I've been using PDAs probably longer than I've been carrying around a mobile phone. For me, my phone is a PDA first, and a phone second. (Far second). I'd even catagorize it as a "communications device" far above a "telephone" - after all, I use email, web, SMS and even Facebook more than I use the voice-telephone.
So if you want to argue that "people don't need smartphones" - I find it kind of nonsensical. If I had to give-up one major feature of my "smartphone", it would probably be the "telephone" piece. If I were to rate in order of importance what I use my iPhone for, I'd have to say:
- Calendar (Shared and synced)
- Notes (Everything from gift ideas, to what kind of light bulbs I have in my house. Some of my notes I've been maintaining and using for YEARS).
- Email
- SMS
- GPS
- Camera
- Games & Entertainment (Yeah - hate to say it - but I kill a LOT of spare time with my iPhone!)
- Facebook
- Mobile Web (Hate to admit it, but the "experience" is still lousy on a small screen)
If I understood the video, they are *NOT* taking video at a trillion frames a second. They are continuously pulsing the laser, then snapping a picture at progressively longer periods of time - the net result being an series of images from SEPARATE EVENTS, that would MIMIC high-frame rate video if a single event, ONLY if the separate events are identical (e.g. a laser flashing, each flash illuminating the same object over and over again).
Apple's developer agreement prohibits applications which execute any kind of interpreted, or downloaded code.
So if you're envisioning an NTX-G style of robotics environment for the iPhone, you may need to think again.
Even a simple "Big-Trak"-type (See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Trak ) application would technically violate such terms. So - Android would clearly be the superior platform of this type of development.
I agree. So lets make sure the next natural disaster or nuclear attack happens during prime-time on Sweeps Week, so that way everyone will hear the announcement.
Exactly. Flash (and sliverlight, to a far lesser extent) was the standard "Embedded Player" for advanced video. Without it, we need to have customized embedded players for Firefox, and IE and Safari Opera, running on my Windows PC, and my Mac, and under Linux, and on my Blackberry, and iPhone, Windows Phone, and my Wii, and Xbox, and my DVD player, and embedded in my TV, etc. Who's going to write embedded players for ALL those - and make it so they actually get embeddded in ALL those. Adobe did this with flash. Without this, how can I make my web video work with ALL these devices. Don't think PC/Desktop - think about our multi-device world.
And as for HTTP byte-range requests, they don't work. First off, they're not cacheable. (Check the RFC). So it doesn't matter that you have a nice big fat fibre pipe running to your house, your provider has no way of optimizing bandwidth on the narrower, more expensive upstream connection they have to their providers.
Adobe, Apple and Microsoft have all converged on the same way to handle all this - adaptive bitrate streaming. They each do the EXACT SAME THING, in three (relatively) slightly different ways. They all worked through years of MMS, RTSP, Progressive HTTP, RTMP and a billion others to all unamimously arrive at the same conclusion. Microsoft and Adobe are abandoning this - the state of the industry will be in peril.
With the decline of these client-side frameworks, where is that going to leave video??
...and don't say "HTML5" - because that doesn't define just about ANYTHING.
First there was Flash video over RTMP, then there was Adobe HTTP Dynamic streaming (HDS). Both of these were ADAPTIVE streaming technologies, and extremely popular an widley used. Moreso RTMP, but HDS is starting to gain adoption.
HTML-5 does not provide any method for any kind of adaptive bitrate, or fragmented video delivery. It is strictly PROGRESSIVE download - i.e. download the whole file, and play it. There are a billion problems with this. No adaptive bitrate (downgrade video quality if you cannot meet the sustained bitrate), and difficulty in caching (caching one giant file very difficult for a reactive, real-time cache, as opposed to caching smalller HDS or HLS "fragments"). The only other really "competitor" would be Apples HTTP Live Streaming (HLS) - which is the standard for iOS devices, and starting to gain adoption on Set-Top Box-devices, but pretty invisible on the desktop space.
