Not entirely true; a good deal of Android ROMs implement changes at the system level. The latest version of Cyanogenmod, for instance, has a modified kernel that uses BFS scheduling instead of the default (round-robin?), uses a modified audio library stack (for supporting system-wide DSP effects and equalizer), and uses Apps2SD for space-constrained devices, just to name a few. Testing on all of *those* platforms IS a nightmare, especially since those ROMs have issues even with native apps! However, I would think that targeting the most popular platforms (Android 2.2, 2.1 and 1.6 stock, along with the Droid and Galaxy S ROMs) would be much more reliable, since most people run one of those variations anyway.
Clearly, this is a troll, but I was waiting for my tab and needed something to do.
For instance there is no way to make a Nvidia GTX460 run under OS/X at the moment, in spite of it being the best bang-for-the-buck video card right now. It was impossible to have an AMD 5xxx series run until only a few months ago! Performance is not good enough. From experience OS/X guzzle memory like no other OS I know.
OS X has always been like that. Apple has a HCL for OS X, and compared to Microsoft or Linux's offerings, it's SLIM. They're finicky about the hardware they support, which is a good part of the reason why the experience has been so tight for people.
Memory consumption on Linux gets about as high as OS X for the same experience (which is worse for me). GNOME is a memory hog, KDE is slightly worse!
I have some experience with Hackintosh. In my opinion, be prepared for a world of hurt, very comparable to the Linux experience of 10 years ago.
Outdated experience. Try it again sometime, and you'll see where we're coming from...
Following on this, here are the generic guidelines for installing OS X on a PC:
DON'T try installing on anything older than a Core Duo. You will experience massive pain (hacked kernels at the very least). It will also be slow.
DON'T use Intel wireless cards if you care about having wireless. The long and short of it is that it doesn't work.
DON'T expect everything to work like a Mac(book). Most people are having troubles with sleep, shutdown and restart.
DO research your graphics card to ensure that OS X will work with it (with the least amount of suffering).
DO research installation procedures for your laptop or components. There might be guides out there already.
And here are general instructions:
Venture out to the Apple Store and buy Snow Leopard for $30.
Afterwards, download the Boot-132 or Chameleon bootloaders that can emulate Apple UEFI and allow the CD to boot.
Format your hard disk with HFS+ (Journaled). Use GUID MBR for dual-boots.
After installation, determine what works and what doesn't. Then start hitting up InsanelyMac for forum posts. It's 90% possible that someone already asked your question.
Expect the first time to take a bit getting it to your desired state. It takes me about an hour to get going nowadays. It's definitely not hard.
First, they inform me about the dangers of "Free Public WiFi." Now, they're educating me on how to install OS X on my Dell. Even though I did it a year ago with MUCH less difficulty than when I tried three years ago, I could always learn, right?!
This is old news. eeePC's and Dell Mini 9's were super popular for being OS X friendly. I, and many, many others installed OS X using retail discs from the Apple Store. Why is this here?
I beg to differ, especially since I see it almost every time my phone picks up Wifi in a subway (i.e. almost every day or every other day). This and "hpsetup" are super popular ninja ad-hoc networks.
I'm just really surprised how few noticed that this is really old news! People have been advising against this for years, too. This is also not entirely a bug; Windows XP wasn't (well) designed for wireless networking until about SP2, and one of the more annoying things it did was save ad-hoc networks. Since ad-hoc networks are supposed to make your computer a wireless access point and people didn't know any better when they saw "Free Public WiFi," a HUGE botnet of varying damage was formed. Windows did give its user heads-up by giving ad-hoc networks a different icon...but it wasn't obvious enough for most people.
Completely true. I've met some really smart and savvy sysadmins who have no issues setting up enterprise-grade systems, but have not the slightest idea of how to script or program. Scripting and systems administration aren't mutually exclusive, but they're not dependent on each other. Nonetheless, automation is really important because there are plenty of times where rote procedures will crop up and automating them away makes the difference between a reasonable time frame and a cancelled project. Thus, it makes sense to get people who know how to script (not necessarily program) to handle those bits instead of having to carry the burden of learning that too.
The good thing about scripting on Windows is that VBscript and PowerShell make it really easy to automate things. Not as easy as AppleScript, but easy enough for busy people to pick up the basics without sacrificing too much time (like Perl and Python, to an extent, do). Of course, thinking like a programmer helps a lot, but it's certainly not a requirement.
