Re: People will still buy them
My understanding is that the watch is barely more than a thin client for the phone. So the proprietary functionality part is more severe here than usual.
2198 posts • joined 18 Jun 2009
My understanding is that the watch is barely more than a thin client for the phone. So the proprietary functionality part is more severe here than usual.
They were wearing it fine; they were oxidating their blood wrongly.
Cheap shots having been taken, if the story is accurate — developed feature pulled late in the cycle for not working — then it's neither reprehensible nor particularly uncommon.
Who could resist?
It's in the Midway Arcade collection and iCade compatible so I most recently played it probably a week or two ago. I doubt I'll ever get to the third bar, let lone the fourth.
The only meaningful solution seems to be to buy an HDMI dongle — Amazon Fire Stick, Chromecast, whatever. But that's based on the premise that surely Samsung wouldn't interrupt content without knowing what it is? Surely?
If Apple is artificially stifling supply then the latest model's first quarter is even more impressive.
Apple's PR trick is burying its failures so well that it looks invincible and declining to discuss what it plans to attack next. It's a very different approach from Canonical's over this, the next step in a long-public plan.
If so then distribution can be halted just by Apple revoking the certificate. Ars also believes that the malware is explicitly tap-to-install (with the usual UAC-style "do you trust corporation X?" prompts), with no sort of drive-by installation or remote injection. So it's a trojan.
The security flaws are whatever under iOS 7 allows this application to hide and to block its own deletion. It doesn't manage those things under iOS 8 but it's not necessarily that security is better, it could just be that the similarly insecure components have shuffled around a bit and the detected version of the malware is out of date.
I'm a little more optimistic than I've historically been — I wouldn't have believed in 2005 that 2010 would produce a coalition, and I wouldn't have believed in 2010 that in 2015 we'd be talking about four unambiguously major parties and five-party television debates. It's the sort of changing environment that could lead to a more diverse range of political voices. But we'll see.
Re: (2); Jobs' letter came two months before Adobe finally managed to launch a preview version of Flash for Android — three years of bickering, when doing so would have been a major PR coup, and Adobe still hadn't managed to produce anything. That says as much about the death of Flash as anything. It clearly wasn't ready when mobile devices came of age. Jobs couldn't have had it if he'd wanted it.
The letter was score settling for the atrocious Mac implementation though, I'm sure.
I think the poster is more referring to stuff like being able to take an ordinary mobile phone call and answer regular, non-proprietary texts via your Mac if it and an iPhone are on the same wifi network.
Photos, contacts, etc automatically sync between your phone and iPhoto if you want (via Apple's servers), and Apple will sell you a music locker, but I think that sort of stuff is fairly normal now across all the handsets?
The browser choice is already ended. It wasn't a requirement for selling an OS, it was a time-limited attempt to redress Microsoft's specific errant behaviour. IE no longer having hegemony for a variety of reasons, I doubt anybody discussed extending it let alone figured out whether legally they could.
That works perfectly, thanks! I have been completely lost because a long press on an image in both Messaging and Internet Explorer brings up an appropriate context menu: 'share picture' in IE, 'forward' in Messaging (which is just for texting onward, but that hasn't proven to be an issue for my use cases and the list of issues was explicitly personal). A long press in any of my inboxes reveals only 'save'. It's very inconsistent.
Factor in that I am possibly an idiot. It took about a week to realise that the icon of a building with a door at the bottom is meant to be a floppy disk because, ummm, that means 'save'. I'm old enough to be very familiar with floppy disks, it's just that in the ten-or-fifteen years since I last saw one the mind has dulled.
Having posted my negative comments about Windows Phone, intended to query its maturity, I'll balance with the positive: at the budget end of the market its a better choice than Android for many ordinary consumers because Microsoft doesn't allow the addition of uninstallable network or vendor additions. El Reg types might like that they generally still come with SD card slots. But I guess it depends on how app-obsessed you are. Now that DropBox is here I've no problems; prior to that using it as a handy video camera was almost unbearable. After doing some sterling work pushing over all my music when I first got the device, the Windows Phone desktop client simply no longer works and the phone's otherwise intelligent policy of shrinking video down to 6mb for email attachment isn't always all that helpful.
In an ideal world, Google and Apple would heavily lift Battery Saver (starts aggressively killing background processes and throttles or disables timed things like email pulls automatically when the battery dips below 20% charged) and Data Sense (when supplied with your contract date and data limit, blocks background fetches and uses a web proxy to download lower quality images if you approach your data limit). Apple could do with broken-out email accounts right in the launcher.
