I'm not a fan of the notch. It's cumbersome, ugly, and requires application designers to make some weird compromises to make it work. All this for the holy grail of small bezels.
I'd rather wait until they find ways to put the camera and other sensor under the screen.
Windows 8 was a huge disaster, and windows 8.1 only applies a different color of frosting to the same stale cupcake. As both a personal user and IT decision maker, there's no way I'd put Windows 8.x on anything around here.
In agreement with Atmchicago, I have to disagree with you here. He wrote them for the clavichord, and that instrument has a specific sound. There are people who record on the clavichord, but as a performance instrument it's quite lacking in volume and is only appropriate for small rooms. Also, the clavichord wasn't really Bach's ideal instrument, as it gave the performer no ability to play soft and loud. Bach's writings were clear about his frustrations with this limitation, which is the main reason the Piano took off like it did.
The key to playing Bach on the piano (as well as Mozart and lots of other pre-Romantic composers) is to use the sustain pedal sparingly if at all, to maintain the clean sound. Glenn Gould was a master at performing music with a clean sound, and there are many other pianists who do this quite well, such as Angela Hewitt.
If you listen to Gould's 1981 recording of the Bach's Goldberg variations, he achieved (with a Yamaha piano rather than his usual Steinway) a very distinct bell-like and clean tone, very dry without a hint of the lushness and sentimentality of the "traditional" Romantic sound the modern piano was designed for. Gould was one of the best at getting this sound, but he's definitely not the only one.
they wont ever be for sale. these are all limited edition..
And that is the number one reason not to bite. Why would I spend that much money on a phone that 1. Will have limited users, so very limited support for applications that take advantage of the platform. 2. No large userbase to call upon when I have issues. 3. A company with no real incentive to develop an outstanding platform, since by the time they get $32m, they will already have as many captive customers as they want.
So what's the point of a limited edition phone? To be part of an exclusive club? That's exactly what I don't want in a phone. I think that the limited edition concept is simply there to take pressure off them once (if) they secure funding.
For us, there is simply no getting out. In the CPA industry, there are very few players in our software market. Finding software appropriate for my size firm (we're a top 40 US firm) is harder. At our industry level, there are basically two companies that make software for us: Thomson Tax and Accounting and CCH. There are no other options. There's no open source software for production level tax prep, or risk-based audit methodology, and we can't build our own. The resources required to build these systems is extensive. Hundreds of tax forms with hundreds of thousands of calculations. Our audit and advisory methodology software contains some 16000 different Microsoft Word and Excel templates and integrates with workpaper management software that documents our audits in the manner required by the PCAOB and the AICPA peer review process. Our document management system (which integrates with tax prep workflow) requires Acrobat.
These are the realities of my business, and many like that. Too many people here think you can just open source yourself out of that and you can't. Yeah, if all your users just use word and excel and some web-based production software, you're fine. But in highly vertical industries, you use the software that's on the market, and you live with their requirements.
Lots of people here saying "Don't use Adobe" and suggesting alternatives. Reality is, for many of us, we deal with complex PDF forms and applications that integrate directly with Adobe Acrobat. In my business (CPA firm) we use lots of applications, and most of them are highly vertical with often just one realistic competitor that can function adequately for a firm our size. Many of our apps integrate directly with Acrobat (and Office) so not using Acrobat simply isn't a choice we can make.
So how do we deal with Adobe Acrobat? As some pointed out earlier, defense in depth. Spam filters, multiple virus scans, and our two most important measures: End users don't have admin on their computers and Adobe is one of our "High Priority" upgrade applications. Updates must be pushed out within one day of being released.
BTW, the other other High priority apps are Java and Flash, again, both required by our software. With Acrobat, they make up my "Axis of Evil" of insecure software.
"At the beginning of the digital revolution it was common to say that digital was killing music," said Edgar Berger, chief executive of the international arm of Sony Music Entertainment. "Now, he added, it could be said 'that digital is saving music."
