Re: Not sure what these are pitched at.
Running netbeans is not a need for a "serious laptop" for 99% of users. Running Word is.
5936 posts • joined 28 May 2010
Running netbeans is not a need for a "serious laptop" for 99% of users. Running Word is.
Yes absolutely. The 1024x768 iPad 2 I own suddenly stopped being usable when they made a version with double the resolution. Oh - wait it's just as nice as it ever was. You sir are the kind of number-driven purchaser the marketing teams are looking for.
I was hoping to see it included - has ER reviewed it yet?
Why are you blaming MS that companies are charging £6-800?
There must be opportunities for a smart entrepreneur to sell some pointless gimmicky use-cases to those who insist on having iPad apps developed for no reason.
WTF are you on about? Why is Netflix going to lose the majority of its customers for staying with DRM? The facts show that Netflix streaming is growing at a huge rate so you're just letting your idealist rhetoric get in front of the facts, which is that they are coining it and DRM has marginal impact.
I don't think "our essential freedom to use the web the way it was intended to be" included watching hi-definition streaming video. The very idea would have seemed preposterous.
Have you never considered that allowing you to save offline content skews Netflix's business also? They want to measure when and how things are watched and this affects what they pay for licenses and how much they can dictate to the content providers. If you download everything and watch it at your leisure, they lose this information.
They could change their model but why should they when streaming is the way the world is going this decade?
I'm sure that's want they want, and are trying to do -but the content creators won't play ball. Some content comes to the UK at the same (or very close to) time as in the US, others is years behind.
Did you not read the article? Netflix simply do not want to sell downloadable content. You might not like streaming-only services so you can go to another provider, but Netflix's success is proving you are in something of a minority and either the cost/profit predictions of offering this are not worth it, or they feel it would dilute their brand. It's their choice and you are perfectly free to go elsewhere.
Is it not possible for Chrome and FF to build DRM capabilities into their Linux browsers? Or does something about DRM make it incompatible with GPL/GNU/etc?
As Rikkeh saya, Netflix aren't able to dictate which countries see which content. They are beholden to the content owners who demand it is licensed separately in different regions.
Tom you are very narrow minded if you think DRM "can't work" if some people can get around it. The aim is not to make it impossible for you to rip it - as you say this is not feasible - but to make it hard enough that 90% of people don't know how to do it, or are put off doing it by the need to install and configure a bunch of extra software.
I never claimed to be defending IE7/8 - they were clearly inferior for general consumers to FF/Chrome. In my view IE10 has finally caught up for the typical user while being the only big enterprise player. I run Chrome on one monitor and IE10 on the other (multiple gmail accounts still don't play too well in the same session) and the difference is small these days although I don't really see much change from IE9 in everyday use.
IE10 is now at least half-decent so there are far fewer reasons to switch from it than there were when it was Chrome Vs IE7/8 - other browsers might still be better but the difference is reduced therefore the pressure to move is also reduced. Any bundled software only needs to be "good enough" to retain users.
Didn't Chrome get hacked as readily as IE at the last hack-fest thingie? I know ChromeOS came out pretty unscathed but the Chrome browser didn't.
That doesn't help if sale of drones is unregulated and millions of the things start being used in this illegal manner... how is PC Plod going to tell who is operating the damn thing when someone reports it keeps bothering them? Hell how's he going to tell who is controlling it if he happens to be there when the drone appears? Users could fly the thing to knock off the copper's helmet with impunity!!
Though I want a drone, I can see blocking them at source is potentially the way this might go. Thought waiting for it to BE a problem first would be preferable in case it's very rare.
"There are perfectly good reasons for using a drone around a home"
I never claimed otherwise. I suggested banning them flying over others' land would be a problem as would using them to spy into others gardens from above your land.
If someone flies a drone into your property, I wonder if you're allowed to shoot it down - maybe yanks will start buying shotguns rather than pistols.
"@jdx: with your fit woman example where do you draw the line? If I could be upstairs in my house ogling her or hovering a drone above my property is that still allowed"
If you could see her from your house, she can expect to be observed and should shut her curtains.
Hovering a drone high above your own land... well you would not be allowed to build a high viewing platform on your garden which allows you to overlook neighbours, as far as I understand it, so I'd say this falls into that category.
Your camera ha to be pretty bloody high to see into my back garden over the roof of my house. Google sees nothing a lorry driver doesn't.
Thanks. Simply banning drones from flying over peoples' houses would be fine in my view... if you live in a city you'd have to take it elsewhere to fly, in the country or a village you could fly it from your garden out across the fields.
"one of the biggest complaints regarding Street View is that the camera is about 9 feet up, and therefore able to see over the top of normal sized fences and hedges - just like a flying drone."
Yes but that's no different from anyone driving a lorry or sitting on the top deck of a bus. If your garden/window is viewable from the road, but only in those situations, you should expect people can sometimes see in.
