legal system for it's own gain, but the legal system should answer for this as a crime.
I don't know how it works in the states, but in some countries you can file for damages against the court and I feel samsung should do so.... After they win, if they lose, I mean what a world to live in...
I tend to agree, the review as actually a good one. Spoke well of the tablet and made note of some of its usability features. But how dare someone post something nice/positive about Microsoft? as really, that's what it boils down too.
Hehehe ... Apple is run off a balance sheet now that Jobs is gone, accept it.
Yeah, my mind is this. Computing is such these days that a bunch of nerds stuck in a room together can build a $25 computer.
Microsoft wont get this wrong, its like buying cars these days. Cars used to be have huge gaps in cost of parts, serviceability and quality. Now, it doesn't matter what you buy, its new and its from a good size company it will work for the next 5 years with no issues.
Computers and the hardware have become much the same. People betting MS will get it wrong are looking at the past and just expecting it aren't thinking about how the hardware industry has changed in the last few years, the concept that hardware is worth nothing and the software is where the money at seems more and more the truth as time goes by.
Too all you Apple bitches who cant take it that their beloved brand is playing catch up to Samsung and Microsoft.
Plus the Ultrabook from Samsung is abuzz showing that you can have a thin device, good power consumption and a fully working OS.
FACT - Ultrabook is as thin as an iPad and can do 2x as much.
iPad cannot handle a fully pledged OS therefore struggles to fill the gap of the entire computing experience.
FACT - Its a mobile OS, try running Photoshop on it - you cant.
The fact Phablets are out several months before Apple's clone comes out
FACT - Apple announced it would be out is Sept, Samsung has had theirs out for 6 months already.
Lets see you dodge those facts with your brainwashed "but Apple is soo good because it's shiny" .... Assholes!
Phablets are selling well and Apple doesn't even occupy that space.... Plus the Ultrabook from Samsung is abuzz showing that you can have a thin device, good power consumption and a fully working OS.
iPad cannot handle a fully pledged OS therefore struggles to fill the gap of the entire computing experience. iPads need to lift there game to hold on to their market, it's there's now but it's easy for them to lose ground.
The fact Phablets are out several months before Apple's clone comes out is a good indicator that they need to call in the Ouija board and ask Mr Jobs for some guidance.
Okay, I wont disagree with you on that but it certainly comes down to what I mentioned earlier and my reference to "Really Good Cops". A Snr Sarge or Snr Const people who has been decorated, who cares about the uniform and build rank within the system. Ones who engages the local community and care about the place of which they live in, Yes and I agree.
But there is a reason why we have prosecutors and defence lawyers (a very lucrative business to be in) and that's because police don't understand the granular aspects to the law yet they enforce it. Take it one step further, if you quiz cops on the whole prosecution process they know very little other than the process of providing evidence and showing up in trails to give testimony.
Oh you poor nieve fool... dealt with many police officers in your day?
You'd realise, they aren't all that smart and not pillars of the community, rather a bunch of trained meatheads that spent a few months at some camp to teach them a set of black and white processes. I think I saw recently a study on low level cases and their percentage rate of success / failure in the court system. The figures looked something like this.
60% of not guilty pleas are dismissed before a summary hearing or trail is even mentioned.
Out of that remaining 40%, 3 in 4 cases are dropped due to lack of evidence or a guilty plea.
Also never forget under criminal law the defence always gets the benefit of the doubt.
Granted Police have their place for serious crime though its only the really good cops that work on such cases. For the most of it many of them are stuck behind a desk filling out paperwork (badly) ticking whatever governmental boxes they need to get out of the office as quickly as possible. They are grossly underpaid and sit at the bottom of the public servant pecking order with no incentive of doing their job properly or better than say a postal worker or garbage man.
2 year not 20 typo
Ever heard of vMotion? Buying an el cheapo Amazon box and expecting it to out perform a fully pledged DR process simply because its in the cloud is senseless.
Build a proper PaaS/IaaS service in cloud and it takes years off the overall cost. I'd start with cost comparisons of collaborative email. For example, as soon as you start hitting Microsofts CALs licenses you're paying a yearly cost for the service. With the cloud you're simply without the cost of having to pay for hardware upgrades every 2 years as the licenses are spread out over a 24 month break down, which works in line with the 20 year hardware deprecation gap. Even better is if you already have an on premises license with MS because you can simply take advantage of their license mobility and assurance program.
MS doped their pants for cloud by doing this and I think that's a good indicator that its cheaper.
