Do I get this right?
UK complains loudly about the oppression of EU regulations?
And lobbies hard to add more of its own regulations on top?
31 posts • joined 19 Aug 2011
UK complains loudly about the oppression of EU regulations?
And lobbies hard to add more of its own regulations on top?
Yes, I am the product.
But the thing is, even advertisers - the paying customers - are not much enthused about Google's product - *the* product - advertisement. From the accounts I have heard, there are lots better and cheaper advertisers out there, and more powerful and smart advertisement platforms - but Google simply has the largest outreach. The same accounts said that the problems are solved fast, but just like with the rest of the Google services, user feature requests apparently go straight into a recycle bin.
> You can replace a £80 to £100 smart TV box
A TV tax for the Internet age? Sounds a lot like it.
Google reminds of the Microsoft of old.
Loads of money and personality disorder.
They have no idea where from the money are coming - and do not give a hoot for as long as they would keep coming.
And they consistently make bad choices and sidestep real problems, because they have no idea who their customers are and what they need.
It's Microsoft of 90s all over again.
Google Talk is another of those fine examples of how corporations turn away from something what works and is desired, toward something fitting their corporate strategy. Google has been "ill" with the blind following of the blind corporate "strategy" for quite some time now. Talk is not the first victim - and not the last. It's not that the Hangouts can be somehow monetized, compared to the Talk.
The web-based Hangouts are simply not the same as the standalone, OS-integrated client.
I am sort of stuck with the Google Talk because it mostly(*) works and because it is (was(**)) the best Google Mail notifier.
(*) When Google rolled out the Hangouts, they have broke and never fixed the file transfers in the Talk. Needless to say that the Hangouts did never support the file transfers at all.
(**) Well, Google has managed to break that too: since about one year, Talk still can properly detect the availability of new messages, but it fails to clear the "unread mail" indicator after the messages were read. Same version for the past 5+ years, meaning Google broke something on the server side.
All that leads me to believe that the breakage was deliberate. As if Google simply can't tolerate when people actually find their services useful...
I have to say I was appalled when I learned how the Chromecast works.
But on the bright side, from the user comments I have learned about Miracast which: does precisely what I want, is already here (marketing names differ, Samsung calls it "AllShare Cast"; official feature of Android 4.3) and dongles for it cost not much more than the Chromecast (about 50€).
"[...] and often mutual incomprehension."
And the obvious, most common, option is missing: architects are there blow the budget, while business wants it cheaper.
As result, very often projects end up being over-designed (architects and designers tried to show off, create more "work" for the software houses) and under-budgeted (because to close the deal unrealistic lower price was agreed).
"what are the aspects of the way Reader works that made it so useful for you?"
From before the times of redesigns and the G+.
1. (Major) It allowed to read the news in a undisturbed fashion. Without all the crap the modern Web throws at you with the animation and crap. (Later on some silly animation were added, but I can't remember for certain anymore - I have removed them with the Stylish early on.)
2. (Nice to have) "Sharing" feature and friend's comments. That (killed in favor of G+) was something still unreplicated by no social network. In a very simple form you could see comments of you friends about news - on a single page. For no apparent reason all the "social" networks insist on the "share == own page."
3. (Important) Excellent search/tagging/mass article management functionality. Kidding. Reader users begged for all of it for *years* and were simply ignored.
Reader IIRC was a one man project in Google and was known to be abandoned for some years now.
Overall, I do not think that Google as it is now can replicate the experience even of the old Reader. The web generation of today, Google developers especially, simply don't know simple things like "reading" anymore. They do not use their own services, they have forgotten what it is to be a user. Case in point: Google+.
"I love the outrage when someone who has been providing a free service for years decides not to anymore."
Outrage is because Google now consistently does promotes the stuff nobody wants and terminates the stuff some/many actually do want.
Reader isn't the first and not the most popular thing they have killed.
Thanks for the update.
The Oldreader got lots of attention right now, because it was built and advertised as an alternative to the Google Reader. And obviously, now that the EOL was announced, users started migrating in droves.
Again, thanks for the update. I haven't tried it myself yet - because few days when I learned about the service, even their static start page was slashdotted. I'll wait couple of more weeks before trying to import my subscription.
"Use a native RSS reader ..."
Offline RSS readers have the tendency to miss things - when lots of stuff happens at once or you are on vacations, for example. That makes them good only for for general news and such. And for general news - splash and sensation - we already have TV and tabloids.
"Wow, Microsoft. Yet again #hotmail is down...You're making the decision about whether to switch fully to gmail or not very easy."
How many spring cleanings you think GMail would survive?
