1192 posts • joined Saturday 12th February 2011 22:09 GMT
Enterprise drives are NOT designed to be more reliable
They're designed to have better error checking so potential failures can be identified before they become actual failures, and better error handling/correction so they can get by longer in a degrading state to give you time to replace them.
Not a problem for DSL
If the line throws up too many errors it'll reset and redo the training phase and notch out the frequency it is broadcasting because it'll see that range has having too low a SNR.
Transmitters are not really an issue, unless someone is broadcasting a 100 MHz VHF wideband signal down the street.
Something people seem to be missing
It won't use the entire frequency band up to 100 MHz (or whatever figure they top out at) They can notch out whatever frequency ranges they wish to avoid interference. This is how DSL works now, if it didn't it would only work on 'perfect' phone lines. A lot of older plants have bridge taps and other impairments that will knock out certain frequency ranges.
The training phase of DMT identifies these impairments and avoids using those ranges. These ranges can also be programmed in, so if there is a strong VHF channel 4 in town, you might avoid using that, if there are certain bands used for police radio or FM or whatever, they can be avoided, etc.
The fight for amateur radio enthusiasts isn't against G.fast, because if they fight that battle they'll lose. They are a tiny minority, versus all the people who want faster internet. The proper battle is to identify some frequency ranges they think ought to be notched out, and work with their telco provider(s) in the area to see if they can reach a reasonable agreement.
Re: Where was Icahn when Apple needed money?
He doesn't have any real power, other than name recognition. If I won the lottery (20 times in a row) and had $2.6 billion to buy Apple stock, I wouldn't have anyone writing articles about what I thought Apple should do, or get private meetings with Tim Cook, because I haven't been doing this for 30 years like he has.
But maybe if I did it for a couple decades I'd be well known and The Reg would write about me trying to get Elon Musk Jr. to borrow a bunch of money to pay out more of the profits from Fusion Powered Flying Cars, Inc.
There would seem to be little point for Netflix to pay ISPs to insure the "best possible transmission" of a movie. Most people already have links much faster than a stream requires, so you don't need any sort of guaranteed bandwidth. Just let the stream get ahead and stay ahead, and I don't care if the data from Netflix is coming in at 20 Mbps one minute and 20 Kbps the next.
The only reason Netflix would pay for that is if the ISP makes it like a protection racket because net neutrality isn't enforced:
Psst hey Netflix, youse guys might wanta pay us ta insures youse packets is gettin through to youse customas. Lotta things can happin ta packets when dey passes throughs our netwark. Ya never knows, dey could mebbe falls down da stairs, breaks their legs or sometin like dat.
The debt still has to be paid back, so if the US based profit stream can't support that, they'll need to bring in and pay taxes on overseas earnings. TANSTAAFL.
Authorizing debt lets you get at the money now, and leaves the task of repatriating cash for later. Icahn is all about making a quick buck and moving on to his next target, so of course he takes the short term view, and would love Apple to take on $300 billion in debt and leave them exposed to bankruptcy down the road if sales fell due to changing markets and future profits weren't quite enough to keep up with their debt payments.
He's not dumb enough to ask for that because it would be clear what he's doing, but if he is able to push a vote and get it passed, he'll go back for more and more until he's shot down, then he'll sell his Apple shares and move on to his next target.
Water is fine, but are the alien fish tasty?
WASP-17b fish sticks, yum!
Regular cuts are smart
But only if they were able to target them to get rid of the least effective employees. Every company has some idiots who accomplish nothing, or worse, make more work for others. A company that never has layoffs never gets rid of these people, so you don't want to be a company that never has layoffs.
Unfortunately that isn't what HP does, they decide on a certain amount of "savings" they must have, internal political battles between factions determine who bears the brunt of the cuts, and they preferentially target higher paid more experienced employees were possible (buyout packages, early retirements, etc.) because then they have to lay off fewer people to reach their goal.
