2226 posts • joined 6 Nov 2009
Re:"Samsung can make huge profits on the Galaxy III, selling at £500 odd, but.......
.......... clearly not on tablets."
I have to admit that I do not understand it. In both cases they are running the same os as the equivalent phone and both phones sell gangbusters to their respective customer bases, so it is not unfamiliarity with the respective operating systems. In certain ways Sammys offering is clearly better equipped than the iPad and both systems have a very large choice of apps. If it is not primarily the screen (iPad 3) then I have to say I am at a complete loss as to how to work out how Sammy's high-end phone can compete with the iPhone and then some but apparently not the tablet.
Re: Infrastructure cost, development cost and security risk
Highly relevant points. I think that companies are at the very least going to have to develop a list of approved devices or the whole issue will be a dog's breakfast security-wise and enormously time-consuming for the IT depts concerned.
I, in common I suspect with most here, could find better things to do with 250 k..........
............if I had it lying around, which I don't! Ok, there is no reason why RegHardware can't do a comedy special every now and then - it should be read it that spirit, LOL!
Re: "But, but....but....we were the best.....we had it all, .....what's happening?"
Indeed. Competition is a wonderful thing, except when you fear that you are beginning to lose! :-)
This kind of thing is hardly surprising.
"In an apparent jab against the US and its allies, which have all but admitted using state-sponsored malware in recent attacks on Iran and other targets, Suffolk warns that the lack of international law governing cyber security may soon have severe consequences."
On the one hand they complain the Huwei may be engaging in or permitting others to engage in espionage against Western interests via "modifications" to the equipment that the company supplies customers with. This they do whilst they, at the same time, can hardly fail to be aware that various Western security agencies are doing precisely this kind of net based spying/sabotage themselves. One can only conclude that certain forces amongst Western politicians and industrialist are using this as an excuse to hamstring a major industrial rival to their own home companies. I am increasingly getting the feeling that a growing number of Western "movers and shakers" are beginning to be attracted by the thought of using a fairly eclectic and unscrupulous mix of IP "protection" and "security concerns" to try and cope with an unpleasant discovery. I.e. That since they managed to shove their own neo-liberal trade policies down the throats of the rest of the word during the nineties and early two thousands, they have ended up hoist upon their own free-trade agreements petard.
@Chris Miller "Re: That is not 'naked' short selling" You are quite right. There was an.....
....... important word missing from part of what I wrote.
"(where you simply pretend to* borrow shares you are
fucking with investing in rather than having to pony up anything yourself)"
I wrote that one too quickly. :) Though in my own defence I will say that a short explanation of the practice is not the easiest thing in the world to write!
Re: That is not 'naked' short selling
With all respect I would be astonished if "naked shorting" was not involved here. What the complainants appear to be upset about here is behaviour that is not normally associated with people trading in shares they in fact actually own. The kind of manipulation/dishonesty they are alleging is usually found amongst the "naked shorters". That was in fact the point I was making when I said that that practice positively encouraged villainy. One can very clearly argue that there are entirely respectable reasons for conventional shorting, I have yet to see any convincing case for the "bare arse" version.
"In the United States, naked short selling is.................
.....................covered by various SEC regulations which prohibit the practice."
If that is the case I am delighted to hear it.
It would not actually need *legislation*.
The leading exchanges to could do it themselves in concert - it would after all demonstrate their commitment to honest markets (strives manfully not to howl with laughter at that thought).
This stuff is hardly surprising.
"The letter then goes on to say that while some negative reports on Chinese companies listed in the US have “helped cleanse the environment”, the likes of Citron have “started targeting legitimate companies with either no problems or minimal problems”, and done nothing but tell bold-faced lies."
The technique of short selling, most particularly so-called "naked shorting" (where you simply borrow shares you are
fucking with investing in rather than having to pony up anything yourself), has a thoroughly pernicious effect given that it positively begs market manipulators/sharks to get involved. When in engaging in this type of "investment" the opportunities/temptations for fraudulent behaviour are so obvious that it is inexcusable that the exchanges have not yet banned at least the "naked" version of the practice.
You may have noticed the term "hands-on review"?
A rather particular piece of terminology/tech-slang - now what might it mean, hmm?
"Stylophone" Love it! Now there is a blast from the past.
Late sixties I think?
@Bernard Re: "No offence to Stephen Fry"
I have admit that although I have enjoyed a great deal of Fry's work as a comedian I cannot dispute what you say. Wilde's talents were considerable including a mastery of the epigram, what we perhaps might today often be tempted to call "the soundbite". He was a past master at summing up a socio-political point he wanted to make whilst making it extremely funny. In the hope that no techies from the Countryside Alliance are going to log on and hose me, I feel that his description of fox hunting as "the unspeakable in pursuit of the uneatable" is an example of an absolute mastery of encapsulating a point in one sentence and cracking a very funny joke at the same time.
