Yutyrannus, me Jane.
I know, I know, I'll get my coat.
2770 publicly visible posts • joined 6 Nov 2009
True enough. However, it is also more interesting than that. In very recent years the Chinese have begun to attempt the shift from primarily export-led exogenous growth to (partially) import-led endogenous growth (as well as seeking of course to shift the attention of their own manufacturerrs in the direction of the home market). This may contribute to the change rather more quickly and on a larger scale than anyone was expecting.
There have been three major iterations since (depending on how one is counting - phones and/or tab operating systems) and they are still releasing kit with 2.2 on it, the leading Android OEM? That's the sort of thing you except on a bottom feeder slate from Generic KrapTek Inc.operating out of a backstreet garage in Shanghai , not Samsung. What the hell are they playing at?
...............investing in industry in the US providing jobs for skilled American workers and contributing positively in terms of taxes, GDP and the trade-balance etc whilst so many US conglomorates are busily continuing to do the opposite - hmm?
............offered by equipping your flying car with a rapid firing cannon and the next time some numpty cuts you up really showing him what the concept "road rage" can mean. In fact just fit number plates on an A10 Warthog and you're good to go.
They are indisputably capable of being "cut your nose of to spite your face"-stubborn but it is not entirely unknown for them to rethink if they get a big enough kicking. The capacity to hide the ribbon in Office 2010 as a "one-click" operation contra their "spin on this" attitude with Office 2007 which appeared to cost them sales (a lot of companies refused to upgrade from Office 2003 until 2010 came out) for example. If they get the feeling that ignoring the response to this beta is going to cost them they may think again - well one can always hope.
"The Finnish gaming disrupter’s Angry Birds characters will soon be on your high street, building activity parks in your suburb, launching an animated series and within two years starring in a feature film, according to creators Rovio."
...........but then I remembered that those homicidal poultry are, allegedly, in space now as well. Where can I hide?
"Apple aren't responsible for the EU's sluggish adoption of LTE, nor for the fact that 4G is currently only available in North America and parts of the Middle East. (I've heard reliable reports that Dubai has adopted the same LTE frequencies as the US carriers, so yes, the new iPad's LTE features do work there as well.)"
No, they are not responsible for the fact that it is only available in the US and a small degree of availability in Canada. As to whether or not Dubai has LTE now I have not a clue. This however in practice means that in about every market of any size all over the face of the planet outside the US the iPad3 cannot be used as advertised - end of. It is therefore misleading of Apple to advertise the iPad3 in that way outside the North American market. I should also point out that there are very few areas on earth that are going to roll out LTE based on the same frequencies as the US use. IE The iPad3 will never deliver as advertised for the vast majority of Apple's customers outside the US.
.......published on El Reg now and then. Usually however it is because the field concerned within IT is so far outside my knowledge that I have difficulty following the gist of the piece. This article on the other hand is the second* in the last couple of days or so when I have been entirely convinced that one had to be on drugs to have any hope of connecting with it. When you feel like publishing in an earth language (current within the last two thousand years or so) please do get back to me.
*http://forums.theregister.co.uk/forum/1/2012/03/30/steve_bong_tibetan_recovery/
That is positively magical. You managed to turn a discussion about how Google may (or may not) up its game in competition with Cupertino into a drive-by anti-Microsoft rant. I have to say that your capacity for intellectual gymnastics is impressive, quite the most innovative use of the straw-man tactic that I have seen in a very long time. Simply reclassify Android customers as closet 'Softies and Bob's you Aunty Joyce, one can turn a debate about the prospects of the Android os contra iOs into yet another MicroDemonBastard$oft posting.
Indeed, a useful corrective to implications of the article's subheading. Ironically enough I have experienced such working conditions in the UK. When I left school as an eighteen year old I got my first job as a porter (in practice a general labourer - carrying luggage was not part of my duties -:P) on BR (we are in the early seventies here) at a central London station. The wages were so piss poor that if you were on a basic 40 hr week day shift BR paid you an extra (very small) allowance because you would otherwise have been entitled to claim off the social. In order to make ends meet I worked 12 hour nights for six nights a week and an eight hour night shift on Sundays. Even after that the pay packet was still below (well below) national averages at the time. I did that for three and half years before moving on. The attitudes of my workmates were divided. Some would much have preferred a somewhat better hourly rate and more time with their families (even if that meant that they did not earn the same amount as with the existing system) and others were prepared to work as many hours as they could get even if (like the Foxconn workers) it had meant literally living at work. With such a huge workforce as Foxconn's it is scarcely surprising that opinion is divided amongst the employees - an issue that the article should have mentioned.
Really, have you failed to notice what has been happening in the US and the Middle East over the past twenty years or so? Radical fundamentalists in both the Islamic and the Christian conservative traditions? They are not some missionaries from Africa, they have very fundamentalist religious perspectives and considerable political influence. Take a look at what is happening on the right wing of the Republican party in the US if you have not already noticed. Take a look at the internal balance of power within the right wing in Israel. Take a look at what the Wahabis in Saudi Arabia have been up to in recent decades (clue - Osama Bin Laden to name an infamous example). Take a look at what has been happening in Iran since the fall of the Shah. In short, take a look and start doing some thinking. The influence of fundamentalists within all of the Abrahamic religions is significant and highly pernicious in its effects . Common to all of them would be an utter hatred of beings that not only would likely not recognise their God but in many ways from the fundamentalist's point of view the very existence of such beings would be a denial of the existence of their Deity.
