And I wouldn't use software that has small print instead of guarantees.
42 posts • joined 5 Jun 2008
And I wouldn't use software that has small print instead of guarantees.
I'll just do what I've always done - Google it and then paste the image in.
Have you reported this to Amazon? It happens sometimes, and they've generally been quite good at providing compensation when they fail to meet the delivery times on (what is effectively) a paid option - even when the failure is outside of their direct control.
To be honest, the whole Prime thing might be a little bit mis-sold.
It's not so much a next day delivery promise, as you get the cheapest paid delivery option free. Usually, that is a next day delivery. In some cases, it's an "expedited" delivery that may still take 2-3 days. (I think this means they are unable to physically ship it on that day, but it will go on a "next day" delivery service.
I don't necessarily have a problem with them pushing back the promise in times of high demand - it's more important that they are honest about what you will be getting at the time, you can't always anticipate every peak, every weather event, every service disruption ahead of time to ensure that you can always provide a next day delivery.
I'm not entirely happy with them mixing the "next day" and "expedited" services in general use - at least not in terms of marking an item as "prime eligible". It's too easy to see something as being "prime" and expecting to get it the next day, without noticing that it was only ever going to arrive in 2-3 days. They need to be much clearer about that - possibly splitting the markings to "Prime eligible" and "Prime next day".
But also, it's not much of a guarantee. I placed an order last week, that was shipped on Royal Mail with no tracking code. It should have arrived on Saturday, it still hasn't as yet. It's a bit early to chase up on a "where is it", but I'll be giving them hell in a couple of days about their failure to put it on a guaranteed next day service.
I really should stop buying these New Age flash drives. Bloody crystals.
Come on, please. Do NOT do this.
I absolutely do not want a system that depends on sending a text message to a mobile.
1) What happens if I lose my mobile / it runs out of juice when I need to make a purchase? (Like, maybe, a replacement mobile)
2) I do not get any mobile signal in my office. At all.
3) What happens when we are mugged and the crooks take our card *and* phone?
If they have a token generating app that can work offline (or just via a data connection), and/or multiple ways of validating, that may be ok. But sending to the registered mobile is a massive, massive no no.
OK, I don't want to be on O2, but if they want to only offer contracts with O2, then fine.
What really gets my goat is that they have an option to buy the phone outright - but it's still locked to O2. There are other reasons not to buy the Fire phone, but they can take that "deal" and shove it...
OK, one network is better than none, and competition might mean that one network goes to the expense to give it an edge.
But that still relies on the competitive edge being something that can generate a profit. If it doesn't why would they?
Just think if the infrastructure was provided by a public company, that leased access to the telcos at a reasonable rate. Then we could have a better service for everyone, and at a lower cost.
TCO can be cut a number of ways. If you (or your organisation) is not the technical type, and you are going to rely on the manufacturer to provide support, then Apple does provide good support.
If you have technical ability and resources, then the risks and downtime of having an Apple can far exceed the alternatives. I've got a dozen HDDs lying around and could replace a failed drive in a PC laptop in 5 minutes. If an Apple SSD dies, I'm screwed until I can get to a store.
And because Apple offer so few options, most people would have to pay for a bunch of things they don't care about, in order to get what they need.
I really do like Apple. I'm currently using an iPhone. But even if they offered something that matched my needs, I couldn't buy into the desktops / laptops, because I can't rely on it not costing 2-3x my PC ownership over time.
The only reason for banning anything from passwords should be based on technical capabilities of storing them. They should be stored as hashes from which you can't derive the original text, comparisons only ever being of the hash.
If you are ever worried about what the contents might be, then you are saying that the password list can be decrypted, which is very bad.
I don't care about people being able to see what I favourite - moreover, I want people to know when I favourite their tweets, and vice versa.
But I don't want to see things in my timeline just because somebody else has chosen to favourite it - that's what retweet is for.
As for people getting irate about a supposedly "private" thing not actually being private - wake up and research what you are using instead of just assuming.
Oh, there was an update to OneDrive in June? That might explain why recently it has been consistently crashing on startup.
Almost the entire set of respondents in the poll attached to this [correctly] decided that he wasn't generalizing about all women. Actually, he wasn't even generalizing about some women, or describing one in particular...
"[It's comparing women to objects, negatively, and] perpetuating idiotic harmful gender roles."