I think the author might not fully understand who most admins are. They're people who couldn't write a shell script if their lives depended on it, because they've never had to. GUI-dependent users become GUI-dependent admins.
But those same admins can normally work a command line really well when needed. In my (limited) experience, admins don't like shell scripting because it's close to programming...and they HATE programming. I really like programming, so a bulk of my job now is scripting...which kind of sucks because as a Windows admin, WMI, ADSI and ADO make it seem way easier than it should be and the de facto scripting languages kind of suck. (VBscript is mostly lame and Powershell is nice, but isn't integrated into a core Windows installation yet, so it still feels like a sort-of distant cousin.)
Well, not really; it's never *necessary* to pirate software. However, here's a thought:
On the iPhone App Store, most applications don't go higher than $5; in fact, the majority of them are under a dollar. Unless you're trying to use your iPhone as a Blackberry replacement (bad idea), one doesn't need an email or calendar client. iPhones are iPods through and through, so they don't need music software. From a usability perspective, most of the core functions anyone would want are already there; in other words, they've bundled with the price of the phone.
Not so with Android. A lot of people rightfully point out that a big advantage of the Android Market is that many of the applications are free to keep with Android's "open" nature. However, what they don't tell you is that getting anything that goes beyond the absolute basics costs money. LOTS more money. (Relatively speaking.) You want to have a decent Exchange experience on your phone? TouchDown's $20. Want a music player that can do full-screen cover art and has an equalizer for your Ultimate Ears IEMs? MixZing's $6. (They have a free edition, though.) How about a decent camera app that can use the whole screen and give you some basic editing features? Camera ZOOM FX is $3 [?].
I'm not saying that justifies piracy; it doesn't. It just doesn't make sense to do a phone that "does" when it does less (out of the box) than its iPhone counterpart, and buying MORE stuff is the only way to remediate that. I hope this situation changes in Gingerbread; I really want to have a clean phone; no add-ons.
How would one mask the picture such that a user can click on the map without anyone else obviously seeing? The good thing about passwords is that the word can be masked as you type it, with the idea being that only the user entering the password "knows" what's going in that box. An adversary can get it by keystrokes, sure, but that's much less obvious (hence, much more non-trivial) than seeing a user click a flamingo a few times to access a restricted zone. To make matters worse,
I suppose it would be a good authentication step in a multi-factor authentication scheme, where a user types a password and then marking a point on a map that they specified. No idea, though.
Totally right, but some people don't want to spend the extra $200+ dollars for a decent GPS mount or deal with the extra hassle of uploading routes/etc, especially for shorter distances that the iPhone can definitely cover. I don't think a smartphone (that is also the personal phone) is a good choice for long-distance bike routing (tried routing a century ride I did two weeks ago with a completely-offline G1 and RMaps...epic fail), but it's definitely a good choice to have.
As a cyclist, seeing any effort that benefits towards improving bike commuting and transportation is wonderful and much appreciated! I think a major benefit for this would be the ability to download map tiles and route over them. RMap on Android does this; not sure if there's any app on the iPhone (apart from Garmin/TomTom) that does the same. This could be a huge battery saver, since it would eliminate needing a constant 3G/EDGE connection throughout the trip. It would obviously require more space, though.
I think the famous adage is "if it ain't broken, don't fix it." They have plenty of demand for smartphones strictly designed for business. Fortunately, some of the loudest voices demanding that are also RIM's biggest clients (federal/municipal governments, military, some top financial firms, etc.) Also, quite frankly, I don't want business intermingling with my personal items, even if it offers the convenience of convergence. I don't want to be reachable at all times; convergence would make that much more difficult to maintain. Worse, making my personal mobile a business mobile (for corporate) makes my device much riskier to lose, since it can potentially carry confidential information that might or might not be easy to retrieve. It also makes it slower and limits my freedoms with it. (What if I store some stuff to my SD card by mistake? Does that mean I have to encrypt my SD card and make it even slower just so I can carry one device? Oh, now my N1 has to do all of this other background check stuff to make it secure enough for our environment; looks like I'll need that bigger battery bulge.)
Of course, the icing on the cake is the mobile contract itself: either I would be paying for the minutes, or I transfer my then-personal number to the corporation paying for my minutes and lose some desired privacy in the process. Lose-lose scenario. With that said, there is nothing wrong with making a phone that's strictly business, all of the time.
