Re: "Well..." I am assuming that you were of course being ironic :)
What of course we have every reason to fear is that the influence of the large European and American corporations will tend to ensure that we get the worst of all possible worlds.
2683 posts • joined 6 Nov 2009
What of course we have every reason to fear is that the influence of the large European and American corporations will tend to ensure that we get the worst of all possible worlds.
................I would agree with you - their margins are very thin because the vast majority of such kit is at the low-end and medium-low-end price points. However, the x86 tablets are most unlikely to turn up at those price points any time soon. It is not (from my point of view) first and foremost the price-points concerned, it is what they are willing to supply at those price points that is the question. Judging by what we have seen so far it has been, in relation to what they have been willing to offer, rather shabby. As far as Redmond's influence is concerned I think that can be exaggerated in this context. They do not remotely have the same influence that an original producer/designer like Apple, by definition, has and I do not think that they deserve being excused on those grounds. One of the reasons why Vista (in addition to it's own intrinsic failings which were considerable) ended up selling relatively poorly was word of mouth amongst the punters when they "experienced" the appalling kit that the OEMs released it on - 1Gb RAM anyone? A very large number of those boxes were in practice a fraud perpetrated on the punter given that they were in no way capable of doing very much more than get the os out of bed in the morning. That was most definitely not in Redmond's interests at the time and I do not see how the OEMs can escape their responsibilities for what they did. They are fully capable of being short-sighted and greedy without any help from MS.
""So far, the PC industry has failed to create the kind of buzz and excitement among consumers that is required to propel ultrabooks into the mainstream" said Craig Stice, senior principal analyst".
Well one can certainly see why he is a senior principal analyst (yes, that was irony :)). Indeed, he is a veritable font of wisdom.
"When combined with other factors, including prohibitively high pricing, this means that ultrabook sales will not meet expectations in 2012."
Never mind of course the very mediocre specs that you get for the money. RegHardware's review of the HP Spectre XT for example - magisterially dismissed by the first poster with "1366x768.... next...".
Yet more wisdom.
"especially with fierce competition from new mobile computing gadgets such as the iPhone 5, Kindle Fire HD and forthcoming Microsoft Surface."
The only relevant device here in his list, if we are talking high-end computers (not phones), is the Win 8 Pro version of the "Surface". We note the fact that (according to all the reports at least) it has fine build quality, pretty highly specced and has a high-res screen. If however we look at the various tablet announcements from the OEMs it is not obvious to me that they are going to do any different with their tablet offerings than they have with their ultra-books. Over-priced, underspecced, and soon to be over here - no doubt raising the same kind of yawn that their "thinnies" have been raising. Common factor IMO? The OEMs won't contribute shit to growing a market. They've had two decades or more cruising on the back of Windows doing bugger all other than "banging out boxes" and they see no reason to change their habits now - and absolutely no reason to accept lower margins at the outset to establish a market. I am not surprised that Redmond decided to build "benchmarks" themselves with the two versions of the Surface, they must have strongly suspected what they and we are going to see on the market this Autumn.
I have just noticed that iSuppli have had to downgrade their estimate for ultrabook sales in 2012 by about 50% - I wonder why? Couldn't possibly have anything to do with the OEMs selling mediocre kit at premium prices by any chance?
..........nick-name for such a device is a "shiny". It does not mean we want the screen like that! Matt and higher res or go screw is my personal message to the OEMs.
One does have to wonder what the DPP uses for brains these days. This guy, they alleged, deliberately sent this message to his girlfriend and his, mother-in-law, his ageing grandparents (of both genders), likely his father and his mother etc, etc. In other words to "world+plus+wife+dog" within his circle. They could not see that this could not possibly be anything other than a mistake? WTF? One also has to ask what the hell the judge in this case was doing.
If you wish to post an ad hominem attack concerning another poster's intelligence you might at least try spelling his/her handle correctly.
brain-dead chimpazee former president G W Bush said "if you're not with us you're against us". As far as a very particular section of the US body politic is concerned if you do not play ball you are classified as "un-American" or "anti-American" depending on which passport you hold. However, in reality as far as they are concerned this is merely a formal distinction - everybody they don't like is a traitor and should be subject to the "appropriate" penalties.
