They claimed the technology had the potential to hit 1000 times faster than current flash memory... they didn't specify when or what flash they were comparing to.
Just to be up-front this is a topic I'm very ignorant about, it was only casual curiosity that made me peek into the comment section. But does't Intel normally announce a new design with where the intend for it to land long before they announce their products that are only blips along their roadmap? For example: "With this our new Pentanium Matrix we'll reach 64 cores and 10 gigahertz."... and a few months later: "Now announcing our Titticaca processor with 16 cores at 3.09ghz"
Eh I dunno, but now you have an idea of why I don't pay a lot of attention to these announcements until I'm reading them on Newegg.
"Exception"? Do you even understand the words you're writing? You're arguing the Nexus series is an "Exception" to the concept that Android is "designed" to disallow upgrades?
Yes. That's exactly what I'm saying. The Nexus phones are not proof that Android isn't designed that way, they're proof that it is! Nexus phones are produced for Google. They are Google's phones. They are to Google what iPhone is to Apple. Android is to Google what iOS is to Apple. Google can update their own phones to the latest Android because the OS and the Nexus phones are theirs. They're not some random manufacturer producing their own phones who just happen to be unique in that they get updates sooner than say... anybody using a Samsung phone. They are commissioned and supported by Google to be a design reference for the rest of the industry to look up to.
Your claim is that Android, by design, prevents users from upgrading it. You're wrong.
"My roof is leaking."
"No it isn't!"
"Dude, the floor's all wet!"
"Not in this corner I'm standing in! See! You're wrong!!"
Do you understand that manufacturers like Motorola advertise how long they plan to support Android on their phones? They make promises like: "We'll go up to three upgrades on this phone!" That doesn't happen when you purchase a desktop computer. This. Is. By. Design. This is also why Stagefright is such a huge problem for Android, nobody can update their phones to fix it!
Before I continue I want to say that our opinions aren't that different.
If i say black people should die and 3 years later one of the listeners killed a black person? does that mean that I am guilty of inciting the listener to violence?
An argument could be made either way, but that's not what we're talking about. It's a question of do we allow the rights of individuals to be violated. Remember, we're talking about minimizing an expression of speech as "just an opinion". What happens when "just an opinion" means "I ain't gonna hire you.", not because the person saying that is behaving as a bigot, but because they don't want trouble from the locals who have subscribed to that nonsense?
It's powerful enough that it isn't an issue of restricting first amendment rights, rather it becomes an issue of protecting the rights of minorities. You have to minimize the impact of it quite a bit to fit it in a box labeled 'opinion'.
I wasn't referring to Google approving their own updates. I was referring to the Nexus series allowing users to update their own phones. You don't need Google's permission to do so.
Nexus is Google's own phone. That's why you get those updates.
We should never allow people with unpopular opinions to have any privacy at all.
Although I agree with you that this isn't a case where the violation of privacy is warranted, handwaving it away as an "unpopular opinion" is disingenuous and, frankly, betrays your credibility. You cannot behave as though free speech is more important than the safety of lots of people, then turn around and suddenly it's just a few inconsequential mutterings and any response shows just how petty one side is.
Either free speech is powerful or it isn't, pick one and stick with it, you don't get to have your cake and eat it, too.
I'm not sure why so many Android users find this to be acceptable. Imagine requiring Dell's permission to install a new version of Windows. That's how Android works, BY DESIGN.
They're complaining because they missed a major live event that one-fifteenth of their cable bill hardly compares to. I am in no way a fan of baseball, but I they certainly have my sympathies.
OK.. Split hairs if you want, it's the same thing to me.
The reason it's not is in this particular case every single person cold-calling Gravity is doing so after hearing that they've lowered their profit margins, but not in a way that will mean lower prices for them. This point right here leads directly into your question about whether or not they will need to raise prices in the future. Potential customers should, in theory, be asking that as well.
But how many will stay if they have to charge more to stay afloat?
This is an important question, I'm eager to know the answer as well. Right now the wages are being taken directly out of the CEO's pocket. However, it's almost certain he's really really really hoping that the increase in business will be more profitable in the long-run. If this is the sort of business that requires quality interaction between Gravity and their clients, it could pay off big.
Why did they get the 20 fold increase in contacts? From the PR generated by the international press coverage..