As for the article, RIM probably doesn't really need to push a tablet out, but popular demand kind of forces them to. Lots of folks are getting iPads and are pressuring IT departments to make them work at work; we're going through the same motions at my employer. Thus, it makes sense for RIM to try and provide a more corporate alternative that would please those with the power of choice. It's not going to dissuade the iPad wave, but it would make for a damned good e-mail device at no additional risk (provided that it works with BES).
Allow me to one-up you. I traded in my Blackberry Bold for the Blackberry 8700 just about a month ago. It's a clunker hardware-wise: it's screen is faded and small, as big as a brick (relatively speaking) and looks just fabulous in today's world of iPhones and Droids. However, it's the most reliable e-mail and phone device I've ever owned. Ever. A DoS on RIM and T-Mobile's server would have to happen before my device crashes (and it's happened!). The scroll-wheel makes viewing email perfect and intuitive, and the keyboard fits great in my hands and is a pleasure to type on. Even more importantly, it's great for phone calls and has, hands-down, the best mobile speakerphone EVER.
I'd never, EVER use it as my personal device nowadays, especially since web browsing sucks hard on it and the OS isn't supported anymore. However, it's a perfect business phone that's all work, no play (except for BrickBreaker). My Nexus One covers the play part pretty well.:)
When you're on the top, the only way to go is down. While iOS isn't the zenith of smartphone computing worldwide (Nokia is), it has a lion's share of the market and is expanding tremendously daily. The only problem is that people are fickle, especially when it comes to electronics, and with Android catching up quicker by the quarter, Apple's long-term strategy is definitely a good bet to hold on to.
Now, Apple isn't going to disappear in the smartphone space any time soon. It would have to do something incredibly stupid, or get trumped by something incredibly and undeniably better (iPhone 4 is really tough to beat), for that to happen. However, Android certainly has the potential to become the de facto alternative mobile platform, which is just as good with a market as wide as this. If they can make significant inroads into RIM and Nokia's space while putting Windows Mobile out of the picture for good (which they are certainly capable of), there's no doubt on my mind that this will happen. As an added bonus, it's barrier to entry for application development is pretty low and very cross-applicable (at least in the most trivial sense -- Java is used in so many other places whereas Objective-C is not).
Yeah...from reading that Facebook note, it's pretty clear that DNS had nothing to do with the outage. Do you guys think the outage would've been better or worse had it been one?
That's actually a pretty good point. However, those stats came from this benchmark test, which has a good explanation of how those results came to be.
In short, HTML5 under OS X Safari uses less CPU than Flash because of Safari's built-in acceleration. Notice that HTML5 under OS X Chrome barely fares better than its Flash counterpart, and neither browser plays HTML5 video as efficiently under Windows. Firefox 4 will be getting hardware graphics acceleration too, but it (ironically) only works on Windows at this point. (I guess I can understand why now, since Mac users at least have Safari if they want hardware-accelerated video whereas Windows users have no options.)
It's super easy to have 97% installation base when the IT guys behind MOST of the Fortune 500 bundle them in their Windows desktop builds and some of the most highly-visited web sites out there (YouTube, a few news sites, a couple of amazing porn sites, etc) still require Flash. Same goes for Silverlight (though Microsoft bundled that in Windows Update, so its numbers should be higher).
HTML5 video isn't there yet. For starters, Firefox doesn't support H.264, which is the de facto video streaming codec at the moment. Even if it wasn't, Theora doesn't hold a candle to it and seems to be in the middle of growing pains. VP8 is coming, but it isn't here yet. HTML5 YouTube doesn't work all the way yet. Worse still, differences in CPU performance with HTML5 when compared to Flash have been shown to be negligible. (In fact, some of the stats on that page show that Flash 10.1 is more efficient with its CPU utilization.) Worst, and most importantly, of all, tons upon tons of people are still on IE6, which doesn't support HTML5.
I think we all agree that, on paper, HTML5 is a great idea and will do more to unite a powerful web experience with the convenience of mobile computing. In practice, however, it's still very nascent and will take a while before it supplants Flash, et. al. And I guarantee you that Adobe will be on top of that (unless they're stupid and become a numb bystander to their own death).
