Well, I now have an invite.
And it's demanding a phone number for verification before I proceed.
Call me paranoid - but there is no way in hell Google will ever get any of my phone numbers. Also I'm not willing to give one of my work numbers.
So that appears to be an impasse.
Hmm, lets see what happens when they stop restricting the supply to stoke demand...
jlgoogleplus@btinternet.com
yes, I did just create that for the purpose and create a google account around it.
call me paranoid... but I'm wary of giving any social media too much of an idea who I am.
I assume Digia are after commercial licensing fees, service agreements and support contracts for Qt and will attempt to build up the user base.
Kinda sad to see Nokia vanish into a death spiral though. I really cannot see Windows based smart phones gaining traction against iPhone/Android unless they are really something special or are heavily discounted. I find the whole business tactic fairly incomprehensible to be honest, but I am assuming other people know more than me here.
Given Nokia's position what else could they have done to preserve the market share? Any Ideas?
reminds me of this satire that was created by some university friends of mine in the 90s, it was picked up by the main stream news and they were interviewed, linked constantly. It was, of course, a joke - and eventually bogged down the the constant phone calls and links they were freely saying so on their site and begging for it all to stop...
and of course, they were slashdotted: http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=00/05/21/1947222&mode=thread
I'm guessing that one possible reason is whilst encryption is moderately rare - then they might assume that any encryption means a greater chance of something to hide and hence they can focus on it.
And of course that unencrypted stuff is easier to track though less immediately suspicious.
Anybody work in forensics and can give us an insider viewpoint?
The first thing that crossed my mind is that all these species are localized to one particular area and hence rather vulnerable if the environment changes in any way.
You only need to introduce 1 badly chosen predator and its the Stephens Island Wren all over again.
I agree with the other posters, this should be preserved. Or at least the 1st one.
Anybody else remember "First Footprint City" from the BBC SciFi series Earth Search?
If there is a real compelling scientific justification to see how the materials have survived then designate one of the other landing sites that is deemed less important and send the robot there. After all several Apollo missions went to the moon.
Sending one for Apollo 11 sounds more like a badly thought out publicity exercise then anything else.
Give me a wall screen TV or a whole ceiling panal light and I'll be impressed.
It has no real purpose unless somebody sells something from it...
My favorite game of all time for gameplay?
Tie Fighter the original when you play as an Imperial pilot to take down the rebel scum.
Graphics? Terrible, but the Gameplay? second to none. That really got you involved.
I'm probably in a minority here though
I disagree.
I think that when any technology - be that DVD, FaceBook, Internet Explorer - reaches a mass audience and is perceived to be good enough to meet the users needs it is more or less impossible to dislodge even when there are technically superior products out there.
The only way a new product will ever dislodge a entrenched rival is when they offer something unique and compelling or are readily interchangeble with the old one.
I kind of get what they are saying, but I see more evidence of entrenched mass market products that are seen to have reached an acceptable level of functionality and ease of use.
A better solution would of been "This firmware update identifies the use of 3rd party batteries and alerts the user to the risk of using them. It monitors the voltage output and shuts down the camera if it determines that the battery is insufficient or possibly dangerous. And invalidates the warranty too". This would of left open the choice to the user - after all there are a great many very good 3rd party batteries and they have saved my bacon in the past.
By monitoring the voltage I mean the camera can detect an abnormally fast voltage drop against its usage that might mean a defective or damaged battery - naturally it cannot detect if the battery is about to get white hot and set fire to the camera, but hey the user was warned and the warranty invalidated. I would expect the manufacturer to check the damaged camera EEPROM and say "aha! according to our data log you used not panasonic batteries, thats no repair for you!".
By removing the element of choice they raise the natural suspicion that this decision was taken on commercial grounds, not safety and risk a consumer backlash and dissatisfaction.
1 + 1 = 3, for large values of 1.
