Apple made the same bet, about 20 years ago. They dumped massive resources into capturing the educational market. Their computers dominated classrooms K-12. And once they reached saturation, it resulted in nothing in terms of Windows' position in the business world. Chromebooks will most likely face the same fate: big adoption by schools - and no real change in Windows marketshare. Established markets and software offerings are what keep Windows dominant, not shiny and new features.
My guess is that most of those chromebook purchases are going towards replacing a tablet. The user wants something lightweight (like a tablet - light physically and in terms of horsepower), but with a usable screen size and keyboard. I doubt many are replacing laptops (which are plentiful at the $600 price point) with chromebooks...
It is working as designed. ALL software, in the long run, is a race to the bottom in terms of pricing. There is always cheaper labor, and with zero tangible resource cost (unlike computers, houses, or cars) that means it eventually falls to the lowest price for labor - often for free. Open source accelerates that, as the product is basically free to begin with, and you HOPE you can find someone to pay you to manage it. This often results in UIs that are not heavily worked over for user friendliness, because that kind of sabotages the entire "hire me to make it work" push. And because it cannot be realistically deployed without that help - it becomes of little interest to consider unless there is a lot of already-built-up demand and use in the market. A vicious cycle, that results in poor or zero income for everyone in it. By design.
China's jails would make US jails seem like Intercontinental hotels, and China convicts 99.9% of all defendants, so if you are even close to the line - don't cross it, you WILL end up in a shit-hole...
Call on a business account. Some of my employees can call and get basic information, but they cannot change the account settings - only a few of us are authorized to do that. It's quite common in the business/corporate/Government world to have people with different levels of access. But if all you've ever had was a small, individual account, I can understand how you don't get it.
I had heard that, but I heard that once Verizon authenticated the emergency provider, more bandwidth was turned. In other words, just because someone calls up and says "I'm an emergency provider, I need more bandwidth" they just don't drop everything and crank up your limits. They want to see a little proof of identification, first.
Rather, that's the co-pay on one doctor's visit. The cost would be easily 3 to 4 times that amount, meaning, in actual dollars, you'd get to talk to the receptionist and fill out half your forms for this amount of money.
The Federal Government spent $986 billion directly in 2015, itself. It's beyond $1 trillion now. And that does not include State and local Governments. This does not include individual spending, as well - just Government spending.
I wonder of you realize we already spend more on healthcare than defense. Around $1 trillion a year is spent - at the Federal level alone - on healthcare. Given that level of spending (about $3,050 per man, woman, and child in the US), I don't think this amount (about $40 per man, woman and child) would help much, if anything.
No, it is taxed against will. Do you want to pay taxes? If so, why not pay more? Why take any deductions? They are not voluntary, they are enforced at the threat of jail.
Who says I haven't, at least economically? You can locate your business in a low-tax/no-tax State or country around the world, and only pay taxes on the income you repatriate. As Justice Learned Hand famously wrote in Commissioner v. Newman:
Over and over again courts have said that there is nothing sinister in so arranging one's affairs as to keep taxes as low as possible. Everybody does so, rich or poor; and all do right, for nobody owes any public duty to pay more than the law demands: taxes are enforced exactions, not voluntary contributions. To demand more in the name of morals is mere cant.
You have no duty to pay more than the absolute minimum the law demands, and if you can legally lower it by locating your business elsewhere, then there is nothing wrong with doing so.
This patent was issued in 1990 - it expired after 17 years, in 2007. US patents are only good for a limited amount of time, somewhere between 3.5 years and 17 years (depending upon if you want to pay the maintenance fees to keep the patent in force). He's not collecting on the concept of a microprocessor any more.
As far as his other pending patents, it appears the USPTO is playing games with him, as inventors 65 years old or older qualify for expedited examination, and it should take no more than a year for him to either receive his patent or receive a final rejection.
That's why I am in Ventura. Close enough to LA that I can go there for meetings with bigger clients and/or fly from LAX, but still small town enough - and affordable enough - to offer a great quality of life.
LOL - I live in Ventura, nice and peaceful, much better weather, better beaches - and only 1 hour away from Los Angeles (which is a MUCH bigger, better city than SF). Why would I want to "splurge" on a $1.2MM 2 bedroom condo in SF when I can get a real 3+ bedroom house just 200 feet from the beach, for less money?
I lived in Shanghai for 6 years - I know about big cities and non-stop nightlife! But you can get the same in LA, NYC, Chicago, Miami, Dallas, even Las Vegas. If that's what you want - 24 hour entertainment - there are a LOT cheaper places to live and get that benefit.
The world is small, thanks to communications and travel systems. Why go to the Bay area with exceptionally high costs and congestion? If you want great central California weather, there are lots of places just down the coast around SLO that are great. The LA/Ventura/OC area is great. And then there's the rest of the country as well. The only reason to be in the Bay area is you want to be there because you perceive it has "extra value" in terms of how others perceive you. In essence - vanity.
Slashdot Mirror
Apple made the same bet, about 20 years ago. They dumped massive resources into capturing the educational market. Their computers dominated classrooms K-12. And once they reached saturation, it resulted in nothing in terms of Windows' position in the business world. Chromebooks will most likely face the same fate: big adoption by schools - and no real change in Windows marketshare. Established markets and software offerings are what keep Windows dominant, not shiny and new features.