Becoming a bank
Banks are regulated a couple orders of magnitude more, which I suspect is the reason why no big company has tried to become one since GM and GE.
I do think Apple would benefit from direct consumer financing, in areas where phones are unsubsidized. But they prefer to stay very narrowly focused on a few things, so if they ever did that, you'd know they finally buried Steve Jobs.
I have some problems with this article
First of all, whole the He3 mining thing seems to be written by someone who failed economics. What difference does ownership of the ground make when the entire lunar surface is effectively a He3 mine? It isn't like mining materials on Earth where there are limited areas/seams where the good stuff is found, surrounded by a lot of crap.
The incentive to develop technology to exploit it would come from patents that protect you from others using the same method as you, ownership of the ground you're mining would be pointless and unnecessary, because if someone else develops a competing process and they have no reason to want to mine the same ground as you. Though I suspect given the time required to ramp up commercial operations, rather than patenting He3 mining technologies they'd be kept as trade secrets. It isn't as though people could sneak up on your operation from the next crater over and figure out how your machines work.
Maybe ownership of "land" starts to matter if there's a lunar settlement, since ground nearer the settlement would be more convenient to mine that ground hundreds of kilometers away. By the time there is a full time settlement on the moon, housing people engaged in purely commercial, as opposed to research, activities, the moon will need to have a functioning government of some sort that will regulate this sort of thing.
Second, I'm curious exactly what we'd be hoping to mine on asteroids. Mining gold would be clearly stupid, because if you find a way to get many tons of gold from asteroids, the price of gold would fall through the floor, just as it has in the past when major additions of supply came online - except in this case, the potential available supply would be almost limitless, so the price would drop and never recover. Gold's problem is that has little use, mostly we dig it up so we can bury it in the ground again in a safe. Maybe platinum or palladium would be useful to mine, since they have real uses, but if the supply increases greatly the uses would need to as well or they'd suffer the same fate.
I hadn't ever really thought about it before, but I guess the author has a good point that there would be an incentive for miners to sabotage each other, as the less the guy on the next asteroid over brings home, the more what I bring home is worth. That would tend to increase the risk and therefore cost of mining and this needs to be taken into account by anyone hoping to make a commercial profit from mining.
I am skeptical of the whole idea of mining asteroids to bring stuff home, at least not stuff we already can get here like gold or palladium. I suspect most/all asteroid mining will be for things that are built in space, or on the moon, rather than returned to Earth where we already have plenty of materials to build stuff. The cost of lifting materials to orbit, or to the moon or Mars makes those materials worth 100x more in orbit than they are once you drop them down to Earth, especially if others are doing the same. You may not need a whole lot of gold to build a lunar settlement, but even the cheapest metals like zinc would almost certainly be far more valuable delivered to the lunar surface than gold or platinum would be delivered to Earth's surface.
What a stupid idea
The EU already has tighter privacy laws than the US, which sometimes affect/influence US companies (like Google or Apple) that operate in the EU. Why not pass some regulations that NSA-tainted US cloud providers probably will be unable to qualify under, that take effect in say 2020 or so? The demand for EU privacy regulation compatible cloud services from companies wishing to do business in the EU would cause EU companies to spring up organically.
Doing this for airplanes makes some sense, because of the huge economic barriers to entry in that market, as well as economies of scale. Neither of which affect cloud computing.
Re: "nothing illegal to be wearing Google Glass"... yet.
Mini-roundabouts are accident generators. There's nothing like coming into one when the yahoo coming in the opposite direction decides to make a left the wrong way 'round
Have you got morons of an even higher level than the usual variety where you live? I've never seen that, and where I live in the US midwest they've been adding roundabouts here and there over the past decade. Only on those intersections not busy enough to warrant traffic lights, too busy for a two way stop, but where they don't want the traffic flow impediments of a four way stop. They published some accident figures recently, and they had fewer accidents than slightly busier four way stops did.