...........that the assumptions we so often see reported in the press accurately reflect the motivations behind this particular raid.
It is possible that it was straightforward industrial espionage carried out on behalf of a Chinese company operating in the same area. The automatic assumption that if it has anything to do with China then it must be a government-sponsored attack pursuing a cyber-war agenda is nothing more than just that, an assumption. The assumption may indeed sometimes be correct, however it is highly likely that the situation is more complex and varied than tabloid headlines would suggest. However, it is certainly perfectly possible that private criminals might use this information to carry out a "your money or your networks attack" as indicated in the article.
Has this got something to do with delivering the popcorn to both ears at once?
Satellite-dish sellers (regardless of the primary purpose of the dish) have a reputation amongst the general public that is on a par with double-glazing and used car salesmen.
That is the point IMO. We have had those resolution specs as standard for how many years? When we take into account what the OEMs are likely going to charge for these devices there is no excuse for a resolution that was "cutting edge" most of a decade ago. I accept that the resolution is "good enough" in the sense of being usable, but if one is going to persuade punters (enterprise or home retail) that they should be willing to blow the dust off their wallets then the OEMs are going to have to do better than this. I am not surprised that MS decided to "benchmark" the market with their "Surface" devices - they clearly had a gut-feeling with regard to what their "partners" could be expected to produce.
All the usual connectivity etc etc and a powered dock giving no fewer than 4 usb ports. There's a full size usb on the tablet itself and a mini-hdmi. I was getting quite interested and then I saw the screen resolution. Yes, that's right, you guessed it. NFW are they getting a penny piece off of me if the best they can offer is 1366 x 768. Most of the x86 tablets are going to be priced as high-end or medium-high-end kit. Manufacturers who think that they can get away with screens like that at the kind of prices they are likely to be charging can kiss my *******.
.....and you're a Barista? :P
*This icon was selected for the sake of the quotation in the title and the literary reference therein. No sarcasm was intended or deployed during the uploading of this posting.
Thumbs up for the "*Ello, 'Ello" reference.
..............that Redmond has considerable form in this area I have to say that on this occasion I am inclined to agree. Apparently the "fat, sweaty, chair-throwing maniac" (as a certain section of the cognoscenti here affectionately refer to him) contacted the commission personally to assure them that MS were coming in with their hands up and did not dispute that they were in breach. On the basis of the evidence so far it does appear to be a case of "do not ascribe to malice what stupidity can explain" - or at least the cock-ups that a large and fairly bureaucratic organisation can explain.
"If Microsoft cares, though, it should to do more to woo them than merely penning a slightly sarky blog post on a relatively obscure Microsoft web page. "
.................and having read through your article I am obliged to say, "kettle meet pot".
.............within hailing distance of reality (I want to see some kit with this chip in it first) then the "Bay Trail" version which, allegedly, will be coming out towards the end of next year may be very interesting indeed.
I can assure you that I was not suggesting that they were and furthermore my "nerdy fanboy senses" are at all times fully under control. :P
I was referring to the desire of the police to be seen to be doing something when the crime concerned is attracting public attention and (implicitly) how more serious offences don't get the attention they should.
........of their customer base for whom a great deal of the point of the exercise is that everybody should know that they own a product from A Certain Famously Cool Mobile Phone Producer. The fact that after dark in certain areas of the average major city this is equivalent to walking around wearing a large billboard saying "please mug me" does present them with something of a conundrum. I will admit that the mental image of a couple shadowy figures lurking in a doorway watching their mark strolling down the street and the one saying to the other "me first with the barista" is irresistible.
Except where the theft involves serious violence against the owner I would have thought that a major US urban police force might have higher priorities than petty larceny? An example of "PR-policing" from the NYPD perhaps?
That is highly likely IMO. A jury in that situation need to feel that the judge is sympathetic to the highly onerous task they have been faced with. It is of the first importance that the judge makes it clear that he/she not only welcomes such questions from the jury but regards it as part of the jury's job to pose them such that the jury-members feel reassured that the judge is supportive. If they are however drowning in a complex case, are also faced with potential public humiliation at the hands of a "bad tempered beak" and have a saloon bar know-all in the jury room one ends up with the kind of situation one sees here.
