Theres a NASA animation of it crossing the moons orbit
Looks a little like one of those slow motion bullet films, I think it's fair to say that if it collided with us it would be game over man.
967 publicly visible posts • joined 11 May 2006
Banks offline, SSL cert authorities pawned, RSA encryption seeds stolen, Military defence contractors burgled, nuclear reactors sabotaged, something new and exciting every day.
Script kiddies, organised crime and governmental hacks all blurred together, exploiting networks and systems that were designed for utility rather than security.
This will end badly.
I would imagine in normal operations the craft is orientated with sensors towards the planet, like the moon or a coms sat for instance, so the solar array would still receive sunlight for periods of the day but would be at acute angles for most of the subside orbit. Safe mode I would guess sets the satalite in a tumble* so that the panels are always facing the sun while the instruments peer into space, planet, space, planet and so on.
*Technically, in normal operations the satellite revolves around its axes, to keep the planet in view as it free falls round it, while in safe mode it stops revolving, which to an observer would look like its tumbling.
Can't believe how few people notice that gadgets in MS concept videos are imbued with mind reading abilities, between a fantasy UI and reports about the hardware being prototyped in pieces, it's pretty clear that W8 was easily going to beat this concept to production.
There's also a lot of people here saying "how hard would it have been to put email on it", way to miss the point, if these stories are to be believed, it had already been in development for 5 years, when BG asks how it does email and they guy replies that it doesn't yet, Bill isn't going to be thinking "well that's not hard to add", he's thinking "these guys don't have a fucking clue".
Then that was a colossal waste of time and money, because that test environment is literally 250miles away from the kind of instant death scenarios the real ship's crew will operate under and the test subjects would have been well aware of that fact.
You might as well argue that people are psychologically prepared for living on a 1m squared platform at the top of a 20m pole because your test subject survived balancing on a pallet for a month.
Pop a crew in a submersible and drop them down the Mariana trench and I'll bet a few heads get broken long before 5 months go by.
You Are Not It.
The reason Apple sells so well is because they make beautiful hardware combined with UI's that don't require the user to be technically minded to use.
It turns out that the majority of consumers don't want to have to read a manual to use something, they're not curious about what the button with the weird icon does, they never explore menus looking for buried treasure, they just want a hassle free experience, to feel in control of the thing, they hate the idea that they might screw the thing up by pressing the wrong button.
I think improving TV for joe public is something Apple would excel at, but it all hinges on the content, and sans Jobs, I'm not sure Apple could pull off the deals required to make it possible. Which would be a shame, because where Apple ventures everyone else follows.
Android was in development (publicly), prior to 2007, and Google did buy the company, but prior to the iPhone launch Android was an obvious blackberry rip, top half screen, bottom half keyboard, the interface was also BB inspired, with a dock of apps along the bottom of the tiny screen and a hardware joystick for navigation.
After Apple unveiled the iPhone all that work was basically thrown in the bin and replaced with a full size screen, soft keyboard, capicitive touch screen and a grid of icons.
Don't take my word for it though, google it for yourself.
There was a first time for every new technology used in warfare, to argue that because X hasn't happened yet it never will seems remarkably reckless, especially in these days of Stuxnet, daily intrusions by the PLA and rumours that the US considered hacking Gaddafi's air defences.
At this point I think it's a given that most if not all industrialised nations have cyber warfare divisions, that the Yanks are better than the Chinese because they don't get caught as often (and when they do pretty sophisticated code is uncovered), I'd also posit that the civilian systems that ensure humans around the globe are fed, watered, warm and happy are riddled with bugs that the aforementioned agencies have spent the last 5 years discovering, weaponising and filing away for a rainy day.
TL;DR
This guy is on crack, we will certainly see SoftWar cause human casualties at some point, agree that there's no sense worrying about it though.
It doesn't bother backing up anything that can be redownloaded, like the OS, apps, media from iTunes or that's been synced from your PC, IMAP mail, anything that's already backed up as part of iCloud, like contacts and calendars.
Which is to say you only need a fraction of the device space for a complete backup, eg: 500 mb for my 16GB iPhone and 700MB for my 32GB iPad.
To my mind, this is a clever approach that minimises bandwidth requirements and drastically cuts down the time taken for a backup but we're all entitled to our own opinions.
Yes, Its v1.0
I'm just glad it works, they'll get round to adding the "remove photo I really shouldn't have snapped" option later, just like they finally got round to adding the option to remove a single dodgy call from your call history.
Don't hold your breath, I'd imagine it's way down Apple's To Do list.
I have given a lot of thought to supermarket own brand products, which if I am honest, I rarely (never), find a willing audience for.
Tesco Choco Snaps are Coco Pops copies, they taste almost as good as the real thing yet there's just enough of a difference that in blind taste tests (conducted upon offspring at the Jubtastic household), the test subjects noticed and voiced their disapproval.
Tesco also sells a "value" coco pops copy, whose value is debatable because IMHO they bear more in common with cardboard than food, now when you think about it, coco pops are just puffed rice and some chocolate flavouring, yet the value range has clearly been gimped beyond reducing costs on the raw materials to ensure that the product compares poorly with Choco Snaps and of course, Coco Pops.
