The version I'm most familiar with is nobody getting fired for buying Cisco. I don't believe that this necessarily has anything to do with the quality of the products or the amount of hassle involved. IMO it has more to do with the appearance that the product provider's market cap is somehow inversely proportional to doing business with them. (adjusts tinfoil hat) This may or may not have anything to do with the "good old boy's club" that is the board rooms of large corporations.
hardware in the UK is generally much more expensive than in the US for some reason. I'd guess it has to do with VAT or something, but it's generally eye-popping expensive.
There is but one certification process for doctors as far as most of America is concerned, which ones take my health insurance. Other than that, I don't know and/or care. If I'm having an emergency I will only be taken to a hospital that I theoretically trust to have chosen talented workers. I honestly have never seen or asked to see any doctor's certifications of any sort. I typically find doctors to be a nuisance that I have to go through to get the same Z-pack I get every year around the same time of year when I get a sinus infection.
Meh, give it a few months before some Google engineer gets bored and adds a couple tweaks to their indexer for the archives. Then you can use the various google features like site: to search the archives.
I prefer to say "oil prices which reflect the total cost of oil including disease caused by the associated pollution" to "higher oil prices." The affect is the same, but it is generally more palatable to people on the fence.
There's gotta be some threshold there. Sure, it's probably not fair to compare computer related articles from a 30 year old paper encyclopedia. However, in the real world my actual options are probably something like a 5 year old encyclopedia or Wikipedia. I don't have access to search Britanica's latest and greatest updates on a whim like I do with Wikipedia.
I think statistically scientific articles on Wikipedia have 10 false claims, while old school encyclopedias have 8. I wouldn't base my thesis on it but it's certainly a viable source for my 99% off the cuff internet BS that I use it for.
Seconded. Visual Studio is still (imho) the best IDE for C/C++ development out there. Bing Maps has a superior API to Google Maps for my company's specific needs, so we went that direction. All things being equal though, I will tend towards supporting the little guy. Not just when MSFT is concerned, I prefer to support local businesses over national megacorps, etc.
The background images on bing are very distracting to me, having become accustomed to Google's pale demeanor. I dunno about user friendliness, but that jarring landing page is one of the reasons I can't get accustomed to using Bing regularly. Bing maps, on the other hand, have a superior API for developers (IMHO).
I found this to be true. Some of that is likely due to the fact that I have, subconsciously, tuned my queries to produce meaningful results in Google. If I were for some reason forced to use Bing for a while I suspect I would be able to produce meaningful results from it as well.
It would be easy to determine which is which. Bing would provide page summaries that are totally useless, while half the results from Google would be zero-content ad landing pages.
That's an artificial limitation created by the Mobile Safari team. There's not a good technical reason why a webapp shouldn't be able to store 1GB of data (set in user prefs). For a weak example of what I expect to come check out the Chrome Web Store. You can get apps installed into your browser which are often usable offline. Some of it is pretty cool. I can play Super Mario (the old NES one) without being online. I can also play through the entire game as a character from a different game like Mega-Man, the Metroid character, the guy from Castlevania, etc.
The computer can calculate that it has X seconds between the time it buzzes and the time it must answer. It can determine the most statistically likely correct answer it can find within X-1 seconds of "buzzing" and report that answer.
My grandfather was a draftsman for Martin Marietta (now Lockheed Martin) back in the day before computers. How did he get his job? After applying he was given an IQ test. He was considered smart enough for the job and they taught him how to draw airplane parts. These days you'd get sued six ways from Sunday if you gave someone an IQ test as a pre-requisite for employment.
I think the issue is that "smart" people tend to work differently than "normal" people, which makes them appear anti-establishment. More to the point, people who are actually interested in being productive (rare, but unrelated to intelligence) have little tolerance for rules/policies/practices they view as fruitless. We all have these meaningless policies where 10 years ago someone screwed up royally and we implemented this knee-jerk policy in response and it wastes a ton of man-hours and doesn't even address the original issue. These people will run around calling management/the company/etc. morons.
Exactly, we're basically in the same boat. My real point (which you strengthened) is that since there's a whole section of these types of games at mass retailers there's clearly a market. How big? I have no idea. But big enough to have a full sized shelf at big box stores.
Only tangentially related, but I gave up on having the latest and greatest PC hardware/games years ago. I buy my games *solely* from the $20 or less section in Target/Wal Mart. Particularly on the lower end of in-store games (the $10 bargain bin for time-wastey type times) you'll see price competition from the online stuff at less than $5. I doubt that $20 range will be impacted though. That will continue to be the games that were $50 1-2 years ago, and over time the price will drop to some lower bound before it disappears from the marketplace altogether.
I don't have an android phone so perhaps someone can inform me if I'm in the wrong here... but I would assume that the android store has some sort of filtration system that doesn't show games which require a touch screen to users of phones without touch screens. Games that require serious power would similarly be limited from lower end phones. I can't imagine all of the apps currently in the Apple app store work on the original iPod touch/iPhone. I can see how it might be disappointing for someone with a cheap/old phone not to be able to use the new whizbang app someone else has, but I would also assume there'd be some expectation of not being able to do "high-end" stuff on your "low-end" phone. *shrug*
Slashdot Mirror
err inversely proportional to THE RISK of doing business with them :(
The version I'm most familiar with is nobody getting fired for buying Cisco. I don't believe that this necessarily has anything to do with the quality of the products or the amount of hassle involved. IMO it has more to do with the appearance that the product provider's market cap is somehow inversely proportional to doing business with them. (adjusts tinfoil hat) This may or may not have anything to do with the "good old boy's club" that is the board rooms of large corporations.
hardware in the UK is generally much more expensive than in the US for some reason. I'd guess it has to do with VAT or something, but it's generally eye-popping expensive.
