I serviced court-reporting systems in the 70s, both Stenograph (an independent technician, and the Stenograph Corp hated me and my kind) and tape recorders. Even then, some steno reporters started using tape and shielded mics to supplement their transcription, and most tapes were not immediately transcribed if there was no need for a written record. Of course, there was a need for transcripts for most cases, and so the transcription services worked long hours overnight to git 'r done.
And often the first requestor paid the fee, so it was an interesting cat-and-mouse game to see who requested the transcripts. If the judge did, every one got to pay for copies, pretty cheap. If counsel did, well, they caught the bill for the typists, and everyone else got off paying just for copies, except the court that always got copies for free.
I was part of a team that brought multichannel recording on cassettes into use there, and it was a blessing. Typists often had to call reporters in the night and ask what they remembered about an exhcange where everyone was talking at once, recorded in stereo if they were lucky. And of course, some participants didn't actually want their remarks heard, so they would avoid the microphone at all costs, with the result that they were inaudible. After a bit, judges had steno reporters monitor the recording and signal to them when someone's remarks weren't clear - and the judge would magically instruct them to speak loud and clearly for the record...
I supported Sony equipment, and it was solid. But not perfect. The previous Lanier systems weren't very good in the long haul, but the Sony stuff was still working 20 years later. Now of course it's all digital, good stuff. But Sony had good mics, excellent fidelity, and superior AGC and such.
The mouth shields were common in Federal court, where steno reporters seemed to be part of a union or something, and had to record everything - no tapes. And military courts occasionally. But that's pretty mich gone from what I hear.
And I don't miss working on Stenograph machines. Reporters are very, very picky about keyboard feel, and silence is one of the critical features of a Stenograph. That and staining your fingers blue while working on them.
on Windows. They say I can find a sha512sum.exe for Windows... cool. now all I need is an xxd replacement for Windows, and finish it with a >{filename} if I want to save the result for actual use... I'll have to delete it, so maybe juyet letting ti echo is ok, but will run it in a CMD window, not from the start->run line, where it will complete and close the window on the way out before I see the result.
Windows misses the CLI. Linux has its moments, and this is one of them.
Seems a hard way to do it... Must be some other password-maker.
In the U.S., we get access to government data by default when it's convenient.
When it is not, we get stiffed. Witness the ACTA fiasco. And we will get stiffed on this one if we don't keep up the pressure, and get Congress out of the habit of passing legislation they can't even bother to read.
England still has an Official Secrets Act far as I know. How's that working out for ya?
If it's any consolation, we don't bother with that in the U.S., really. We just fight it out in the courts.
People familiar with Windows won't be recommending a command available on Windows. Your example is several commands. Which one?
Seriously, strong passwords require some creativity and of course some investment by the user. If you've administered a fairly large (or even small) corporate network for any length of time, you know users generally are not overly concerned about security until they are personally inconvenienced. Then they blame everyone else.
This is a corporate issue, as important as financial controls and marketing. Some corporations, of course, suck at those functions too, so no surprise. But security is a core process nowadays. If you value your job, you will be diligent at your password management. If not, well, you take the change that you will be reading about the reasons for the demise of your employer while you search for your next I Hate Passwords job.
Where I work, I currently have 12 unique passwords, used on 27 differnet systems. My personal passwords are a different matter, when I use over 50 unique passwords for various online stuff.
I use combinations of
- variations on a theme; like password1, password2, password03, passwordH, passordT% - reversed passwords; carrot, torrac, trouble, elbuort - word-sounding passwords; c@rr0T, St!ck, b@g3!, myb!rtH@^, these are bad examples.
Since my eBay account was compromised about 2 years ago, I've gotten harder about passwords.
Now my wife, she seems to cling to passwords like lost children. I'm working on her.
Well, wait until Adobe changes the Flash spec sufficiently to break Gordon. Flash plug-ins will work fine, of course.
My faith is based on experience. I was a Novell guy originally. Microsoft wasn't done until Novell didn't run. Not just a catchy phrase, this was BAU in Redmond. Adobe knows this tactic. If they wish to kill Gordon, they only have to worry about getting caught. Doing it is reasonably trivial.
I'm looking forward to SVG/HTML5 to solve this, but it will take time for authoring tools to catch up.