That is an insufficient answer to the question. PR just means people are looking at you, it doesn't mean they magically want to throw money at you. So I'll rephrase the question: Once these people have heard of Gravity, what made them want to pick up the phone, call them, and enter into business with them? Is it because they're just looking around to do casual business with them and just needed a name of a company to flash in front of their eyes, or did something about the reason they're hearing about them make them think "hmmm... the way they treat their employees could be an advantage."
Public Relations and "Good Marketing" are not magical answers to questions about why products are successful.
Their sales department has enjoyed going from 90 to 2,000 unsolicited contacts which is TOTALY due to the PR they are getting.
Okay, fine. So WHY would they get the unsolicited contacts? Is it just hearing the name and they want to try something new, or something about their approach intrigued them in a way they think may be beneficial to their business? The answer to that is very important. It's not as simple as "Oh.. there's a company called Gravity, we should try it today!", especially when things like contracts are involved.
The question of if there's a market for it is most certainly a valid one. It may mean that their success or failure is conditional on the type of service they're offering. For example: If Apple suddenly shut down all of their stores (i.e. Genius Bar) would lots fewer people buy iPhones since they cannot just walk in to get help anymore? Would Android sales surge if Google opened a Google store? The answer to one is in no way related to the answer of the other because iPhone and Android customers have different bidness requirements.
Besides all that, Gravity's not exactly the sort of company you use on impulse. They handle finances. It's not like people are running out to buy twenty dollar bottles of Pepsi on the anniversary of a movie. PR only goes so far in this case.
Slashdot Mirror
By the way, I fucked your mom in the poop-chute.
To bring this back on topic you'll need either ZBrush or ... heh ... Mudbox.
They claimed the technology had the potential to hit 1000 times faster than current flash memory... they didn't specify when or what flash they were comparing to.
Just to be up-front this is a topic I'm very ignorant about, it was only casual curiosity that made me peek into the comment section. But does't Intel normally announce a new design with where the intend for it to land long before they announce their products that are only blips along their roadmap? For example: "With this our new Pentanium Matrix we'll reach 64 cores and 10 gigahertz."... and a few months later: "Now announcing our Titticaca processor with 16 cores at 3.09ghz"
Eh I dunno, but now you have an idea of why I don't pay a lot of attention to these announcements until I'm reading them on Newegg.
Heh. Ah, man. That's funny. Okay, here we go:
"Exception"? Do you even understand the words you're writing? You're arguing the Nexus series is an "Exception" to the concept that Android is "designed" to disallow upgrades?
Yes. That's exactly what I'm saying. The Nexus phones are not proof that Android isn't designed that way, they're proof that it is! Nexus phones are produced for Google. They are Google's phones. They are to Google what iPhone is to Apple. Android is to Google what iOS is to Apple. Google can update their own phones to the latest Android because the OS and the Nexus phones are theirs. They're not some random manufacturer producing their own phones who just happen to be unique in that they get updates sooner than say... anybody using a Samsung phone. They are commissioned and supported by Google to be a design reference for the rest of the industry to look up to.
Your claim is that Android, by design, prevents users from upgrading it. You're wrong.
"My roof is leaking."
"No it isn't!"
"Dude, the floor's all wet!"
"Not in this corner I'm standing in! See! You're wrong!!"
Do you understand that manufacturers like Motorola advertise how long they plan to support Android on their phones? They make promises like: "We'll go up to three upgrades on this phone!" That doesn't happen when you purchase a desktop computer. This. Is. By. Design. This is also why Stagefright is such a huge problem for Android, nobody can update their phones to fix it!
The people annoyed by ads are subsidizing your torrent experience.
Do you understand that Nexus is Google's own phone? You need to because that's the reason you can find only one exception.
Before I continue I want to say that our opinions aren't that different.
If i say black people should die and 3 years later one of the listeners killed a black person? does that mean that I am guilty of inciting the listener to violence?
An argument could be made either way, but that's not what we're talking about. It's a question of do we allow the rights of individuals to be violated. Remember, we're talking about minimizing an expression of speech as "just an opinion". What happens when "just an opinion" means "I ain't gonna hire you.", not because the person saying that is behaving as a bigot, but because they don't want trouble from the locals who have subscribed to that nonsense?
It's powerful enough that it isn't an issue of restricting first amendment rights, rather it becomes an issue of protecting the rights of minorities. You have to minimize the impact of it quite a bit to fit it in a box labeled 'opinion'.
Okay, so you're saying until people have actually been killed in very specific circumstances, the speech has no real power to it. Right?
I wasn't referring to Google approving their own updates. I was referring to the Nexus series allowing users to update their own phones. You don't need Google's permission to do so.
