Unfortuately, we have no idea what the REAL "DNA Code" is. We poke around, attempting to reverse-engineer a data structure by examining multiple samples of data, then try creating our own "specially crafted packets" to see what the result looks like.
Unfortunately for the eugenicists, the "fields" in the DNA packet were not designed with genetic modification in mind, and so there often ISN'T going to be a neat-and-tidy DNA "bit" that conveniently turns on and off certain features. So, great, you found the "gene" that controls Multiple-Sclerosis, but unfortunately, it seems to control the growth of muscles, too; and now those people are all too weak to even hold their heads up.
Add to that the fact that we share some frighteningly huge amount in DNA in common with, well, pretty much every other living thing on this planet at least, and you're much more likely to create a person with a Chimpanzee head than to cure the tendency for criminal behavior.
"Our intellect is capable of producing a better world on its own, if given sufficient technology."
"It is immoral not to condition our babies to accept whole-hardheartedly, their statistically inevitable circumstance in life."
Thank Ford, Huxley's vision of a moral paradise is nigh.
Mod Parent UP!
This isn't genetics; it's EUGENICS.
...and it always starts with the best of intentions...
Mark my words: If followed, this will have extremely negative, and unforseen, impacts. Such as "Ok, you've gotten rid of schizoid and autistic tendencies; but now the mean IQ is 60, and no one is left that knows how to modify the software in the automatic, and now government-mandated fetus-selector."
So, programmable evolution and quickly become programmable devolution.
Why don't you ask the professionals that use Final Cut Pro that question when Apple released Final Cut Pro X? It was a royal clusterfuck and goes to show that Apple does not care about its pro customers. Even its latest line of Mac Pro was criticized by people like Any Hertzfeld for being subpar. Apple only cares about making the latest toy not about professionals getting work done.
Um, some of those "Professionals" work for Apple. Do you really think they don't know what "Pros" need?
In a way, it's a ray of common sense -- trust the user to know what's best, after adequate warnings have been given. The biggest suck here, though, is that indy developers who are hoping to get compensated through Apple app's store are at a severe disadvantage.
Why?
They learn the APIs and they're good to go. How does sandboxing put them in any greater disadvantage?
Oh, and the slang abbreviation for "independent" is "indie", not "indy", which is the slang abbreviation for the city of "Indianapolis".
I am assuming that the application cannot access the file system unless a file is within the applications sandbox, or opened through the operating systems open file API.
That includes dragging a file or a folder to the app, and keeping bookmarks of files that can be opened. What doesn't work is letting the user type in a path, which is not a good user interface anyway.
Especially on a Mac.
The only time I ever have to type in a path is in Terminal, for obvious reasons.
This wouldnt work if the user simple opened the file (from the equivalent of Explorer in mac, by double clicking the file (which I believe is the most common way to play a video), or clicking on open from Firefox). And most of the videos in my laptop are in the same folder "Downloads". If I had to go up a directory, open Downloads under MplayerX, and wade though the videos to select the one I want to play, I would be really frustrated (and would start looking for alternative players).
Like, for example, the player that Apple makes, which presumably won't have this problem. A happy coincidence for Apple, for sure.
This wouldnt work if the user simple opened the file (from the equivalent of Explorer in mac, by double clicking the file (which I believe is the most common way to play a video), or clicking on open from Firefox). And most of the videos in my laptop are in the same folder "Downloads". If I had to go up a directory, open Downloads under MplayerX, and wade though the videos to select the one I want to play, I would be really frustrated (and would start looking for alternative players).
Um, you're either fucking too retarded, or too illiterate, to comprehend the words you pretend to have read.
All it takes is a little user education, telling them to first open ONE video from within the app, and then the app can "whitelist" the entire DIRECTORY where the video was located. So unless you are in the habit of scattering video files all over the filesystem, the "problem" can be quickly (and permanently) ended.
IPS still has very poor diagonal angles. I'll take my vastly superior OLED displays any day.
I like OLEDs, too. They are true lambertian light sources. BUT the blue color still has VERY shitty lifespan in OLEDs, which results in a constantly-shifting "white level" over time.
The real issue with LCD panels as readers is that they are directional, and contrast varies (sometimes greatly) depending on the viewing angle. This means that each eye sees an image with different contrast (especially when held in portrait mode), which can be very fatiguing.
You apparently haven't experienced the IPS panels that Apple (and a very few others) use.
