"Unlimited upward potential", right... There's only so much advertising budget to go around; companies will shift some of it from traditional media to social / online ads. The actual upward potential comes from serving the long tail: small firms that cannot afford to pay traditional media ads, or larger firms that are willing to spend more on advertising if it turns out to be more effective. Or an advertisment arms race. But even that only goes so far.

As the joke goes: Merkel was mad about her phone being tapped, then our prime minister Rutte (in NL) got mad about his phone not being tapped, as if he's not important enough...

What I find interesting is that she's mad about her phone being tapped (and others are mad about it too, I heard they're launching an official investigation now). So tapping phones of all other Germans, from fry cook to captain of industry, apparently doesn't merit any outrage. I'd argue that it's the other way around: if there's any phone that the US has any business listening in on, it's hers.

That's a fair point. However, to what extent do these issues exist because the iOS simulator is a simulator rather than an emulator? An emulator might have broken OpenGL support, same as the simulator. And for performance-related stuff I'd prefer a real device over either.

By the way, the author of that article does not IMHO make a strong point for simulators. He seems to have a lot of problems with the Android development environment, some related to performance and reliability but many related to usability, and the reason the emulator has these problems is not the fact that it's an emulator. An equally crappy simulator isn't going to solve those problems.

Virtually nothing? I'd say that the simulator covers about 95% of my testing and diagnosis needs. I only have to resort to running on a physical device when I have to test stuff related to the on-board sensors, camera, or push notifications. So far I've found 1 case where the simulator did not behave as expected. If it works on the simulator, chances are it'll work on the device. If it doesn't work on the simulator, in almost all cases you will be able to use the simulator to diagnose and fix the issue. I should note that I do not do game development; I've no experience in writing apps with high performance 2d/3d graphics.

With that said, I always test release candidates on various types of real devices.

As far as I can tell, MS does not keep the patents secret (they can't), they just tell others: "We have over a million patents, and we think you are violating a least one of them. We're not saying which one, so that you cannot look it up and decide whether to pay up, work around it, or fight us in court. We'd rather that you do not take the risk of a lengthy court battle that ends in your product being taken of the market; much better for the both of us if you just pony up what we ask, now".

This amounts to legal blackmail. Surprisingly there's no law against this sort of thing.

I want... similar drool inducing screen specs to make it into the bigger screens, where ultra-high resolutions actualy make sense. The choice in TVs and monitors with resolutions that exceed HD is still decidedly poor. On tablets, a high resolution helps especially when reading for longer periods of time, but I couldn't care less about black levels or color reproduction. Again, such features are more important for bigger screens.

I'm surprised such changes can be made from the front panel of the machine. I'd say that any administrative mode should only be accessible by a switch or keypad inside the machine's strongbox.

Overinformative I would say.

Is that the case? Over here in NL, you have the right to film the police, however you do not have the right to publish that material. You also do not have the right to interfere with police business, and you do have to follow orders related to public safety. And if your camera is actually inciting violent behaviour in others, the cops can rightfully order you to move on. It's not always a 100% clear cut case, and both the filmer and the police have to make judgment calls. And the police frequently make the wrong one... in which case, you can NOT be convicted for not following orders. It's the same in the US, IIRC.

And it's the same for flight attendants. You are obliged to follow orders related to safety: e.g. to get back in your seat and buckle up. You are however not to follow the purser's order to strip and dance naked in the aisle.

Funny, I have the same urge when using an Android phone. Truth is: both take some getting used to after switching. It appears that casual (non techy) users find the iPhone slightly easier to get to grips with, while techy users prefer the flexibility of the Android (which for casual users may actually be a downside). But that's just anecdotal, and it's not that big a differentiator in any case; the main decision criteria appear to be price and appearance (of the device, not the OS).

How were the seller's hands tied exactly? Most app developers just click every country in the app store when it comes to selling it. The only reason I can think of for a developer not to sell an app in a certain country is that he is not allowed to sell it there, because of content which is illegal in that country, or because the software uses libraries with a license that restricts sales in certain countries. In both cases it is appropriate not to sell the app there, and no fault of the "bastards in the middle"

IIRC, the problem with DDT was that is was used indiscriminately and in large quantities, rather than locally, in small quantities, and only use it if the situation warrants it. The dangers of using DDT in that manner may well have warranted the outright ban, but it's been proven since that DDT can certainly be used responsibly, especially against the spread of malaria.

It's similar to the practice of putting antibiotics in cattle feed to prevent / treat diseases or promote growth. Feed used to be laden with the stuff, which gave rise to all manner of resistant strains of diseases. Many countries have now regulated such use of antibiotics and often only allow it when there is an actual outbreak to be treated, but antibiotics haven't been banned outright as far as I know.

VR could be great for movies with a lot of nice scenery, to increase immersion. Even if you create the movie in such a way that all the action happens in front of the viewer (perhaps with cues prompting the viewer to look forward when something happens), while still allowing him to look everywhere else and take in the scenery. For movies where most scenery is computer-generated, it shouldn't even be too expensive to produce such a VR version of the movie along with the regular release.

It does suck that FB bought OR. In principle I have nothing against buying a VR headset from them, same as buying a mouse from "evil" Microsoft, as long as it's just hardware. Problem is: FB, unlike MS, is a company founded on a business model of gathering and whoring out our personal data, and serving us ads. Not a big fan of that. FB may be trying to diversify their business a bit with projects like the OR, which is good, but they may also see it as something to augment their existing business model. In general I'm not happy to see these exiting new startups being snapped up by the new molochs: FB buying OR, Google buying Nest, etc.

There are a number of other groups working on VR headsets, but as far as I can tell they range from DIY efforts to prototypes that are still a long way from appearing on shelves in shops. Even Valve seems to be struggling, with their VR team bleeding talent to OR's team. With that said, I do expect some consumer and computer electronics manufacturers to jump on the bandwagon once OR proves that there is a viable market for VR headsets.

It might have saved him, if the drunk driver would have spotted him earlier because of it. Besides, good illumination is not about making you safe from any and all accidents, it's about vastly improving your odds in situations that can potentially turn into an accident.