"At the beginning of the digital revolution it was common to say that digital was killing the music industry," said Edgar Berger, chief executive of the international arm of Sony Music Entertainment. "Now, he added, it could be said 'that digital is saving the music industry."
FTFY
This is where they just don't get it. Music has never been in danger. Nothing in the industry has or will stop people from making and performing great music. They aren't concerned with saving music, just their cut of music.
Of course the media wants to tear down a non Apple company. They are well on their way.
What exactly are you smoking? What part of this story is shitty journalism or "tearing down a company". The founder and former CEO of an important tech company dumps all of his stock at once, which is a pretty unusual event. It's definitely reportable, as is the impact it had on the company. Apple, Google, Microsoft, and the other players in the industry weren't even mentioned.
So clearly this isn't shitty journalism. In fact, someone *not* reporting on this would be really shitty journalism. So what, exactly, is your problem with the new story?
I don't know if I like government to get involved in regulations like these. I can't say I don't like this particular one, of course - it pisses me off when the kids are sleeping and we need to turn up the volume to hear the show, then the commercial comes on and wakes up the whole f-ing neighborhood. But I have to wonder if this is the best use of government, and if we eliminated these positions that come up with and enforce rules against things that don't violate your rights, how much money we could save?
I see where you are coming from, and we shouldn't need government interference here. But if government doesn't create laws like this, then the alternative is that big business sets defacto policies for us, because they hold all the cards. Your only choice as a consumer is to just turn off TVs.
I liken this to the CAN SPAM act. Technically it's a limitation on free speech, but if the government doesn't step up to create policies that benefit consumers, who will? Trust me here, the media companies don't have our backs here. Never will.
Do you have an actual example of the government punishing free speech in this case? What happened is that a few politicians said stupid things they could never back up. It was a major political blunder by those mayors, who actually added fuel to the fire of the the pro-chick-fil-a crowd.
Still, it was *only* comments. Unless you have an example of the government actually punishing free speech in this case, what exactly is your point?
So I go to the download page on the Zorin site, and get this notice:
ATTENTION: To avoid any complications, we recommend you to download Zorin OS using Firefox as other browsers may corrupt the file and may cause errors.
So they are stating that Safari, IE, and Chrome are incapable of downloading an ISO without corrupting the file? What a ridiculous spew of FUD. Not impressed. Not at all.
Still, looks like a nice way to transition someone to Linux easily, if that's what you want to do.
I wonder if a famous driver didn't occasionally die in a fiery crash would the sport be as popular as it is today.
Well, to go back to Formula 1, there hasn't been a death in F1 since Ayrton Senna in 1994. After his death, the sport made significant improvements in the safety and crash-worthiness of the cars. There have been some spectacular crashes, but no deaths. Still, F1 is growing in popularity all the time. I don't think you need deaths to make it more interesting.
Except, of course for NASCAR. I'm not sure you could do anything to make watching people drive in circles interesting. Open wheel road or street course racing is where the good stuff is.
I think that's a horrible idea. The thrill in watching F1 is not just watching cars go fast. It's about watching real humans test their skills, stamina, and guts in very demanding situations. It's interesting because something is at stake: the lives and well-being of the drivers. Just watching robot cars go fast around a track would quickly bore me.
Oh sure, just throw up your hands and spread your ass-cheeks for the ass fucking by the bad guys, because you refuse to think. While, letting the bad guys get away with more, and harming all the rest of us more.
What you're talking about has nothing to do with the reality of the situation. The FBI arrested the suspects, downed the DNS servers that were serving bad data, and replaced them with DNS servers that act like any other normal DNS server. Not sure how this equates with letting the bad guys getting away with anything.
Fuck you and everybody that thinks like you.
Really? REALLY? We have a disagreement about this subject, and this is what you come up with? This complete lack of any basic civility while sitting behind the relatively anonymous curtain of the internet is what makes me really sad about humanity. At least have the decency to argue the points instead of resorting to childish insults.