Stop using crap, get the to an Apple Store and you'll see that the panel on the iPad has 170 degree viewing angle in all axes. No polarizer artifacts and brightness drop-off until you're at such a steep angle you couldn't read it, even if it were a piece of printed paper.
My point (which you know, yay for being deliberately obtuse!) is that insinuating that Amazon and Barnes and Noble are in any sort of trouble just because Apple is releasing a 7" tablet is fucking retarded. The iPod certainly didn't kill off all other MP3 players, the iPad certainly didn't kill off 10" tablets, so why the fuck would a 7" iPad kill off the Nook or Kindle? It's completely ridiculous, and this is just click-bait.
Also, I really love the fact that, to you, iPad:Nook/Kindle = house:cardboard box. The fanboy is strong with this one!
Wow! You are reading WAAAY too much into my analogy!
I was simply proposing that there really ARE differences in products. One car is not like another; one TV is not like another; one guitar is not like another, and one Tablet Computer is not like another. It is YOU that decided to analogize the Nook/Kindle to the cardboard box, not me.
For all intents and purposes, they both perform the same functions, after all, regardless of the price tag.
And a cardboard box provides the same function as a house, and a 9" B/W TV performs the same functions as a 60" HDTV; but I know which one most people would rather live in, and watch...
So what exactly was your point? Oh, that's right; you really didn't have one.
If there is an "Apple Tax" on tablets, then how come NO ONE has been able to even MEET, let alone BEAT the iPad's price-performance metric?
And it ain't all "Apple has sewn-up the components". That affects someone like Samsung (for example) NOT AT ALL.
In fact, Samsung SHOULD be able to sell Galaxy tablets for $200 ALL DAY LONG, since THEY can actually fabricate every single component of a Tablet themselves, and THEY don't have to pay ANYTHING over raw manufacturing costs; whereas THEY obviously make SOME profit on components sold to Apple.
So please, show me exactly where this mythical "Apple Tax" is on the iPad? And don't point to bullshit CONJECTURE about "How Apple makes 40% profit on the iPad"; because, if that were true, Samsung (to name just one) would be eating their lunch with tablets that provide the same or better specs for, let's say, 30% less than the iPad.
But that just ain't happenin'. And the planet has had THREE YEARS to do it, too.
They'll survive because nobody with two brain cells to rub together enjoys reading on a backlit and always-refreshing screen.
Spoken by a person reading slashdot on a "backlit and always-refreshing screen".
There's a big difference between spending 30 minutes browsing the web and spending hours reading an eBook. I always use the eInk Kindle instead of my 7" android tablet for reading a book - it's just easier on my eyes. And while I can browse the web on the Kindle, it's not really the best platform for web browsing so I use the tablet (or my laptop) for that.
People that feel their tablet is "fatiguing" to read for long periods generally have their backlight adjusted incorrectly (usually too bright). I know my iPad 2 has enough backlight to make my irises squinch shut on a predominantly-white page in normal home-level lighting. Of course that's going to be fatiguing after a few hours; because your irises are relaxed when open (why people's eyes dilate when they die). You can duplicate this effect by trying to read a dead-tree book in bright sunlight. After awhile, you just want to run screaming...
So, try adjusting the brightness of your tablet such that, when looking around the room, then looking at the screen, your don't feel your eyes "adjusting" too much. Then see if that doesn't tame that "backlight fatigue" when reading/browsing.
Also, give your eyes a little exercise by deliberately changing the focus-plane (looking around the room) every few minutes. Even a few seconds makes a big difference. I know this isn't news; but it bears repeating.
But I shouldn't have to tell that to an audience of/. readers, who probably spend far more than average times staring at a display that is essentially in the same focus-plane for hours at a stretch...
They'll survive because nobody with two brain cells to rub together enjoys reading on a backlit and always-refreshing screen.
You do realize, of course, that active-matrix LCDs (like the IPS panels used in ALL Apple products) do not "flicker" (like the unavoidable consequence of "always-refreshing" CRTs).
This is why reading text on an LCD is much less fatiguing than reading it on, say, a CRT. e-Ink displays are also "comfortable" for this same reason; but that's not the point: The point is that properly-designed active-matrix LCDs don't flicker any more than e-Ink displays, at least as far as human eyes are concerned. And until the U.N. Non-Human Rights Treaty passes in 2030, we don't have to worry about making displays tuned to horses, dogs, cats and pigs.