My guess is (and I admit it is a guess) that they were so intimidated by the avalanche of evidence and decisions required of them that they were only too grateful that somebody appeared to know what they were doing. It takes some self-confidence to insist on going back into court in order to ask for guidance from the judge - and risk feeling that you have made a complete fool of yourself in a very public fashion, a feeling that is very intimidating for many people when they are being asked to cope with something as complex as the arguments presented at this trial.
It is of course for precisely that reason that jurors in such complex cases are given a very clear instruction which can be roughly summed up as "if you need any guidance on points of/interpretation of the law ask the Judge". It has to be that way because (as you have indicated) it you get a saloon bar loudmouth/fast talker in a complex case where the jury are struggling you end up with this kind of mess. The guy's fearless belief in his own "perspicacity" and "knowledge" are exactly the kind of thing that can totally fuck up any chance of a rational result from a lay jury. His
overweening ignorance remarkable self-confidence led him to utterly disregard the clear promise/oath he had signed as a jury member and the sheer complexity of the trial that the rest of the jury were drowning in led them to accept his dubious leadership when they should (given that they had signed the same promise) have told him to shut the fuck and, if necessary, complained about his behaviour to the Judge.
Hell.I cannot believe it. I've actually upvoted one Barry's posts - I need to lie down.
Once other members of the jury had started to speak in public about the case (as they inevitably would, especially given that the press would certainly be pursuing them for interviews) it did not matter whether he had opened his mouth or not. In fact, once the foreman of the jury had disregarded his oath as a juror within the jury room during the course of the trial in the blatant way that this guy by his own admission did, then the case for ruling a mistrial was always going to become known and Samsung's lawyers would be "on the case" (so to speak :)). The verdict in this trial appears (with the wisdom of hindsight, natch) in practice to have been a ticking bomb ever since it was delivered - the issue now is, in whose backyard the blast craters are going to end up.
""Some were not sure of how prior art could either render a patent acceptable or whether it could invalidate it... (I) laid it out for them," he said."
So they had an amateur patent lawyer on the jury who regarded his oath as a juror to be a minor irrelevance - according to the contrast between his signed promise/oath when he became a juror and his own words in the aftermath.
Furthermore, I do not feel that it is going too far to wonder if his experience as a patent holder might perhaps be thought to have had some influence on his attitudes with regard to a US company complaining that a foreign company was ripping them off - particularly such a famous US company as the one involved. Given that he was the foreman of the jury and other jurors have said that he provided them with "guidance" and he has admitted that himself, it is clear that there is a serious risk that he was steering a jury who were virtually drowning in that large and complex trial towards the verdict he preferred.
Thank you - :)
I think that part of the conundrum is explained in this paragraph:
"However, there’s an escape clause at the quantum level: the ions can be given a push with a weak magnetic field, to get them rotating, and since they lose no energy to the outside world, that rotation should continue forever – even, according to research leader Xiang Zhang, after the “heat death” of the universe. And since there is no energy output from the crystal, it doesn’t break the rules to offer a perpetual motion machine."
However, what is not clear to me is how one is meant to "read" this clock. The action in so doing would surely impart energy to the system, a sort of "observer effect"? If by observing one imparts energy to the system is it not then above the zero state referred in the article? It is of course highly likely that I am missing something here because this is not my field. Is there a physicist in the house?
"a spatial ring of trapped ions in persistent rotation will periodically reproduce itself in time, forming a temporal analog of an ordinary spatial crystal. With a periodic structure in both space and time, the result is a space-time crystal."
Sorry I could not resist that. It is in fact a very interesting concept, it is just that the description had a certain "new age" ring to it.
Not unless it wants to be buried at a cross-roads with a stake through its cpu.
Yet dear boy, yet. I foresee a large market in "snide seasons".
"Still, despite the insider's account of lukewarm salary offers of $85,000 (£52k) plus moving expenses, it appears Apple is simply picking up people whose contract work with Google has ended."