Exactly. We know we never have to worry about a private corporation using personal data for profit, right? And no company would ever play ball with the feds in return for a juicy government contract. And its a good things they have a good reputation. I mean, someday companies might even have to start hiring PR people and the like to try to hide the evil things they do behind a good reputation.
Who said anything about a private corporation. Do you know what ISC IS?
They are a non-profit organization whose sole purpose is to support the infrastructure of the Internet. They build open-source software (like BIND and implementations of DHCP). Sorry, but you really should research before you spout off.
Dropping the requests on the floor and teaching these folks a valuable lesson would have been handling it right.
We can debate whether just dropping the servers should have happened or not. Personally I think that was correct, as just dropping internet connectivity for a large group of infected people (most of whom wouldn't have a clue about what's going on and how to fix it) would have been far more disruptive than the campaign that attempted to notify people they had a problem and how to fix it (with clickable links that worked while they were on the computer.)
That said, my original comment about them "handling it right" had more to do with the way they handled replacing the DNS servers once that decision had been made. They used a private organization with a good reputation that wasn't beholden to any governmental organization. This pretty much nullifies the paranoid delusions of people like GP
But presumably somebody at the FBI realised that they could collect all that lovely data on where everybody was going on the internet, and all without the need for a single warrant
Care to show a source, even a single one, for that? The FBI handled this right, asking ISC to install and run the DNS servers. I really doubt the ISC would play ball with any extra-legal requests for data.
Amazing how much pure paranoia is modded up around here
I can't watch youtube at work. Is there a text version of this?
I like the old "plugin" model of web browsers. If you want to see a JPEG, install JPEGview. If you want to hear an MP3 or AIFF, install a player. Over time though I guess all these plugins have been buried inside the browser code. Now the browser is expected to do it all automatically in one large massive program that eats a gigabyte of RAM.
If someone came out with a browser out of the box that could only display HTML text with no pictures, sound, etc, do you really think it would get enough use to become traction? Images, sound and video are part of the modern day web browsing experience for the vast majority of users. It's time to get over the origins of the web as a text-only system
Also, most browsers do have the capability for plug-ins, which meets some of your needs. Ultimately, though, plug-ins present their own privacy and security concerns (think Flash). I'd rather have my basic services provided by a trusted vendor with the resources to properly test their software and with a reputation I can trust.
He is because his foundation pushes Microsoft software and lets those who sign on the dotted line know they are not supposed to use open source software.
At which point you could either get it from a different app store or just skip the app stores altogether and side load it. And no, that does not require rooting it. It just requires not using Apple.
Right, and these alternate app stores are a huge mess of security holes (as is the Google App Store). I understand all of the issues of a closed ecosystem, but after seeing the kind of security nightmares the Android market is seeing, plus the issue of getting updates to devices (which is a complete mess in the Android world), there is a legitimate argument for the Apple way of doing things.
This is particularly true for consumers who don't understand security and don't have the wherewithal (the first time I've ever written that word!) to do their own research and vetting. If my mom is getting a device (she isn't, thank god), I'd definitely recommend an IOS device over Android. If my geeky cousin is, that's a completely different discussion.
We're a community of geeks here, so we tend to have somewhat homogenized opinions about tech and openness. For most people, they don't really care. They want stuff that works, that's reasonably secure, and is easy to use.
ow would that help? Pr0n has never nagged me, never harangued me, and never made me sleep on the couch.
Neither has my wife:P
Do not settle on the first girl you go out with, take a small samples before. If you are dumped, find-out why, then seduce a girl who tolerate, or even better when possible, like, that behavior.
When the sampling is done, find one that do not features the behaviours you disliked and seduce her.
That is simultaneously, the most logical and coherent and the most utterly useless advice I've ever seen. Unfortunately relationships are never logical nor coherent, thus it's just useless.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm not a fan of the notch. It's cumbersome, ugly, and requires application designers to make some weird compromises to make it work. All this for the holy grail of small bezels. I'd rather wait until they find ways to put the camera and other sensor under the screen.
How does something actuate without power?
You spring load it. The spring wants to "open" the locking mechanism. It takes power to hold the lock closed against the spring.
