Re: SSD is a problem
Laptops seem the ideal place for hybrid drives, which appear to work wonderfully well.
5946 posts • joined 28 May 2010
Laptops seem the ideal place for hybrid drives, which appear to work wonderfully well.
Yes I wasn't being sarcastic... if you are happy with cheap bulky laptops then good for you but there's no need to tell the world you don't like slimline versions. I would rather spend £500 than £1500 myself but so what, both are available.
Maybe because you still only need 4Gb for a well-performing system for most peoples' uses.
I was more surprised none of these are higher than HD-res though, after Apple & Google upped the stakes in that department.
Then you can continue to buy 4Kg 2" thick laptops that meet your needs.
FB is compatible with playing outside and using emails but it would be a pretty crap parent who deliberately tried to stop their kid being up to speed with this decade's technology. Just because you don't get it... your parents probably thought having a personal stereo was equally terrible.
Is this just the same old "only stupid people use FB" dross that you felt compelled to spew, or a specific critique on Home?
If I was a big FB user - it was the main thing I did on my phone - I'd probably welcome better integration.
As for iOS, you are right BUT sometimes big players get special rules/exceptions, for instance WP has built-in Twitter/FB/etc functionality (which you can ignore). It is unlikely IMO though.
Sorry Dave but it's a good job you are a wage slave rather than an entrepreneur. You just have no clue
a)You get to earn about £10k tax-free. That could cover your expenses to work like travel and clothes, meaning you are then taxed on 'profit'.
b)Equating a job and a company is asinine in the first place.
c)"A billion dollar company IS making massive profits, or it is on the way out anyway." Balls it is. A $1bn company making profits of $100m is not any more profitable than a £1m company making profits of £100k.
d)Some companies run on a margin of say 10% - they manufacture and sell on so they have vast costs and thus very high turnover without that big profits. Others have margins of 70% or more if they are a service company. If you tax on turnover, you kill any company which actually makes anything.
Because a company IS completely different. A company might bring in $1bn but spend $900m. Your 'margin' is ridiculously high in comparison.
In fact the personal tax-free allowance of £10k you get covers things like transport and other expenses so you effectively ARE being taxed on your 'profit'.
Only when "people" in question are over-privileged nerds who think shady tax strategy equates with being evil.
If you want to be a contractor, running a Ltd company is the only really sensible option because many companies will NOT hire sole traders. Contractors go Ltd for other reasons than tax efficiency, that is simply a bonus once they are set up.
Also, if you don't avoid NI, you end up paying both employee AND employer NI as you are the employer - how is THAT fair?
Why do you possibly think he would be upset by that?
A a tax on turnover is a stupid idea designed to appease stupid people who think that because a company is "a billion dollar company" they must be making vast profits.
And of course you shoot yourself in the foot, but then socialists are happy to ruin it for tehmselves as long as they can bask in the warmth of spoiling it for others.
Do you really think Starbucks are simply going to pay full tax on all UK earnings? Of course not, they will simply divert a few £m to the UK as a peace-offering... there is no legal obligation so it's basically a donation to appease the masses.
Is "don't be evil" the new "Hitler" of online discussion?
"it is not moral and it is not right." Based on what exactly?
You're also ignorant because this is not true: "she 'earns' a minimal wage to avoid paying tax and has a personal income of around 4x the average. She doesn't pay tax on her income"
Any money she takes from the company has been taxed corporation tax (what Google are avoiding paying). You don't pay personal (income) tax on this income up to the upper threshold because it's already been taxed. If you take income above the upper threshold (about £40k) then you pay some additional income tax on it (about 12% I think) so the income is double-taxed.
"a UK business tax based purely on transactions in the UK"
What a stupid idea. Any company which imports goods from outside the UK is now not able to offset valid expenses against sales. Kill what remains of manufacturing in one swoop.
They aren't claiming no profit, they are moving which country it is charged in. Hard to stop this without blocking entirely legitimate cases where Google UK pays Google US for services and so on which reduce Google UK's profits.
I didn't say they were. It was a hypothetical comment.