"How long before HTML5/SVG next-generation browsers like Chrome, Firefox, Opera, Safari, Epiphany, and other Web-Kit based browsers completely supplant Flash and Silverlight/Moonlight?"
Well, it is important to carefully describe our expectations and grievances with our government.
Reining in the railroads may have been a good and proper thing - they were using the commons, that is rights of way, to profit unfairly. But I see both sides. If our government is working to ensure freer markets, this is good. Sadly, they get it wrong a lot.
Telling you how much you must pay your employees over-simplifies the issue. The government tells you you must pay at least *this* much. If you're in the restaurant business, imagine how your servers feel having to declare a certain minimum amount of income, even if they don't in fact receive it... Amazing.
Many American citizens think it is ok to ask the government to do for them. They have no idea what they are giving up. My lunch mate wants healthcare costs reduced, so he's in favor of a single-payer government plan. Why does he believe this will be cheaper? Because it will share costs more equitably. Or to put it more honestly, because someone will pay for his care, in part, as they pay MORE.
Socialism. This was not our system. We need to be consulted, as a people, before our government enacts such changes. Time to call my representatives again, I'm getting upset...
The analogy of a locked briefcase is instructive. If the government were to try to guess the combination, aren't they ignoring my intention of privacy? That is, I locked the briefcase, intending to shield the contents from disclosure without my consent. Being a combination lock means nothing, because picking a key lock is the same effort, indeed snipping off the lock is the equivalent. Does the means of entry matter? Indeed, coercing me to divulge the combination, or give them the key, aren't these also violations of the Fifth Amendment, allowed only in the most dire of circumstances, if at all?
So if I password protect my files in the 'cloud', don't I have a similar expectation of privacy? The government could indeed coerce the service provider to open the files (snip the lock). And if I encrypt the files, why should the government be allowed to even attempt to decrypt them by any means (guess the combination or pick the lock) including coercing me to offer the key (Fifth Amendment again)?
The slope we are slipping down is an old one - new technology doesn't change the principles. It just changes the means. As the government does not have the right to enter my home and search my papers without due process, so they should not have the right to rifle through my 'papers' online, either.
While any expectation of privacy in normal email is futile, if I choose to use Gmail, for instance, via SSL, then I should be granted the expectation of privacy also in that communication. And since I need my user ID and password to access my GMail account, I epxect my stored email data to also be granted that expectation of privacy.
The only reason that protections against unreasonable searches and seizures of electronically stored items should be 'lagging behind' the protections that 'more' physical items enjoys is twofold; 1. The government is charging in where they should not be, in the absence of court decisions, and 2. The courts have not yet handed down decisions that would retrain the governemnt.
But to point 1; Our goverment in the U.S. should not be seeking ways to expand their influence in the absence of restraint by the courts. They should act like the officers of the court they should be and consider the legality in favor of the people. And I'm sure they would claim to be doing so now and always. I disagree. Our government seeks to assume power in every area where the restrictions are unclear, or where the courts have not yet decided, or where they can justify the effort in the name of some greater good. We would be better off if our government considered first, "should we be doing this?".
I know I am probably in the minority with this belief. That doesn't make it wrong. Our government was devised from documents that also described its limits.
Congratulations. You've highlighted one of the problems I had back in Maine.
Not much topography fit into neat little topological categories. The whole area east of Auburn Lake, for instance, or of course the backside of Streaked Mountain. And that whole space above the Allagash. Ogunquit, that's just the town council refusing to let them build a tower until recently, and it's so hilly they need three just to cover the village. My favorite spot is pretty much off the service map, and it's barely a mile from the tower. Just on the other side of the ridge, and they can't get approval for a 600 ft tower to overcome the problem. Hills, man. Suck.
To the respondent that claimed they expected service anywhere there were more than 500 people; Um, that counts for a LOT of Maine. Places that do NOT get good service, and a pile of places that do not get any service at all. The number is too low. Not only are there plent of places in Maine that have around 500-600 people and poor to no cell service, but a lot of these places only have 500 people there between June and August. And a lot of the rest are more than 20 miles from anything. The fiber haul to serve a tower can't be cheap. They have no cable TV, and POTS service is pitiful. 20 miles of copper is still common in Maine, and it doesn't do much for your old 56K modem. DSL is a cruel hoax out there.
And there are places like Pownal, that should be served, but I remember how lousy service was. And how hilly it is.