Re:" I don't know why anyone thought that it was worth what they started out at"
I think that the basic rule of thumb is these situations is that if the price reminds one of a
poncey ponzi scheme it probably will end up functioning like that even if nothing technically illegal is afoot.
@Mike Flugennock Re: "or, at least your average major American brands"
You got there before me. I will just add that there are a considerable number of very good local and regional breweries in the US producing absolutely everything one could imagine from the lager end of the scale through various ales and bitter beers to stouts, porters etc. Contrary to what some appear to believe American taste in beer is not confined to Budweiser!
Re: "Payment system" To be absolutely frank with you old chap...........
..............given the various security issues we have seen cropping up with FB I wouldn't touch any such financial service with the thin end of a very long barge pole if it had anything to do with that company.
@tirk RE:".......there are laws against that?"
I had intended to post something to the following effect. "Anybody actually going to post defending Cupertino's attempt to ban the GSIII and the note?". In my naivety I could not believe that anyone, not even the the most
borderline psychopathic enthusiastic Apple fanboi could bring themselves to defend the latest developments with the attempt to ban those devices. Then bugger me, I read your post. It just goes to show.
"clenching one’s teeth will make the copter descend."
Remembering the last time I flew in a helicopter, I started to clench my teeth (as well as another portion of my anatomy) when the copter started to descend - it was doing so rather rapidly at the time. Icon? Describes my feelings at that moment.
"all the people who I know who live in Facebook all have iPhones "
Live in FB? If that in any way describes their real feelings about their FB world then all I can say is - sad, very sad indeed. Which ever phone they use.
"magazine-layout' design of..... ."Notro""
Why not call it the "Clint"-UI. You know, "The UI with no name". All right, I know I ought to be ashamed of that joke. On a somewhat more serious note Andrew I have to say that after have lived with an LG E900 for the last half year (I have a pair of sims answering to the same number, one's in this one and the other in my Desire Z) I largely agree with what you say about the os itself. Do I find it impossible to live with? No, not at all but that does not change the impression one has of the os as a somewhat unfinished work in its current iteration. As far as the current Nokia range being able to compete on the hardware front with the likes of the Galaxy series or the iPhones, that is due also to the hardware restrictions that MS built WP 7.5 on. It is not just the rather short time to market that has been available to Nokia with the current members of the Lumia family. With the coming WP8 phones Nokia will be in a position to do their side of the job, the question is of course: Have Microsoft done theirs?
Re: Goodness Gracious
Upvoted. Though I fear that only aficionados of early rock n' roll will get it. :)
"John Travolta may star in a Toxic remake." I agree entirely, that combination could.........
........certainly be described as a toxic remake.
RE "Larry Crapbeans? Is that the Samsunged copy of Barry Shitpeas?"
No, it's his
even more evil twin.
Re: "Are these Galaxy S mobiles any of the banned ones?"
Indeed they are. However it is just possible that some customers fear that future support may be lacking. However, another motivation for some customers may be the following. We know that many customers partially finance their next upgrade by selling their current phone. Given that the GSIII has made quite a splash we would expect to some extent a surge in earlier Galaxies coming on to e-bay. If this was also reinforced by some customers fearing that if they do not sell now they won't get as good a price at a later date one can see how the judgement against Samsung might play into this*. Having said that of course none of this IMHO suggests that punters are abandoning Samsung's flagship product, just that they are maybe upgrading earlier than they otherwise might have done.
*It might also be the case that give that the sales of the GSII in the States have been the largest of the Galaxy series so far, then the the apparently unusually high number of sales on e-bay are a function of Samsung's success in the States (larger customer base now) and that those sales are indeed largely provoked by the launch of the GSIII. Comparative statistics is a dangerous game!
If there is anything in this at all then I think that the explanation may lie in this......
" and customers might fear that Samsung will be even less likely to issue updates for models that it isn't allowed to sell anymore."
It would not be entirely irrational for customers to fear that they would get very little support for their phones if they are amongst the ones that are banned. Having said that of course there is a considerable head of steam developing behind the GSIII (not to be banned AFAIK) and a fair amount of this may be customers coming to the end of their current contracts and/or simply wanting the latest and greatest in the Galaxy series.
Am I the only one who was reminded of the Python's famous "Parrot Sketch" by this?