Just loaded Linux on my Father's PC yesterday :)
Are you angry at your father? Did you have an unhappy childhood? Did he beat you?
Surely this must be revenge for something.
Windows 8 was a huge disaster, and windows 8.1 only applies a different color of frosting to the same stale cupcake. As both a personal user and IT decision maker, there's no way I'd put Windows 8.x on anything around here.
In agreement with Atmchicago, I have to disagree with you here. He wrote them for the clavichord, and that instrument has a specific sound. There are people who record on the clavichord, but as a performance instrument it's quite lacking in volume and is only appropriate for small rooms. Also, the clavichord wasn't really Bach's ideal instrument, as it gave the performer no ability to play soft and loud. Bach's writings were clear about his frustrations with this limitation, which is the main reason the Piano took off like it did.
The key to playing Bach on the piano (as well as Mozart and lots of other pre-Romantic composers) is to use the sustain pedal sparingly if at all, to maintain the clean sound. Glenn Gould was a master at performing music with a clean sound, and there are many other pianists who do this quite well, such as Angela Hewitt.
If you listen to Gould's 1981 recording of the Bach's Goldberg variations, he achieved (with a Yamaha piano rather than his usual Steinway) a very distinct bell-like and clean tone, very dry without a hint of the lushness and sentimentality of the "traditional" Romantic sound the modern piano was designed for. Gould was one of the best at getting this sound, but he's definitely not the only one.
they wont ever be for sale. these are all limited edition..
And that is the number one reason not to bite. Why would I spend that much money on a phone that 1. Will have limited users, so very limited support for applications that take advantage of the platform. 2. No large userbase to call upon when I have issues. 3. A company with no real incentive to develop an outstanding platform, since by the time they get $32m, they will already have as many captive customers as they want.
So what's the point of a limited edition phone? To be part of an exclusive club? That's exactly what I don't want in a phone. I think that the limited edition concept is simply there to take pressure off them once (if) they secure funding.
For us, there is simply no getting out. In the CPA industry, there are very few players in our software market. Finding software appropriate for my size firm (we're a top 40 US firm) is harder. At our industry level, there are basically two companies that make software for us: Thomson Tax and Accounting and CCH. There are no other options. There's no open source software for production level tax prep, or risk-based audit methodology, and we can't build our own. The resources required to build these systems is extensive. Hundreds of tax forms with hundreds of thousands of calculations. Our audit and advisory methodology software contains some 16000 different Microsoft Word and Excel templates and integrates with workpaper management software that documents our audits in the manner required by the PCAOB and the AICPA peer review process. Our document management system (which integrates with tax prep workflow) requires Acrobat.
These are the realities of my business, and many like that. Too many people here think you can just open source yourself out of that and you can't. Yeah, if all your users just use word and excel and some web-based production software, you're fine. But in highly vertical industries, you use the software that's on the market, and you live with their requirements.
Lots of people here saying "Don't use Adobe" and suggesting alternatives. Reality is, for many of us, we deal with complex PDF forms and applications that integrate directly with Adobe Acrobat. In my business (CPA firm) we use lots of applications, and most of them are highly vertical with often just one realistic competitor that can function adequately for a firm our size. Many of our apps integrate directly with Acrobat (and Office) so not using Acrobat simply isn't a choice we can make.
So how do we deal with Adobe Acrobat? As some pointed out earlier, defense in depth. Spam filters, multiple virus scans, and our two most important measures: End users don't have admin on their computers and Adobe is one of our "High Priority" upgrade applications. Updates must be pushed out within one day of being released.
BTW, the other other High priority apps are Java and Flash, again, both required by our software. With Acrobat, they make up my "Axis of Evil" of insecure software.
Apparantly the only purpose of the government is to regulate everything but sex. Oh, and to force people to pay for other people's sex.
Whoa, the government is going to pay for me to have sex? SIGN ME UP!
"At the beginning of the digital revolution it was common to say that digital was killing music," said Edgar Berger, chief executive of the international arm of Sony Music Entertainment. "Now, he added, it could be said 'that digital is saving music."
