11 posts • joined Wednesday 20th January 2010 14:33 GMT
same old story with all of these services... the content available on smart TVs and consoles is always a fraction of what's available on PC.
When will the industry learn that restricting access to their content (while at the same time spending a fortune on marketing) simply drives people to piracy.
working families with 2 or more kids might even be low income families claiming in work benefits.
Hardly surprising - staff in many mobile phone shops are woefully lacking in even basic knowledge. My mother was recently told by the "salesperson" in carphone warehouse that there was no way for to keep her number when changing networks. I was gobsmacked.
"the Go program ran slightly faster – though the C++ program was slightly shorter and easier to write because the C++ code uses automatic deletes and allocation instead of a cache."
So in fact the same set of optimisations were not applied to both the Go and C++ code, since memory caching is clearly an optimisation.
Apples and Pears?
I can't see how by comparing individual models from Apple, with the entire output from other manufacturers you can draw any conclusions about the which individual smart phone model is most reliable. What a nonsense!
they don't seem to be able to use this for something useful like issuing me with a residents parking permit without me having to provide a mountain of documentation.
"If you're a Google Apps user and you've enabled beta programs".
beta software in 'has bugs' shocker.
meanwhile in the real world...
'We strongly suggest that you use different passwords for each service you sign up for'
Oh yes good practical advise. If I did this then I'd quickly have to start writing them down to remember them all. I mean I'm probably using up to about 10 different variants of user credentials across everything at the moment and I that still means a hell of a lot of duplication.
So which is the more cardinal security sin? Duplicating or documenting?
RE: Ads? What ads?
Agreed, why all the fuss about Googles tiny text based adds, when competing services (I'm looking at you Yahoo!) have got graphical ads that take up nearly half the screen.
Honestly there's nothing wrong with companies making money from providing services.
subscription is nothing new
In case you hadn't noticed people are already buying movies on monthly flat rate from netflix or lovefilm, people have been paying for TV on a monthly flat rate for even longer from the satellite and cable companies. Changing the delivery mechanism can only increase the number of people willing to go legitimate and subscribe, a large percentage of those that don't would never have been willing to pay in the first place, even if it meant not getting the content.
- Geek's Guide to Britain INSIDE GCHQ: Welcome to Cheltenham's cottage industry
- 'Catastrophic failure' of 3D-printed gun in Oz Police test
- Game Theory Is the next-gen console war already One?
- BBC suspends CTO after it wastes £100m on doomed IT system
- Peak Facebook: British users lose their Liking for Zuck's ad empire