I'm sure Apple will be able to come up with artificial means of obsoleting their older hardware when the bottom line demands it. It's something they have an expertise in.
But the flood of older small screen iPhones into the used market will crater Apples general sales. They don't make ANYTHING on the sale of a used iPhone. I guess they'd better accelerate the release of iOS updates to force the 5s into obsolescence faster.
Right now Tesla's Gigafactory does nothing, because it's just some hype that's been used to get funding.
We need to wait for it to be built and see some results. Otherwise, we might as well be discussing the environmental soundness of the warp drive on the starship Enterprise, or the predicted efficiencies from the dreams any other capitalist has spun up.
Base NetBSD installs just work, too. Actually as good or better than Linux. You just install the 300-500Megs that a base install consists of, then configure your network and X and install packages. And edit your ~/.twmrc file so everything is in the menu.
By being better. Which is something you have to work at. Microsoft is a company filled with persistent bastards who have proven they can eventually Get It Done successfully. They've done so in several markets recently. I don't particularly like Microsoft and my phone and tablets at present are Android. But I'd like them to be better, and Microsoft could be the ones to produce that 'better.' If for no other reason, because they don't have the long-tail legacy that Android is starting to carry.
I wouldn't say Microsoft was 'late to the party with DOS.' There was basically CP/M and lots of little stuff out there. They bought one of the 'little stuff OSes' because they had IBM as a customer and the opportunity to be in charge of the Next Big Thing DOS.
Windows prior to Windows 95 was based on the same GUI standard as OSF/Motif.
Lotus 123 was a latecomer. Visicalc was the breakthrough spreadsheet from the spreadsheet inventor, and ran on the Apple 2 and the IBM PC (among others).
Microsoft is persistent. That sums it up. They'll produce a crappy product if they need a placeholder in a new market. Sometimes they later abandon that market. Other times they succeed.
When you have a relatively small customer base and are highly restrictive about what hardware your OS will run on, you have a lot of freedom to be very VERY controlling of your environment. Apple nearly died in the period when they allowed their OS to run on third party hardware. But they could never scale up with only their own hardware. We don't need a ubiquitous Winston Smith viewscreen common to everyone, either. Diversity is good.
If your most recent experience is 'the Windows CE days' you really aren't entitled to an opinion. I have a Windows 8.1 tablet, they're available for no more than a high end Android tablet now, and with a real x86 processor in them so they're not one of those stunted Windows RT things. It's really nice as long as you can stay in Metro. I wish there were more Metro apps, but for what most people do with a tablet the platform is well covered.
I also have a recent 10" Android tablet and an older 7". The thing I'll probably never buy new again is an iOS device. My iPod Touches kept falling 'obsolete' soon after I bought them. They also failed much earlier than anything I've had since.
The most common smartphone in the world is the iPhone!
That's just because there is such a limited model selection of iPhones. Generally one or two models on the market at a time. Even with a midget market share they can claim to be 'most common.'
Since only the 'bosses' where I work haveApple phones, I propose that my idea for anon-linear clock be rolled out for 'smart' watch. Basically, just a watch/clock with the time prescaled so that during lunch hour time runs slower. The working hours compensate for this by running faster.
It needs to be installable by a remote exploit or have somesort of compelling 'sports' theme such that the boss-fuckoffs (who waste about 50% of every meetingbullshitting about 'sportsâ) would immediately need it.
A Metro version of Minecraft that I could play on my Windows 8.1 tablet would be awesome, if it integrated seamlessly. It would give me a compelling version to turn that tablet on.
Metro isn't much good for anything other than tablets, though, no matter how Microsoft strives.
Who is to say they are even the same A.C.? Any AC comment here on this topic that professes to 'inside info' is suspect. There are a large number of people who resent or otherwise strongly dislike Minecraft and Mojang, for any number of reasons.