This sugggests that Tesco actually employ someone to gimp value range products, which personally I find both perverse and yet fascinating.
Back to your questions:
Yes.
Of course not.
Actually, the logo on the box is Trademarked, reproducing it without permission is not a copyright violation, it's counterfeiting. Wiki Trade Dress for enlightenment: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trade_dress
Good day Sir.
Next time you're out buying food, compare the packaging of the supermarket's own brand copies of successful brands, notice how they remind you of the branding of their originals yet aren't straight copies. Thats because If Tesco did simply copy a box of cereal, replacing "Kellogs" with "Tesco" and dropped in a picture of a bowl of their own product that was similar enough to the original that few would notice, they'd get rightly sued for imitation.
Regardless of whether you believe Apple's own products to be the work of Satan, Smartphones and Tablets were a niche before Apple got into the business, thanks to their efforts they've both gone mainstream and there's now a wide variety of products running on a range of OS's, Apple isn't suing RIM over its Playbook or HP over the TouchPad, they're fighting one Android tablet manufacturer that's chosen to imitate their own products design, packaging and look and feel to a ridiculous degree. Why this is unexpected I can't understand because if you had developed the iPad and had a major component supplier copy the thing right down to the box you'd be taking legal advice right?
To sell more in an hour than 6 months of last year would be off the fucking chart.
Of course by this time next year, when every phone and computery thing has an indispensable Siri type AI embedded, Apple introducing it to the mass market will be ignored by the haters because it will turn out to have been an obvious evolution and would have happened anyway and Apple didn't invent it and blah blah fucking blah.
The level of ingratitude to this company from the IT sector is frankly depressing.
A) the updates are Ginormous, 750MB for iOS alone.
B) it's not staggered by timezone, system updates for example are usually scheduled to run at a fixed local time.
C) Users have been waiting for this for a long time and lots of them hit the button as soon as it went live.
Updated an iPad, took two goes, iPhone will have to wait till morning as the missis is threatening to yank the mains so she can sleep.
While a little choice is a good thing, endless choice can be exhausting and we're getting closer to the latter every day. Of course there's times when the ability to search or browse for a particular show is liberating but for the most part people don't want to have to trawl through listings looking for something to watch, they just want to slump down in front of something entertaining.
This is basically iTunes style "Genius mixes" for TV and if the execution is good, I'd expect it to be a hit.
Both parts were a great read.
From the management style interview it appears that Steve acted as a sounding board to most of the major project teams, I can't see anyone else filling those shoes. I realise there's a lot of stuff in the pipeline that will see daylight as the years roll by, but who could guess what he'd be prepared to go all in on a decade from now? there's going to be a whole heap of stuff that's unlikely to happen now because no one else seems to have the passion to risk their livelihoods on an idea.
We've lost a rare thing, a dreamer that actually delivered, A loss to the whole industry.
Sent from my iPad
That's what he said, there are GSM networks worldwide, so your GS2 and this 4S and the 4, and the 3(S) and the 2G and all the other GSM phones work like that and always have.
However, if you have a CDMA phone from say Verizon, then when you visited another country you were likely to be SOL, basically the 4S has GSM backup for CDMA users. GSM users don't need a backup.
Google recently stated in court that iOS represents 2/3 of their mobile search queries, we know how many iOS devices are out there, by looking at the cash Google sends to say Mozilla for Firefox searches someone could calculate roughly how much they're saving on searches from Android devices.
Not me though, can't be arsed, bet it's dwarfed by their costs at the moment though, especially given the Motorola purchase.
A single game sale will push a PS3 into profit, and subsequent sales will generate lively income, whereas the stuff Amazon is shifting carries razor thin margins, App Store revenue is a rounding error for Apple, and as far as tablet content sales goes (books, films, music & apps), Amazon will be hard pushed to match that.
Now Amazon may well be happy with those slim profits from content as a long term income stream but Samsung, Motorola and the rest of the Android tablet Manufacturers can't replicate the strategy with no content and are likely to be squeezed out between Apple and Amazon, Google can't be best pleased about degoogled Amazon Tablets derailing their tablet efforts either.
And doesn't require constant patching, keep chrome around for the odd time a website doesn't fail back to HTML when flash isn't installed and get a third party app for PDF's.
Not a lot of help if you have to run Java apps but most users only interaction with java is through malware.
So Apple should restrict address book data from apps? Even contact based apps like Skype?
Skype has to have an address book to work at all, restricting access in iOS isn't going to change that, all it's going to do is annoy iOS users who will be forced to upload their contacts to Skype from their computers instead while Skype says "sorry peeps, nasty old Apple won't let you do it the easy way".
I also don't see how anyone could expect an OS to distinguish between a messaging app uploading data to a remote host in the normal course of usage and uploading data to a remote host because it's been coerced to do so, this is Skype's fail pure and simple.
What sort of stuff were they selling? Random gizmos with apple stickers applied or exact knockoffs of kit like headphone cables etc? Anything big, like a MBA? Was the software hacked versions of Apples or skinned something else? How does the counterfeit stuff compare with the real?