Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop


Forgot your password?
For the out-of-band Slashdot experience (mostly headlines), follow us on Twitter, or Facebook. ×

Comment: Re:Cool (Score 1) 189 189

What you don't appreciate is that there is always a cost to adding UI. If the phone has windowing then there has to be some means of activating it. And that's extra UI. And if that extra UI has to work with the iPhone, then that has implications for how it's implemented on the iPad.

The windowing system on the iPad is really sweet. It uses the dimensions of the screen really well. Why potentially fuck it up for no gain by implementing windowing on iPhone?

What people miss about the essence of good design is it's as much about what you leave out as what you add.

Comment: Re:Cool (Score 1) 189 189

Are you talking about graphics tablets - separate from the screen? Can you point to an actual product you are referring to? I already came back with an affirmative on your WACOM query, if you're being more selective even than that, then be explicit and actually state what you're talking about.

It's pretty obvious how the iOS stylus works, but if you point to what it is you are thinking of it'll be easier to explain by comparison.

Comment: Re:Cool (Score 1) 189 189

That was the most irrational message I've read in a while.

A new hardware feature leaves users of older devices "out in the cold"? How is that different for iPhones than any other smartphone?

And "after a few months"? Android manufacturers release new phones every month. iPhone has a new model once a year. How can you possibly have not worked out that your stupid criticism applies to Android not iPhone?

And windowing? iOS has windowing on the iPad, where it makes sense. Windowing on a phone makes no sense whatsoever. It's too small.

Comment: Re:Oblig. Musk stroking (Score 3, Insightful) 247 247

People that believe in Apple's reality distortion field are the kind of people that fall for perpetual motion machines.

If Apple didn't actually deliver devices that people love, they wouldn't be able to continue to be the most popular brand of smartphones whilst charging a significant premium.

The so called RDF Is a simply a trustworthy brand. A brand is a promise of quality, and even though they aren't perfect, they do deliver better quality than any other manufacturer. They deliver on their promise. They beat all other companies in customer satisfaction surveys year in year out.

Comment: Re:Bolt will be cheaper than the average car (Score 1) 247 247

It's also a damn stupid name, since my first web search found numerous page on Chevrolet wheel bolt patterns before it actually found anything about the car.

Of course that will change by the time it's a production car, thanks to how pagerank works.

Comment: Re:Still ugly as sin (Score 1) 247 247

You need to grow up. A car is to transport you from A to B. If you do a lot of driving then things like power, interior comfort and equipment become important. But exterior looks? You can't even see it when you're driving. You only see it for the few seconds when you're walking towards it to get in.

If you're buying for the looks, you're buying it to show off, because you have an inferiority complex. And a small dick.

Comment: Re:Still too expensive (Score 1) 247 247

If you mean the Commodore PET, then the Apple II beat that by a few months, and indeed Apple does pretty much dominate the market now.

Maybe you mean the VIC-20, but then that's picking an arbitrary definition of "inexpensive". The Atari 400 for example was cheap and earlier, though not quite as cheap as the VIC-20.

Anyhow, that's a bit by the by as Atari isn't in business any more either. Other than Apple very few computer manufacturers from that era do still exist.

If the analogy was a predictor (and they never are) the future would be very bright for Tesla. They are the Apple equivalent - first to market with a worthy product, albeit an expensive one.

Talking of which, the EV market will become really interesting when Apple release their car in a few years time.

Comment: Re:I don't get the problem with going after Uber (Score 1) 333 333

it seems to be a social right to not pay for the metro if you look like a poor person.

Pretty much. And it's a good system. Why stop people who are too poor to pay from travelling? If someone is desperate enough to leap the barrier, let them.

And Chatalet is just an outdoor square, with roads leading off in all directions. You can't police it like a real enclosed bus station. I've been there many times at all times of night and never felt threatened. Females would be. But so would they be in any major city centre late at night.

I never cheated an honest man, only rascals. They wanted something for nothing. I gave them nothing for something. -- Joseph "Yellow Kid" Weil