...and don't say "HTML5" - because that doesn't define just about ANYTHING.
First there was Flash video over RTMP, then there was Adobe HTTP Dynamic streaming (HDS). Both of these were ADAPTIVE streaming technologies, and extremely popular an widley used. Moreso RTMP, but HDS is starting to gain adoption.
HTML-5 does not provide any method for any kind of adaptive bitrate, or fragmented video delivery. It is strictly PROGRESSIVE download - i.e. download the whole file, and play it. There are a billion problems with this. No adaptive bitrate (downgrade video quality if you cannot meet the sustained bitrate), and difficulty in caching (caching one giant file very difficult for a reactive, real-time cache, as opposed to caching smalller HDS or HLS "fragments").
The only other really "competitor" would be Apples HTTP Live Streaming (HLS) - which is the standard for iOS devices, and starting to gain adoption on Set-Top Box-devices, but pretty invisible on the desktop space.
Or can it be that TIOBE is just wrong. A poor index, not necessarily representative of anything. I forget exactly how the index is calculated, but to my last recollection, it wasn't representitive of anything "real-world-enough" to really account for much of anything.
I'd guess that SO is more representative of "what people are actively engaged in". Maybe....for example, I work in "C" and "Perl" all the time. However, I knew them well enought that I very, very rarley post any C or Perl questions
I have worked a lot with Andrioid an iPhone latley. As these are more recent environments for me, I post questions on SO to them more.
So maybe SO is more reflective of what people are learning?
It may be orthagonal to the point - or on the point - I can't tell - but one thought immediately came to mind.
---
If by "app" you are talking a "user application", meaning one with a whole user interface (i.e. GUI), etc. - I'd say that is eroding. I wouldn't say that "SaaS" is what's eroding it however. I've been using Linux for almost twenty years, and only have written a single GUI-based (Glade) application for it. I see Linux as a "back-end" system, and have always used Windows, or a Mobile platform as the "front end". When I need to write, let's say a "management" interface for something, or something else that requires something prettier - like a GUI, I've always implemented this as a web service.
This is more of an effect of the fact that Linux has never really made it big into the desktop arena. Conversely however, Android is making it mainstream in the tablet and smartphone space (albiet, under Java for user-apps) - so as tablets and phones eclipse desktops in the user-oriented space - Linux, ironically, stands to become the dominant force in "user" systems, they just won't be "desktop" systems as we think about them today.
Yes. The BS artists, or the people who are outgoing, or egotistical enough to thrive in that kind of an environment. Not that that's a BAD thing, it's just that when someone is nervous, they are MUCH more susceptible to messing up even very SIMPLE tasks - even ones that they know well, or have done a million times.
Personally, when peoples "eyes are on me" - I even hate answering specific "white board coding" questions. If you put me at a computer and have me CODE - no problem. If you ask me about a project and get me talking - I'll go all day, and into specific detail.
Put me in front of a white board and tell me to write a linked-list insertion function (something I've written a billion times, have been asked a million times in interviews, and KNOW I'll be asked in future interviews) - It's a complete mental choke!!
I've sat through interviews before where I got hit with some of these "puzzle" questions. The thing that really struck me was that the questions were the kind you'd need to be a Nobel Laureate to solve (not really), but were completely obvious if you *knew* the answer. So, as these were "novel" or "neat" "brain-teasers" - they really assessed only if you were some mathematical savant - and had nothing to do with your coding, or even problem-solving abilities. I'm 100% sure that the interviewer wouldn't have been able to figure out the answers, if he hadn't already known them.
(In the end I admittedly had absolutely no idea how how to solve the problems, and didn't even attempt to. I got the job anyway.)
When I interview people - I feel it is my job to "extract" the best out of the candidates, and to find out what "their best" actually is. If I come away from an interview and don't have a strong feeling for a candidates abilities - good and bad - I feel as though I didn't do my job as an interviewer. I've seen too many people "freeze up", or just be shy in interviews. These people maybe were VERY qualified - I feel it is always my job to understand that. My creedo is this: Get the people talking. Get them talking about what they do, and what they love. If you can do this - they'll go into the depths and bowels of their technical knowledge, working style, experience, etc.
