The Nokia which the whole world came to know and love, is dead. The handset business.
Nokia is a hundred year old business. They had a great run with handsets, but it's just a chapter in their history.
Sure they can. Just an Google asset stripped Motorola Mobility and then sold the remnants to Lenovo.
Well that was Google's strategy with Motorola Mobility.
For legal documents, less than 100% accuracy with attendant cleanup efforts and opportunities to miss something, means a laborer has to do a lot of proofing.
How spoiled we are. When I started work, anything not handwritten was prepared by the typing pool. And had to be proofread every time. With a many times poorer accuracy than OCR.
OCR is truly amazing.
Now get off my lawn.
Maybe, but it's plateaued at a very good level. OCR is extremely useable. If there are errors they are more likely to be in the document that you scanned than in the scanning process.
That's provided the scan is good. OCR from a mobile phone photo is more challenging...
I've got a scansnap for the paperless office thing. The success rate is far greater than 96%. I recently scanned a whole book in, one with varying formatting tables etc, and the errors are one mistake every few pages, not several per page.
The software is ABBY Finereader.
On the other hand, this is the ideal scenario, a purpose made document scanner. A mobile phone photo with arbitrary lighting and possibly slightly out of focus probably would have a worse rate.
The other thing is that usually the occasional error doesn't usually matter is you're archiving as the document is saved as a PDF which displays the original scan as a graphic, and just uses the scanned text for searching or if you need to cut'n'paste.
No I'm saying exactly what I said. In a nutshell: "But once the concept is understood, the metaphor gets in the way and can only mislead or clutter."
BTW, I notice that you said there's nothing wrong with gentle gradients and animation. Well there's more animation in iOS 7+ than iOS 6-
And what are the gradients for? If it's just a subtle effect for a background that makes an app look pettier, OK, but when it's used as a pseudo 3D effect, it's likely to clash with the proper 3D transform based layer animation. Flip a screen with pseudo raised bits and shadows, and it becomes clear it's just a sham.
You also state that you hate the vast amount of white. But you're looking at larger expanses of white when looking at a website such as slashdot classic, or a word processor file. If it's too bright, turn down the brightness!
Oh, and if you're confused by the lack of outlines on buttons, there's an accessibility option to add them.
What did you expect from a hipster marketing company?
I know! Look at this sad sack showing off his iPhone:
http://i.kinja-img.com/gawker-...
Wait a sec... that's an Android, and that's Google's VP of design, responsible for Android's latest makeover. My mistake.
In the TFA case, apple has control over your keys.
False. The private keys are unique to the phone and the paired device. The public keys are shared between the two when they are paired. Apple doesn't have have the private keys (or the public keys for that matter), and thus cannot read either side of the communication.
I'd argue that engineers provide quality apps for iOS despite Objective-C, and not because of it.
How many iOS apps have you worked on?
Except the "old thing" is practically from the 1980s.
C is even older. As is the Unix model (programs, shell, POSIX) that Linux users swear by.
I'd agree that Objective-Cs deficiencies are in the C parts. The good "Objective" parts are being retained in Swift.
I'd still rather have Objective-C even with the C baggage than Java. I did a course once that used Java as the language, and I hated it.
Anyhow, this is rapidly becoming an obsolete debate with Swift 1.0 approaching rapidly.
Yes, because people not even being ever confronted with programming before enrolling into a university course is the optimal approach to STEM promotion.
Who told you you couldn't learn programming on an iPad?
https://www.google.co.uk/webhp...
Apple hasn't been able to provide programmers with a decent consistent and modern language for over a decade.
Objective-C and Cocoa continue to be great, and produces far better quality apps than on exist on Android. Swift one day might be better. But the "oh there's something new coming along so the old thing must be crap" game is juvenile.
Porn is viewable in the browser these days.
Not on school networks it's not.
No hacker tools is a major crippling factor in iOS in any educational settings. No in-process compilation => no JIT-equipped programming learning environments, no LuaJIT, no hosted Oberon or any similar environment, no nothing.
The topic is schools. Not computer science/software engineering at university.
Compared to the technical capabilities of iOS and OSX, Android and Chrome are the crapfest of the century.
...except consumer tablets aren't proper digitizers. This is especially true for platforms where a stylus is a banned option because it doesn't seem fashionable enough.
Your ignorance is showing.
https://www.fiftythree.com/pen...
Even a mundane mouse is better at the "direct manipulation" stuff than what's provided on your average consumer tablet.
Ignorance again. A mouse cannot be direct manipulation. It's an indirect tool. You move your hand on one place, and a pointer moves in another. It's like the difference between piloting a plane, and controlling a model aircraft.
Lack of "hacker" tools is a disadvantage for any educational environment. Students might actually be expected to create something rather than just being mindless consumers.
You seem to be confusing schools with universities. Creating hacker tools is beyond school level education, and for the occasional over achiever who might want to try it on their own, will usually find it a disciplinary offence.
There have already been educational programs mired by patent attacks that have been pre-emptively banned from the iPad.
If it breaks IP law it shouldn't be in schools.
The number of vulnerabilities per time has, but the number has not. Both numbers are 10. 10 is 0% more than 10.
Yeah, that's what a rate is.
They're making a prediction on the total number of vulnerabilities based on the rate of vulnerabilities.
No they're not. You are. There is a point at which language pedantry becomes idiocy you know.
No man is an island if he's on at least one mailing list.