Yes, buildings built to spec, by the lowest bidder.
There is but one certification process for doctors as far as most of America is concerned, which ones take my health insurance. Other than that, I don't know and/or care. If I'm having an emergency I will only be taken to a hospital that I theoretically trust to have chosen talented workers. I honestly have never seen or asked to see any doctor's certifications of any sort. I typically find doctors to be a nuisance that I have to go through to get the same Z-pack I get every year around the same time of year when I get a sinus infection.
Meh, give it a few months before some Google engineer gets bored and adds a couple tweaks to their indexer for the archives. Then you can use the various google features like site: to search the archives.
I prefer to say "oil prices which reflect the total cost of oil including disease caused by the associated pollution" to "higher oil prices." The affect is the same, but it is generally more palatable to people on the fence.
There's gotta be some threshold there. Sure, it's probably not fair to compare computer related articles from a 30 year old paper encyclopedia. However, in the real world my actual options are probably something like a 5 year old encyclopedia or Wikipedia. I don't have access to search Britanica's latest and greatest updates on a whim like I do with Wikipedia.
I think statistically scientific articles on Wikipedia have 10 false claims, while old school encyclopedias have 8. I wouldn't base my thesis on it but it's certainly a viable source for my 99% off the cuff internet BS that I use it for.
You sir are clearly unfamiliar with the US patent office.
It wasn't intended to be interpreted that way :). That was more of the all things being equal, I'd choose [not msft].
Seconded. Visual Studio is still (imho) the best IDE for C/C++ development out there. Bing Maps has a superior API to Google Maps for my company's specific needs, so we went that direction. All things being equal though, I will tend towards supporting the little guy. Not just when MSFT is concerned, I prefer to support local businesses over national megacorps, etc.
The background images on bing are very distracting to me, having become accustomed to Google's pale demeanor. I dunno about user friendliness, but that jarring landing page is one of the reasons I can't get accustomed to using Bing regularly. Bing maps, on the other hand, have a superior API for developers (IMHO).
I found this to be true. Some of that is likely due to the fact that I have, subconsciously, tuned my queries to produce meaningful results in Google. If I were for some reason forced to use Bing for a while I suspect I would be able to produce meaningful results from it as well.
Yeah, the first two results in Bing were included in the first 3 results in Google for me. *shrug*
It would be easy to determine which is which. Bing would provide page summaries that are totally useless, while half the results from Google would be zero-content ad landing pages.
That's an artificial limitation created by the Mobile Safari team. There's not a good technical reason why a webapp shouldn't be able to store 1GB of data (set in user prefs). For a weak example of what I expect to come check out the Chrome Web Store. You can get apps installed into your browser which are often usable offline. Some of it is pretty cool. I can play Super Mario (the old NES one) without being online. I can also play through the entire game as a character from a different game like Mega-Man, the Metroid character, the guy from Castlevania, etc.
It's important to note that if your trailer still has the wheels on it you do not have to pay property tax on the value of the "house". Just the land.
The computer can calculate that it has X seconds between the time it buzzes and the time it must answer. It can determine the most statistically likely correct answer it can find within X-1 seconds of "buzzing" and report that answer.
I agree with this, though I would add that smart people will automate most of those tasks if they are given the freedom to do so.
My grandfather was a draftsman for Martin Marietta (now Lockheed Martin) back in the day before computers. How did he get his job? After applying he was given an IQ test. He was considered smart enough for the job and they taught him how to draw airplane parts. These days you'd get sued six ways from Sunday if you gave someone an IQ test as a pre-requisite for employment.
I think the issue is that "smart" people tend to work differently than "normal" people, which makes them appear anti-establishment. More to the point, people who are actually interested in being productive (rare, but unrelated to intelligence) have little tolerance for rules/policies/practices they view as fruitless. We all have these meaningless policies where 10 years ago someone screwed up royally and we implemented this knee-jerk policy in response and it wastes a ton of man-hours and doesn't even address the original issue. These people will run around calling management/the company/etc. morons.
Exactly, we're basically in the same boat. My real point (which you strengthened) is that since there's a whole section of these types of games at mass retailers there's clearly a market. How big? I have no idea. But big enough to have a full sized shelf at big box stores.
Only tangentially related, but I gave up on having the latest and greatest PC hardware/games years ago. I buy my games *solely* from the $20 or less section in Target/Wal Mart. Particularly on the lower end of in-store games (the $10 bargain bin for time-wastey type times) you'll see price competition from the online stuff at less than $5. I doubt that $20 range will be impacted though. That will continue to be the games that were $50 1-2 years ago, and over time the price will drop to some lower bound before it disappears from the marketplace altogether.
I don't have an android phone so perhaps someone can inform me if I'm in the wrong here... but I would assume that the android store has some sort of filtration system that doesn't show games which require a touch screen to users of phones without touch screens. Games that require serious power would similarly be limited from lower end phones. I can't imagine all of the apps currently in the Apple app store work on the original iPod touch/iPhone. I can see how it might be disappointing for someone with a cheap/old phone not to be able to use the new whizbang app someone else has, but I would also assume there'd be some expectation of not being able to do "high-end" stuff on your "low-end" phone. *shrug*