"At the beginning of the digital revolution it was common to say that digital was killing the music industry," said Edgar Berger, chief executive of the international arm of Sony Music Entertainment. "Now, he added, it could be said 'that digital is saving the music industry."
FTFY
This is where they just don't get it. Music has never been in danger. Nothing in the industry has or will stop people from making and performing great music. They aren't concerned with saving music, just their cut of music.
Shitty Journalism
Of course the media wants to tear down a non Apple company. They are well on their way.
What exactly are you smoking? What part of this story is shitty journalism or "tearing down a company". The founder and former CEO of an important tech company dumps all of his stock at once, which is a pretty unusual event. It's definitely reportable, as is the impact it had on the company. Apple, Google, Microsoft, and the other players in the industry weren't even mentioned.
So clearly this isn't shitty journalism. In fact, someone *not* reporting on this would be really shitty journalism. So what, exactly, is your problem with the new story?
I don't know if I like government to get involved in regulations like these. I can't say I don't like this particular one, of course - it pisses me off when the kids are sleeping and we need to turn up the volume to hear the show, then the commercial comes on and wakes up the whole f-ing neighborhood. But I have to wonder if this is the best use of government, and if we eliminated these positions that come up with and enforce rules against things that don't violate your rights, how much money we could save?
I see where you are coming from, and we shouldn't need government interference here. But if government doesn't create laws like this, then the alternative is that big business sets defacto policies for us, because they hold all the cards. Your only choice as a consumer is to just turn off TVs.
I liken this to the CAN SPAM act. Technically it's a limitation on free speech, but if the government doesn't step up to create policies that benefit consumers, who will? Trust me here, the media companies don't have our backs here. Never will.
Do you have an actual example of the government punishing free speech in this case? What happened is that a few politicians said stupid things they could never back up. It was a major political blunder by those mayors, who actually added fuel to the fire of the the pro-chick-fil-a crowd.
Still, it was *only* comments. Unless you have an example of the government actually punishing free speech in this case, what exactly is your point?
ATTENTION: To avoid any complications, we recommend you to download Zorin OS using Firefox as other browsers may corrupt the file and may cause errors.
So they are stating that Safari, IE, and Chrome are incapable of downloading an ISO without corrupting the file? What a ridiculous spew of FUD. Not impressed. Not at all.
Still, looks like a nice way to transition someone to Linux easily, if that's what you want to do.
I wonder if a famous driver didn't occasionally die in a fiery crash would the sport be as popular as it is today.
Well, to go back to Formula 1, there hasn't been a death in F1 since Ayrton Senna in 1994. After his death, the sport made significant improvements in the safety and crash-worthiness of the cars. There have been some spectacular crashes, but no deaths. Still, F1 is growing in popularity all the time. I don't think you need deaths to make it more interesting.
Except, of course for NASCAR. I'm not sure you could do anything to make watching people drive in circles interesting. Open wheel road or street course racing is where the good stuff is.
I think that's a horrible idea. The thrill in watching F1 is not just watching cars go fast. It's about watching real humans test their skills, stamina, and guts in very demanding situations. It's interesting because something is at stake: the lives and well-being of the drivers. Just watching robot cars go fast around a track would quickly bore me.
Oh sure, just throw up your hands and spread your ass-cheeks for the ass fucking by the bad guys, because you refuse to think. While, letting the bad guys get away with more, and harming all the rest of us more.
What you're talking about has nothing to do with the reality of the situation. The FBI arrested the suspects, downed the DNS servers that were serving bad data, and replaced them with DNS servers that act like any other normal DNS server. Not sure how this equates with letting the bad guys getting away with anything.
Fuck you and everybody that thinks like you.
Really? REALLY? We have a disagreement about this subject, and this is what you come up with? This complete lack of any basic civility while sitting behind the relatively anonymous curtain of the internet is what makes me really sad about humanity. At least have the decency to argue the points instead of resorting to childish insults.