My guess is that most of those chromebook purchases are going towards replacing a tablet. The user wants something lightweight (like a tablet - light physically and in terms of horsepower), but with a usable screen size and keyboard. I doubt many are replacing laptops (which are plentiful at the $600 price point) with chromebooks...
Don't worry, if you miss shit in the street, you can visit San Francisco!
Of course, in China they often times don't end up in jail but just disappear. No one knows - officially - what happens. There are at least 125,000 not officially jailed, but being re-educated. In prisons that are forced labor camps.
It is working as designed. ALL software, in the long run, is a race to the bottom in terms of pricing. There is always cheaper labor, and with zero tangible resource cost (unlike computers, houses, or cars) that means it eventually falls to the lowest price for labor - often for free. Open source accelerates that, as the product is basically free to begin with, and you HOPE you can find someone to pay you to manage it. This often results in UIs that are not heavily worked over for user friendliness, because that kind of sabotages the entire "hire me to make it work" push. And because it cannot be realistically deployed without that help - it becomes of little interest to consider unless there is a lot of already-built-up demand and use in the market. A vicious cycle, that results in poor or zero income for everyone in it. By design.
China's jails would make US jails seem like Intercontinental hotels, and China convicts 99.9% of all defendants, so if you are even close to the line - don't cross it, you WILL end up in a shit-hole...
Call on a business account. Some of my employees can call and get basic information, but they cannot change the account settings - only a few of us are authorized to do that. It's quite common in the business/corporate/Government world to have people with different levels of access. But if all you've ever had was a small, individual account, I can understand how you don't get it.
And in China and Russia, you don't even have to commit a crime to get hauled off to jail!
NEVER admit going blind whilst sitting in front of a computer screen. Just sayin'...
I had heard that, but I heard that once Verizon authenticated the emergency provider, more bandwidth was turned. In other words, just because someone calls up and says "I'm an emergency provider, I need more bandwidth" they just don't drop everything and crank up your limits. They want to see a little proof of identification, first.
Or he's such an Incel he's trying to show how woke he is to score a date...
Rather, that's the co-pay on one doctor's visit. The cost would be easily 3 to 4 times that amount, meaning, in actual dollars, you'd get to talk to the receptionist and fill out half your forms for this amount of money.
The Federal Government spent $986 billion directly in 2015, itself. It's beyond $1 trillion now. And that does not include State and local Governments. This does not include individual spending, as well - just Government spending.
I wonder of you realize we already spend more on healthcare than defense. Around $1 trillion a year is spent - at the Federal level alone - on healthcare. Given that level of spending (about $3,050 per man, woman, and child in the US), I don't think this amount (about $40 per man, woman and child) would help much, if anything.
Did Verizon lift the cap once they were officially notified this is an emergency? If so - what's the problem?
No, it is taxed against will. Do you want to pay taxes? If so, why not pay more? Why take any deductions? They are not voluntary, they are enforced at the threat of jail.
Why get a puny little "touch bar" when you can have a full-on "touch board"?
COURAGE!
Hush your mouth, Rooster. We don't want them here. Let them move to goddamn Fresno.
You are welcome on my lawn.
Yeah. Let that sink in.
Over and over again courts have said that there is nothing sinister in so arranging one's affairs as to keep taxes as low as possible. Everybody does so, rich or poor; and all do right, for nobody owes any public duty to pay more than the law demands: taxes are enforced exactions, not voluntary contributions. To demand more in the name of morals is mere cant.
You have no duty to pay more than the absolute minimum the law demands, and if you can legally lower it by locating your business elsewhere, then there is nothing wrong with doing so.
This patent was issued in 1990 - it expired after 17 years, in 2007. US patents are only good for a limited amount of time, somewhere between 3.5 years and 17 years (depending upon if you want to pay the maintenance fees to keep the patent in force). He's not collecting on the concept of a microprocessor any more.
As far as his other pending patents, it appears the USPTO is playing games with him, as inventors 65 years old or older qualify for expedited examination, and it should take no more than a year for him to either receive his patent or receive a final rejection.
The issue isn't buying land for new office buildings - the issue is the tight housing market with insane valuations. And crazy traffic as well. Or dealing with taxi drivers urinating and defecating in SFO parking lots.
That's why I am in Ventura. Close enough to LA that I can go there for meetings with bigger clients and/or fly from LAX, but still small town enough - and affordable enough - to offer a great quality of life.
LOL - I live in Ventura, nice and peaceful, much better weather, better beaches - and only 1 hour away from Los Angeles (which is a MUCH bigger, better city than SF). Why would I want to "splurge" on a $1.2MM 2 bedroom condo in SF when I can get a real 3+ bedroom house just 200 feet from the beach, for less money?
I lived in Shanghai for 6 years - I know about big cities and non-stop nightlife! But you can get the same in LA, NYC, Chicago, Miami, Dallas, even Las Vegas. If that's what you want - 24 hour entertainment - there are a LOT cheaper places to live and get that benefit.
The world is small, thanks to communications and travel systems. Why go to the Bay area with exceptionally high costs and congestion? If you want great central California weather, there are lots of places just down the coast around SLO that are great. The LA/Ventura/OC area is great. And then there's the rest of the country as well. The only reason to be in the Bay area is you want to be there because you perceive it has "extra value" in terms of how others perceive you. In essence - vanity.