It feels like just yesterday we crossed the 6-Billion mark. I remember when I was younger (about 30 years ago) there being 4-billion. The number isn't just increasing, but the rate of acceleration itself is picking up in a scary way. You think of these things as being long-term, but when you can see it happening over the course of your own lifetime...
Schools increase their tuition simply because they can.
It doesn't matter if if it's a "non-profit". There's always more land to buy, higher salaries for administrators, the new-bigger sports arenas, etc.
If I were to offer they typical 18-year-old a $100k loan, today, interest-free, with no repayments for 5 years - they'd take it. And if they have access to it - the schools will take it. Sort of the same mentality of why GM created GMAC. If people can't afford it, they won't buy it. If you give (a.k.a. "loan") them the money, they'll do it.
People are short-sighted. They don't think far enough down the road to see that it's a bad idea. Especially if you're 18 years old.
But when this is commonplace in our country, all the colleges realize they can charge the same - and they do, so it becomes the "norm". Even state schools don't get to frugal with the money and the salaries, because, after all - they're still way cheaper than the privates.
So in Ron Paul's plan - if the market decides that the price tag on an education is worth (let's just make up numbers) $10k, not $100k - schools will have to adapt to that fee structure. This is going to mean less money. They will have to do as they see fit. If they can run the same school, and give the same students the same education by spending that much money - and foregoing the huge administrative and sports expenses - so be it.
I'm no republican, and at first I was thinking "here we go again - another GOPer trying to take money away from the little guy" - but I think he has a valid point.
People would only be willing to spend a hundred-grand on education if there was someone standing right there willing to easily loan them a hundred-grand to do so. I've always thought there was some odd market force that was allowing the cost of education rise in such a bizarre way - this is probably it.
If if were really up the the "free market" - i.e. there were no "special" loans, scholarships, or free-rides, people would be willing (and able) to spend a LOT less. Schools would have to come *WAY* down in price to get people in. It would be a very different landscape.
When there are conflicts being photographed, there are conflict photographers?
The pretense of the article seemed to imply that the events or photos were "staged" or something by the journalists. Nothing of the sort was happening in any of these photos.
Are we supposed to be shocked to believe that there were photojournalists on the scene when these photos were taken?
Right - but my question would be - how long would it reasonably take to "adjust the parameters" to get a photo correct. A minute? Any hour? A day? A week? Seriously.
-BKG
Slashdot Mirror
So if you want to argue that "people don't need smartphones" - I find it kind of nonsensical. If I had to give-up one major feature of my "smartphone", it would probably be the "telephone" piece. If I were to rate in order of importance what I use my iPhone for, I'd have to say:
- Calendar (Shared and synced)
- Notes (Everything from gift ideas, to what kind of light bulbs I have in my house. Some of my notes I've been maintaining and using for YEARS).
- Email
- SMS
- GPS
- Camera
- Games & Entertainment (Yeah - hate to say it - but I kill a LOT of spare time with my iPhone!)
- Facebook
- Mobile Web (Hate to admit it, but the "experience" is still lousy on a small screen)
- Misc. productivity apps
Oh yea...and..
- Telephone
If I understood the video, they are *NOT* taking video at a trillion frames a second. They are continuously pulsing the laser, then snapping a picture at progressively longer periods of time - the net result being an series of images from SEPARATE EVENTS, that would MIMIC high-frame rate video if a single event, ONLY if the separate events are identical (e.g. a laser flashing, each flash illuminating the same object over and over again).
Can you say: "Lodestone Resonator"?? :-O
A true testimony to the power of Angry Birds...
"Fix it again, Tony!" -- Dale Gribble
So if you're envisioning an NTX-G style of robotics environment for the iPhone, you may need to think again.