"There is also a list of key phrases not to be used by Genius Bar staff. Apple hardware does not "bomb," "crash," "bang," or even "freeze." Instead it "unexpectedly quits," "does not respond," or "stops responding." Similarly there's no such thing as a "bug" or "problem," just a "condition" or "situation."
No, he hasn't crashed he's just resting. :)
"knackering access to......Facebook...........for more than 24 hours"
"'It is an ill wind indeed that blows no good at all."
Re: " ......unless you're trying to tell.................."
Now that would be an example of painful honesty!
Re: "Communism" No, no, old chap it's known as............
.............."Capitalism Within One State."`*
*A joke for old political fogies like me. If you aren't an old fogy like me try googling it, substituting "Socialism" for "Capitalism".
Re: "Patriot Scientific Corporation?" That was exactly what struck me about this.
I am beginning to wonder if there is a new form of "isolationism" (take a look at pre-war American politics and the difficulties that Roosevelt had in getting "lease-lend" past Congress in the early days of the war if that seems unclear) developing amongst certain political and business forces in the US. Many such companies are (despite all the outsourcing and all that) beginning to feel the heat in terms of turnover and cash-flow. However, international trade agreements prevent them from using crude import barriers as they were used in the past (by all countries). What a lovely opportunity to re-introduce such barriers disguised as "defending patents", Oh, and no, I do not for one moment believe that this bunch are uniquely guilty, I am quite certain that if this patent insanity goes much further many other countries will be tempted to use IP law to circumvent free-trade agreements. I just find it very ironic given that during the eighties and the nineties the US was the big driver for establishing these agreements, that this means of circumventing them appears to be cropping first on this scale on that side of the pond (Samsung's fate, anyone?)
I was rather interested to see that......
.....almost half the adult purchasers of Meccano are women. I freely confessed that if I had been asked to guess what the proportion was I would not have got near the correct answer.
RE:"All of the innovation is in..............
..............the software, the chips are just the mechanics."
That, is without peer as the most asinine comment I have read in a long time.
Re: "I especially enjoyed the plum that spewed......." A word of advice.
You have already dropped yourself in a very big hole (and deservedly so) - stop digging.
Re: "Isn't it easier" Oh dear.
Re: "Why?" Hmm. Famliar style - is that you Barry?
In fact this program resolves two issues for those who do not have a touch screen or wish to work primarily in desktop even if they do. Not only does one have a very familiar start menu but the pc default boots to desktop when you restart or shut down and restart (I have very recently installed it and tested it myself). As far as the rest of the operating system goes for desk top users it is in fact somewhat faster and more efficient than Win7. Having said that of course, if one has a good Win7 install that one is happy with and touch interactions are not relevant then there is not an amazingly strong case for upgrading. However, don't let facts get in the way and spoil your enjoyment of your membership of the Anti Microsoft Choral Howling Society.
@Rampent Spaniel Re:"These are the same patents Android handset makers pay.........
............MS for already. MS can bring something to the table so Apple plays ball with them."
That is precisely why, IMHO, Cupertino are taking the risk of proving to have been Redmond's useful idiots come the Autumn when MS enter table space for the first in any serious sense. Until Apple started its litigation war against Android Redmond was facing a war on two fronts (although not a land war in South East Asia :-P) against two major already existing competitors in that particular market place. What Apple has potentially done is at the very least partially lame Android in advance of these events and ensure that to a greater extent than would otherwise have been the case they'll be going head to head alone with Redmond and its senior OEMs such as Samsung (!), Lenovo, Asus etc. Thanks to Apple it is entirely possible that Redmond will have considerably less effective competition from Android in tablet space in the coming year or so and will be able to focus to a greater extent than they otherwise would have been on going up against the iPad and iOS. I do not claim, of course, that this is any certain prediction of the likely fallout from Cupertino's lawyering but the "Law of Unintended Consequences" being what it is, their cunning strategy may turn out to have more than just a touch of the Baldrick about it.
@Turtle RE: The USA patent system is a disgrace
The fact that Apple continue to fund the departments in their company that you refer to does not change the fact the their corporate focus (that intangible is more important than many are willing to credit) has been substantially distracted. It is no coincidence that the work that led to the first iPhones (crucially the two "3" iterations) and later the first iPad occurred before Mr Jobs/Apple got distracted by his hatred of the Android os. I was, as I am sure you noticed referring to what we may see from here on in.
With regard to my use of the word "abuse" I would think that what I was referring to was rather obvious. When a company use the law in order to attempt, in practice, to create a de facto monopoly then it can only be regarded as abuse of the law's intention if not its current letter. If this decision is upheld on appeal Apple will start to go after the other Android OEMs and judging by the outrageous demands (revealed in court filings) that they subjected Samsung to as the price for "licensing" the net effect will be to reinforce their attempts to gain the aforementioned monopoly control. That the parlous state of US IP law permits this kind of tactic does not make it any less abusive.
