"It's like Prozac."
Well - he said it.
2352 posts • joined 6 Nov 2009
Well - he said it.
............possibility that the AC was being satirical - if you can manage that type of heavy lifting that is.
........unlike Mr Eadon do better than that. Microsoft do indeed deserve criticism here but not for the reason you have suggested. Their only serious experience with the manufacture and sale of hardware over an extended period of time is in fact the xbox as well as a sideline in peripherals (mice, keyboards and the like). In my opinion they were so (at least until Sinofsky departed) preoccupied with trying to do an "apple" with Win RT that they failed to focus enough on the crucial area of touch-slabs and the enterprise sector. That should have been a no-brainer for them as far as ensuring that there were sufficient Surface Pro's available when they launched. This is not an example of trying to manipulate the headlines by running out of kit, this is a production cluster-fuck in relation to what they should have been capable of expecting with regard to the sales of Win RT slabs contra Win 8 - especially since if they don't keep enterprise they are dead in the water as far as tablets are concerned. I and many others in this forum and various other places have commented that MS might get one hell of a surprise with regard to which of these two versions of their operating system would be the one they should really keep their eye on. They have fucked up certainly - just not in the way you are suggesting.
......certain types of individual or at least appears to. If it is indeed true that Apple's most senior managers would have preferred not to go down the judicial route and their former CEO in practice bounced them into it, why are they not now (as far as we can tell) trying to row back? Can it really be the case that loss of corporate face is the same (in the psychological sense) as individual loss of face? Is it that the individual managers feel (consciously or unconsciously) that it would be a personal loss of face for them now if they back away rather than there being any "corporate gestalt" involved? It is a curious phenomenon that has been observed in many companies over the years, not just Apple. Senior managers when defending the culture of the "managerati" in Western economies frequently claim that they take "necessary, cold, hard, calculated decisions for the benefit of the company and its shareholders" whereas in practice many of their decisions appear to have very individualistic not to say egoistic overtones.
I was not for one moment advocating what might be euphemistically called rationing or anything like it. I was simply pointing out that given the usage to which the bandwidth is likely to be put the system will not cope and/or prices will indeed go through the roof. You are perfectly at liberty (by definition) to disagree with what I have posted but please do not impute to me something I have not argued for explicitly or implicitly - I have little liking for "straw-man tactics".
...............communications history and what is it going to be used for? A sort of 24hr P2P youtube, endless holiday vids and an enormous amount of porn. Not only that the increase in that type of video traffic bids fair to send mobile broad-band costs back up through the roof and/or break the infrastructure given that the demand is likely to increase way faster than the increase in available bandwidth. Very occasionally I really do despair - this is the revolution in mobile communications we've been getting all enthused about?
.......................that you are letting the Linux side down. You must be an MS shill!"
Ah I see. You are proposing the "reverse FUD hypothesis" to explain his remarkable record hear at El Reg. Whilst I am not entirely unsympathetic to the suggestion I fear that the old saw "never subscribe to malice what idiocy can explain" still remains my favourite take on this kind of thing. Expressed bluntly, he has proved time and time again that he does not have the brains for anything so "advanced" as you are proposing.
......do not get it. El Reg's Vanguard of the Commentariat are a fairly mixed bunch. The largest grouping are (if such labels have any meaning) Android enthusiasts (as far as their phones are concerned at any rate) the second largest group is (as far as I can tell) those who like what Cupertino produce and the third group (rather smaller but not insignificant are our compadres of the Linux persuasion). In fact, "Softies" or MS-fanbois are almost non-existent here - where they do exist they, very wisely, keep their heads very firmly below the parapet. You are a most remarkable commentard - unique in fact. I have never seen any member here (in the last three to four years I have posted on this site) who has managed to achieve what you have. No member, in my experience, has ever made himself such a figure of derision or attracted so many down-vote hosings as you have. Now you may comfort yourself with your little delusion that anyone downvoting you is a closet Redmond-bumboi. I am fairly certain that you are very much mistaken - to get the regular hosings you have as far as down-votes are concerned you have succeeded in pissing off people from all the groups I have mentioned above. Your very special blend of idiocy and abuse directed at anyone you disagree with, regardless in fact of what they have said or how they have expressed themselves, is not having quite the effect you might have hoped for.