Exactly. We know we never have to worry about a private corporation using personal data for profit, right? And no company would ever play ball with the feds in return for a juicy government contract. And its a good things they have a good reputation. I mean, someday companies might even have to start hiring PR people and the like to try to hide the evil things they do behind a good reputation.
Who said anything about a private corporation. Do you know what ISC IS?
They are a non-profit organization whose sole purpose is to support the infrastructure of the Internet. They build open-source software (like BIND and implementations of DHCP). Sorry, but you really should research before you spout off.
How is this handling it right?
Dropping the requests on the floor and teaching these folks a valuable lesson would have been handling it right.
We can debate whether just dropping the servers should have happened or not. Personally I think that was correct, as just dropping internet connectivity for a large group of infected people (most of whom wouldn't have a clue about what's going on and how to fix it) would have been far more disruptive than the campaign that attempted to notify people they had a problem and how to fix it (with clickable links that worked while they were on the computer.)
That said, my original comment about them "handling it right" had more to do with the way they handled replacing the DNS servers once that decision had been made. They used a private organization with a good reputation that wasn't beholden to any governmental organization. This pretty much nullifies the paranoid delusions of people like GP
My other gut feeling about all this is that we, as a digital society, are doing this all wrong.
...which I read as: There's a big problem. I have no solutions, but dammit, this is a problem.
But presumably somebody at the FBI realised that they could collect all that lovely data on where everybody was going on the internet, and all without the need for a single warrant
Care to show a source, even a single one, for that? The FBI handled this right, asking ISC to install and run the DNS servers. I really doubt the ISC would play ball with any extra-legal requests for data.
Amazing how much pure paranoia is modded up around here
I can't watch youtube at work. Is there a text version of this?
I like the old "plugin" model of web browsers. If you want to see a JPEG, install JPEGview. If you want to hear an MP3 or AIFF, install a player. Over time though I guess all these plugins have been buried inside the browser code. Now the browser is expected to do it all automatically in one large massive program that eats a gigabyte of RAM.
If someone came out with a browser out of the box that could only display HTML text with no pictures, sound, etc, do you really think it would get enough use to become traction? Images, sound and video are part of the modern day web browsing experience for the vast majority of users. It's time to get over the origins of the web as a text-only system
Also, most browsers do have the capability for plug-ins, which meets some of your needs. Ultimately, though, plug-ins present their own privacy and security concerns (think Flash). I'd rather have my basic services provided by a trusted vendor with the resources to properly test their software and with a reputation I can trust.
He is because his foundation pushes Microsoft software and lets those who sign on the dotted line know they are not supposed to use open source software.
Can you cite a source for this?
At which point you could either get it from a different app store or just skip the app stores altogether and side load it. And no, that does not require rooting it. It just requires not using Apple.
Right, and these alternate app stores are a huge mess of security holes (as is the Google App Store). I understand all of the issues of a closed ecosystem, but after seeing the kind of security nightmares the Android market is seeing, plus the issue of getting updates to devices (which is a complete mess in the Android world), there is a legitimate argument for the Apple way of doing things.
This is particularly true for consumers who don't understand security and don't have the wherewithal (the first time I've ever written that word!) to do their own research and vetting. If my mom is getting a device (she isn't, thank god), I'd definitely recommend an IOS device over Android. If my geeky cousin is, that's a completely different discussion.
We're a community of geeks here, so we tend to have somewhat homogenized opinions about tech and openness. For most people, they don't really care. They want stuff that works, that's reasonably secure, and is easy to use.
ow would that help? Pr0n has never nagged me, never harangued me, and never made me sleep on the couch.
Neither has my wife :P
Do not settle on the first girl you go out with, take a small samples before. If you are dumped, find-out why, then seduce a girl who tolerate, or even better when possible, like, that behavior.
When the sampling is done, find one that do not features the behaviours you disliked and seduce her.
That is simultaneously, the most logical and coherent and the most utterly useless advice I've ever seen. Unfortunately relationships are never logical nor coherent, thus it's just useless.