I have the Lumia 635 and impressions include: it's seemingly impossible to forward an image from email by text or any other medium; while listening to voicemail the phone frequently gets into a state whereby any tap to the screen acts the same as the sleep button, so I can never stop whichever message I'm listening to; if you hit the 'take photo' button really quickly when trying to add one to a text, the camera will crash, will then remain unusable across all applications and upon a reboot will appear to work but ignore any photos taken for a couple of minutes; an update released shortly after I got the phone broke my music library and left it entirely inaccessible for several months, a subsequent update has restored it but everything in my recent listens list is connected to the wrong music underneath so I'll tap one thing, hear another; standard instinctual practice when an app shows the 'resuming' animation is to switch back to the launcher and try again as whatever Windows Phone does to resume applications that have presumably been turfed from memory appears rarely to work.
Also sometimes the OS just crashes of its own volition while doing nothing. I've had the phone for about five months now and that's happened only twice though. So I don't think it's common.
I feel like I also see Android zealots, Linux zealots, Liberal Democrat zealots, anti-US zealots, Doctor Who zealots, GoPro zealots, north-of-the-river zealots, Sunderland FC zealots, vinyl record zealots, and a million other kinds, all the time. I guess what we observe is not nature herself, etc, etc, etc.
Like most people my instinctive feeling about anything from Adobe is that it's probably a kludge of twenty-year old source code and some flimsy hacked-together OS abstraction layer that is guaranteed to be at least ten times slower than the native alternatives. But is that just prejudice?
Not that it matters. Now that Netflix streams without plugins to both IE and Safari I'm sans-Flash. That was the last thing.
The suggested neutrality rules for carriers prohibit what they can do. Packets are inherently have equal priority; the primary offense is taking action to perform market-restricting traffic shaping.
Chen wants not to prohibit something but to force it; he wants to put a positive burden on Apple, Netflix, etc to develop software they weren't otherwise planning to.
I don't foresee that leap being widely supported.
I don't think Apple should be worried: the difference in Samsung's release schedule and Apple's routinely means that one manages to launch a newer/faster/shinier flagship than the other. It's business as usual. It's expected.
It's now been, what, four years since Android became number one? And eight years since the original iPhone came out? Apple is doing fine and Samsung is still doing spectacularly by any fixed measure, even if less spectacularly than for the last few years. But that's Android diversification and ever-ongoing phone commoditisation for you.
At my most recent publishing role, now five years ago but out in the real world and completely unconnected to anything in tech, every desk was kitted out with a thin terminal that presented a Windows desktop from a server upstairs. It was running Server 2008, I think; for me to know that it was likely in the 'winver' box so I'm not clear whether it was virtualisation or just headless multi-user on a single OS instance — nothing ever happened that would make it clear. Not that it matters so much when it's all in-house anyway.
Being run on a sufficiently fast internal network, the only thing that felt odd was that everything was rendered at 8bpp, but this was the sort of publisher where we spent our days just poring over text so it was no real impediment.
The terminals were very cheap (but not in the shoddy sense); certainly a lot dumber than a Chromebook.
There's a difference because there are a huge number of people that find the depiction of Mohammed offensive but there's no significant group that considers the depiction of Jesus offensive. So if you make any evaluation of potential offence then the outcome will differ.
Thought of a really funny joke but are sensitive to people's feelings? The joke will probably have to be funnier if it's about Mohammed to make the one consideration outweigh the other.
Just aiming to offend? Then don't bother with Jesus.
Would prefer above all else not to offend? Then stick with Jesus.
However there's absolutely no difference in my mind as to the protection that each cartoon should be given. Both should be equally protected in a secular state.
My only problem with Charlie Hebdo is that I don't seem to get the joke. But there are lots of riotously popular comedies that leave me cold so that doesn't necessarily mean anything. If freedom of speech is used as a cover just to offend minorities then that's worthy of reproach but the principle of the freedom itself is still worth defending and, again, possibly I just don't get it.
A sad part of the whole thing is the huge number of people that have seized the opportunity for reductive us versus them rhetoric; I think possibly you originally came across as one of those.
Which is fine, but a bank, a commercial concern that is in business to make a profit should be paying for that oversight itself, just like they pay accountants to conduct audits on their financial operations. Why should we pay for government to carry out a security audit on banks to allow twats like David Cameron to be seen to be 'doing something?'
The counterargument is that should these institutions fail then the cost for you and I would be huge, just as it was in the 2007–2008 financial crisis. So we're paying for preventative care in order to reduce total expected lifetime costs.