..................gets to blast out his version of reality".
I think that as far as that goes it is a part of society today. Look at how many celebs exploit their fame in one area to mouth off in another (a certain well known comedy actor's love for A Certain Famous Mobile Phone Manufacturer comes to mind) whether they know fuck about what they are talking about or not. As to the issue of suing I have to say that if he believes that the company is failing in its duty to its shareholders then the judicial route is not necessarily illegitimate - although I am no admirer of that approach. If we are saying that if he does not like it then the only legitimate option he has is to sell and fuck off, what sort of "ownership" is that? I make these points on general principle - I take no position on whether his complaints in this instance hold water or not.
Well he is after all a shareholder. In other words a proportion (related to the size of his shareholding) is in fact his. If he does not like the way the company is handling this he is at least entitled to say so. Now, of course he may simply be a greedy bastard who wants his now and fuck everybody else. However, he is as an owner entitled to express his opinion, hmm?
Up here you only have to register your objection to cold calling and all the telesales etc companies get three months to comply. Thereafter the local telecom watchdog can (depending on the seriousness and scale of the breaches) do everything from fining them to shutting them down. Not saying the system is perfect but it has been several years since we have been bothered by those kinds of nuisance calls.
I fear that you fail to understand that the concept "constructive self interest" does imply that the company (whoever it is) doing whatever it is can in fact be doing it for the most cynical reasons of self interest and yet still do some good. No, I am not about to shower Redmond with praise because of this but on the other hand I do not see why we have to be subjected to yet more of your obsessive and irrelevant howling. Do us all a favour and get back under your bridge.
Ah yes Eadon. You are at it yet again are you not hmm? Anyone who says something you don't like is a villain or a shill. You expose your own pathetic bigotry with everything you post.
It is plain that he knows who his most important partner is even if some of the usual suspects here are totally obsessed with Redmond's involvement. I suggest that everyone just takes a pause and waits to see how this pans out.
.............when somebody is taken out who is guilty of murder, the hitman or his employer? I say shoot the lawyers and the people who employ them for such purposes as referred to in the article.
............you take as your motto "think before you post". The subheading on the front page was "Microsoft's 'Contoso' may be more real than some users" and the article did make clear that Contoso is a known "model". This was in fact the author's point - that some of the "customers" given by vendors as references are less real the Redmond's "fake". The difference being that MS are using Contoso as a model as in "Everyone who knows anything about IT knows this" and are not attempting thereby to fool anyone, whereas some unscrupulous vendors are most certainly trying to pull the wool over peoples eyes.
No, and if he did he most certainly would not say it out loud. However "Commentard space" is a rough place rather like the business world it self. You will often see commentards posting on any thread that covers the Surface that SB said that they were going to sell millions. He did not. He said that he thought that they would sell "a few million" (I quote him verbatim). That however does not stop the usual suspects "misunderstanding" what he said.
Of course. I entirely agree with you. My only point was an attempt to pre-empt the howls of "Dell's been borged" etc. I was simply pointing out that although Redmond will of course have a say "at the table" both because of their stake and because they are the provider of the main os that Dell use, that there are limits on how far they can throw their weight around. In this "transfer of ownership" there are several powerful players involved, some of whom may not be exactly willing to swallow Redmond's agenda in any automatic sense. I was simply hoping to contribute to a slightly more grown-up debate than that we very often get here the moment that the "Great Satan" is mentioned.
........at least implicitly underlined? MS will have a 10% stake - that gives them a say but not any form of unilateral power over Dell. The other investors are highly unlikely to roll over just because Demon* Lord Ballmer tells them to.