The world is not uniformly populated. And therefore not uniformly served.
Force your Droid back to 2G data service and tell me how it looks.
And wait for a software update. Not out of the ordinary for an Android phone, and is the Droid the first CDMA Android model? Expect some fimware issues with the radio.
ps- Try comparing at various spots and orientations. Antennas differ. But I'm not tryng to tell you to make a judgment on a limited number of observations. Try checking out your Bluetooth headset performance in the middle of a basketball court, no players. Put the phone on the other side of your body from the headset. Tell me how it works. Scratchy? There is more to this stuff than just one observation.
Personally, I can find a place to garage the SU-27. But they don't have room for a Shuttle, and you're not going to toll around Mesa in one. The SU-27, OTOH, that I can see buzzing the orchards around here. I'll have to sell a kidney for 3 hours of fuel, and sell my wife for ground school but hey, it's doable. The Shuttle, I need 2 more guys and a relly big candle to get it up high enough to just turn around and crash-land.
Most people have no idea how cell service works. They complain that they have no service at home, not looking at the coverage map that shows a poor spot. The hilly country, distance from freeways and high-density residential don't figure into their assessments of capability.
When I lived in Maine, I suffered from multiple problems. Several spots where reception was poor to nonexistant, all due to topology - hills, trees, you name it. On the coast, it took 2 years and many calls to diagnose a roaming problem, and when I finally got through to a diligent tech, presto! Roaming along a 35 mile section of US Route One worked! I know I wasn't the only one calling, but 2 days after my best session with a Cingular tech, magic!
In Maine, and a lot of other states, topolgy is important. I imagine an Francisco is tough. Tulsa, not so much?
Now I live in the Phoenix area. Flat as a pancake, relatively speaking. Two spots along the Pima and Red Mountain freeways I drop calls, due to some tower handoff problem. But I'm complaining about afternoon rush hour, and I bet this is a capacity issue. So do I complain about being able to keep a call for the busiest 3 hours of the day? Well, sometimes I do.
I also had a hard time getting 3G at home, so I located the tower with a tech and sat a quarter mile from it. No 3G. He got me into the phone setup screen on my G1 (*#*#4636#*#*, from memory) and found my phone was set to GSM only. It was a small miracle I got any 3G at all. Fixed that. Only 7 months after getting my phone, and 4 calls to TMO service. No other tech even dreamed of checking that setting.
How many phones are set up wrong? Who knows? Are all equally capable? Who knows.
But I've NEVER had a billing issue in 4 years with TMobile, nor in 7 years before that with AT&T/Cingular. Go figure.
It is not so simple as people think. Of course, they largely don't care until it impacts them, of course.
Nokia finds infringing product(s) from Apple Nokia contacts Apple and asserts their patent rights, asks for a licensing agreement or cease and desist Apple responds "not infringing!" and ignores the licensing request Nokia responds "yes you are" and threatens to sue Apple responds "well, you're infringing on OUR..." Nokia says "not infringing" Tit-for-tat at this stage for a while...
Nokia sues Apple Apple counter sues Nokia
Nokia seeks to ban Apple Imports via ITC Apple responds by seeking to ban Nokia imports via the ITC
My point was that the FTC's complaints that Intel has an abusive position due to their assumed manufacturing advantage is not a good thing.
Mind you, Intel's holding customers over a barrel with a combination of exclusive marketing agreements and coop funds is probably a pretty good bet for the FTC. It seems to meet a common-sense definition of restraint.
Interesting, and I had to put away my mod points and respond.
"it is like the classic economic example of the steel mill where it is almost impossible for new competitors to enter the market"
I suspect that if this is the theory the FTC is presenting, Intel is correctly going to counter that this is neither sufficient grounds for additional restrictions, nor is it actually a hindrance in today's or even last year's market.
There are some competitors to Intel (AMD) that don't even OWN fabrication facilities. They have access to competitive foundries that can produce their product. Similarly, competitors such as Freescale etc. also have their own foundries and can even find other manufacturers. There is a thriving boutique business for chips, and multiple CPU makers with multiple manufacturing options.
Now, if the FTC thinks Intel has an unfair advantage because they own their fabs, well, AMD chose a different route. Emphasis on CHOSE. The FTC is not chartered to address a competitor's poor choices, if indeed AMD made a poor choice in being fabless.