Nexus is Google's own phone. That's why you get those updates.
Yes, Google can approve their own updates, the rest of the manufacturers and carriers remain as bottlenecks.
Saying "i hate black people and think they should all get hanged" isn't actually enough to warrant restricting their first amendment rights.
Are you describing that as an opinion or as a threat?
We should never allow people with unpopular opinions to have any privacy at all.
Although I agree with you that this isn't a case where the violation of privacy is warranted, handwaving it away as an "unpopular opinion" is disingenuous and, frankly, betrays your credibility. You cannot behave as though free speech is more important than the safety of lots of people, then turn around and suddenly it's just a few inconsequential mutterings and any response shows just how petty one side is.
Either free speech is powerful or it isn't, pick one and stick with it, you don't get to have your cake and eat it, too.
Well they did try to prove each members' membership to the clan by gathering DNA evidence, but they found it was all the same.
I'm not sure why so many Android users find this to be acceptable. Imagine requiring Dell's permission to install a new version of Windows. That's how Android works, BY DESIGN.
Here, I'll answer both ways:
"Why yes, I'm an extreme liberal. I'd prefer not to make the same dumb mistakes that the faux-news crowd routinely does."
Alternatively...
"I'm a Republican and I know that's not even remotely true. I hope you lot do start spewing that garbage so it'll ruin your credibility."
Pick whichever one you like.
I don't like the Tea Party either, but there's plenty of legitimate stuff to complain about, we don't need to assign negative traits to them.
The Bose thing, really? That's just desperate.
It's sitting at -1 because your shallow post relies way too heavily on the term "SJW" to get the pitchforks a'wavin.
I was commenting on the "above and beyond' remark you made. Orders of magnitude above crap does not automatically equal 'awesome'.
They're complaining because they missed a major live event that one-fifteenth of their cable bill hardly compares to. I am in no way a fan of baseball, but I they certainly have my sympathies.
As many Fandroids love to point out around here: Apple has a miniscule market-share and is dying every year.
Most of the answers to your questions will come from... wait for it.... testing, like the summary says they're doing.
Settle down, we're learning a lot more from their doing than from your whining.
OK.. Split hairs if you want, it's the same thing to me.
The reason it's not is in this particular case every single person cold-calling Gravity is doing so after hearing that they've lowered their profit margins, but not in a way that will mean lower prices for them. This point right here leads directly into your question about whether or not they will need to raise prices in the future. Potential customers should, in theory, be asking that as well.
But how many will stay if they have to charge more to stay afloat?
This is an important question, I'm eager to know the answer as well. Right now the wages are being taken directly out of the CEO's pocket. However, it's almost certain he's really really really hoping that the increase in business will be more profitable in the long-run. If this is the sort of business that requires quality interaction between Gravity and their clients, it could pay off big.
Why did they get the 20 fold increase in contacts? From the PR generated by the international press coverage..
That is an insufficient answer to the question. PR just means people are looking at you, it doesn't mean they magically want to throw money at you. So I'll rephrase the question: Once these people have heard of Gravity, what made them want to pick up the phone, call them, and enter into business with them? Is it because they're just looking around to do casual business with them and just needed a name of a company to flash in front of their eyes, or did something about the reason they're hearing about them make them think "hmmm... the way they treat their employees could be an advantage."
Public Relations and "Good Marketing" are not magical answers to questions about why products are successful.
Their sales department has enjoyed going from 90 to 2,000 unsolicited contacts which is TOTALY due to the PR they are getting.
Okay, fine. So WHY would they get the unsolicited contacts? Is it just hearing the name and they want to try something new, or something about their approach intrigued them in a way they think may be beneficial to their business? The answer to that is very important. It's not as simple as "Oh .. there's a company called Gravity, we should try it today!", especially when things like contracts are involved.
The question of if there's a market for it is most certainly a valid one. It may mean that their success or failure is conditional on the type of service they're offering. For example: If Apple suddenly shut down all of their stores (i.e. Genius Bar) would lots fewer people buy iPhones since they cannot just walk in to get help anymore? Would Android sales surge if Google opened a Google store? The answer to one is in no way related to the answer of the other because iPhone and Android customers have different bidness requirements.
Besides all that, Gravity's not exactly the sort of company you use on impulse. They handle finances. It's not like people are running out to buy twenty dollar bottles of Pepsi on the anniversary of a movie. PR only goes so far in this case.