The Nexus 7 looks cool, but what I really wanted was the canceled Microsoft Courier. A dual screen paperback book form-factor with hand-writing recognition. Something I could easily hold in one hand and take notes with, or browse the web with, or compose emails with. If Microsoft had made the Courier, it would own the enterprise tablet market, and possibly the college kid market.
You can't cancel something that never really was...
Exactly. The biggest reason that the Nexus 7 is able to undercut the iPad in price is because it's a smaller screen and because Google isn't making a profit on hardware, not because of significantly less features. It's still as every bit capable and more internally, but the smaller screen on a device being sold at near cost is what makes it $200.
According to financial reports Apple has close to 50% margin on the iPad. That is a lot of dollars to shave off a device price tag, or use to offer superior specs, if you have a different business model or can live with more normal margins.
If Apple is making 50% margin on the iPad, then why has no one else been able to come close to the specs for even 25% less money?
Slashdot Mirror
And they might not. They may just be flaws.
Sometimes something that appears bad is bad.
Unfortuately, we have no idea what the REAL "DNA Code" is. We poke around, attempting to reverse-engineer a data structure by examining multiple samples of data, then try creating our own "specially crafted packets" to see what the result looks like.
Unfortunately for the eugenicists, the "fields" in the DNA packet were not designed with genetic modification in mind, and so there often ISN'T going to be a neat-and-tidy DNA "bit" that conveniently turns on and off certain features. So, great, you found the "gene" that controls Multiple-Sclerosis, but unfortunately, it seems to control the growth of muscles, too; and now those people are all too weak to even hold their heads up.
Add to that the fact that we share some frighteningly huge amount in DNA in common with, well, pretty much every other living thing on this planet at least, and you're much more likely to create a person with a Chimpanzee head than to cure the tendency for criminal behavior.
"We always know best, and what is for the best."
"Our intellect is capable of producing a better world on its own, if given sufficient technology."
"It is immoral not to condition our babies to accept whole-hardheartedly, their statistically inevitable circumstance in life."
Thank Ford, Huxley's vision of a moral paradise is nigh.
Mod Parent UP!
...and it always starts with the best of intentions...
This isn't genetics; it's EUGENICS.
Mark my words: If followed, this will have extremely negative, and unforseen, impacts. Such as "Ok, you've gotten rid of schizoid and autistic tendencies; but now the mean IQ is 60, and no one is left that knows how to modify the software in the automatic, and now government-mandated fetus-selector."
So, programmable evolution and quickly become programmable devolution.
Why don't you ask the professionals that use Final Cut Pro that question when Apple released Final Cut Pro X? It was a royal clusterfuck and goes to show that Apple does not care about its pro customers. Even its latest line of Mac Pro was criticized by people like Any Hertzfeld for being subpar. Apple only cares about making the latest toy not about professionals getting work done.
Um, some of those "Professionals" work for Apple. Do you really think they don't know what "Pros" need?
Your post highlights how little you understand Apple, their hardware and their userbase.
In a way, it's a ray of common sense -- trust the user to know what's best, after adequate warnings have been given. The biggest suck here, though, is that indy developers who are hoping to get compensated through Apple app's store are at a severe disadvantage.
Why?
They learn the APIs and they're good to go. How does sandboxing put them in any greater disadvantage?
Oh, and the slang abbreviation for "independent" is "indie", not "indy", which is the slang abbreviation for the city of "Indianapolis".
I am assuming that the application cannot access the file system unless a file is within the applications sandbox, or opened through the operating systems open file API.
That includes dragging a file or a folder to the app, and keeping bookmarks of files that can be opened. What doesn't work is letting the user type in a path, which is not a good user interface anyway.
Especially on a Mac.
The only time I ever have to type in a path is in Terminal, for obvious reasons.
This wouldnt work if the user simple opened the file (from the equivalent of Explorer in mac, by double clicking the file (which I believe is the most common way to play a video), or clicking on open from Firefox). And most of the videos in my laptop are in the same folder "Downloads". If I had to go up a directory, open Downloads under MplayerX, and wade though the videos to select the one I want to play, I would be really frustrated (and would start looking for alternative players).
Like, for example, the player that Apple makes, which presumably won't have this problem. A happy coincidence for Apple, for sure.
Oh, you mean the FREE one?
This wouldnt work if the user simple opened the file (from the equivalent of Explorer in mac, by double clicking the file (which I believe is the most common way to play a video), or clicking on open from Firefox). And most of the videos in my laptop are in the same folder "Downloads". If I had to go up a directory, open Downloads under MplayerX, and wade though the videos to select the one I want to play, I would be really frustrated (and would start looking for alternative players).