Intel has a good point. If the a major point of the FTC's inquiry is that they have an integrated presence in the market, then is Intel being penalized partly for merely being successful, and making good business decisions? Pah. They are in a competitive business. AMD is suffering as much for their choice in manufacturing partners as anythuing right now. Design aside.
Among other things, I have a process that I need to enter a ~ into.
And I suspect some editors and wordcrafters, you know, people who use Microsoft Word for something other than creating birthday announcements, have good reason to type more than a few characters in upper case.
Actually, birthday announcements are probably a great place to use some caps. Another use.
"The only people I know who use the Caps Lock Key are AOLers."
You need to get out of the basement more. There is more to the world than former AOLers.
I use CAPS LOCK regularly to input data in CAPS. Duh. So not all the apps I use know enough to shift for me when it is needed, and not when it is not, as in they can't predict the use of my data. I also use it in queries, where the editor doesn't force caps for me. It's big world out there, with people doing things you don't know about.
Honestly, CAPS LOCK has a useful function. Ditch Scroll Lock first, if you must.
Of course, does the Pause/Break key do anything at all? Missing an opportunity there, I bet, but does someone use it? Dunno.
Slashdot Mirror
I serviced court-reporting systems in the 70s, both Stenograph (an independent technician, and the Stenograph Corp hated me and my kind) and tape recorders. Even then, some steno reporters started using tape and shielded mics to supplement their transcription, and most tapes were not immediately transcribed if there was no need for a written record. Of course, there was a need for transcripts for most cases, and so the transcription services worked long hours overnight to git 'r done.
And often the first requestor paid the fee, so it was an interesting cat-and-mouse game to see who requested the transcripts. If the judge did, every one got to pay for copies, pretty cheap. If counsel did, well, they caught the bill for the typists, and everyone else got off paying just for copies, except the court that always got copies for free.
I was part of a team that brought multichannel recording on cassettes into use there, and it was a blessing. Typists often had to call reporters in the night and ask what they remembered about an exhcange where everyone was talking at once, recorded in stereo if they were lucky. And of course, some participants didn't actually want their remarks heard, so they would avoid the microphone at all costs, with the result that they were inaudible. After a bit, judges had steno reporters monitor the recording and signal to them when someone's remarks weren't clear - and the judge would magically instruct them to speak loud and clearly for the record...
I supported Sony equipment, and it was solid. But not perfect. The previous Lanier systems weren't very good in the long haul, but the Sony stuff was still working 20 years later. Now of course it's all digital, good stuff. But Sony had good mics, excellent fidelity, and superior AGC and such.
The mouth shields were common in Federal court, where steno reporters seemed to be part of a union or something, and had to record everything - no tapes. And military courts occasionally. But that's pretty mich gone from what I hear.
And I don't miss working on Stenograph machines. Reporters are very, very picky about keyboard feel, and silence is one of the critical features of a Stenograph. That and staining your fingers blue while working on them.
Cygwin is too much work.
Booting an alternate OS ditto.
The solution has to be practical. I once used a 'pronouncable password generator' that had potential.
You got no shot.
"essential algae nutrients.... come from petroleum."
FAIL
This should be tagged 'dontgetit'
I know pipes, and redirects. Windows does that.
I'm looking for a solution that does
echo -n "LongUnchangingBasePasswordSiteNameJan2009" | sha512sum | xxd -r -p | tr -cd [:print:]
on Windows. They say I can find a sha512sum.exe for Windows... cool. now all I need is an xxd replacement for Windows, and finish it with a >{filename} if I want to save the result for actual use... I'll have to delete it, so maybe juyet letting ti echo is ok, but will run it in a CMD window, not from the start->run line, where it will complete and close the window on the way out before I see the result.
Windows misses the CLI. Linux has its moments, and this is one of them.
Seems a hard way to do it... Must be some other password-maker.
In the U.S., we get access to government data by default when it's convenient.
When it is not, we get stiffed. Witness the ACTA fiasco. And we will get stiffed on this one if we don't keep up the pressure, and get Congress out of the habit of passing legislation they can't even bother to read.
England still has an Official Secrets Act far as I know. How's that working out for ya?
If it's any consolation, we don't bother with that in the U.S., really. We just fight it out in the courts.
Funny.