As for your budget comparison, I'm confused, are you inferring that because Cloud switches costs under OPEX as my statement above stipulates, you carry the cost over a 12/24 month "pay as you go" concept evening out the cost and substantiating its use better? Most businesses love the idea of this because it means that they gradually pay for what they use when they use it. Rather than a yearly shopping spree where they have to fork out for a pile of money at the beginning of every FY? and maybe just maybe that's why shitloads of IT projects fail in the ass and maybe just maybe the accountability of Cloud ensures its success ... just spit balling here but that's what ive seen happening in my job.
The end result of a catastrophic failure or data loss event is exactly the same whether you own the service or contract it out.
So under this amassing fucktard's blog of anti-cloud propaganda the summaries cradanzna ends with the point "your fucked either way" ...
I say except cloud is cheaper and business tends to go with the cheaper end of the-fucked-either-way stick.
Okay, granted, to a degree ... He's an academic / VC with vested interests in social media companies? I don't agree with what he says rather I prefer to take the philosophies of Rick Bolander who I'd pin as being of a similar breed to this guy.
Shrugging SV off and saying the future is in Social Media and inherent advancements in technology pale in comparison. Really whose he kidding?
If I can get a straight answer to one question and that is "where is the tangible ROI on social media?" rather than speculative "we trust Mark Z cause he's a genius that made Facebook a success so he should be able to take my money and double it?"
Don't forget according to your above snippet Blank's original investments where of a hardware nature and it's not social media killing hardware it's cloud. Look at what VM Ware and the damage they've done to the likes of intel.
Oh leave the poor academic pottering around in his study thinking up these mind boggling scenarios. This is just yet another example of how too much school and not enough practical creates what I'd like to refer to as "academic world".
People in this world don't work more than 4 days a week and no more than 3 hours per day, they think they're better than everyone else, dictate at parties about their superior intellect and talk about how great they are because they had dinner with some famous politician 6 years ago.
Meanwhile if they actually got out in the real world they could never top the corporate ladder because they cannot grasp the concept that money has to come from somewhere, you do infact have to get up before 10am and that the idiotic business senarios they learned in uni really counts for shit. Granted the knowledge they pick up at uni when excersiced in the right circumstances is very useful many fail to understand that the practical application of this know how is not nearly as polished as what is in their text books.
Carriers are a dying business model. It's no coincidence that Skype on iPhone was clipped to ensure it didn't operate on 3G. It's merely a matter of time before the carrier model either changes or gets pushed out and with microsofts acquisition of Skype I'd imagine within a few years all that carriers would charge for is data usage. All hail 4g!!!
No, I was just raising a point. Constructive feedback is constructive. Thank you!
I wonder what impacts cloud will have on this, with say googles terms of use they retain ownership of data, does that mean one day google would be registered as a sex offender?
So really nothing more than a marketing ploy? the dead link to this service is really encouraging :) I mean even just a place-holder would of been nice.
Is this guy stupid or what?!?! (mark zukker not you) Apple boasts the germ free environment based on the fact they control their own App stores. So how the F%^& is FB going to be allowed to put an App store on iOS unless its jail broken?
And Google, I see Google doing it too...
My sentiment exactly. Samsung creates a consumer product whilst at the same time sells "nuts and bolts" to Apple so they can make their own. I wont dispute the power of Samsung but before the tablet era the world only knew them as a company that made good computer screens and fridges. They don't float in the stock exchange, they don't reveal themselves so openly and no they have no real fear of Apple in the market place. I believe they have no real fear of anyone in the market place.
Apple on the other hand contrives products of luxury and sophistication. Everyone wants to look like they are worth lots of money and strapping an Apple product to their belt does just that. It's shown the world that desirability is so saleable and that it can build a huge empire but it's merely an empire built on emotion and not requirement.
I always said if Apple fell off the planet tomorrow the world wouldn't change as we knew it. If Google did the world / internet would feel it. These patient trolls are just a form of control that Jobs tried to inflict on competition because his main competition (Samsung) has a massive hold on him! it only serves to demonstrate his own personal inadequacies, he could of just purchased his "nuts and bolts" from another supplier? Why didn't he?
Control everyone with patients? yet we have laws that prevent monopolies from taking over the world i.e "anti trust". How twisted is our system?
No, no ........... no ....
Cook is going to run Apple off a balance sheet, Jobs ran Apple via his "visionary" stance. Cast your mind back to the days when Jobs was sacked and the same thing happened then. In the bigger picture Apple is doomed, unless they can replace the Jobsie cult figure that once ran the company to its success - 7inch tablet really? Apple is now playing catch up to Samsung? Not very innovative.
Further, watching Samsung and Apple go at it is like watching too ally cats, lots of hissing and spitting a couple of whacks in the face but we all know they aren't really going to hurt each other.
I've always considered space mining would be a cool concept but .....
Wouldn't the adverse affects of bring large quantities of 'alien' minerals have an effect on our gravity? it just seems if you'd increase the mass of the planet the adverse effects could be potientally devastating.