Um, you're either fucking too retarded, or too illiterate, to comprehend the words you pretend to have read.
All it takes is a little user education, telling them to first open ONE video from within the app, and then the app can "whitelist" the entire DIRECTORY where the video was located. So unless you are in the habit of scattering video files all over the filesystem, the "problem" can be quickly (and permanently) ended.
What these idiots don't want to believe is that Darwin himself started out to be a member of the Clergy, and in fact wrestled with the "Creation vs. Evolution" question quite a bit during his studies.
Only he was intelligent enough to go where the FACTS led him. Too bad we've devolved so far in such a short time.
iPad is only dual core. Transformer Prime is quad core. Do the math, idiot.
So, what is this now, "Core Wars" (Sorry, couldn't resist!). Bonus points if you get the joke.
Oh, and it ain't all about the CPU, and especially not just the number of cores, idiot.
I think his obtuseness is genuine. You forget, you're dealing with someone who buys Apple products. Intelligence is anathema to those people.
Just let him clicky clicky, point n' drool with his fisher price computer and ignore him.
Ahem.
Embedded systems developer with over 30 years of hardware and software experience.
And my "Fisher-Price computer" runs Unix. So does my phone and my Tablet.
What was your point, again?
IPS still has very poor diagonal angles. I'll take my vastly superior OLED displays any day.
I like OLEDs, too. They are true lambertian light sources. BUT the blue color still has VERY shitty lifespan in OLEDs, which results in a constantly-shifting "white level" over time.
SSl (256 bit) using 128-bit keys has been cracked for years...
Citation, please?
a href="http://www.inet2000.com/public/encryption.htm">These sites beg to differ.
Apple tax that I referred to is that 30% that Apple takes if you want to sell any content via an iOS app. So your rant is completely irrelevant.
Since this wasn't a iOS developer or Apple Store-related article, it is YOUR rant that is completely irrelevant. And off-topic to boot...
Even if you do turn the backlight down there are enough problems with lack of contrast to make E-Ink better for reading.
Maybe on your shit TN display; but that isn't much of an issue on a iPad with an IPS Retina Display.
IPS varies too with off-angle. Just not as much, and not quite so sensitive to direction in particular.
Yeah, 170 degrees off-angle...
The real issue with LCD panels as readers is that they are directional, and contrast varies (sometimes greatly) depending on the viewing angle. This means that each eye sees an image with different contrast (especially when held in portrait mode), which can be very fatiguing.
You apparently haven't experienced the IPS panels that Apple (and a very few others) use.
Stop using crap, get the to an Apple Store and you'll see that the panel on the iPad has 170 degree viewing angle in all axes. No polarizer artifacts and brightness drop-off until you're at such a steep angle you couldn't read it, even if it were a piece of printed paper.
There really IS a difference.
If there is an "Apple Tax" on tablets, then how come NO ONE has been able to even MEET, let alone BEAT the iPad's price-performance metric?
You mean, someone like Asus? Who sell a tablet better than the ipad for a lower price? Who sell a 7" tablet for the same price as an ipod?
Shit, that's just one manufacturer and I haven't even done any research.
Apple do have great control over their supply chain but try and take the blinkers off.
Hmmm. Did something happen in a week?
/.
I was just modded +4 Insightful about a week ago by making the exact same comment here on
So which is it? Oh, and which Asus tablet is this? And "better" HOW?
My point (which you know, yay for being deliberately obtuse!) is that insinuating that Amazon and Barnes and Noble are in any sort of trouble just because Apple is releasing a 7" tablet is fucking retarded. The iPod certainly didn't kill off all other MP3 players, the iPad certainly didn't kill off 10" tablets, so why the fuck would a 7" iPad kill off the Nook or Kindle? It's completely ridiculous, and this is just click-bait.
Also, I really love the fact that, to you, iPad:Nook/Kindle = house:cardboard box. The fanboy is strong with this one!
Wow! You are reading WAAAY too much into my analogy!
I was simply proposing that there really ARE differences in products. One car is not like another; one TV is not like another; one guitar is not like another, and one Tablet Computer is not like another. It is YOU that decided to analogize the Nook/Kindle to the cardboard box, not me.
But if the box fits...
For all intents and purposes, they both perform the same functions, after all, regardless of the price tag.