Otherwise, as a long term Reader user, I'm slightly disappointed. "Disappointed" because it was a good product 5 years ago and I'm still using it and alternatives are all miss the point (and overloaded with the "social" carp - while I only want to read the darn news). Only "slightly" disappointed because Reader could have been so much more, but Google has always kept it suffocated: advanced search and saved searches never materialized, tagging was too dumb to be useful, some uncofigurable interface tweaks never became really useful.
IMO Google right now is in race to the bottom. I see it on the desktop - and I see it now in the Android. As a fresh Android smartphone user I was surprised how much non-Google software manufacturer has preinstalled. After trying the Google originals I have realized that bare Android, loaded with exclusively Google apps, right now is as useful as say bare Win95. Lots of stuff - shiny interface - but very little substance beneath.
A decade ago I've spent a week learning the VIM editor (no, not vi, but VIM).
It really payed off more than any other week I've spent learning anything.
If vertical blocks or regexps or macros or abbreviations can't do it, then VimScript for sure can.
Read it in full. And probably read it again to let it sink.
Quote from the article:
"Tesla has a load of instructions to maximize battery power, and I think I followed them pretty well."
That is not the counter. It is more or less confirmation of the Broder's experience: unless you drive perfectly, couple of wrong turns or missed exists mean you might have to call the towing service.
RTFA carefully. It wasn't test of the car - it was the test of the Tesla's Supercharger station network.
Network is apparently OK. Car... well we knew the limitations of e-cars beforehand, but Musk comments have simply inflated the story's newsworthiness.
Now it's more about bashing the car manufacturers and/or the auto reviewers.
"It seems to be the common practise."
Welcome to the world of Windows-only hardware.
> wind power will be an even more cost effective source.
Up to the point - when storms would get so strong, that they will be demolishing the wind farms.
Just to realize the scale of the things, how huge the things we're are dealing with, I can recommend to read The Swarm by Frank Schätzing.
It's still to be seen how really fragile the balance the biosphere is built up on us. But I really do not want to be here if/when it hits the fan.
And some prominent developers still insist that we should rewrite all software in Java or other managed languages. It's all about security and safety, they say, which one can never achieve with the C/C++.
Well, I'm glad to see the people being repeatedly proven wrong.
Worst part is of course the fact that the managed language VMs themselves become the targets. Considering complexity of e.g. Java VM I think we are going to have a bumpy road ahead.
There are piles of regulations around the world surrounding network connected devices - even more *wirelessly* connected devices. That, in addition to all the regulation on the TVs. So the only option to produce one unit sellable across the world, is for manufacturers to make optional all the stuff which much raise eyebrows of the customs and certification authorities. It's called "globalization" - looked it up.
Now, that "Bla-bla Ready" language *IS* pretty annoying. I learned over time to read it as: oh you might happen to get it working - theoretically - but it still might suck and be unusable, even after alas you paid us all the money.
You of course forget that MS is after market domination. Or have you already forgotten the "embrace, extend and extinguish?"
In their minds, ecosystem == market. As soon as they would control one established ecosystem, they would start pushing into neighboring ones, till they have them all under some control. Then they would be able to set rules, control manufacturers and limit access to the other players. Or something along the lines.
HP sells tons of Intel x64 servers running Solaris/x64, Linux and Windows (x64 vs. Itanic). Same is with the Sun (x64 vs. SPARC). Same with the IBM (x64 vs. POWER).
It's just they want to keep the proprietary platform for proprietary long-term solutions, where they can lock customers down into upgrade and support contracts.
But that what virtualization started recently cannibalizing. Problem in the past was that 3-5 years on, and you cannot find spare parts for the x86/x64 server anymore. With virtualization, the H/W of VM is in fact software; one installs new physical hardware and simply moves the VMs onto it. Start VMs, and they are not even aware that something changes and go on working as before.
Open Source made the binary compatibility/transparent CPU emulation obsolete. Most software is available in source code form and can be easily recompiled.
That of course might not work on HP-UX because in my experience, this is one of the most retarded UNIX variants out there. Runner up - AIX. But at least on AIX I can compile GCC and rest would just work. HP-UX? tough luck googling for binary packages and then wasting weeks kissing IT arses so that they would finally install them. (And often only to find that something's still missing. Rinse. Repeat.)
In the end, lack of HP-UX/x64 might be an overrated problem: people migrate in droves to Linux/x64. And not without the help of the HP Services themselves, I might add.
Oh, another clueless comment about us "luddites," being senile old fools afraid of upgrade.
Question about now-useless version numbers is the wrong one.
The real question is about development model. Change of the versioning model is the tip of the iceberg: FireFox as of version 4 is effectively a developer build channel. It's an alpha-quality software and not once FireFox (and Chrome too) had to suspend the auto-updates to fix problems. But some user did already got updated to the broken version. Do you want to be among them? I doubt it. In the end, all users are playing the Russian roulette: will it work for you tomorrow or not?