I think the key to the implementation here was that the first few places they added them were three way intersections, so there were fewer directions for traffic to enter, as well as including signs that make it clear how it works. I'm sure it is still confusing for people from out of town since they are still pretty rare in most places in the US, but it hasn't been a problem.
The signs look sort of like this: http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/NR/rdonlyres/80ECE784-A6A9-4A26-B1CD-FEEA44BF4C44/0/LaneControlSign.jpg
Re: Filed March 6, 2008
The priority date on Google Patents for that one is Dec 25 2007, for Apple's is Jan 3 2008. However, Google says the "priority date is only an estimate", so it isn't clear from the available information which patent would take precedence (if they even have overlapping claims)
Two problems with your post
One, you can install bog standard Windows 7, then install the widely available 'Windows Loader' freeware. Granted, that's closed source, but considering how many people use the most popular one, the author is playing the long game if he has evil intent, not to mention that Microsoft adding a NSA backdoor is a likely source of attack than the Loader.
Two, Microsoft bases their support based on the date of the last service pack. Releasing another XP service pack would reset the timer. Why do you think they decided against releasing SP2 for Windows 7? They're looking forward to the scheduled end date in January 2015 (yes, barely a year from now!) though I'm sure there will be huge pressure applied against them to extend that date given the dislike of Windows 8.
So instead of saying "text message from Jane" or "text message from Bob" it just makes the alert tone.
Which is worse, the jealous wife saying "who is Jane" and maybe not worrying about Bob, or the jealous wife saying "who the hell was that texting you" after every single text message you get.
Amazon's drones are autonomous
So no takeover attack is possible since they aren't radio controlled.
OK, obviously there has to be some way for it to communicate with home base, at least in emergencies ("help, I've been shot, going down at the following coordinates") but the problem of encrypting/securing communication is well solved, if not solved well.
Of all the issues to worry about with this plan, 'Amazon drones in 2020 will be vulnerable to a takeover attack that works on hobbyist equipment in 2013' isn't one.
Re: "nothing illegal to be wearing Google Glass"... yet.
How about getting the new technology to actually provide those benefits, rather than letting people do the Glasshole equivalent of texting while driving and potentially killing people while we wait for these future benefits you're talking about?
The same argument could be made to let any self driving cars on the road today, because they'll eventually be better at driving than people are. I'd prefer that before they open the floodgates to this that they make sure the cars can do at least as good a job of driving as an average human, thanks.
Been waiting for the Reg to pick up on this
Read about it a couple weeks ago elsewhere. Guess the Reg's science desk must have been on vacation :)
Re: unregenerated ?
I had to look up how far that is though I assumed it from pretty far from context.
While that's impressive, you can always make up for attenuation loss by using a stronger signal at the input, as well as having a receiver able to amplify the signal as necessary while introducing as little noise as possible. The cost of doing that is practical when you're doing a small number of links, but not so practical to do that for millions of homes.
Sort of like the difference in cost between consumer satellite dishes and those used by major broadcast networks.
Filed March 6, 2008
Clearly others filed for patents on facial recognition earlier, probably not for unlocking a mobile device but perhaps for say unlocking a laptop using the built in webcam.
No comments on the merits of this patent, but you can't use the "Android phones did it first, that's prior art" as an argument, since there were exactly zero Android phones for sale when this patent was filed, nor can you claim Apple is copying Android if they do choose to implement it someday.
Seems a bit unlikely they will implement it since they've already thrown in with touch ID, though I suppose doing both facial recognition and fingerprint recognition would raise the bar to some degree for someone trying to bypass the protection since they'd now have to fool two (albeit neither are terribly difficult to fool) separate systems to do so.
Foxconn doing UI debugging? NOT
You can tell from that alone that the story is a complete fabrication, or such a poor translation that almost nothing in it can be relied upon.