If you have a secluded back garden or your house is not overlooked, you do not expect any possibility of anyone looking in.
True, but it's only recently become a mass consumable cheap device anyone can buy off the shelf. A few people doing it, it can be treated under existing laws. Millions doing it, easier to bring in specific legislation.
You have a very naive view of humanity. You don't think a guy who gets a drone for 'honourable' (nerdy) purposes who realises a hot woman sunbathes naked in her private garden or showers with the curtain open in her un-overlooked bathroom, would abuse that? It's very easy to say people won't BUY drones to perve, and I agree (mostly). But that doesn't mean they won't use them for that...
His cars can't go into your back garden.
There is a difference taking static photographs on a car traversing public roads anyone could see, and flying a drone over my garden to look through my windows.
Does anyone know the legal ownership of the air above your land? If a person can hover 2" above my lawn are they 'in' my property? 2 feet? 20 feet?
That's what I was going to post... however I agree with his comments in this case even though I think drones are incredibly awesome and I really want one. They are such an open opportunity for perving and so on - I shouldn't have to close my curtains if my window is not overlooked.
I fear they may be banned before they properly take off (!) as a toy.
The pictures in the article look very reminiscent of the covers on sci-fi books/magazines from the 60s.
Did Greenpeace just read John Wyndham's book? Are they also warning of giant sea tanks?
It's a bit odd with cars, but in the drug war this happens all the time with super-spec speed boats; an "arms race" between smugglers and coastguards.
As he said, women can drive and wear western clothes, in Dubai. But not in Saudi.
And yet we all have smartphones which need a daily charge rather than weekly as used to be the case (well my Lumia lasts nearly a week but I don't use it heavily).
If you make decisions on "because they're Apple/MS/Google" rather than on the product being offered then you deserve what you get.
I did find it interesting that nobody in that article mentioned Android, suggesting nobody in the real world gives a toss about the OS... Android phones are often customised so maybe punters don't even realise it's the same OS?!
It's nice you can tell what their time-machine would show them without having a time-machine yourself, or an advanced academic background in history.
Good: allowing you to pass on (!) your data to a family member
Bad: that people need to rely on Google to tell your family you are dead
Worse: that just by stopping using Google... you switch to MS or go to prison... family will be told you're dead
He does have a point though. Although our current "always on" for phones and home WiFi is "always on bit a bit spotty".
I can watch Netflix 24/7 for instance.
But this is clearly not something we're ready for yet, and we're a fairly well equipped nation... in many countries consistant broadband is a bit of a luxury.
Rumours were the PS4 would do this too. It doesn't.
Btw, your Apple Market share comment is totally irrelevant.
One buys a computer every 5 years versus a 2 years upgrade cycle on phones.
Um, that makes it TOTALLY irrelevant? You buy a phone 3X as often as a PC, but the fact it took Apple DECADES to even get to 10% of the laptop market isn't relevant?
Thanks a lot James, I appreciate that.
How is android with 20 different OS versions and thousands of different hardware combinations less fragmented?
It seems shortsighted to say a market cannot turn around. How many years did Apple languish at 1% of the laptop market? How dominant were Sony for cool personal audio?
As for FF OS... please, you're joking right?
I saw quite a lot of modern Nokias in Finland too, and advertised in pride-of-place in shop windows. Not that this makes Nokia less of an also-ran, but there are probably more places where it's doing better than the UK. It's not to be underestimated how much things differ between countries so basing it on the UK/US is not accurate.
Netflix HD (or superHD as they seem to call it now) is really quite good. I'm sure it's not up to blu-ray quality but on my 42" TV I never notice any artifacts or anything. So being able to get 2X as much data seems likely to make a big difference for streaming, at least.
If people think they need 1080p on a 4" smartphone, probably quite a lot of people. The newer iMacs are already at 2K or above and iPad Retina, Chrome Pixel and so on are just about there.
I take your point Peter but if I make something I want to sell, the fact you use it in software you choose to give away isn't really my problem - give your software away for free but I don't want you giving away mine.
... the embarrassment of FFOS (or possible FFS) tarnishes his name?
now try searching "maps"
"Not sure when Google last prevented me from viewing Streetmap, though, which kinda undercuts their argument for abuse of market position."
Not if you have the slightest understanding of the subject. MS did not stop you installing an alternative browser to IE.
Maybe you should search for it on the internet
HIRE SOME BLOODY DEVELOPERS WITH THE SOLE JOB OF WRITING DECENT APPS. Stop waiting on everyone else, it will cost 1% of your marketing budget and do far more good.
This is exactly the kind of thing which will not deter experienced pirates - who are not scared of naked IP addresses - but could put off/confuse a vast number of casual "I just want to click download" pirates who use piracy because it's so easy.