*Yes, I am satirising the attitude of some round here.
..........maniacal legal assault on their main rival in the industry over the last two years? If they have to an increasing degree bet the farm on the retail small mobile device market then they would be damn near terrified of Samsung's sales figures.
No, they will just spend more time checking their FB accounts.
Yes, I had an Acer W500 with Win7 preinstalled and lived with that for about 3 months until they released the build version of Win8. The experience of Win7 on a tablet is not to be recommended (although it is of course a fine desktop os). The W500 was very painful with Win7 on board for all the reasons you might anticipate, installing Win8 made it at least usable despite the C50 cpu and the limited amount of RAM (2 Gb). If you do have a user case for installing Windows on a touch device, make it Win8.
Your postings are always attacks on MS - "what is there to discuss?".
......dried frog pill dosage.
Really Eadon? Please do give us a credible link to those sales figures - please, share this with us. Note, that I said a credible link to an independent source regarding your evidence for that assertion.
..........am not exactly a friend of the iFruit company (to put it very mildly). Even so, unless you are entirely content with preaching to your particular choir and are totally uninterested in persuading anyone else of your point of view you might make a start by dropping such epithets as "iSheep". Persuasion and insult do not make a good cocktail in debate.
What you appear to be saying is that because he has taken decisions that you don't agree with then that proves he is Redmond's trojan horse? I do not know where to begin to explain the fallacy in the logic of that argument. Apart from anything else it is based on an assumption that the man is a villain because he does not share your opinions. You must be an absolute joy to be down the pub with if you are of the view that anyone who disagrees with you must be doing it for the worst possible motives.
If he left because MS' corporate culture was not to his liking (as implied in the article) then that does rather beg the question as far as his alleged role as a "trojan horse" at Nokia is concerned, hmm? Perhaps we might even focus (when the issue comes up) on evaluating his decisions at Nokia on their own merits/demerits rather than the tin foil hat speculation that a certain number here are so fond of.
............until I remembered what "azure" literally means. I was clearly not awake at the time!
Would we be talking about a "sonic squawk" when they broke the sound-barrier?
.................as a weapon of offence rather than defence. A weapon to be used even when there does not appear to have been any legitimate grounds to deploy it. He was clearly prepared to use it in order to extort "cooperation" from other companies even when there was no genuine IP issue involved. Something to think about in the context of Apple's judicial carpet bombing of their main rival in the industry over the past two years perhaps?
.........contributing another story from film history of the same period. When a certain Mr Lucas had persuaded Alec Guinness to take on the role of Obi-Wan Kenobi in the original Star Wars film he discovered at a vital point in the project that he was running out of "cash up front" and was forced to beg Sir Alec to accept a percentage of the gross instead - to which Sir AG most unwillingly agreed (a story that he told against himself many times afterwards) . The rest is history as was Sir Alec's very comfortable retirement.
........of behaviour is (relatively) new. However, companies using those kinds of shenanigans are not anything new qualitatively (so to speak). We all remember what a huge success the first Alien movie was (total world wide takings by 2004 had hit $185,000,000 almost 17 times what the film cost to make) and certainly such luminaries as Sigourney Weaver and John Hurt were at the outset feeling pretty pleased with themselves because they were on a percentage. To their utter astonishment and considerable fury Twentieth Century Fox claimed that the film had (when all extraneous expenses had been taken into account) almost made a loss. They had unfortunately not negotiated a percentage of the gross turnover but of the profits. Hence today there is not an actor in the profession who has the clout to be on a percentage who does not insist on a percentage of the gross. Fox' fairly shameless attempt to do an end run round the IRS had ended up robbing the very actors who had contributed to much to the film's success in the first place. The sheer scale of these practices today however are a wholly different level of challenge to society.
"unless XP SP3 is installed along with one or more updates"
.................running XP without both SP 2 and SP3 - say it ain't so. Nobody could be that stupid could they?