Even a simple "Big-Trak"-type (See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Trak ) application would technically violate such terms. So - Android would clearly be the superior platform of this type of development.
I agree. So lets make sure the next natural disaster or nuclear attack happens during prime-time on Sweeps Week, so that way everyone will hear the announcement.
I do have a cell phone on me all the time, and received no alerts on it.
I can tell you from experience however, that if it were an Amber Alert, I would have been aware of it immediately.
CONCLUSION: EAS is another complete misguided federal program.
And as for HTTP byte-range requests, they don't work. First off, they're not cacheable. (Check the RFC). So it doesn't matter that you have a nice big fat fibre pipe running to your house, your provider has no way of optimizing bandwidth on the narrower, more expensive upstream connection they have to their providers.
Adobe, Apple and Microsoft have all converged on the same way to handle all this - adaptive bitrate streaming. They each do the EXACT SAME THING, in three (relatively) slightly different ways. They all worked through years of MMS, RTSP, Progressive HTTP, RTMP and a billion others to all unamimously arrive at the same conclusion. Microsoft and Adobe are abandoning this - the state of the industry will be in peril.
First there was Flash video over RTMP, then there was Adobe HTTP Dynamic streaming (HDS). Both of these were ADAPTIVE streaming technologies, and extremely popular an widley used. Moreso RTMP, but HDS is starting to gain adoption.
HTML-5 does not provide any method for any kind of adaptive bitrate, or fragmented video delivery. It is strictly PROGRESSIVE download - i.e. download the whole file, and play it. There are a billion problems with this. No adaptive bitrate (downgrade video quality if you cannot meet the sustained bitrate), and difficulty in caching (caching one giant file very difficult for a reactive, real-time cache, as opposed to caching smalller HDS or HLS "fragments"). The only other really "competitor" would be Apples HTTP Live Streaming (HLS) - which is the standard for iOS devices, and starting to gain adoption on Set-Top Box-devices, but pretty invisible on the desktop space.
So...my question is... "What about video!?"
First there was Flash video over RTMP, then there was Adobe HTTP Dynamic streaming (HDS). Both of these were ADAPTIVE streaming technologies, and extremely popular an widley used. Moreso RTMP, but HDS is starting to gain adoption.
HTML-5 does not provide any method for any kind of adaptive bitrate, or fragmented video delivery. It is strictly PROGRESSIVE download - i.e. download the whole file, and play it. There are a billion problems with this. No adaptive bitrate (downgrade video quality if you cannot meet the sustained bitrate), and difficulty in caching (caching one giant file very difficult for a reactive, real-time cache, as opposed to caching smalller HDS or HLS "fragments"). The only other really "competitor" would be Apples HTTP Live Streaming (HLS) - which is the standard for iOS devices, and starting to gain adoption on Set-Top Box-devices, but pretty invisible on the desktop space.
So...my question is... "What about video!?"
I'd guess that SO is more representative of "what people are actively engaged in". Maybe....for example, I work in "C" and "Perl" all the time. However, I knew them well enought that I very, very rarley post any C or Perl questions
I have worked a lot with Andrioid an iPhone latley. As these are more recent environments for me, I post questions on SO to them more.
So maybe SO is more reflective of what people are learning?
---
If by "app" you are talking a "user application", meaning one with a whole user interface (i.e. GUI), etc. - I'd say that is eroding. I wouldn't say that "SaaS" is what's eroding it however. I've been using Linux for almost twenty years, and only have written a single GUI-based (Glade) application for it. I see Linux as a "back-end" system, and have always used Windows, or a Mobile platform as the "front end". When I need to write, let's say a "management" interface for something, or something else that requires something prettier - like a GUI, I've always implemented this as a web service.
This is more of an effect of the fact that Linux has never really made it big into the desktop arena. Conversely however, Android is making it mainstream in the tablet and smartphone space (albiet, under Java for user-apps) - so as tablets and phones eclipse desktops in the user-oriented space - Linux, ironically, stands to become the dominant force in "user" systems, they just won't be "desktop" systems as we think about them today.
