Really this one boils down to one thing. Most of my reference books deal with either electronics or software development, both of which typically require extensive use of my computer's screen real estate; put simply a paper reference book allows me to use the book without juggling windows or flipping back and forth. I know that probably isn't the best answer but thats it.
I really have to disagree with you there and I am sure I am not the only one. Personally the only books I prefer in print is either reference books or those that use a lot of pictures. Any novels that I buy I first look for the ebook version. There are a few reasons why:
1. I don't need to disturb my wife's sleep with a lamp. 2. I can adjust the type size to suit me. 3. I can read a lot faster on the devices. 4. I predominately read during the evening and the backlight makes things far easier to read and a lot more comfortable since I am not constantly adjusting to book for the best lighting as I change pages.
Unfortunately the SEC only has jurisdiction on stocks traded on certain exchanges coupled with the fact that profiting from it alone really doesn't mean you did it, it makes it a lot harder to track down then you think.
What sort of medical imaging device is connected to the greater Internet, rather than a secure WLAN of some sort, if it actually needs networking?
You would be surprised. A lot of imaging in smaller hospitals and clinics are read by radiologists off-site though a service firm and the reports are sent to the doctor via email. It would be insanely expensive for a clinic or small hospital with an Xray and a CAT scan that is used perhaps 3-4 times a day to hire a radiologist.
This is not a phone for the average/. reader. It is a phone for the VP of Sales and/or Marketing at the company the average/. reader works for. People like that wouldn't know how to install a 3rd party app, but they sure as hell want to impress everyone else in the boardroom with their slick new phone.
I think you grossly underestimate the people in those positions. These are the same people who likely have had a Palm/PocketPC 4-7 years and in that time period have downloaded a few apps or games on the device. Why those people would think that the iphone they bought to replace their current smartphone or phone and palm/pocketpc that they cannot play poker, add info to quicken on or read ebooks on would somehow be ok I have no idea. I can see a rather big backlash from this.
Well, this must be the most arbitrary and random comment I've seen today.
This whole things started by you crying about how there are people who criticize Christianity while defending Islam.
You refuse to "squabble" about it because you need to cling onto the fantasy that everyone is morally equal,
Where the heck did I say things were equal? Personally I believe Christianity has a heck of a lot blood on it's hand then Islam, but perhaps it's because I am a Christian and know a lot more about what we did vs. what they did. Equal or not however, it's pretty fucking stupid to try to take some high road and point fingers at others problems when you have the same problems.
and you don't want to deal with unpleasant or controversial subjects.
Refusing to deal with is, common grow up. We are discussing your so called upleasant and controversial subject right now. Just because I don't agree with you doesn't mean I am not "dealing" with it.
Oh can the whole persecution complex, it gets old fast and make you sound like a spoiled brat. There is plenty of blood on everyone's hands to go around. Squabbling over who has the most blood on their hands just seems petty. The fact you don't seem to see this proves nothing more then your inability to detach your own fantasy.
Oh bullshit. You say that as if there isn't a just as significant (or more so) portion of the population that will bash Islam while defending Christianity. Both are just as Anti-American, being a country that thought the freedom of religion was so important that they placed it within the cornerstone of law, the constitution. Of course is just as much against what western culture stands for.
That's really not the point, yes the price is hard to see. What microsoft is after is not the little guy making CD-Rs of windows, but rather dealers to OEMs pirating copyies and selling it to OEMs as the real thing for a lot less then what a legit company would charge. Often the OEMs don't even know it is a fake, you can hold them side-by-side and they look identical. This would not happen if windows it competitively priced. Microsoft has been pretty good at punishing the bad dealers, how about giving the legit dealers a break (price wise)? It costs the OEM dealers illegaly produceing copyies of software in order for them to look legit, plus the added risk. If illegaly copying software no longer becomes feasable, maybe the piracy problem will get smaller.
Firstly I know plenty of companies that prirate software and who have been knowingly for years. Generaly people are not big on ratting people out, especialy you're employer. Microsoft really needs to make a better insentive to users in order to make things like this work. In cananda it is $100+ per OEM licence, that includes no technical support etc. I would say that is slightly higher then "a few bucks".
The really strange thing is I find with games in general and paticularly 3D action type games, is the virtual invisablilty of the code. Most of the game is art (3D models, maps, movies, textures, etc.) and really what users rate the game on. it is what the user interacts with and interacts with the users. Replaceing all the art in a game such as quake could easily make it look like a totally different game. I am not saying that developers are not important in games, but rather open-sourceing of a game code (no need to open source the art) does not in any way mean that you lose a competitive edge in a gameing market. OSS in gameing is an advantage to developers, not only does the licence help improve the game over time, but also improves the open line of thought between companies. Which is benificial to all (and what you seem to agree with me on).
