Why would you distinguish between Desktop and Mobile? 99% of desktop functionality COULD be duplicated on mobile save a few things.
What could possibly go wrong if you tried to duplicate desktop functionality on a phone?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_Mobile
You don't get decide whether OS x is Unix. The Open Group decides what is and is not Unix. OS X is certified Unix.
You really think the trademark only covers UNIX and that a none certified version can call itself "Unix" without getting sued?
Open BSD on their home page don't describe Open BSD as Unix. They describe it as "Unix Like".
[pedantic]
iOS is not Unix (and neither is Linux). the Open Group has a legal trademark on what is Unix and only operating systems that pass the certification can call themselves "Unix". OS X is certified Unix, iOS is not.
[/pedantic]
Or try using a non-Firefox browser with the Firefox OS.
Or try using a non-Chrome browser with the Chrome OS.
You can point your finger at Microsoft, Windows and IE and point out a lot of problems. One thing they do a pretty good job of however, is supporting their systems for a long time. Contrast with Apple... my company bought me an iPad in 2010 shortly after the first version came out.
The original iPad was an outlier as a previous poster said. The next version of iOS that will be introduced in a few months will support all iPhones and iPads released since 2011. Apple released a patched in March of 2014 for a security vulnerability found in the iPhone 3GS released on 6/2009. Which other manufacturer supports their mobile devices that long? Android manufacturers definitely don't.
Microsoft supports their OS's for a decade or more and even unsupported versions tend to just keep working.
Tell that to Windows Phone 7 users or even all of the enterprise customers that had multi-million dollar deployments of $1200 ruggedized Windows CE devices.
The difference is that when Apple patches a security flaw, every semi-current iPhone user worldwide can install the patch and Apple usually patches the current version and one version back. For instance, the "goto fail" security patch that was released in March 2014 patched every phone back to iPhone 3GS in 2009 (patch for 6.x) and IOS 7.
I am facing the same situation. I could choose to get a larger house with a longer commute or a smaller house/condo with a shorter commute. We decided that getting 10 hours of our week back and less money spent on gas and car maintenance was worth the trade off.
But yes I know the pain of having a house that is worth less than what you owe.
I didn't say relocate for a job. I said choose a place that is a convenient commute to where the jobs are. For instance, I wouldn't live anywhere that I have to spend 30 minutes just to get to the interstate or on the opposite side of town than the tech center.
So if you have chosen to be a developer, why wouldn't you live somewhere within an acceptable (to you) commuting distance to where the jobs are? You might end up with less square footage for your money but you aren't wasting hours of your day in traffic. I know of a few metropolitan areas where there are plenty of jobs and reasonable home prices.
That's easy - leave off irrelevant work history. If I'm applying for a job as a "full stack
I'm in my early 40s and in my last set of interviews, I would work into the conversation that I'm married, have kids, and believe in a work/family balance. I wanted to be "discriminated" against. I didn't want to work for a company that expected me to work consistently more than 45 hours a week. The market is way too good for qualified, experienced developers to just accept anything. I am sure I was declined one job offer because of "discrimination". I was offered another job that was a much better fit the next week.
I don't see any reason that a qualified person in IT should have trouble finding a job or at least go into consulting. There are so many openings right now, I would classify the unemployment rate to be negative in tech.
This might bet the point at which Apple without Jobs falters.
Well a few responses....
1. If you look at Apple's stock price, revenue, and profit since Cook took over, Apple clearly hasn't "faltered".
2. Even before the iPhone came out, the phone market was clearly the largest consumer tech category. In other words, there is no conceivable electronic market that is going to be larger than the phone market in the foreseeable future. The watch couldn't hope to be as larger as the iPhone market.
3. The watch doesn't need third party apps to be useful. For instance, I am thinking about buying one just to replace my old Garmin GPS watch when I'm running -- yes I know it doesn't have GPS built in. When I run I have my phone on an armband anyway and my watch. I tried using the Nike+ GPS and it works well enough, but trying to look at the phone screen on an armband is not nearly as convenient as looking on my arm.
For another take:
Yes if only the guy who was in charge of logistics and procuring hardware when Jobs died hadn't disappeared. I wonder what happen to that guy.....
Apple had their old creaky OS, had just failed doing a deal with another OS company and then just jumped into BSD.
Huh?
Around '96 Apple was internally working on a new OS that was a failure and bought NeXT started by this guy you may have heard of named Steve Jobs. They then ported NeXT to PPC, replaced Display Postscript with Quartz, added a few classic MacOS technologies and the Carbon API to make developing apps compatible with OS X and classic Mac OS.
OS X. Is based on the internally written NuKernal with a BSD user level and the Next API's.
You knew the job was dangerous when you took it, Fred. -- Superchicken