Because they can't afford the super-expensive PR people that excel (no pun intended) at that...
Choosing a name is not as easy as most people think. There's a lot of psychology that goes behind a brand name that marketing and PR experts are best at exploiting. Additionally, most software developers aren't known for their UI creativity...
Slashdot Mirror
Not entirely true; a good deal of Android ROMs implement changes at the system level. The latest version of Cyanogenmod, for instance, has a modified kernel that uses BFS scheduling instead of the default (round-robin?), uses a modified audio library stack (for supporting system-wide DSP effects and equalizer), and uses Apps2SD for space-constrained devices, just to name a few. Testing on all of *those* platforms IS a nightmare, especially since those ROMs have issues even with native apps! However, I would think that targeting the most popular platforms (Android 2.2, 2.1 and 1.6 stock, along with the Droid and Galaxy S ROMs) would be much more reliable, since most people run one of those variations anyway.
They could have let their iPhones keep replacing 'fuck' with 'duck'. :)
For instance there is no way to make a Nvidia GTX460 run under OS/X at the moment, in spite of it being the best bang-for-the-buck video card right now. It was impossible to have an AMD 5xxx series run until only a few months ago! Performance is not good enough. From experience OS/X guzzle memory like no other OS I know.
OS X has always been like that. Apple has a HCL for OS X, and compared to Microsoft or Linux's offerings, it's SLIM. They're finicky about the hardware they support, which is a good part of the reason why the experience has been so tight for people.
Memory consumption on Linux gets about as high as OS X for the same experience (which is worse for me). GNOME is a memory hog, KDE is slightly worse!
I have some experience with Hackintosh. In my opinion, be prepared for a world of hurt, very comparable to the Linux experience of 10 years ago.
Outdated experience. Try it again sometime, and you'll see where we're coming from...
And here are general instructions:
Expect the first time to take a bit getting it to your desired state. It takes me about an hour to get going nowadays. It's definitely not hard.
First, they inform me about the dangers of "Free Public WiFi." Now, they're educating me on how to install OS X on my Dell. Even though I did it a year ago with MUCH less difficulty than when I tried three years ago, I could always learn, right?!
This is old news. eeePC's and Dell Mini 9's were super popular for being OS X friendly. I, and many, many others installed OS X using retail discs from the Apple Store. Why is this here?
I beg to differ, especially since I see it almost every time my phone picks up Wifi in a subway (i.e. almost every day or every other day). This and "hpsetup" are super popular ninja ad-hoc networks.
I'm just really surprised how few noticed that this is really old news! People have been advising against this for years, too. This is also not entirely a bug; Windows XP wasn't (well) designed for wireless networking until about SP2, and one of the more annoying things it did was save ad-hoc networks. Since ad-hoc networks are supposed to make your computer a wireless access point and people didn't know any better when they saw "Free Public WiFi," a HUGE botnet of varying damage was formed. Windows did give its user heads-up by giving ad-hoc networks a different icon...but it wasn't obvious enough for most people.
I don't understand why this is an article now...
i can post fine using the default browser on my Nexus One (classic or 2.0)...
setenv $PATH=[add-path]:$PATH.
Completely true. I've met some really smart and savvy sysadmins who have no issues setting up enterprise-grade systems, but have not the slightest idea of how to script or program. Scripting and systems administration aren't mutually exclusive, but they're not dependent on each other. Nonetheless, automation is really important because there are plenty of times where rote procedures will crop up and automating them away makes the difference between a reasonable time frame and a cancelled project. Thus, it makes sense to get people who know how to script (not necessarily program) to handle those bits instead of having to carry the burden of learning that too.
The good thing about scripting on Windows is that VBscript and PowerShell make it really easy to automate things. Not as easy as AppleScript, but easy enough for busy people to pick up the basics without sacrificing too much time (like Perl and Python, to an extent, do). Of course, thinking like a programmer helps a lot, but it's certainly not a requirement.
I think the author might not fully understand who most admins are. They're people who couldn't write a shell script if their lives depended on it, because they've never had to. GUI-dependent users become GUI-dependent admins.
But those same admins can normally work a command line really well when needed. In my (limited) experience, admins don't like shell scripting because it's close to programming...and they HATE programming. I really like programming, so a bulk of my job now is scripting...which kind of sucks because as a Windows admin, WMI, ADSI and ADO make it seem way easier than it should be and the de facto scripting languages kind of suck. (VBscript is mostly lame and Powershell is nice, but isn't integrated into a core Windows installation yet, so it still feels like a sort-of distant cousin.)