I still think if Apple is ordering 12.9" Retina panels (whether 4K or not) that they're for the 13" Macbook Air. If they do a 12.9" iPad, well, I fail to see the market for a larger, heavier tablet. Maybe I'm wrong, but I think the success of the 7" iPad Mini, and the near total lack of success almost all 10" Android tablets have seen compared to their smaller brethren, that the demand for tablets above 10" will be rather tepid, and not worth Apple pursuing.
Think back to 2008-2010, when the rumors of an "iPhone Mini" were rather strong, suggesting a 2.5" or 3" screen. How many times did we read one was being worked on and release was imminent? That was before phablets took over, and analysts still remembered how phones had become smaller and smaller in the past, or perhaps compared with iPods, and assumed there was a market for smaller touchscreen phones. Today analysts can't help comparing tablets to phones and maybe TVs and seeing the trend towards bigger and bigger screens, and assuming tablets will work the same way.
Stupid analysts, incapable of original thought, all they know how to do is plot two points on a graph "yesterday" and "today" and draw a line through them to tomorrow. Took those idiots over two years to figure out that PC sales were in a long term decline.
Re: A bodacious attempt, it sits well with this commentard.
Surely a round for the El Reg staff would cost more than £500?
Do you think their staff that large, or their tastes that high end? I have no idea, but I suspect neither is true and you could get away for well under £500 for a single round.
If you had to take the staff out for the whole night, on the other hand, you will likely need to up the limit on your card and may want to consider a second mortgage just to be safe.
Of course it isn't a "finished product"
Why should anyone be surprised Sony is promising new features in the coming months and years. What would be surprising if Sony said at launch "what you see is what you get, don't go whining for new stuff because we plan only fix bugs and never add any sort of additional functionality, no matter how the world changes over the next half decade".
The new features will likely be mostly/totally useless, as is always the case with anything that is or plugs into a TV - all of which are somehow required by law to at least do Netflix and Youtube, as near as I can tell, because if six ways to watch Netflix is good, nine ways is apparently better!
Also it is a SALES tax. There is no way to NOT pass it to the consumer.
Sure there is. If you charge $10 for an item now and don't have to charge sales tax, and are later required to charge sales tax and still charge $10 for it, you are eating the cost of the sales tax, not the consumer. The seller collects the sales tax on behalf of the consumer. If you buy that item from your distributor at $7/each, you can probably afford to do that.
Go to a bar and ask to see a beer menu and a food menu. You see a beer for $5 and a burger for $10, how much is your bill if you buy first one, then the other? Answer: $5 for the beer, and $10.60 (assuming 6% sales tax) for the burger. One is advertised with the sales tax included, the other isn't. I'll leave it up the reader to realize why that is.
Re: Major revision to Windows RT will probably be to kill it
RT may be brilliant in your mind, but why should developers develop for it when they can target the Windows market and hit Surface Pro, or develop for Windows Phone?
Has the non-Pro Surface sold even a million yet? Microsoft is having a hard enough time getting developers to develop for Windows Phone, which has many many times more sales than the Surface RT. The Surface RT will never have many apps unless they merge its API with Windows Phone at some point (perhaps at Windows 9, though in keeping with Windows Phone 7 and 7.5, current Windows Phone & Surface RT devices probably won't be able to upgrade to it)
Getting electric drones from distribution centers to rural houses
They wouldn't have to fly direct. A delivery vehicle could go part of the way, then multiple drones go the rest of the way to the individual houses. Saves the delivery vehicle having to drive out to each one individually, while still staying within electric range. The drones return to the vehicle, perhaps at a different location if has its own deliveries to make of larger items that a drone can't carry, and are driven back to the distribution center.
I still think the idea is rather silly and fraught with many problems, but this particular one Lewis picks out isn't one of them.
You don't shoot them, you net them
They have to land or hover very close to the ground to deliver a package. Drop a net over it and take the package and the almost certainly far more valuable drone. Much easier and less risky than trying to drop a net over the UPS delivery guy (and he's probably not worth much in ransom)
The net will cause the blades to stop on the craft, then you can quickly disable it and put it inside a container that will block its signals from getting out until you have time to do proper surgery on it to extract the valuable parts and throw away the rest. Or toss it in the dumpster because you hate drones.