I.E. "Cupertino has now realised that they are in fairly deep shit as far as this particular issue is concerned and are desperate enough to employ Mountain View's leavings". That interpretation may or may not be fair but on the basis of the available evidence it is as valid as any other call. I repeat a comment I made on another thread, it is impossible to believe that their former CEO would have allowed this out the door. That they are now reduced (if this article is the "real deal" as far as the information in it is concerned) to hiring those whom Google either do not wish to keep or do not need to keep says everything that needs to be said. I still do not understand how they could have released an app so important to so many users as the navigation/mapping app in this condition.
............after some head-scratching that I realised that they meant "about to drop" in the sense of about to "hatch" - so to speak. :)
"This article is definitely written from a hard left position"? If you characterise the tone of this article as in any way "hard left I am obliged either to assume that you have never talked politics with anyone from the outside left or to ask you just how right-wing you are if you actually believe what you have just written.
I love it!
I think that is indisputable. If there is one thing we can say with certainty it is that's Mr jobs definitely did not enjoy being left looking foolish. One can readily imagine the fate of the manager concerned if he was still their CEO. Though it has to be said I don't think that he would have let it out of the door in the first place.
..........consider that this:
"....can recognise each other from pictures of each other's arses."
.......is of the first importance. Maybe there should be an app for that instead of face recognition!
................ mark with this one than I was anticipating. They must have worked nightshift in Espoo this time.
It is certainly very tempting to amuse oneself and I for one am having a quiet chuckle. However, I have to confess that because online maps/navigation really matter to an awful lot of punters (unlike Siri whose limitations do not matter (currently) in the greater scheme of things) I am absolutely astonished that Apple let this product out of the door in this condition. I am convinced that Jobs would never have permitted such a high profile and important part of the software services on any smartphone to be released in this condition. Cupertino really have taken their eye off the ball with this one. A certain Finnish phone producer with a very widely admired maps/navigation package must be laughing their gonads off about now!
At some stage after we had gotten past picking fleas out of each other's pelts we began to develop language (fire and the wheel probably came rather later!) precisely because our development as a species required that we develop the capacity to convey a wide range of information with precision. Words are important, without words we would not have developed human civilisation and technology. However, we do occasionally get throwbacks to an earlier stage of development who fail to understand one of the key things that humanity has spent the last couple of hundred thousand years or so doing. I think that Verizon's managers should concentrate on with picking fleas out of each other's pelts - its about their level.
...............are at an all-time historical low, did you not comprehend?"
I fear that in most cases they comprehend all right, it is just that they would rather gnaw their own legs off than admit it because then they would "not have a leg to stand on" - boom, boom. Sorry for that appalling pun, I could not resist it. My point in support of your posting was however entirely seriously meant.
"No-one likes paying taxes, but they are fundamental to the environment that built the high tech sector. You need an educated workforce, with enough wages to buy toys like the iPhone, along with a good communications infrastructure and the rule of law, in order to build a successful economy, and that costs money that most companies seem unwilling to pay. ®"
...............more of that and Fox News will be denouncing you as a commie. :P
I entirely agree BTW - see my reply to YAAC (Yet Another Anonymous Coward).
....................that companies will move the revenue elsewhere. If you want the tax then lower your rates."
That of course is utter rubbish. When Thatcher's regime in the early eighties made huge cuts in the upper tax bands rich individuals and companies simply said "thank you very much" and carried on avoiding even those taxes. Nothing has ever stopped the "1-percenters" shitting on the rest of society - or stopped apologists like you trotting out the same pernicious rubbish when defending them. It does not matter how much you cut taxes the bastards automatically find all legal and sometimes illegal ways to avoid the taxes they still are supposed to pay - that has been an observable fact for decades.
"Haswell will use a new LGA1150 socket instead of the LGA1155 socket that Sandy Bridge uses and Ivy Bridge will also use when it tips up next year. This means that to upgrade to Haswell, you will need a new motherboard featuring the LGA1150 socket."
Though it has to be said that the main advantages at the outset appear to be in mobile devices (which I presume we are unlikely to start spannering ourselves :P) and by the time (2014?) those chips are launched for desktops and the like it will probably be time for an upgrade anyway. :)
systemd'oh! DNS lib underscore bug bites everyone's favorite init tool, blanks Netflix
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2017