Slashdot Mirror
Really this one boils down to one thing. Most of my reference books deal with either electronics or software development, both of which typically require extensive use of my computer's screen real estate; put simply a paper reference book allows me to use the book without juggling windows or flipping back and forth. I know that probably isn't the best answer but thats it.
I really have to disagree with you there and I am sure I am not the only one. Personally the only books I prefer in print is either reference books or those that use a lot of pictures. Any novels that I buy I first look for the ebook version. There are a few reasons why:
1. I don't need to disturb my wife's sleep with a lamp.
2. I can adjust the type size to suit me.
3. I can read a lot faster on the devices.
4. I predominately read during the evening and the backlight makes things far easier to read and a lot more comfortable since I am not constantly adjusting to book for the best lighting as I change pages.
Unfortunately the SEC only has jurisdiction on stocks traded on certain exchanges coupled with the fact that profiting from it alone really doesn't mean you did it, it makes it a lot harder to track down then you think.
You would be surprised. A lot of imaging in smaller hospitals and clinics are read by radiologists off-site though a service firm and the reports are sent to the doctor via email. It would be insanely expensive for a clinic or small hospital with an Xray and a CAT scan that is used perhaps 3-4 times a day to hire a radiologist.
I think you grossly underestimate the people in those positions. These are the same people who likely have had a Palm/PocketPC 4-7 years and in that time period have downloaded a few apps or games on the device. Why those people would think that the iphone they bought to replace their current smartphone or phone and palm/pocketpc that they cannot play poker, add info to quicken on or read ebooks on would somehow be ok I have no idea. I can see a rather big backlash from this.
This whole things started by you crying about how there are people who criticize Christianity while defending Islam.
Where the heck did I say things were equal? Personally I believe Christianity has a heck of a lot blood on it's hand then Islam, but perhaps it's because I am a Christian and know a lot more about what we did vs. what they did. Equal or not however, it's pretty fucking stupid to try to take some high road and point fingers at others problems when you have the same problems.
Refusing to deal with is, common grow up. We are discussing your so called upleasant and controversial subject right now. Just because I don't agree with you doesn't mean I am not "dealing" with it.
Oh can the whole persecution complex, it gets old fast and make you sound like a spoiled brat. There is plenty of blood on everyone's hands to go around. Squabbling over who has the most blood on their hands just seems petty. The fact you don't seem to see this proves nothing more then your inability to detach your own fantasy.
Oh bullshit. You say that as if there isn't a just as significant (or more so) portion of the population that will bash Islam while defending Christianity. Both are just as Anti-American, being a country that thought the freedom of religion was so important that they placed it within the cornerstone of law, the constitution. Of course is just as much against what western culture stands for.
That's really not the point, yes the price is hard to see. What microsoft is after is not the little guy making CD-Rs of windows, but rather dealers to OEMs pirating copyies and selling it to OEMs as the real thing for a lot less then what a legit company would charge. Often the OEMs don't even know it is a fake, you can hold them side-by-side and they look identical. This would not happen if windows it competitively priced. Microsoft has been pretty good at punishing the bad dealers, how about giving the legit dealers a break (price wise)? It costs the OEM dealers illegaly produceing copyies of software in order for them to look legit, plus the added risk. If illegaly copying software no longer becomes feasable, maybe the piracy problem will get smaller.
Firstly I know plenty of companies that prirate software and who have been knowingly for years. Generaly people are not big on ratting people out, especialy you're employer. Microsoft really needs to make a better insentive to users in order to make things like this work. In cananda it is $100+ per OEM licence, that includes no technical support etc. I would say that is slightly higher then "a few bucks".
The really strange thing is I find with games in general and paticularly 3D action type games, is the virtual invisablilty of the code. Most of the game is art (3D models, maps, movies, textures, etc.) and really what users rate the game on. it is what the user interacts with and interacts with the users. Replaceing all the art in a game such as quake could easily make it look like a totally different game. I am not saying that developers are not important in games, but rather open-sourceing of a game code (no need to open source the art) does not in any way mean that you lose a competitive edge in a gameing market. OSS in gameing is an advantage to developers, not only does the licence help improve the game over time, but also improves the open line of thought between companies. Which is benificial to all (and what you seem to agree with me on).