"You might wish to do some more research before stating such conclusions. The vast majority of religions have already answered this question"
You might care to justify that very grandiose claim. What I suspect you are saying is that religious denominations you are comfortable with have managed to square the circle (yet again) to their satisfaction and convenience. You may perhaps however have noticed that fundamentalism (in several monotheistic flavours) has been on the rise for the last couple of decades or so - it should not need much "research" for you to notice that. The "nutters" are not a small marginal fringe, they are very influential in a number of very dangerous contexts (albeit out of proportion to their absolute numbers) - and yes, they would still regard the discovery other sentient life as a theological disaster.
.................that we will see real proper bonafide aliens in my lifetime (circa 50 years left), which means I want reincarnation to be real, so I can live again and see some weird shit straight out of Dr Who."
You and me both old chap, you and me both. -:)
........crapping themselves in the face of this kind of evidence. I.e. Religious fundamentalists (of all stripes) who, by definition, believe that there is only one Deity and he/she or it created us as unique images of the godhead. In other words it is essential for them and their beliefs that we are alone in the universe (we saw who was behind the killing of federal support for the SETI project in Congress several years ago did we not?) and the possibility that they may have to face up to a theological question that they would above all else like to pretend does not exist must be causing them to shit themselves. Personally speaking the more evidence of this kind that shows that it is increasingly unlikely that we in fact are unique the better I am pleased. The sooner that cosmic reality kicks the legs out from under the godbotherers (regardless of which religion we are talking about) the better.
No indeed, they do not have to do anything so silly as overtly break the law. They simply understand their interests very well and by means of the good old "nod's as good as a wink" method are able, in practice to rig the market as thoroughly as if they had formed a cartel. Ironically enough the "Father" of free market theory, Adam Smith, warned about precisely this kind of behaviour several hundred years ago. Strange that modern neoliberal economists have a tendency to go very quiet on this issue, hmm? Their demagogic insistence that government intervention is to be avoided at all costs when there are obviously circumstances where only government intervention is going to work leaves them silent on a subject (rigging the market) that ought (according to their own professed beliefs) to have them screaming loud and long.
If you are saying that Nokia are simply Microsoft's stalking horse on this issue what then is your explanation for Motorola's role? By exactly the same logic you should be making the same references to Google, hmm? I do not suppose you could possibly consider that the two most experienced mobile phone producers on the face of the planet (Moto and Nokia) might have at least some genuine tech reasons for preferring their offering?
"Apple clearly isn't proposing its design in order to make money from patents, or control the standard, but neither is Nokia.
Unlikely as it sounds, the companies are genuinely arguing about which proposal is the best solution to making SIMs smaller, while ensuring they still fit between our stubby fingers, so they can squeeze more functionality into ever-smaller handsets."
I had to read the paragraph three times before I could believe what I was seeing - and no I am not being sarky. It has however become unfortunately a rarity these days to see honest and constructive disagreement over the technology. It would be nice if it were a harbinger of an improvement in the currently poisonous atmosphere in the industry although I have to admit that I am not holding my breath.
Whilst one can of course say (with justice) that they should have begun this a long time ago it is indisputably true that in recent years they have been devoting increasing efforts and considerable resources (=a great deal of wonga and man-hours) to making a significant dent in the problem. Good to see.
"I think we have to go to a model where we assume that the adversary is in our networks. It's on our machines, and we've got to operate anyway."
That feels intuitively like sound common sense. However, the devil (as always) is in the detail. Are they talking about systems which allow them to track the "enemy's" presence within the system and thereby control what he knows (or ensuring that what he gets access to is not quite as useful/accurate as he thinks it is) or are they talking "hardened" areas within the system which they believe they can succeed in keeping him out of? Or are they thinking of a combination of these types of strategy? Anybody got any suggestions?
We see the same mindset at work when reviewers/pundits give the Android OEMs the benefit of their enormous wisdom. Along the lines of "in order to compete with Apple they have to significantly undercut Cupertino on price whilst at the same time compete on hardware and build-quality". For some reason I cannot help feeling that that advice has somewhat limited utility!
Hallelujah! Sammy has seen the light brothers and sisters! On a slightly more serious note I have to say that it is about time. They are selling into the budget workhorse end of the market and I think they (and the other OEMs) can afford to spare their customers eye-strain, rising irritation and possible migraine. If I want to shave I use the bathroom mirror, not my lappie.
Would face a PR nightmare? They would only then experience a breakdown in trust between them and their employers? I think somebody should start talking to the poor sods presently working at the coalface. They might then discover that this lack of trust and a desire to get the hell out it it is a widespread condition today, never mind at some stage in the future. Costing cutting? That's simply a question of who gets cut. Doing things smarter, being genuinely innovative to grow a business and improve profitability - that is way to much like intellectual heavy lifting for The Directorati. Attempting to take that route might expose their total inadequacy, people might see that the managerial emperor is mother naked.
The chances of Cupertino going to a five-incher as their primary smartphone are zero. I agree however that for many people something around the 4 inch or so mark appears to be the current accepted size and anything the Apple release is going to be in that ballpark.
I would guess that since the unit actually working on MS software for Macs would by definition need those machines in order to do their work they would of course be supplied with them on the company's dollar. What the "baristas" in sales and marketing might fancy is another issue entirely.
.............with these opinions:
"A harsh environment is a good thing", "Hungry people have especially clear minds" and "An army of one thousand is easy to get, one general is tough to find."
I'd start a frakking trades union, never mind join one.
...........of "BigCorp" openly firing senior execs. They normally prefer them to leave quietly speaking about "the exciting new challenges they are going to and how much they have enjoyed their time at the company." Tightly clutching their golden goodbyes on the way out the door - natch. These two must have been very naughty indeed if Redmond decided that making a public example of them in this way was necessary/desirable. It is in fact pretty much a career-killer for both of them - I mean with all the implications behind the way they have left the company they are not going to find it very easy to get new positions, revolving door culture regardless.