And a cardboard box provides the same function as a house, and a 9" B/W TV performs the same functions as a 60" HDTV; but I know which one most people would rather live in, and watch...
So what exactly was your point? Oh, that's right; you really didn't have one.
(unless you're willing to pay the Apple tax).
2001 called and wants its meme back...
Seriously.
If there is an "Apple Tax" on tablets, then how come NO ONE has been able to even MEET, let alone BEAT the iPad's price-performance metric?
And it ain't all "Apple has sewn-up the components". That affects someone like Samsung (for example) NOT AT ALL.
In fact, Samsung SHOULD be able to sell Galaxy tablets for $200 ALL DAY LONG, since THEY can actually fabricate every single component of a Tablet themselves, and THEY don't have to pay ANYTHING over raw manufacturing costs; whereas THEY obviously make SOME profit on components sold to Apple.
So please, show me exactly where this mythical "Apple Tax" is on the iPad? And don't point to bullshit CONJECTURE about "How Apple makes 40% profit on the iPad"; because, if that were true, Samsung (to name just one) would be eating their lunch with tablets that provide the same or better specs for, let's say, 30% less than the iPad.
But that just ain't happenin'. And the planet has had THREE YEARS to do it, too.
They'll survive because nobody with two brain cells to rub together enjoys reading on a backlit and always-refreshing screen.
Spoken by a person reading slashdot on a "backlit and always-refreshing screen".
There's a big difference between spending 30 minutes browsing the web and spending hours reading an eBook. I always use the eInk Kindle instead of my 7" android tablet for reading a book - it's just easier on my eyes. And while I can browse the web on the Kindle, it's not really the best platform for web browsing so I use the tablet (or my laptop) for that.
People that feel their tablet is "fatiguing" to read for long periods generally have their backlight adjusted incorrectly (usually too bright). I know my iPad 2 has enough backlight to make my irises squinch shut on a predominantly-white page in normal home-level lighting. Of course that's going to be fatiguing after a few hours; because your irises are relaxed when open (why people's eyes dilate when they die). You can duplicate this effect by trying to read a dead-tree book in bright sunlight. After awhile, you just want to run screaming...
/. readers, who probably spend far more than average times staring at a display that is essentially in the same focus-plane for hours at a stretch...
So, try adjusting the brightness of your tablet such that, when looking around the room, then looking at the screen, your don't feel your eyes "adjusting" too much. Then see if that doesn't tame that "backlight fatigue" when reading/browsing.
Also, give your eyes a little exercise by deliberately changing the focus-plane (looking around the room) every few minutes. Even a few seconds makes a big difference. I know this isn't news; but it bears repeating.
But I shouldn't have to tell that to an audience of
They'll survive because nobody with two brain cells to rub together enjoys reading on a backlit and always-refreshing screen.
You do realize, of course, that active-matrix LCDs (like the IPS panels used in ALL Apple products) do not "flicker" (like the unavoidable consequence of "always-refreshing" CRTs).
Flicker in LCDs does NOT come from "refresh"; but rather from asymmetric-drive signals. Modern LCDs have hardware compensation for this. Hence, they don't flicker. At all.
This is why reading text on an LCD is much less fatiguing than reading it on, say, a CRT. e-Ink displays are also "comfortable" for this same reason; but that's not the point: The point is that properly-designed active-matrix LCDs don't flicker any more than e-Ink displays, at least as far as human eyes are concerned. And until the U.N. Non-Human Rights Treaty passes in 2030, we don't have to worry about making displays tuned to horses, dogs, cats and pigs.
The Nexus 7 looks cool, but what I really wanted was the canceled Microsoft Courier. A dual screen paperback book form-factor with hand-writing recognition. Something I could easily hold in one hand and take notes with, or browse the web with, or compose emails with. If Microsoft had made the Courier, it would own the enterprise tablet market, and possibly the college kid market.
You can't cancel something that never really was...
Exactly. The biggest reason that the Nexus 7 is able to undercut the iPad in price is because it's a smaller screen and because Google isn't making a profit on hardware, not because of significantly less features. It's still as every bit capable and more internally, but the smaller screen on a device being sold at near cost is what makes it $200.
According to financial reports Apple has close to 50% margin on the iPad. That is a lot of dollars to shave off a device price tag, or use to offer superior specs, if you have a different business model or can live with more normal margins.
If Apple is making 50% margin on the iPad, then why has no one else been able to come close to the specs for even 25% less money?