............was all battery one could achieve very efficient use of case volume but at the same time have changeable batteries. Or, (to pick up directly on your suggestion and accepting non-changeable batteries), if the entire case construction excluding (of course) the screen were the battery that might pave the way for phones with a charge capacity not currently achievable.
...........for larger volumes of battery in a mobile phone case? By that I mean that if it is possible to (so to speak) "cast" the battery in the casing (as if the casing were a mould) such that the battery occupies otherwise unused volume because is not rigid and not imposing its own shape of the process of constructing the phone it surely would mean more battery in a given case size. IE A larger charge capacity for a phone of a given size than is possible with a conventional rigid battery. In principle one could imagine that the back half of the phone would be in a certain sense "all battery". Just a thought.
...saintly! As for the elk I suspect that that king of the forest would likely make cover before our "correspondent" managed to hit him. Though he might manage entirely randomly to fell a few trees while he was at it. :)
................most "pistoleers" would have difficulty hitting the proverbial barn (let alone its door), even at 50 yards, with any kind of side-arm. I can see him now going over the top* with his DE in one hand and a Ruger Blackhawk in the other - in his fantasies.
*I am not sure whether that expression is used in the way I meant it in US English. If not, then for our friends across the pond it is World War One slang used by British soldiers meaning to leave your trench and attack across "no man's land".
.....................perhaps with driver support so if you convert a laptop to tablet it switches. Perhaps Win8 SP1...?"
There I agree 110% despite the fact that I am nowhere near as hostile to Win8 as many here are. That type of change and at the very least a decent tutorial with the os is the absolute minimum as far as I am concerned. In addition of course the capacity to boot directly to desktop and to use "apps" in window form in desktop such they can be used like any other program when one is in "keyboard and mouse" mode.
.............whether one is talking about Redmond, Cupertino or Mountain View (and their associate hardware producers) I think that any of the fanbois from the various sects would do well to keep a low profile on this one.
...............seriously sad person downvoted you for pointing out that which was clearly the case. Some saddos clearly do not like tackling facts. Upvote delivered in an attempt to even up the behaviour of the knobheads.
That paragraph almost, but not quite, gives the impression that MS should be within handshake distance of matching Apple's download figures already. As a matter of interest how quickly do you think that MS should be able to catch up? Just so that we can see what your bench-mark of "success" would be.
...................as I am to buy an iPad. For precisely the same reasons.
Yes indeed he is, thus placing himself in the convenient position of rendering it impossible for all other contributors to the thread to evaluate for themselves the comparison he is making. In practice he is comparing an iPhone/iOS with some unknown Android phone loaded (he says) with jelly bean, likely skinned with some manufacturers UI etc etc. We have no means of validating or disputing his comparison from experience that some of us might have had with a known Android phone that has actually been released. Oh and there is no need to shout - just use italics as in "not yet released" - much pleasanter.
.................in every single area than an iPhone5, but at half the pricetag."
I entirely agree about the various positive qualities of the Nexus 4 but your comment concerning the price-tag is a major fail. Google are selling the Nexus in limited numbers at a near cost price (they have "only" shipped 400k units in the three months since release so as not to piss off their OEM partners). They could not (at current costs in today's market) possibly sell the Nexus at the current price as normal business practice. They are essentially selling the phone at cost to raise the profile of the latest iteration "jelly bean" - and as far as one can tell they are playing a blinder as far as generating attention is concerned. I have rarely if ever seen so much coverage for a non-Cupertino device in the media (rivalled only by the attention that the SGIII has generated - we can expect a writ from Apple any time now).
Only if we forget the being guilty of mass murder bit.
In addition of course to the implicit comparison of Redmond with Al-Qaeda. Ever thought of improving your postings by toning down the hyperbole? Unless of course you actually do believe that Redmond's anti-trust violations can be compared to 9/11?
For one terrifying moment after reading your post I felt that I could almost understand Martian.