I guess the fact that we keep paying at all comes down to a resigned acceptance that the industry is a net benefit rather than a net cost in a country with limited natural resources and no significant manufacturing base. Not the healthiest position to be in but there it is.
... so that's a Caesar cipher? I guess it'd do for any completely indiscriminate group attack.
I heard that it did that once but the government covered it up.
Apple's service provides things like direct Wikipedia suggestions, links to film trailers, etc. It's for Safari's "smart" autocompleting address bar. These things are on by default even if you select DuckDuckGo. The direct UI allows them to be switched off but it's hardly straightforward in explaining itself. Which doesn't appear to be all that accidental.
So there's clearly a vested interest on Apple's side in serving those autocompletes. I'll bet they're monetising them in exactly the same way Google monetises its entire search engine. But they are, technically, optional.
You'd want to weight against browser stats for other sites, surely, not sales statistics?
While I agree that freedom with limits is in practice greater freedom than freedom without limits — e.g. it's fine that I'm not allowed to steal because the principle in general frees me from a lot of burden by facilitating shops — I'm not I want Anonymous policing anything for me. Accountability is important too.
... and there are no skyscrapers in Africa?
Just because three pathetic little European criminals claim to be doing something for a particular region of the world, doesn't mean we should target that region of the world.
I vote for a Google Doodle, including the full range of Charlie's targets.
(per released details, at the time of writing, all three were raised and educated in France. The birth country has been released for only one: it was also France)
What a blessed generation the baby boomers must be, to have had both candidates for greatest British comedian of all time amongst their ranks.
Evidence is a verb according to the OED and according to Merriam Webster, and has been since at least 1610. Even Wiktionary knows it.
The Dictionary of Modern Legal Usage entry on evidence (noted as a transitive verb) is available via Google Books.
I agree: Lynn Truss would probably be sad if she read this thread.
If the party that makes an accusation cannot or will not evidence it, I don't believe the accusation.
You're inventing false claims from thin air.
In the US courts Apple has: been found guilty under antitrust law of ebook price fixing; lost the attempt to establish that Amazon can't call its an 'App Store'; lost an attempt to compel various rumours sites to reveal their sources; been successfully forced by Creative Labs to pay royalties for use of hierarchical menus in iPods; failed to win a patent case againt HTC; failed to win a patent case against Kodak; failed to win a patent case against Motorola.
Apple has ended up settling rather than going to court in the US: with resellers who argued that Apple were illegally driving them out of business; an antitrust case about cold calling employees of competing companies; a class action over the reliability of early MagSafe power adaptors; a class action about price switching, where gift cards couldn't buy the number of songs indicated due to a price change; the trademark case with Cisco about use of the iPhone mark; a class action over iPod battery life.
So Apple has been successfully prosecuted by the US government. It has lost cases started against it by other companies. It has lost cases it started against other companies, it has had to pay out for cases started against it by groups of consumers.
The problem being that phones are very much about user interaction and Linux is just a kernel. So Linux solves the hardware interaction problem but that's all. It'd be more appropriate to say that FirefoxOS or Ubuntu Touch or Sailfish or something else is the smart choice and leave the Linux component implicit. But even then: where are the apps and where are the cosy carrier agreements you need to launch a mass-market phone?
More likely someone doing the typical mediocre developer rubbish of deciding they're so clever that they can learn a framework not by reading the documentation but just by poking around, and then being surprised when all the things that they figured out empirically and all the code that seemed alright when they ran it a few times fails under a different version of the framework because they're relying on a whole bunch of things that were never API guarantees — many of which the documentation probably explicitly offers the correct approach for. But, you know, developers are too clever to need to read things, right?
If anybody here has never worked with such a person then you have my envy.
The original poster is referring to whatever drivers he had installed for an "old but functional graphics tablet" no longer working under the latest OS X. This is exactly a third-party hardware compatibility problem. Apple didn't make that hardware, somebody else did.
The author said, and I quote exactly: "I don't touch the damn thing unless I have to, it applied it's UI 'improvements' and rendered hardware obsolete on it's own."
The administrator's password is required to install all OS updates. Major versions are not pushed automatically, you have to go to the App Store and select to download them, supplying your store login credentials.
The Mac definitely did not install Yosemite "on its own".
It's unclear to me from what I can find online how Android/Badaccents actually works but I think it's safe to assume that the payload is exploiting a security flaw elsewhere in Android or in the specific banking apps, rather than Google having thought it'd be smart to extend bank account details to any installed app that asks.
... and who didn't already purchase it from Google or Microsoft. The macrumors.com gossip (i.e. not deliberately anti-Apple) was that after the cinemas pulled out, Sony wanted it to be an iTunes exclusive and went elsewhere only when Apple (initially) declined involvement.