No, it isn't. It's comparing a spouse negatively, and perpetuating the stereotype of a partner. And *everybody* complains about their partners - men, women, straight, gay, lesbian... *everybody*.
Well, I guess there is no reason to avoid doing more, if you can easily.
But dynamic range? We're limited to 140db of practical hearing capability, and have to contend with a 30db noise floor, and a noise ceiling limited by the proximity of our neighbours.
Even in a concert hall you don't exceed 80db of dynamic range. There simply isn't any need for greater dynamic range than we have on CDs.
Increasing the sampling rate to reduce quantization errors, and give a bit more room at the top end may be welcome, as could increasing the capacity beyond 72 minutes. In some circumstances, even surround could be (although the cost / value of providing equipment fidelity across multiple channels is somewhat prohibitive).
But really, with the rise of digital downloads and streaming services, it seems the real battle is just preserving the fidelity that we are used to (and possibly increasing it - there's no reason why downloads can't go higher), rather than introducing more disc formats.
All-you-can-eat data is "all the internet use you need" whilst in the UK.
It's when you go abroad to one of the Feel-at-Home destinations that you are capped to 25GB per month.
You could just stop being a dick and pay attention to what you are doing.
Remember that? The time before smart / mobile phones? When people actually paid attention to what was going on around them instead of playing with a lump of plastic?
Nobody ever gave a toss about Metro apps on the desktop.
It would have been useful to have an alternative browser for Windows RT, but failing that there is no point for anyone to be doing a Metro interface.
Like most things, the devil is in the detail. How does this work in practice? How does it scale with organization size?
The thing is, effective communication within a company is an important thing. I'm saying this as a developer who goes through daily rituals of stand ups, etc. Now, I'm not a fan of ritual communication - it generally means that you get information too late, or too early (which can be just as bad), and it interrupts your work day.
Potentially, discovering documents being worked on can be useful for everybody in a company in facilitating communication - not just managers keeping an eye on what people are up to.
Does this actually work in practice? Who knows, because I haven't tried it yet. But I'm actually kind of intrigued.
Gameplay is more important than graphics. But as with most things, it's all relative. It was OK for the Wii to introduce a fairly radical motion control, coupled with not top of the line hardware. But the Wii U doesn't really do anything interesting, and the hardware is far behind the PS4 and Xbox One.
That doesn't just matter for graphics, but gameplay as well. If it was just slightly more basic graphics, coupled with an original, interesting input mechanism, it would be fine. But lacking in processing power affects also the kind of simulations / AI that it can run - limiting the possibilities for gameplay.
Tablets and phones are getting advanced enough now that it completely undermines Wii U's position in the market.
If you're going to do a dedicated console now, you need to give it enough power to make it worth being a console, otherwise it's impossible to sell.
Everything I've heard about what is going on at Bletchley Park suggests that Lottery funding should be withdrawn, until they come up with a better plan that includes the National Museum of Computing.
And very serious questions should be asked both of the BP management, but also the lottery until this resolved.
It's a *tiny* bit more expensive than MySQL, and an awful low cheaper than SQL Server or Oracle.
I don't need 152mbps. I don't even need 120mbps.
Getting rid of traffic shaping would be a far more useful prospect, and ensuring there is capacity for the advertised rates, so that it is reliable for things like iPlayer, Lovefilm, etc. streaming.
Also, making the service more reliable in general - too often the equipment and/or service flakes out.
Driving up unnecessary headline numbers, without providing the fundamental service behind it, will just lead me to switch to a lower tier.
"Boycott Netflix and any other streaming service which is contractually obliged and MUST use DRM to stream its content."
That's not the most helpful attitude. DRM has a time and a place. The main problem with DRM is the issue of ownership. If I believe I am buying an album, then I should have the same rights, the same capabilities, whether it is a download or on CD. I should be able to buy a new PC and be able to play my download from it. I shouldn't have to worry about an authorization service being taken offline in 1, 2, 5, 10 years time.
If I subscribe to Netflix (or Lovefilm, Spotify, Google Music All Access, etc.) then I am clearly buying a time based subscription. If the service disappears, so does my subscription. I'm only renting access, I don't expect to be able to keep anything. As long as it works, it makes no difference whether there is DRM or not.
The reality is if DRM wasn't available, then these subscription services could not exist. It would be too easy to subscribe briefly, download stuff, cancel, resubscribe, download, etc.