It will be interesting to see what Apple does with this technology
It doesn't really seem to fit in with any product or service Apple currently offers. It may be for something they're doing that even the rumor mill hasn't managed to guess at yet.
Who knows, if Apple does do a TV someday, maybe this will be used to scrape tweets and tell you what people are watching/tweeting when you can't find anything to watch. That's pretty thin reasoning, I admit, but it was all I could come up even thinking about rumored Apple products/services :)
Major revision to Windows RT will probably be to kill it
Arguably they have four different APIs now:
They can't kill classic Windows for many many many years, too many applications will depend on it forever. They can't kill Metro, because they've bet the future on it. They'll probably try to merge it with Windows Phone, hoping that applications will run seamlessly from phone to tablet, to desktop, but that's more based on hope they can leverage their desktop monopoly in the mobile world than actual consumer demand for this.
Windows RT is squeezed in the middle, with no place to go, making fools of all those who bought a non-Pro Surface. They'll be left with the Microsoft equivalent of a Blackberry Playbook.
This isn't really a problem for them as Amazon makes hardly any profit. Their ridiculously inflated stock price is based upon hope that in some far off future they'll have killed off enough of the competition that they can finally raise prices and collect much higher margins than they do today.
Re: How long will it last?
Agreed they are a nightmare to collect, but that only matters for a small firm. Walmart, Best Buy, McDonalds, Starbucks and all manner of big companies already do this, so I don't see how it is much of a burden on Amazon.
No, the reason is exactly as the previous poster gave. It is all about avoiding collecting sales taxes so their goods have a competitive advantage over these from non-Internet based retailers. Had Amazon been required to collect sales taxes from day one, they would never have achieved the size they did because their prices would have been 5-10% higher in most states due to the addition of sales tax.
And no, you can't claim "they wouldn't have fully passed those costs onto the consumer" because they've made so little profit since their inception they couldn't afford to drop their margins 1%, let alone 5-10%.
That's it, I've decided my kids will never be taught to drive!
Re: Dark side of the Moon
Or put several arrays in a narrow loop orbit around L1, where they can get sun 100% of the time. From there, they beam their energy to a network of geostationary satellites which then send it down to receiving stations on Earth.
We already know how to put things into orbit around L1, we use that spot for solar observatories. That's a lot easier than building structures on the moon!
Using multiple arrays we have a bit of redundancy in case one of them gets taken out by a meteor, though not as much as a lunar ring. On other hand, we get 100% duty cycle out of these, versus only 50% for the ones on the moon.
By beaming the power to geostationary satellites, we can send power down to nearly any spot on earth (outside of the poles) even areas directly opposite the sun at the time.
As ever, the hard part of this is the "beaming the power to Earth", which always seems to be accompanied by a lot of hand waving. Hopefully someone much smarter than I can figure that part out someday. If they solve that, my intermediate stage of beaming the power to geostationary satellites should be simple by comparison :)
Seems more likely to happen in China than in the US
We'll see self driving cars before we see autonomous drones delivering packages to our houses. Amazon has pockets way too deep to not get sued for 7 or 8 digits every time one of them has an issue (whether a malfunction or someone hitting them with a BB gun or green laser pointer or whatever) and goes down on someone's head. Or goes down near someone and they make it look like it went down on their head, hoping for a payday.
I can see a new sport arising: "guess which drone is carrying an iPhone [or other suitably expensive and easy to resell item]" Send up your own remote controlled chopper and drop a net onto the Amazon chopper, which tangles up the blades and causes it to go down. Presto, one free iPhone!
I give Bezos credit for thinking outside the box, but just because someone wants to try something new on a big scale doesn't mean that his solution doesn't have too many problems to be workable. Yeah yeah, someone will say "obviously they've thought of these problems" and I know they have. They think they can overcome them, but they underestimate the sue-happy culture in the US, and people liking to screw with "the man".
