Re: It's like 2001 again..."...where money wasn't a problem ..."
Money can't buy good taste.
6077 publicly visible posts • joined 10 Jun 2009
I decided to not install it for the same reasons. I'm also pissed off by the way installed apps offer updates that have escalated permissions from their original installed settings. I'm considering rooting my phone so I can use a fine grained permissions control app.
I have an idea........ Samsung should sue the US patent office for false representations which led Samsung to spend money of a court case and also placed it in a position where it could be sued by Varia. Then Varia could sue the patent office for the same false representation that caused it to spend money suing Samsung. Then Apple could...... oh, wait a minute.
If you're a medical worker carrying out health screening of a large number of people and you don't have time to give each of them a detailed prodding and poking, or do further tests; then BMI is a useful indicator of the possibility of weight related health issues.
Doctors know that heavyweight boxing champions, international-level rugby players and similar types of people have a large BMI, due to the great big slabs of muscle they develop and doctors know that they have to analyse other measures and other factors besides BMI.
For the general population of 'normal/ordinary' people, BMI is a good first stage indicator of possible obesity related issues.
Have a look at this:
http://www.androidme.org/news/android-clobbers-siri-japanese-well-english.html
androidme.org seems to be an Android news site that lifts articles from other sources, then runs them through a doubleback translator, maybe to disguise the source.
An alternative explanation is that Bill Ray copied his article from androidme.org and did a very good job of rewriting it - which I'm sure he didn't :)
The purpose of copyright on the logos and 'anthem' is to prevent me (and anyone else) using it in my own production. To have the logos seen and the anthem heard by a group of people in a pub is not damaging to the holders of the copyright since it is a 'genuine' production.
The purpose of the logo and anthem is to identify the source or owner of the content to the audience, which it accurately does; so what is the (legal) problem?
Is it? If you can demonstrate a clear cost-benefit for settling over fighting a case, then it's your duty to reach a formal settlement for the benefit of your shareholders. In the accounts, it can be noted as 'Protection payment to a bunch of Euro-trash gangsters (unavoidable cost of doing business)'
I still have my old, original HTC Wildfire - now usurped by an Incredible-S and relegated to 'spare phone' with a t-mobile PAYG SIM in it. It plays videos just fine with a high volume from the built-in speaker. I use Any Video Convertor to squash videos down a bit for playing on my phones.
"... as well as stopping the Google News snippets the internet giant also stopped displaying links to the newspaper websites via its search engine results."
Which is exactly what I'd do in that situation.
"The newspapers had complained that Google had been "unnecessarily aggressive" in removing them from the search engine."
So they want free advertising and also to get paid for being advertised.
Yes, it does sound very strange. Without looking at it in detail, the only explanation I can think of is that Microsoft had some kind of IP input into the patent when it was first granted; or did own an interest in the patents at one time but has sold them on with a 'percentage of future yield' condition attached to the sale.
(I know it sounds weird, but stranger sounding things happen in the financial instruments markets).
"The Victorian based company ..."
I imagine colossal racks of steampunk style servers filling a great vaulted hall. Frock-coated sysadmins rush around checking pressure guages, writing on clipboards as technicians lubricate brass valves and pistons.
Ok, I'm going; but it was too good to miss.
I think this was covered in an old Star Trek episode where you passed through some kind of isolating protective corridor, that good old Mother Nature had set up to prevent mutual annihilation.
I'm sure someone will be able to give a suitable reference for this in a short time.
What would be interesting would be for you to find yourself alone among a group of aggressive and violent homosexual men with attitudes matching those displayed by these Australian soldiers.
I'm sure it would be a learning experience for you. You might even learn the meaning of the word 'empathy'.
If I watch BBC iPlayer, I am paying my ISP to shovel the data from the 'internet' to my house. Also, the BBC is paying their provider to shovel it from their servers to the 'internet'. What happens on the 'internet', in terms of who pays for it, is an arrangement between ISPs and higher level organisations.
If I use an app that pulls down 200MB a day, the app is working for me, installed on my PC or phone. In the operation of the app, it is me who my ISP is shoveling data to and another operator is shoveling website data (see first paragraph example). The app is not an 'end', it is me who is the 'end'
As for 'either organisation (do you mean each end?) paying their way', it is up to the provider of the service (data storage and shoveling) to adjust their charges (and organise their investment and operations) to make a profit. The problem is that they didn't think it through and didn't adapt as their initial assumptions blew up on them. Imagine a postal service that offered an 'all you can eat' deal on sending parcels; they would soon run into problems. If the ISPs want to recover the situation, they will have to think up realistic charging structures and operate in a sensible way.
If Microsoft want to ride successful coat-tails into a the big corporate tablet market, then why wouldn't they choose Android tablets shipping with Office as the way to go. They could form strategic partnerships with those Android using manufacturers who already pay them 'patent hush money' and maybe even produce their own version of Android (Microsoft Ice Cream anyone?)
That way, they could have influence in a crowded and fragmented market instead of getting crumbs from the massive monolith which is Apple.
They have lots of experience with 'embrace, extend and extinguish', so why not use Android like that? Hasn't Android been 'open sourced' by Google?