I tried Minetest and it was okay but disappointing. It's about as fleshed out as a snapshot of Minecraft in late Alpha. I saw no mobs or animals at all, though I did only stay in the game for a few day cycles.
The current lack of features isn't necessarily bad, because it was playable and is open source, but when I looked into the development blogs, it seemed to be the effort of a very small group of devs, and didn't seem like a growing project. Maybe that will cease to be the case if Minecraft proper seizes up and a critical mass of people move over to Minetest.
The modularity of Minecraft is a feature, though, that isn't present in an open-source codebase. With rigid 'firewalls' in place that can't be penetrated, people can independntly throw together Mods to run against a binary. With Minetest developers would instead be inclined crowd their way into the main codebase. Which is good when a dev team can scale that way, bad if it turns into a code swamp or design-by-committee.
The main thing is to find it quickly and get grant funding to root around in it. Move important parts from the site to modern steel and glass buildings, and record everything about it all on paper and (better yet) on hard drives that will be obsolete in a decade.
Yes, it's essential that we find and explore all historical relics, because history has ended and it's just a matter now of summing everything up.
The reason its an archeological marvel is no archeologists have had access to it to rip it apart and muck it up. A hundred years from now archeologists will wish it hadn't been discovered and mucked up because THEY will have non-invasive capabilities we only wish existed today.
Anything that represents a 'time snapshot' that no other scientists have had access to is valuable to an archeologist. So long as he/she gets to it first.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm sure Apple will be able to come up with artificial means of obsoleting their older hardware when the bottom line demands it. It's something they have an expertise in.
But the flood of older small screen iPhones into the used market will crater Apples general sales. They don't make ANYTHING on the sale of a used iPhone. I guess they'd better accelerate the release of iOS updates to force the 5s into obsolescence faster.
Right now Tesla's Gigafactory does nothing, because it's just some hype that's been used to get funding.
We need to wait for it to be built and see some results. Otherwise, we might as well be discussing the environmental soundness of the warp drive on the starship Enterprise, or the predicted efficiencies from the dreams any other capitalist has spun up.
Show us results before saying more.
Base NetBSD installs just work, too. Actually as good or better than Linux. You just install the 300-500Megs that a base install consists of, then configure your network and X and install packages. And edit your ~/.twmrc file so everything is in the menu.
By being better. Which is something you have to work at. Microsoft is a company filled with persistent bastards who have proven they can eventually Get It Done successfully. They've done so in several markets recently. I don't particularly like Microsoft and my phone and tablets at present are Android. But I'd like them to be better, and Microsoft could be the ones to produce that 'better.' If for no other reason, because they don't have the long-tail legacy that Android is starting to carry.
I wouldn't say Microsoft was 'late to the party with DOS.' There was basically CP/M and lots of little stuff out there. They bought one of the 'little stuff OSes' because they had IBM as a customer and the opportunity to be in charge of the Next Big Thing DOS.
Windows prior to Windows 95 was based on the same GUI standard as OSF/Motif.
Lotus 123 was a latecomer. Visicalc was the breakthrough spreadsheet from the spreadsheet inventor, and ran on the Apple 2 and the IBM PC (among others).
Microsoft is persistent. That sums it up. They'll produce a crappy product if they need a placeholder in a new market. Sometimes they later abandon that market. Other times they succeed.
When you have a relatively small customer base and are highly restrictive about what hardware your OS will run on, you have a lot of freedom to be very VERY controlling of your environment. Apple nearly died in the period when they allowed their OS to run on third party hardware. But they could never scale up with only their own hardware. We don't need a ubiquitous Winston Smith viewscreen common to everyone, either. Diversity is good.
There's only one true Window Manager (Tab Window Manager) TWM but there are a lot of pretenders, too.
Tab is well documented in the O'Reilly X manual set.