People familiar with Windows won't be recommending a command available on Windows. Your example is several commands. Which one?
Seriously, strong passwords require some creativity and of course some investment by the user. If you've administered a fairly large (or even small) corporate network for any length of time, you know users generally are not overly concerned about security until they are personally inconvenienced. Then they blame everyone else.
This is a corporate issue, as important as financial controls and marketing. Some corporations, of course, suck at those functions too, so no surprise. But security is a core process nowadays. If you value your job, you will be diligent at your password management. If not, well, you take the change that you will be reading about the reasons for the demise of your employer while you search for your next I Hate Passwords job.
Where I work, I currently have 12 unique passwords, used on 27 differnet systems. My personal passwords are a different matter, when I use over 50 unique passwords for various online stuff.
I use combinations of
- variations on a theme; like password1, password2, password03, passwordH, passordT%
- reversed passwords; carrot, torrac, trouble, elbuort
- word-sounding passwords; c@rr0T, St!ck, b@g3!, myb!rtH@^, these are bad examples.
Since my eBay account was compromised about 2 years ago, I've gotten harder about passwords.
Now my wife, she seems to cling to passwords like lost children. I'm working on her.
Passwords are as necessary as rain.
And what entity in the U.S. is protecting us from Chinese cyber attacks?
Just curious. Who would be putting us at risk by 'letting their guard down'?
Well, if authors recompile (wrong term I know) their Flash, they won't be distributing 'legacy'.
If YouTube updates to current Flash embeds, they won't be 'legacy'
If just a few very popular sites update their Flash content, 'legacy' won't be good enough.
And Gordon will have to play catch-up.
Not a new strategy. So far, Adobe hasn't broken legacy. If HTML5 catches on, hopefully they will compete and not destroy.
Well, wait until Adobe changes the Flash spec sufficiently to break Gordon. Flash plug-ins will work fine, of course.
My faith is based on experience. I was a Novell guy originally. Microsoft wasn't done until Novell didn't run. Not just a catchy phrase, this was BAU in Redmond. Adobe knows this tactic. If they wish to kill Gordon, they only have to worry about getting caught. Doing it is reasonably trivial.
I'm looking forward to SVG/HTML5 to solve this, but it will take time for authoring tools to catch up.
"How long before HTML5/SVG next-generation browsers like Chrome, Firefox, Opera, Safari, Epiphany, and other Web-Kit based browsers completely supplant Flash and Silverlight/Moonlight?"
Until Adobe and Microsoft break them.
Rinse and repeat.
Well, it is important to carefully describe our expectations and grievances with our government.
Reining in the railroads may have been a good and proper thing - they were using the commons, that is rights of way, to profit unfairly. But I see both sides. If our government is working to ensure freer markets, this is good. Sadly, they get it wrong a lot.
Telling you how much you must pay your employees over-simplifies the issue. The government tells you you must pay at least *this* much. If you're in the restaurant business, imagine how your servers feel having to declare a certain minimum amount of income, even if they don't in fact receive it... Amazing.
Many American citizens think it is ok to ask the government to do for them. They have no idea what they are giving up. My lunch mate wants healthcare costs reduced, so he's in favor of a single-payer government plan. Why does he believe this will be cheaper? Because it will share costs more equitably. Or to put it more honestly, because someone will pay for his care, in part, as they pay MORE.
Socialism. This was not our system. We need to be consulted, as a people, before our government enacts such changes. Time to call my representatives again, I'm getting upset...
The analogy of a locked briefcase is instructive. If the government were to try to guess the combination, aren't they ignoring my intention of privacy? That is, I locked the briefcase, intending to shield the contents from disclosure without my consent. Being a combination lock means nothing, because picking a key lock is the same effort, indeed snipping off the lock is the equivalent. Does the means of entry matter? Indeed, coercing me to divulge the combination, or give them the key, aren't these also violations of the Fifth Amendment, allowed only in the most dire of circumstances, if at all?
So if I password protect my files in the 'cloud', don't I have a similar expectation of privacy? The government could indeed coerce the service provider to open the files (snip the lock). And if I encrypt the files, why should the government be allowed to even attempt to decrypt them by any means (guess the combination or pick the lock) including coercing me to offer the key (Fifth Amendment again)?