Just because WIMPs are shown to exist, does not imply they make up all the "missing matter", it only means they might make up part of it. There would have to be an awful lot of them after all.
$10m in REVENUE is pretty small fry really, that is not a big company by any stretch of the imagination.
black or white, surely?
If they're super-intelligent they wouldn't be setting off H-bombs. We have H-bombs and we're not super-intelligent :)
... does that mean we could also detect that they were spewing radio waves like Earth is? Or is that a whole other level of difficult?
Don't worry, pewpie I'm sure everyone will continue to ignore you just as they do now, other than teenagers mocking you on the bus.
In reality we all know you would never punch anyone or even speak up to them for fear of confrontation.
Hitler was evil. Saddam was evil. Leasing a piece of luxury tech kit is not evil - get out of your arse and take a look at the world around you.
Of course it was not going to run Linux. There could have been an outside shout for ChromeOS, just maybe.
I can't see a good reason Google would want to block 2nd-hand sales of the regular retail version. It's surely similar to an iPad or Kindle - it is tied to a personal account BUT you can change which account it is linked to.
Americans haven't even decided healthcare is a natural right, most of the world doesn't consider a roof over your head a natural right, and you think "free software" is a "natural right"?
Maybe those with no healthcare and nowhere to live could do with some of what you're on.
Have you heard of the idea that adverts make money for sites?
So you can get away with selling it despite agreeing not to... and? You can copy DRM-protected files too. All it means is you are agreeing not to re-sell, not that you can't do it.
They can say the device is registered you your id and therefore deactivate it once it's not used by you. Then they would be pressurised to let you re-activate them against a new account.
You can do that but they'll still reserve the right to deactivate it. Maybe each unit is tied to a google id so you'd have to sell the google id as well.
You can return under statutory rights surely?
It's a contract between you and Google. If you don't like the terms, don't enter the contract. Sale with strings attached is not some new thing Google invented, it's pretty common.
Someone will come along and tell us a fancy legal term for this no doubt.
Does this stand up to legal scrutiny though if you buy them outside the US?
This is a purely technical discussion, nothing about morality in this example. Many businesses have apps which rely on unsupported or crap browsers so it's a valid angle to target them as a way to advertise your brand generally.
Now if only Google would do a proper enterprise version of Chrome so businesses can adopt it properly... centralised updates, proper support, etc.
90% of the world already have.
Tax Free or given not-for-profit status?
Who's going to tell him about The Onion?
"If you have the right to claim God hates $demographic because of $event then I hate the right to say you're a nobend for saying that"
Yes you do, absolutely. But that's not the same as hacking 'my' website to stop me saying it.
"I don’t think you have to be a liberal to dislike the WBC"
I didn't say anything about liking the WBC. I didn't use liberal as an insult, but to make a point.
I SAID the point of free speech is you're supposed to let people you loathe have it too. Taking down their website or supporting those who do is endorsing the suppression of their free speech, surely? Don't anonymous believe in free speech?
Since I'd be in favour of WBC being banned and censored, I have no problem with their site being taken down, but not in the name of freedom.
It's a good job WBC are a bunch of loons then!
Hateful as they are, I thought all you internet liberals were in favour of free speech? When a copper gets in trouble for saying something on Twitter, that's wrong because it suppresses his right to say what he wants. But WBC shouldn't have the freedom to say what they want?
Personally people like WBC are why I am not in favour of the kind of unlimited free speech the internet endorses, but it seems a bit two-faced.
Then you have to sync content between the two and carry both around with you separately.
Now we just need a phone that plugs into a tablet that plugs into a keyboard dock...
If 4OD is crap on WP8 at least it will consistent with other platforms.
That's the attitude which got man on the moon...
Yes - it's a reality show aimed at geeks and people with a sense of adventure. I'm sure the masses will tune in to begin with but it will lose its attraction for them "day 70... still on the bloody spaceship"
Not everyone even intends to use GitHub for OS projects - many use it as a great tool for developing proprietary software. Although presumably they would not make their projects public... so maybe making your project public should have some automatic license - GPL or github's own license or something?