Personally, when peoples "eyes are on me" - I even hate answering specific "white board coding" questions. If you put me at a computer and have me CODE - no problem. If you ask me about a project and get me talking - I'll go all day, and into specific detail.
Put me in front of a white board and tell me to write a linked-list insertion function (something I've written a billion times, have been asked a million times in interviews, and KNOW I'll be asked in future interviews) - It's a complete mental choke!!
(In the end I admittedly had absolutely no idea how how to solve the problems, and didn't even attempt to. I got the job anyway.)
When I interview people - I feel it is my job to "extract" the best out of the candidates, and to find out what "their best" actually is. If I come away from an interview and don't have a strong feeling for a candidates abilities - good and bad - I feel as though I didn't do my job as an interviewer. I've seen too many people "freeze up", or just be shy in interviews. These people maybe were VERY qualified - I feel it is always my job to understand that. My creedo is this: Get the people talking. Get them talking about what they do, and what they love. If you can do this - they'll go into the depths and bowels of their technical knowledge, working style, experience, etc.
I just realized - those numbers actually indicate a very linear increase (though I doubt this will be true in the long-term) ;-)
It feels like just yesterday we crossed the 6-Billion mark. I remember when I was younger (about 30 years ago) there being 4-billion. The number isn't just increasing, but the rate of acceleration itself is picking up in a scary way. You think of these things as being long-term, but when you can see it happening over the course of your own lifetime...
Schools increase their tuition simply because they can. It doesn't matter if if it's a "non-profit". There's always more land to buy, higher salaries for administrators, the new-bigger sports arenas, etc.
If I were to offer they typical 18-year-old a $100k loan, today, interest-free, with no repayments for 5 years - they'd take it. And if they have access to it - the schools will take it. Sort of the same mentality of why GM created GMAC. If people can't afford it, they won't buy it. If you give (a.k.a. "loan") them the money, they'll do it.
People are short-sighted. They don't think far enough down the road to see that it's a bad idea. Especially if you're 18 years old.
But when this is commonplace in our country, all the colleges realize they can charge the same - and they do, so it becomes the "norm". Even state schools don't get to frugal with the money and the salaries, because, after all - they're still way cheaper than the privates.
So in Ron Paul's plan - if the market decides that the price tag on an education is worth (let's just make up numbers) $10k, not $100k - schools will have to adapt to that fee structure. This is going to mean less money. They will have to do as they see fit. If they can run the same school, and give the same students the same education by spending that much money - and foregoing the huge administrative and sports expenses - so be it.
I'm no republican, and at first I was thinking "here we go again - another GOPer trying to take money away from the little guy" - but I think he has a valid point.
People would only be willing to spend a hundred-grand on education if there was someone standing right there willing to easily loan them a hundred-grand to do so. I've always thought there was some odd market force that was allowing the cost of education rise in such a bizarre way - this is probably it.
If if were really up the the "free market" - i.e. there were no "special" loans, scholarships, or free-rides, people would be willing (and able) to spend a LOT less. Schools would have to come *WAY* down in price to get people in. It would be a very different landscape.
Then I found out that that idea was completely swiped from Android!
So what if the was talking or joking with the rioters? Does that make the pictures invalid or untrue?
It's not like he was "directing" the people in the pictures. Or bringing props. Or putting the people into poses. Or "staging" the photographs.
If a rioter talks to a protester before or after a picture is taken or an incident occurs, that's wrong somehow?
He's acting like it's a crime for a photographer to be on a riot scene!
What kind of fuel did the rocket use?
The pretense of the article seemed to imply that the events or photos were "staged" or something by the journalists. Nothing of the sort was happening in any of these photos.
Are we supposed to be shocked to believe that there were photojournalists on the scene when these photos were taken?
Inane.
Right - but my question would be - how long would it reasonably take to "adjust the parameters" to get a photo correct. A minute? Any hour? A day? A week? Seriously. -BKG