The slope we are slipping down is an old one - new technology doesn't change the principles. It just changes the means. As the government does not have the right to enter my home and search my papers without due process, so they should not have the right to rifle through my 'papers' online, either.
While any expectation of privacy in normal email is futile, if I choose to use Gmail, for instance, via SSL, then I should be granted the expectation of privacy also in that communication. And since I need my user ID and password to access my GMail account, I epxect my stored email data to also be granted that expectation of privacy.
The only reason that protections against unreasonable searches and seizures of electronically stored items should be 'lagging behind' the protections that 'more' physical items enjoys is twofold; 1. The government is charging in where they should not be, in the absence of court decisions, and 2. The courts have not yet handed down decisions that would retrain the governemnt.
But to point 1; Our goverment in the U.S. should not be seeking ways to expand their influence in the absence of restraint by the courts. They should act like the officers of the court they should be and consider the legality in favor of the people. And I'm sure they would claim to be doing so now and always. I disagree. Our government seeks to assume power in every area where the restrictions are unclear, or where the courts have not yet decided, or where they can justify the effort in the name of some greater good. We would be better off if our government considered first, "should we be doing this?".
I know I am probably in the minority with this belief. That doesn't make it wrong. Our government was devised from documents that also described its limits.
Congratulations. You've highlighted one of the problems I had back in Maine.
Not much topography fit into neat little topological categories. The whole area east of Auburn Lake, for instance, or of course the backside of Streaked Mountain. And that whole space above the Allagash. Ogunquit, that's just the town council refusing to let them build a tower until recently, and it's so hilly they need three just to cover the village. My favorite spot is pretty much off the service map, and it's barely a mile from the tower. Just on the other side of the ridge, and they can't get approval for a 600 ft tower to overcome the problem. Hills, man. Suck.
To the respondent that claimed they expected service anywhere there were more than 500 people; Um, that counts for a LOT of Maine. Places that do NOT get good service, and a pile of places that do not get any service at all. The number is too low. Not only are there plent of places in Maine that have around 500-600 people and poor to no cell service, but a lot of these places only have 500 people there between June and August. And a lot of the rest are more than 20 miles from anything. The fiber haul to serve a tower can't be cheap. They have no cable TV, and POTS service is pitiful. 20 miles of copper is still common in Maine, and it doesn't do much for your old 56K modem. DSL is a cruel hoax out there.
And there are places like Pownal, that should be served, but I remember how lousy service was. And how hilly it is.
The world is not uniformly populated. And therefore not uniformly served.
Locate the towers precisely.
How high ARE they?
Multipath is a very common problem in scyscraper landscapes.
I haven't purchased an edition of the New York Times for at least 25 years. I won't be buying their online content either.
No problem here to solve.
Force your Droid back to 2G data service and tell me how it looks.
And wait for a software update. Not out of the ordinary for an Android phone, and is the Droid the first CDMA Android model? Expect some fimware issues with the radio.
ps- Try comparing at various spots and orientations. Antennas differ. But I'm not tryng to tell you to make a judgment on a limited number of observations. Try checking out your Bluetooth headset performance in the middle of a basketball court, no players. Put the phone on the other side of your body from the headset. Tell me how it works. Scratchy? There is more to this stuff than just one observation.
How would this compare with a SU-27 for $5Mil?
Personally, I can find a place to garage the SU-27. But they don't have room for a Shuttle, and you're not going to toll around Mesa in one. The SU-27, OTOH, that I can see buzzing the orchards around here. I'll have to sell a kidney for 3 hours of fuel, and sell my wife for ground school but hey, it's doable. The Shuttle, I need 2 more guys and a relly big candle to get it up high enough to just turn around and crash-land.
So it's the SU-27. Fair deal.
Most people have no idea how cell service works. They complain that they have no service at home, not looking at the coverage map that shows a poor spot. The hilly country, distance from freeways and high-density residential don't figure into their assessments of capability.
When I lived in Maine, I suffered from multiple problems. Several spots where reception was poor to nonexistant, all due to topology - hills, trees, you name it. On the coast, it took 2 years and many calls to diagnose a roaming problem, and when I finally got through to a diligent tech, presto! Roaming along a 35 mile section of US Route One worked! I know I wasn't the only one calling, but 2 days after my best session with a Cingular tech, magic!
In Maine, and a lot of other states, topolgy is important. I imagine an Francisco is tough. Tulsa, not so much?