Re: The USA patent system is a disgrace
It most certainly is. Apple no doubt believe that they have been handed personal ownership of mobile tech space gift-wrapped. The consequences of this decision may however not end up being quite what Cupertino are expecting. Tablet space is going to get rather more complicated in the Autumn - who are they going to start suing then? Their rival then will be the "auld enemy", do Apple think perhaps that the same legal tactics will work against Redmond? This "victory" may turn out to be something very different from what they imagine. They have spent the last two - three years or so focused on abusing the judicial system to avoid competition instead of focusing on development and innovation in order to keep ahead of their rivals by that means. They may very well discover that they pay a considerably higher price for that than they had anticipated.
Re:"If the royal family can't figure it out for themselves........"
The Norwegian royal family are, as far as their tech is concerned, ordinary punters like millions of other ordinary punters with regard to their knowledge/understanding of the tech. They are none of them techies, professional or amateur. In common with the rest of the aforementioned millions of ordinary punters they know fuck all about that side of their shinies. That does not make them anything other than average punters with an average punter*s understanding of their smartphones. Norwegian security however are most definitely supposed to know about such things.
Re: "On a WP8 device."
It would be tempting, hmm?
Re: "Meh - havn't they had too many chances already?" Thank you old chap............
.......don't call us, we'll call you.
Re:" as it provides stimulus for the companies that make your device "
I fear that anyone who posts that kind of garbage is incapable of appreciating your point.
I am curious.
Why on earth have you got yourself into such a state that you actually are cheering the possiblility that Nokia might go down the Swanee? What has the company done to you or yours that you feel impelled to log on and excrete that kind of steaming odoriferous rubbish? Just to give one example, my lady and I to not have a single item of Apple kit in the house - do you see me logging on here howling "Apple must die"? Get a life.
Re: So what?
Indeed, exactly my point.
"So far, Google employees have raised more than $263,000 for Barack Obama's 2012 reelection campaign, Reagan says, and Microsoft employees have chipped in another $363,000."
Unless he is claiming that S. Ballmer and L. Page accompanied by their respective boards personally go round Redmond or Mountain View shaking collection tins under their employee's noses murmuring "nice job you've got there, shame if you lost it" then work-place collections (for whatever reason) are scarcely new or unprecedented. What he in reality appears to be complaining about is that a certain proportion of individual Americans donate to a political party he does not like. Funny how those who shout loudest about patriotism in US politics refuse to recognise those rights and freedoms that they boast about when they are exercised by fellow US citizens whose politics the barking wing of the Fox News Party don't like.
Re: "Here's a thought regarding NSFW" Ever thought that someone in IT support might.........
............check out a hardware review for professional work related reasons?
Re: "barred from using Facebook for two years" Yes, yes, please Judge - give me life!
......see title. :-)
@Wayland Sothcott 1 " should be kept quiet" No, nobody is saying any such thing.
What one is saying is that one has to accept that "freedom of speech" has consequences if you misuse it. If you howl (falsely) "fire" in crowed cinema you have not exercised freedom of speech, you have been a total slag, end of.
@sabba Re:"Of course you have the right"
The shouting of "fire" in a cinema example is classically used to illustrate the limits on free speech contra responsibility for ones actions. The point with the example is somebody shouting "fire" as a practical joke when they have no reason to believe that there is in fact a fire. Under those circumstances they might well cause a panic in which people are injured or killed. That is the point with that "parable" - and no, you do not have the right to abuse free speech in that way. Saying that you would have to answer for your actions in the aftermath if it was a false alarm and you had caused injury or death would be of no help to the victims of the "joker's" sense of humour.
@AC 22nd Aug 13.39 "Apple are a corporate and do not care a thing about you"
Exactly. One of the biggest laughs I have had in recent years was when Mr S Jobs said at a press conference during the "antenna-gate" affair "we love our customers". He managed to deliver that line without cracking up and laughing - all hail to him, the master marketeer that he was. However, that is the point, no example of "BigCorp" loves their customers, they love our wallets - nothing else.
- One HUNDRED FAMOUS LADIES exposed NUDE online
- Google flushes out users of old browsers by serving up CLUNKY, AGED version of search
- China: You, Microsoft. Office-Windows 'compatibility'. You have 20 days to explain
- Twitter: La la la, we have not heard of any NUDE JLaw, Upton SELFIES
- Apple to devs: NO slurping users' HEALTH for sale to Dark Powers