(That said, there are possiblities. Prevent people re-subscribing for a period after they have cancelled. Limit the amount of simultaneous accesses / continual accesses. But ultimately, it still needs to be secure between the client and the server, and have authentication, to prevent organised pirates from downloading material).
I've seen elsewhere an examination of (bit) resolution, which appears to show that 16-bit is more than sufficient for encompassing the dynamic range in any recording.
What is important is increasing the frequency. There is an absolute upper limit of half the recording frequency in terms of the the highest frequency that can be represented, and as you approach that limit, you lose subtlety in terms of representing the waveform.
So higher frequency recording can be useful in representing higher frequency sounds more accurately. but resolution doesn't matter so much. What's more important is the audio being mastered correctly in the first place to retain the dynamic range of the recording.
This was never a competition issue. Retailers are free to list goods at a cheaper price elsewhere if they like - they just can't list it on Amazon if they do.
There is no reason for Amazon to not protect it's customers by asking retailers to ensure that they are not charging more on Amazon than through another outlet. If we are going to declare this as anti-competitive, then we also have to stop any retailer from price matching it's rivals. Which is plainly ridiculous.
I'm reading this article through an EE 4G dongle, and I'm getting 35Mb/sec download (and 15Mb/sec up).
I downloaded the Ubuntu Touch beta. Imho, it has a UX that makes Windows 8 look like it was designed by a genius.
I'm sure it will be good for some people, but there are far too many (well, actually everything is) hidden behind non-intuitive gestures. And in many cases the gestures are overloaded (depending on where you gesture from). Worse, some parts simply don't work because of positioning (app tray getting in the way).
I've played with the Firefox OS simulator, and whilst it's a less "powerful" OS, it's a hell of a lot more user friendly than Ubuntu Touch. I was sceptical of Firefox OS, but it looks like it will be a perfectly usable OS for the majority of people (most don't need complex apps that can't be made HTML 5).
He said: “Monoculture remains a problem that we must fight. The web needs multiple implementations of its evolving standards to keep them interoperable.” His lengthy essay continued:
-- well, the question remains, why? The reason why an IE monoculture is / was bad, is that it's a closed source single platform. When that is a de facto standard, it becomes a major problem for anyone not wishing to be tied to a single company's platform(s).
But why is there any advantage to having a standard with multiple implementations, versus a single implementation that is itself open and portable across multiple platforms?
There isn't any evidence so far that what is seen by Google is being restricted.
What has changed, is that if you click on a link to see the details, Facebook will not let you see "public" pages, unless you are logged in. This is an interesting definition of "public", and one that may not make much sense. It will certainly be problematic for some people that want to publicize themselves, and people "forced" to sign up won't be as valuable to Facebook as those "encouraged" to do so.
But, regardless, it's still possible for Facebook to present some data to Google web crawlers to allow information to be found, whilst instructing Google not to cache it, and serving pages up to normal browsers behind authentication. And there isn't evidence that this isn't happening.
At least it hasn't got anything to do with them advertising and selling capacity that they don't have.
I've tried the new interface, and to be honest, I don't quite understand why they bothered.
When composing a new mail, yes, you can interact with the emails behind the new mail - but the new mail dialog covers up too much of the underlying list / mail to make that useful. And yet at the same time, the new dialog is too small for writing an email.
One nice feature though is that you can 'minimize' the dialog - allowing you to interact with the underlying emails better. And you can have multiple 'new message' dialogs (obviously, you would want to minimize any you aren't working on).
So, there are a couple of nice features, but they need to make the 'new message' dialog much bigger by default.
However, if you try to reply / forward an email, then they've also monkeyed around with that, doing nothing that I can see as useful. What they have done is also make the reply box far too small. If this had actually created a dialog like 'new message', then it might have been better.
In all, some interesting ideas that could be useful, but at the moment, it's not been thought through and is terribly half-baked.
I've nothing against special coins being made, or whether they are legal tender or not.
But charging anything above their face value - and especially *that* much above their face value - is utterly insane.
I can understand that they may not be cheap to make, and that they are a limited supply that you would want to charge a premium for. But I don't see why they couldn't have simply been given a higher face value that reflects how much they are priced at.
So, it may have health and social benefits, whilst paradoxically creating higher sales of alcohol and profiteering by retailers, even though many people don't have the money to afford it.