Well, not really; it's never *necessary* to pirate software. However, here's a thought:
On the iPhone App Store, most applications don't go higher than $5; in fact, the majority of them are under a dollar. Unless you're trying to use your iPhone as a Blackberry replacement (bad idea), one doesn't need an email or calendar client. iPhones are iPods through and through, so they don't need music software. From a usability perspective, most of the core functions anyone would want are already there; in other words, they've bundled with the price of the phone.
Not so with Android. A lot of people rightfully point out that a big advantage of the Android Market is that many of the applications are free to keep with Android's "open" nature. However, what they don't tell you is that getting anything that goes beyond the absolute basics costs money. LOTS more money. (Relatively speaking.) You want to have a decent Exchange experience on your phone? TouchDown's $20. Want a music player that can do full-screen cover art and has an equalizer for your Ultimate Ears IEMs? MixZing's $6. (They have a free edition, though.) How about a decent camera app that can use the whole screen and give you some basic editing features? Camera ZOOM FX is $3 [?].
I'm not saying that justifies piracy; it doesn't. It just doesn't make sense to do a phone that "does" when it does less (out of the box) than its iPhone counterpart, and buying MORE stuff is the only way to remediate that. I hope this situation changes in Gingerbread; I really want to have a clean phone; no add-ons.
Think that's weird? I get chastised for liking chubby women. Even the chubby women I've dated don't understand it...(neither do I)
How would one mask the picture such that a user can click on the map without anyone else obviously seeing? The good thing about passwords is that the word can be masked as you type it, with the idea being that only the user entering the password "knows" what's going in that box. An adversary can get it by keystrokes, sure, but that's much less obvious (hence, much more non-trivial) than seeing a user click a flamingo a few times to access a restricted zone. To make matters worse,
I suppose it would be a good authentication step in a multi-factor authentication scheme, where a user types a password and then marking a point on a map that they specified. No idea, though.
Totally right, but some people don't want to spend the extra $200+ dollars for a decent GPS mount or deal with the extra hassle of uploading routes/etc, especially for shorter distances that the iPhone can definitely cover. I don't think a smartphone (that is also the personal phone) is a good choice for long-distance bike routing (tried routing a century ride I did two weeks ago with a completely-offline G1 and RMaps...epic fail), but it's definitely a good choice to have.
As a cyclist, seeing any effort that benefits towards improving bike commuting and transportation is wonderful and much appreciated! I think a major benefit for this would be the ability to download map tiles and route over them. RMap on Android does this; not sure if there's any app on the iPhone (apart from Garmin/TomTom) that does the same. This could be a huge battery saver, since it would eliminate needing a constant 3G/EDGE connection throughout the trip. It would obviously require more space, though.
I think the famous adage is "if it ain't broken, don't fix it." They have plenty of demand for smartphones strictly designed for business. Fortunately, some of the loudest voices demanding that are also RIM's biggest clients (federal/municipal governments, military, some top financial firms, etc.) Also, quite frankly, I don't want business intermingling with my personal items, even if it offers the convenience of convergence. I don't want to be reachable at all times; convergence would make that much more difficult to maintain. Worse, making my personal mobile a business mobile (for corporate) makes my device much riskier to lose, since it can potentially carry confidential information that might or might not be easy to retrieve. It also makes it slower and limits my freedoms with it. (What if I store some stuff to my SD card by mistake? Does that mean I have to encrypt my SD card and make it even slower just so I can carry one device? Oh, now my N1 has to do all of this other background check stuff to make it secure enough for our environment; looks like I'll need that bigger battery bulge.)
Of course, the icing on the cake is the mobile contract itself: either I would be paying for the minutes, or I transfer my then-personal number to the corporation paying for my minutes and lose some desired privacy in the process. Lose-lose scenario. With that said, there is nothing wrong with making a phone that's strictly business, all of the time.
As for the article, RIM probably doesn't really need to push a tablet out, but popular demand kind of forces them to. Lots of folks are getting iPads and are pressuring IT departments to make them work at work; we're going through the same motions at my employer. Thus, it makes sense for RIM to try and provide a more corporate alternative that would please those with the power of choice. It's not going to dissuade the iPad wave, but it would make for a damned good e-mail device at no additional risk (provided that it works with BES).