Yes, Amazon is just another big faceless corporation now, it is just as much "the man" to average people as IBM was 35 years ago or Microsoft 15 years ago. I doubt Bezos thinks of himself as "the man", but when you're trying to take over all of retail you can't escape it. He wants Amazon to be Buy-N-Large from Wall-E, you don't more "the man" than that!
Why would you want messages that immediately appear on your main screen and don't obey the settings you have for SMS? Seems one good way to fix this would be to disable flash SMS capability in the Nexus.
The "smartphone market" is irrelevant. The growth rate of that market is falsely inflated because most of its growth is at the low end (replacing feature phones)
The relevant market is the "mobile market", which includes smartphones as well as feature phones. That market is relatively stable, with the growth in the "smartphone" market balanced by the shrinking of the feature phone market as lower and lower priced smartphones are introduced and replace more and more of the feature phone market. In the overall mobile market Apple has never been in the double digits, but has always been and still is slowly growing.
As feature phones will disappear completely in a few years, leaving smartphones as the only kind of phone there is, the graphs for Apple's smartphone market share (showing declines) and Apple's mobile market share (showing growth) will converge at around 10%.
But please, feel free to portray this as "losing popularity" if it makes you feel better. Just realize that if you compare the smartphone market share for Samsung's top end (GS4 and Note3, versus last year's GS3 & Note2) you'd see the same "losing popularity" phenomena, for the same reasons.
Yes, but just to be pedantic these aren't wages since the guy isn't employed by Apple.
That reduces the cost by the marginal tax rate Apple is paying in the US (39.6%) but charging $1,100/hr is still pretty ridiculous if it is the most Apple has ever paid for a lawyer. For a company involved in so many lawsuits, you'd think if anyone knew what top billing rates were, it'd be Apple.
The guy seems to be abusing his position knowing Apple isn't able to shop around. Must be nice to have a court-appointed monopoly!
Re: It doesn't have anything to do with the iPhone/iPad's success
If it is coded like most internal use stuff, it would be very specific to their environment, and not at all flexible to other environments, so starting from scratch with a new solution would be quicker than trying to modify their solution to be flexible and configurable enough to be an acceptable solution for others.
For $7.5 million
It would be worth hiring a bunch of people to dig around in the landfill with metal detectors and find that hard drive.
It doesn't have anything to do with the iPhone/iPad's success
Apple has never has had the enterprise management tools Microsoft does. I'm sure that's a barrier to Macs seeing more acceptance in that role, but it is sort of a chicken and egg thing. It is difficult to justify the development effort when (almost) no one is deploying Macs in large scale. If they built it, getting people to use it would be yet another battle, since as Google and one other poster in here demonstrate, companies deploying Macs have already developed their own tools and would have little incentive to become Apple's beta testers.
Apple would have to eat its own dogfood, and replace whatever they must be using internally to manage all their Macs to be able to whip whatever they developed into good enough shape to become a product...
The US claimed Snowden's revelations damaged its ability to fight terrorism
It is probably this type of loss of access that the NSA was whining about. Previously no one really thought about encrypting data traversing their intranet, now everyone will be doing it. Sorry NSA, but I don't feel sorry for you!
Now if we can just stop the US government from having "secret" laws. If you can't know the law, how are you supposed to know if someone telling you to comply with something is lying about there being such a law in the first place? Maybe there are no secret laws, and the NSA just lies and tells companies there are.
