I'm buying a massive house that is 1/3 the price it should be (ie, very good shape structurally, but is still half the price of per/square of "poor" quality; very high quality home, just hasn't been remodeled in many decades. Brand new roof though...heh). I'll be removing most of the sheetrock and replacing half of the wiring already, and am installing solar. I can't find a solar company that seems comfortable with DC circuits, low-voltage or otherwise. Coming off the solar it will be already DC; converting from DC to AC just to convert back to DC is likely why they claim the 20-40% loss - you're not losing in conversion just once, right? So then I just need some sort of power stabilizing factor - such as running through a battery or whatnot - thus why I clicked on this article at all. Any already know of a good book or resource with which I could inform myself before spending a good deal of money?

I've personally never understood the "why don't they do something about the..." argument. Why didn't white westerners stop Timothy McVeigh from happening? Why didn't white westerners stop Hitler from happening? Ok, have to stop asking why, I Godwin'd...but seriously, one has to have a very myopic view of the world to think/say something like that.

Sun was flush with cash at the time of the acquisition, and also had a great deal of solid IP and customer faith. Solaris prior to Oracle was *the* most solid OS available in my opinion, and sparcs were always great for their target audience. Sun's only problem is the market became too commodity - fabbers need to make billions of chips now to stay competitive, and that just wasn't possible. But Sun had paths forward to fix these things - they were actually on the right road already, imo - forming ties with AMD, coming up with a way to keep their core but become commodity, by giving AMD access to high tech they needed. A road that Oracle took them off - Sun would be just fine today if Oracle hadn't bought them.

"move on to something else as they become power users?" - huh? Isn't iPhone's thing that it's supposed to "just work" with everything, with no effort? Isn't android's thing supposed to be that it's a lot more hands-on? I don't think I've ever seen someone try to suggest that the iPhone appeals more to "power users" - hell, androids come with the debug/developer mode, not iPhone (press version info 7 times).

Also, as others have mentioned - android has 78% of the market share, iOS has 18.3%. That means 95.5% of the people who have a phone that isn't an iPhone, have an android. So yeah, of farking course those who "switch to" iPhone will have an android, by "majority." That he couldn't say "almost every single person who switches" instead of merely "majority" means either the switch is actually telling, but *bad* for iPhone, or it means he didn't take advantage of the sensational non-statement he could have made.

http://www.techradar.com/news/...
http://bgr.com/2015/02/13/ios-...

Not absolutely convinced they are that accurate, but none of the rates I've seen show much difference between the two platforms and you'd expect them to be very different if fragmentation was a problem.

I'm not convinced these are particularly reliable, but if fragmentation was the bogeyman issue it's claimed to be then you'd expect these rates to significantly favour iOS, and they don't, or even tend the opposite.

http://www.techradar.com/news/...
http://bgr.com/2015/02/13/ios-...

Well, it depends on how you slice the data, but even from your interpretation of that data they are not wildly different, and if fragmentation was such a massive issue you'd expect Android development to be massively more timeconsuming / expensive, or a significantly higher defect rate. Neither seem to actually be true.

What you call 'fragmentation' I call 'variety'. And since Android app crash rates are actually lower than iOS ones (ie a platform with much lower 'fragmentation') then it clearly isn't the problem that you think it is...

I mean, yes, you can't get away with not knowing anything at all about memory management in Java, but singling out edge cases that are a problem vs the vast majority of cases where it's superior is sort of missing the point. Rather like saying that wearing shoes is a problem because you sometimes get a stone in them, far better that you should always go bare feet and constantly make sure you don't step on anything sharp.

Clearly a language can be easy or hard to read - Or do you think well-written Brainfuck is easy to read? Since programs are written by actual flawed humans who make stupid mistakes or have weird style preferences sometimes, it's generally a good idea to have a language syntax that doesn't let them shoot themselves in the foot.

"Seriously I am living in Islamic country right now. (snip) I couldnt understand how any sane person knowing the alternatives would want this."

You're saying you know the alternatives, you're saying someone who chooses to live there knowing the alternatives isn't sane, and you're saying you live there. So, you're saying you're not sane...right? And if so, why should I take your word on the rest of it?

Agile works cheaply for software which is a relative island onto itself; facebook, google stuff, etc - where you have to meet a standard for a web client, but where otherwise you can publish API versions and allow people to continue to use previous versions, but that nothing is really built /on/ your product. It works horribly for anything which has to work with anything else which might change (yes, standards change....slowly). Operating systems, libraries, etc - when a core principle is to ignore documentation or any group other than the engineers themselves (including clients) then yeah - works well for islands, not things which are parts to a larger puzzle.

do you really not see a difference between someone internally testing their own software only they use, and then releasing their software to themselves...and someone doing the same method for OS platforms *other people* use? Even updates to AWS maintain (or attempt to) availability of the different versions of methods; you call it the old way versus the new way (trying to not say backwards compatibility, when it's just a RESTFUL API...)

whichever, point is it's not just one version :) (I'm not an OSX person)

Do you drive your house? Why do you have windows there? Do you drive the plane? Why are there windows there? And carsickness. I mean sure, it's great to ask questions, but the windows on a car aren't just for the driver to know where they are going.