Allow me to one-up you. I traded in my Blackberry Bold for the Blackberry 8700 just about a month ago. It's a clunker hardware-wise: it's screen is faded and small, as big as a brick (relatively speaking) and looks just fabulous in today's world of iPhones and Droids. However, it's the most reliable e-mail and phone device I've ever owned. Ever. A DoS on RIM and T-Mobile's server would have to happen before my device crashes (and it's happened!). The scroll-wheel makes viewing email perfect and intuitive, and the keyboard fits great in my hands and is a pleasure to type on. Even more importantly, it's great for phone calls and has, hands-down, the best mobile speakerphone EVER.
:)
I'd never, EVER use it as my personal device nowadays, especially since web browsing sucks hard on it and the OS isn't supported anymore. However, it's a perfect business phone that's all work, no play (except for BrickBreaker). My Nexus One covers the play part pretty well.
When you're on the top, the only way to go is down. While iOS isn't the zenith of smartphone computing worldwide (Nokia is), it has a lion's share of the market and is expanding tremendously daily. The only problem is that people are fickle, especially when it comes to electronics, and with Android catching up quicker by the quarter, Apple's long-term strategy is definitely a good bet to hold on to.
Now, Apple isn't going to disappear in the smartphone space any time soon. It would have to do something incredibly stupid, or get trumped by something incredibly and undeniably better (iPhone 4 is really tough to beat), for that to happen. However, Android certainly has the potential to become the de facto alternative mobile platform, which is just as good with a market as wide as this. If they can make significant inroads into RIM and Nokia's space while putting Windows Mobile out of the picture for good (which they are certainly capable of), there's no doubt on my mind that this will happen. As an added bonus, it's barrier to entry for application development is pretty low and very cross-applicable (at least in the most trivial sense -- Java is used in so many other places whereas Objective-C is not).
Yeah...from reading that Facebook note, it's pretty clear that DNS had nothing to do with the outage. Do you guys think the outage would've been better or worse had it been one?
That's actually a pretty good point. However, those stats came from this benchmark test, which has a good explanation of how those results came to be.
In short, HTML5 under OS X Safari uses less CPU than Flash because of Safari's built-in acceleration. Notice that HTML5 under OS X Chrome barely fares better than its Flash counterpart, and neither browser plays HTML5 video as efficiently under Windows. Firefox 4 will be getting hardware graphics acceleration too, but it (ironically) only works on Windows at this point. (I guess I can understand why now, since Mac users at least have Safari if they want hardware-accelerated video whereas Windows users have no options.)
Then just use a verification service to unmask the trimmed URL.
You do realize that many of the stupid, stale and "binspam" stories that generate the most publicity on and for the site, right?
It's super easy to have 97% installation base when the IT guys behind MOST of the Fortune 500 bundle them in their Windows desktop builds and some of the most highly-visited web sites out there (YouTube, a few news sites, a couple of amazing porn sites, etc) still require Flash. Same goes for Silverlight (though Microsoft bundled that in Windows Update, so its numbers should be higher).
HTML5 video isn't there yet. For starters, Firefox doesn't support H.264, which is the de facto video streaming codec at the moment. Even if it wasn't, Theora doesn't hold a candle to it and seems to be in the middle of growing pains. VP8 is coming, but it isn't here yet. HTML5 YouTube doesn't work all the way yet. Worse still, differences in CPU performance with HTML5 when compared to Flash have been shown to be negligible. (In fact, some of the stats on that page show that Flash 10.1 is more efficient with its CPU utilization.) Worst, and most importantly, of all, tons upon tons of people are still on IE6, which doesn't support HTML5.
I think we all agree that, on paper, HTML5 is a great idea and will do more to unite a powerful web experience with the convenience of mobile computing. In practice, however, it's still very nascent and will take a while before it supplants Flash, et. al. And I guarantee you that Adobe will be on top of that (unless they're stupid and become a numb bystander to their own death).
Because they can't afford the super-expensive PR people that excel (no pun intended) at that...
Choosing a name is not as easy as most people think. There's a lot of psychology that goes behind a brand name that marketing and PR experts are best at exploiting. Additionally, most software developers aren't known for their UI creativity...