If your most recent experience is 'the Windows CE days' you really aren't entitled to an opinion. I have a Windows 8.1 tablet, they're available for no more than a high end Android tablet now, and with a real x86 processor in them so they're not one of those stunted Windows RT things. It's really nice as long as you can stay in Metro. I wish there were more Metro apps, but for what most people do with a tablet the platform is well covered.
I also have a recent 10" Android tablet and an older 7". The thing I'll probably never buy new again is an iOS device. My iPod Touches kept falling 'obsolete' soon after I bought them. They also failed much earlier than anything I've had since.
The most common smartphone in the world is the iPhone!
That's just because there is such a limited model selection of iPhones. Generally one or two models on the market at a time. Even with a midget market share they can claim to be 'most common.'
Not really. My first quarter at a big ten college in the midwest, in the fall of 1977, the tuition was about $800 for the quarter.
It was much, much cheaper than that a decade earlier.
So, you mean... nobody all will be buying them? Yeah, I hope so too.
Paying attention to what is going on around you and responding to incoming signals on your pocket electronics are polar opposites.
Said watch could be permanently attached and legally mandated.
'Everybody belongs to everyone else' as the saying goes.
(also: 'a gram is better than a damn')
I don't use my iPod Touch at all anymore, but isn't there still an Apple Store app? Perhaps simply a 'notify' feature from that app could be added.
Since only the 'bosses' where I work haveApple phones, I propose that my idea for anon-linear clock be rolled out for 'smart' watch. Basically, just a watch/clock with the time prescaled so that during lunch hour time runs slower. The working hours compensate for this by running faster.
It needs to be installable by a remote exploit or have somesort of compelling 'sports' theme such that the boss-fuckoffs (who waste about 50% of every meetingbullshitting about 'sportsâ) would immediately need it.
Millions of Linux users? Surely you jest.
A Metro version of Minecraft that I could play on my Windows 8.1 tablet would be awesome, if it integrated seamlessly. It would give me a compelling version to turn that tablet on.
Metro isn't much good for anything other than tablets, though, no matter how Microsoft strives.
All of that sort of damage happened last week, when said other company's gaseous cloud let off quite a stench.
But a 547 with a good collection of plugins would be awesome. For reasons that I think, only knowing Notch from a great distance, he would appreciate.
Who is to say they are even the same A.C.? Any AC comment here on this topic that professes to 'inside info' is suspect. There are a large number of people who resent or otherwise strongly dislike Minecraft and Mojang, for any number of reasons.
I tried Minetest and it was okay but disappointing. It's about as fleshed out as a snapshot of Minecraft in late Alpha. I saw no mobs or animals at all, though I did only stay in the game for a few day cycles.
The current lack of features isn't necessarily bad, because it was playable and is open source, but when I looked into the development blogs, it seemed to be the effort of a very small group of devs, and didn't seem like a growing project. Maybe that will cease to be the case if Minecraft proper seizes up and a critical mass of people move over to Minetest.
The modularity of Minecraft is a feature, though, that isn't present in an open-source codebase. With rigid 'firewalls' in place that can't be penetrated, people can independntly throw together Mods to run against a binary. With Minetest developers would instead be inclined crowd their way into the main codebase. Which is good when a dev team can scale that way, bad if it turns into a code swamp or design-by-committee.
The main thing is to find it quickly and get grant funding to root around in it. Move important parts from the site to modern steel and glass buildings, and record everything about it all on paper and (better yet) on hard drives that will be obsolete in a decade.
Yes, it's essential that we find and explore all historical relics, because history has ended and it's just a matter now of summing everything up.
The reason its an archeological marvel is no archeologists have had access to it to rip it apart and muck it up. A hundred years from now archeologists will wish it hadn't been discovered and mucked up because THEY will have non-invasive capabilities we only wish existed today.
Anything that represents a 'time snapshot' that no other scientists have had access to is valuable to an archeologist. So long as he/she gets to it first.
Yellow would have come out exclusively for PDAs running Windows CE. There wouldn't be any other Pokemon games.