I wonder who was lobbying to get that report?
You want my first impressions? Well, I downloaded the consumer preview, and the release preview, ran them both inside VMs, and if that wasn't enough recently reformatted an unused laptop and experienced it with full hardware acceleration, etc.
So, you want my impression? OK, to put it simply, it's the worst experience I've ever had using a computer.
Initially, my experience was hampered when running in VMs, because of it's reliance on hot corners / edges. But even when I give the computer over to it entirely, which made it easier to use the hot corners, it was still painful.
Things that should be obvious to reach - settings menus, switching 'tabs' in IE, etc. - all require weird, magical gestures that can't be reproduced reliably.
And the not-called-Metro applications? Hideous. A complete destruction of productivity thanks to not being able to task switch between them, and just the way they work is perplexing (see previously mentioned IE's interface.
Windows 8 is not going anywhere near my production machines. It's utter garbage. I'll stick with Windows 7 as long as possible, and if necessary move to either Linux or MacOS before I ever go near the Windows 8 UI.
You say that Nintendo have had a year to listen to community feedback, but surely the only thing they need to listen to is the sales of the circle pad add on. If that has only sold to a small percentage of the total of the 3DS market, then wouldn't that mean the community has said that it isn't that bothered?
Besides which, Nintendo - quite correctly - increased the size of the bottom display on the XL. So the only way they could have put a second pad on there is to have it below the buttons, which is hardly ideal in itself.
Yes, the Vita may have got two thumbsticks on their device, but the placement means it is a bit uncomfortable to use the direction pad and buttons.
Thing is, what you've got is a massive number of people pre-ordering from the main source, and very few people ordering from third parties.
So when the big shipment arrives, it's easy to send off a few cases to the main third parties, at the same time (or even after) sending a load of cases to the pre-order fulfillment.
However, the third parties have fewer orders to work through, and have better distribution scale than the Google pre-order fulfillment. Hence the third parties can get it out to people ordering late, whilst Google are still trying to get through the pre-order backlog
So "Anonymous Coward", how long have you been a Microsoft employee?
Productivity? As someone that needs multiple windows open, copy pasting between applications, etc. Metro apps are biggest nail in the coffin of productivity the world has ever seen.
Brian, whilst I agree with your view on Murdoch, I think your criticism of the BBC is going a bit far.
The BBC haven't reneged on anything - their agreement was running out, and a new one had to be made. And if the BBC hadn't made some kind of deal with Sky, then no other free-to-air was going to come in with an offer that could compete with Sky.
That said, I don't think BBC should have made that deal with Sky - they should have left a stark choice for the sport - hidden away on Sky, or entirely free-to-air for less money. As far as most of the teams are concerned, the TV income doesn't make up for the loss in exposure from not being free-to-air.
But, like you, after 25 years, I'll be giving the boot to all of it - BBC coverage included. There is no point in watching part of the season.
I would tend to agree with the other comments about a lack of competition. As consumers, we definitely do want prices to be kept low. But maybe increased adoption of SSD will do that.
Of course, I also want reliability from my drives - and in that regard, I'm really not disappointed to see Samsung leaving the business. Worst reliability I've ever encountered - I've never seen a Samsung drive last for more that 12 months (and I've unfortunately been saddled with a few).
Wow, what a screw up that is. And all over one feature that very few people want (char), and another that a lot do want (series link), but doesn't justify the price.
As for the other comment, if you can't get into the software, then you can't export them to the XMB.
Reading the article that is linked, it's a little less sensationalist than made out. The NHS isn't a bottomless pit of money, and so yes, there are times where it has to make decisions to get the best value for treating the most people. There will be some unfortunate consequences to that, but it's not inherently wrong.
Where the article completely misses the mark is that it assumes you can't have a mixed model - private treatment for people that can afford it, but a good standard of 'free' care for everyone that can't.
Whilst some cases of denied treatment exist with the NHS, there are far more cases in the US of people that can't afford healthcare, are denied health insurance, or worse, where the insurance companies find loopholes to get out of paying for treatments.
The Freesat launch has been bungled big time...
Everybody I know who had signed up to be informed about it received 0 e-mails about it.
And crucially, the HD PVR is missing from the launch (why? Humax make HD PVRs already) - so where I have been waiting for Freesat HD, I'm going to have to wait longer until the PVR is out.
Until then, no HD TV for me