I rely on my browser as on a working tool, which I have customized for my tasks. Honestly I have little desire (and often no time) to play the roulette every 6 weeks. (I actually already have the experience with Chrome breakages. They magically disappeared few days later, still, had I relied on Chrome as a tool, my work would have been impaired.)
I did test FireFox 10 and it worked pretty well. I could find replacement for all important extensions and no obvious breakage popped up. But that was version 10. Who knows how it is now at version 12 or 13 or whatever.
And that's the whole point. With development model around major.minor versions I can plan updates and upgrades because I can tell major feature update from minor patch. With the current FireFox's development model I cannot. And I cannot allow some unsigned 3rd party to control how and when I do my work. For that I already have a whole matrix of management...
No programming language is magically immune to the coding errors.
But if you insist, I have for you some gigabytes of log files from a Java application filled with NullPointerException and ArrayIndexOutOfBoundsException reports.
All the change of language does is to change how an error looks. In the end, it is still an error.
That's pretty much sums it up.
MS turned into a company ran by career managers and MBAs. Talented and initiative engineers do not fit there anymore.
Crossing fingers that the e-Ink would survive on Kindles for at least 2-3 more years - the time when I would want to buy a replacement for my actual Kindle (the Keyboard one).
I have read a lot and on a lot of different devices, and I enjoy reading, and the e-Ink is the first tech I have ever experienced which really replaced to me the traditional dead-tree books. Modern glossy LCD are really no match in readability - but surprisingly also in the weight: my Kindle at 250g is extremely lightweight (my fingers often forget that they are holding it), while e.g. iPad's 800g of bulk, anyway you hold it, tire pretty much any hand within an hour.
But the limitations of the e-Ink tech, though do not bother me personally, obviously hold back its adoption on wider scale. And the mention of the limitations also in a way is the reflection of the fact that, well, most people are not really into the reading - and generally, if available, prefer other forms of entertainment. The forms of entertainment which are currently not possible on the e-Ink.
So within only few hours you have managed to get around to actually doing something useful with your computer?
With the progress marching that fast, I gather, in Windows 9 they would improve the mark to few days.
> He claimed that "only about 0.1 per cent [of the internet giant's userbase] submit name appeals."
Well, that correlates well with G+'s lack of popularity.
My friends with whom I was sharing and occasionally discussing news at Google Reader tried the G+, only to find it bit too distracting and not a good replacement for a news discussion medium Google Reader was. While lots of other (irrelevant) stuff is present in G+, one of the things missing is the ability to show the news discussions intermixed with the news themselves. Verdicts was that G+ is simply too redundant, as it has literally all the same stuff as other (two) social networks (my friends are already subscribed to).
Belarus for past decade from outside seemed to be a test platform for authoritarian laws, many later also introduced in the Russia.
Considering that it is already de facto part of Russia, it is also logical. (Russia seem to enjoy the fact that Belarus is de jure independent, since they can distantiate themselves from it whenever they wish.)
Politically, I do not see anything happening. Or rather: whatever would happen, we will not see a single trace of it. Lots of minor things are happening - but nothing is major. For Lukashenko has taken care of everything (and everyone) major decade ago.
Lukashenko has vast experience in eliminating potential opponents. That is countered by seemingly submissive nature of Belarusians. Do not forget: Belarus for many centuries was occupied interchangeably by Poland of Russia (put Polnish and Russian history books side by side and enjoy the disparities both claiming Belarus being part of their own state). The ages of oppressions and repressions created this unique type of character which on outside doesn't care, but on inside are highly independent survivalist.
So, yeah, we do not care, we do no object. But probably most impacted have already figured ways around.
"prior Sparc T1, T2, and T3 chips did not do very well on jobs where single-threaded performance was important."
That is an understatement. We have in house several latter "high-end" T2s and on most workloads our trusty (low-end and rusty) 440s easily beat them. (Even on highly multi-threaded Java ones!!!) Regardless whether the on-chip multi-threading is on or off. Several applications had to be redesigned just to get acceptable performance from the T2.
HP as a serious H/W business died to many when they spun off the Agilent. And as many say, Agilent was spun off to preserve the culture and principles HP was based on.
If you would ask me, they shouldn't have ousted Carly. If you look back, the HP now is heading precisely where Carly pointed it into. And how many CEOs HP changed since then? To how little effect?
The problem of HP is that it is too large for managers they hire. They still have plethora of talented engineers, yet assign to management positions predominantly bean counters and MBAs who have no clue what to do with all the talent pool. At least Carly's ambitions were of the same scale as HP is.