At least we'd know who to blame if Congress had to pass such a law openly and Obama had to sign it. The PATRIOT Act may suck, and I don't agree with it, but at least it was passed openly (only the "interpretations" were done secretly)
Re: People are not nearly as locked in to iOS and Android as the author believes
I'm not suggesting Microsoft is going to convert many iOS or Android users - the reasons you listed being a good bunch of reasons why. But even more than that, the fact they still only know how to follow and not to lead into new territory. For example, they STILL don't understand that people don't want a tablet that's pretty much identical to a laptop except lacking a keyboard - so much so that they couldn't help themselves but add a keyboard cover and then claim it as some kind of big deal that was going to lead to success for Surface. Nevermind that such a thing had been available for the iPad from third parties within a year of the iPad 1's debut and never was and still isn't a big seller (nor are they big sellers for Android tablets)
However, I think it is easier to switch between iOS and Android than you imply, though perhaps not for business users, who will probably end up locked in by their corporate IT who won't want to support both, or won't support both equally as well. For power users, yeah, something like iWork isn't going to carry over to Android, but to me "power user" implies that they actually do real work with their device. Use it a tool, more than a toy/passive entertainment device like most people. If you find a better tool that makes you more productive, you're going to buy, even if there are some added costs to replace a few hundred dollars worth of apps. Otherwise why would these people buy new laptops before the old one died? They do it because (at least in the past) it was much faster and led to increased productivity.
Apple/Samsung buying ARM
What would be the point of Apple or Samsung buying them? It isn't as though ARM CPUs are uniquely suited for phones, so one of them buying ARM would hurt the other. The licenses each holds aren't going to expire the minute ARM is purchased, so either would have plenty of lead time to avoid any problems. They could switch to MIPS or PowerPC or even design their own similar RISC ISA.
If anyone might have reason to want to buy ARM and toss the phone world into turmoil it would be Intel, but at a purchase price of over $20 billion it would never pay off even if they were able to chase a large portion of the Android world to x86 (which I think is unlikely)
I guess Douglas Adams was wrong
Either that, or the universe is taking its sweet time being replaced by something more bizarre and inexplicable.
I guess the one hope that it becomes more interesting lies with quantum mechanics.
@Steve Davies 3
Why do you think you need a 4K display to watch "original content", but not remakes, sequels, prequels and teen coming of age crap? Is a 4K display going to make Citizen Kane or Blade Runner better? If you think it will, why wouldn't it provide the same benefit to Star Wars Episode VII or Star Trek "I think we'll reset the timeline so we can show Kirk some more"? Or even Twilight: The Hunger Games?
Re: People are not nearly as locked in to iOS and Android as the author believes
Who are you surveying? Certainly not average users. More likely people in the IT industry, or early adopter types who are on their 4th smartphone by now.
I know only a few people who have spent that much (nor have I) and I work in the IT industry where you'd think people who are buying all these expensive apps are more likely to be.
If average app spending was $100, you can do a little math using Apple's statement back in June that they'd paid out $10 billion to developers through the App Store. The developers get 70%, which means the total app sales were a bit less than $14 billion. If the average iOS user had spend $100 on apps, that adds up to 140 million iOS users. Oops, too bad Apple just reported they had sold their 700 millionth iOS device in September. Seems your numbers are WAY off!
If you can't be bothered to do your own research, why should I? Look up Charles Dicken and US copyright, for a start. There were also many patents in Europe that weren't recognized in the US when it suited us, until the 1900s when the US started inventing more stuff than the rest of the world.
Now of course copyright and patents are something we fight for with every international trade deal trying to tighten them and extend the terms.
So why wouldn't Australian installers train on/install the cheapest alternatives?
If they're worried about losing the markup on cheaper kit, they can always mark up their labor to make up for it and still bid well under anyone using the heavily marked up stuff. Or pass along the savings and make up for it by keeping a full work schedule.
I find it ironic that a company called "Outback" has a fat markup. I take it that's not an Australian company, but they may be trying to imply that they are?
- World's OLDEST human DNA found in leg bone – but that's not the only boning going on...
- Lightning strikes USB bosses: Next-gen jacks will be REVERSIBLE
- OHM MY GOD! Move over graphene, here comes '100% PERFECT' stanene
- Beijing leans on Microsoft to maintain Windows XP support
- Google's new cloud CRUSHES Amazon in RAM battle