Only if making a loss was the objective. That all the major chains have declined to show it somewhat limits income — it had a budget of something like $44m and made only $1m in screenings during its opening weekend due to the limited release.
There's also the likely future employment prospects for Amy Pascal et al in the corner of not-such-a-great-set-of-circumstances.
It may be more that fans of a 1984 game are more prone to ask"if this game requires a server, will I still be able to play it in 30 years?"
Apple which has recently ended a half-decade class action re:media player lock-in and is still fighting a case on e-book price fixing, having lost to the government? I'd say the US legal system is doing its due diligence.
That all being said, look to the top. The big Microsoft antitrust suit concluded under Clinton. Then Bush came in and everyone — including Microsoft — got somewhat more of a free hand. Even most of the penalties initially imposed against Microsoft in '98 just sort of quietly vanished on appeal.
Competition law protects the market. As per Roland6 and others, it defines that the wrong is using a monopoly position to distort competition.
So how come Sun didn't get in trouble because Solaris never offered you a browser ballot? Because that was not abuse of a monopoly position. How come Apply don't get in trouble because OS X never offers you a browser ballot? Because that is not abuse of a monopoly position.
Look at the consequences.
Microsoft built a majority market share with a shoddy browser then took steps to lock its platform down and walked away. What effect did the long life of IE6 have on every other part of the internet's technology stack? How much money and how much time was spent dealing with IE6's peculiarities?
Suppose Apple had built Safari not to be especially standards compliant, then baked it closely into the core of OS X and taken market measures to lock out the competing browsers. What effect do you think that would have had on the internet's technology stack? How much money and how much time do you think would be spent dealing with Safari's hypothetical peculiarities?
So, given that the remit is protecting the market, which of those companies was it correct to take action against?
In the worst case what happens is: no benefit for the environment. But it buys the ability for the environmental problem to be fixed centrally. So if cold fusion were discovered tomorrow then they could just plug a couple of those into the grid. Or maybe they'll come around to the idea that new fission stations are the thing environmentally? Renewables don't exactly have a lock on being a better solution if we're optimising for that.
It's nearly 2015. What Windows PC?
I'd rate Android Studio as about a million times as good as Eclipse, and I've also used RubyMine at work so I understand the value of the JetBrains IDE as a transferrable skill. But...
IntelliJ is built in Java. So to use it you have to expose your machine to Oracle's vision of a runtime. Ironically for a just-in-time compiler, it seems to have absolutely no concept of just-in-time launching. Let your machine be forever burdened with Java overhead at boot regardless of what you intended to do that day.
It's also quite visibly not native software. It makes a pretty good stab at hitting a middleground between the OSes and is nowhere near Swing-level awfulness but expect normal cues to be absent and to go ignored. Git integration is one of the obvious examples: you may have your machine set up with an SSH key and all your other appropriate configuration but Android Studio comes with its own embedded version of Git that'll ignore all of that and insist you supply Google's software with your username and password. Presumably just using the Git you already have proved to be an issue across targets.
Then there's the real blight: that emulator. The default is painful and only a computer nerd could love the labyrinth of third-party options and associated manual configuration. Guess what? Being a developer doesn't automatically mean loving configuration. For me HAXM is a default install and lots of people love Genymotion but it feels like an issue is that the first-party tool just isn't up to snuff.
Other grab bag complaints: gradle wants a network connection before you can build anything. There's still no nexus between the IDE and the package manager; the one can know that you're trying to use API 21 and the other can know that API 21 is available but you're the agent that has to transfer the knowledge.
But I think Google can advance in leaps and bounds when it wants. Android 1.6 was awful. Even 2.x retained significant issues, both technical (no accelerated drawing) and in the user interface (that menu button that nobody ever spotted). So probably the future's bright.
I don't think Apple had much left in its witness buying off fund this month, since it overspent on helping to cover up the faked moon landings, sheltering the person that really shot JFK and pretending that Obama was born in the US.
I understand that it's the school's budget but that even iPads were considered justified because the third alternative is textbooks, which are even more expensive. California, like the other states I'm aware of, requires that textbooks be approved before schools can purchase them, which creates something of a captive audience for the publishers and gives them significant extra costs to defray (especially in terms of risk).
Which seems to be similar to the process for hardware but I guess the fact that Chromebooks and iPads have a huge external audience limits price jacking.
Command+shift+control+4 and select an area.
Open Preview and the command+n File menu will have become "New from Clipboard". So select that or hit command+n for an atomic create+paste.