Now I live in the Phoenix area. Flat as a pancake, relatively speaking. Two spots along the Pima and Red Mountain freeways I drop calls, due to some tower handoff problem. But I'm complaining about afternoon rush hour, and I bet this is a capacity issue. So do I complain about being able to keep a call for the busiest 3 hours of the day? Well, sometimes I do.
I also had a hard time getting 3G at home, so I located the tower with a tech and sat a quarter mile from it. No 3G. He got me into the phone setup screen on my G1 (*#*#4636#*#*, from memory) and found my phone was set to GSM only. It was a small miracle I got any 3G at all. Fixed that. Only 7 months after getting my phone, and 4 calls to TMO service. No other tech even dreamed of checking that setting.
How many phones are set up wrong? Who knows? Are all equally capable? Who knows.
But I've NEVER had a billing issue in 4 years with TMobile, nor in 7 years before that with AT&T/Cingular. Go figure.
It is not so simple as people think. Of course, they largely don't care until it impacts them, of course.
So Apple is going to sue claiming Nokia shouldn't be asking for different (obviously higher) license fees?
Or in other words, that Nokia shouldn't be allowed to charge what they want, that would be somehow unfair?
I wonder if Nokia changed terms when Apple balked.
And when do courts get to tell Nokia how much they should charge?
Nokia finds infringing product(s) from Apple
Nokia contacts Apple and asserts their patent rights, asks for a licensing agreement or cease and desist
Apple responds "not infringing!" and ignores the licensing request
Nokia responds "yes you are" and threatens to sue
Apple responds "well, you're infringing on OUR..."
Nokia says "not infringing"
Tit-for-tat at this stage for a while...
Nokia sues Apple
Apple counter sues Nokia
Nokia seeks to ban Apple Imports via ITC
Apple responds by seeking to ban Nokia imports via the ITC
Lawyers order new jets and houses
And so it goes...
My point was that the FTC's complaints that Intel has an abusive position due to their assumed manufacturing advantage is not a good thing.
Mind you, Intel's holding customers over a barrel with a combination of exclusive marketing agreements and coop funds is probably a pretty good bet for the FTC. It seems to meet a common-sense definition of restraint.
Interesting, and I had to put away my mod points and respond.
"it is like the classic economic example of the steel mill where it is almost impossible for new competitors to enter the market"
I suspect that if this is the theory the FTC is presenting, Intel is correctly going to counter that this is neither sufficient grounds for additional restrictions, nor is it actually a hindrance in today's or even last year's market.
There are some competitors to Intel (AMD) that don't even OWN fabrication facilities. They have access to competitive foundries that can produce their product. Similarly, competitors such as Freescale etc. also have their own foundries and can even find other manufacturers. There is a thriving boutique business for chips, and multiple CPU makers with multiple manufacturing options.
Now, if the FTC thinks Intel has an unfair advantage because they own their fabs, well, AMD chose a different route. Emphasis on CHOSE. The FTC is not chartered to address a competitor's poor choices, if indeed AMD made a poor choice in being fabless.
Intel has a good point. If the a major point of the FTC's inquiry is that they have an integrated presence in the market, then is Intel being penalized partly for merely being successful, and making good business decisions? Pah. They are in a competitive business. AMD is suffering as much for their choice in manufacturing partners as anythuing right now. Design aside.
The FTC has to do better than this.
ps - It should be obvious IANAL.
Among other things, I have a process that I need to enter a ~ into.
And I suspect some editors and wordcrafters, you know, people who use Microsoft Word for something other than creating birthday announcements, have good reason to type more than a few characters in upper case.
Actually, birthday announcements are probably a great place to use some caps. Another use.
"The only people I know who use the Caps Lock Key are AOLers."
You need to get out of the basement more. There is more to the world than former AOLers.
I use CAPS LOCK regularly to input data in CAPS. Duh. So not all the apps I use know enough to shift for me when it is needed, and not when it is not, as in they can't predict the use of my data. I also use it in queries, where the editor doesn't force caps for me. It's big world out there, with people doing things you don't know about.
Honestly, CAPS LOCK has a useful function. Ditch Scroll Lock first, if you must.
Of course, does the Pause/Break key do anything at all? Missing an opportunity there, I bet, but does someone use it? Dunno.