There's a big difference between grabbing a drone and a truck.
Creators of 3DMark do not have a clue how to test modern multicore smartphones, but they do not care and release their product.
The real problem? People use this shitty benchmark and judge product basing on the meaningless score it produces.
Why should Samsung LOSE customers because 3DMark lied to them?
It's better to 'cheat' this crappy software into being at least a bit more FAIR in judging their products.
By your argument all of the single threaded apps that run slowly on the S4 are at fault for slow performance because the programmer hasn't optimised their application for the S4 instead preferring to be compatible with all Android phones out there.
So, whilst the rigged S4 may be faster in raw power, its not what the end user is going to see. Which is cheating?
This. Not only that, this is a clear case where he SHOULD be, if not arrested, at least fined heavily. This is clear cut reckless driving; speed limits are posted to keep the public safe. Stunts like this should not be pulled at the potential expense of other drivers on the road. We're all beholden to the same laws, whether you're trying to break a record or not.
The danger of speed varies dependent on the road conditions and traffic. There are ways to break limits safely, and it sounds like he took precautions with having spotters for him on the route. The greatest danger was to himself should he lose control at that speed.
Could it be because, say, it's too big to fit in your pocket? If so then don't you think that means there's kind of a place for phones as well as laptops? If people want a PC in their living room then why is it only a handful of people that have PCs in their living room? Why is it even those that do mostly just use it to replicate the features of existing entertainment focussed consoles like watching media or playing games? Most people want their living room for what it has always been there for - a place to relax and entertain.
Oh dear. I really hope that you aren't in charge of anything involving strategic decisions. It takes time for ideas to mature and their time to come.
All of your arguments could be made against tablets. Who wants an expensive device that you can really only consume content on? Apparently now that a usable interface has been designed millions of people.
Consoles since the PS2/XBox haven't been primarily about playing games but rather being an entertainment hub in the living room. The XBox-360 and PS3 advanced that, the XBox One and PS4 will continue the trend. Computing is ubiquitous but computers are becoming less necessary for the majority of people.
It's not self-importance. It's the exact opposite. We might know more and understand the issue better, but I seriously doubt that there are enough of us, or that we are close enough to the public eye, to make a difference.
I don't think so. I think its self importance. Because we understand the issues we place ourselves above those that don't. We make decisions on their behalf because we know better than they do. The issues around DRM on streamed content take on an almost religious aspect with those that opposed without reservation. They believe that all DRM is wrong and nothing will convince them otherwise. The ordinary user doesn't really care as long as they can view the content.
The point I was trying to make are that there are people that regardless will view anything that enables DRM as being wrong and will oppose it. They pursue this with an almost religious fervour and are out of step with the real world.
My post was in response to one such post where the real world was being dismissed because it didn't fit with the world view of the poster. In an ideal world we wouldn't need DRM, we also wouldn't need locks on our doors, passwords on our accounts, etc etc. However we don't live in such a world and need to face up to that. As technologists we should strive to deliver the best we can, to push the boundaries, but we shouldn't dismiss those that don't understand the technology as being somehow less than we are. In short we shouldn't get lost in our own self importance.
Tech-savvy people will use those browsers and sites. The vast majority of people on the internet have no idea that this issue even exists or why it's important.
Ah, the self-important views of the Technorati. Sadly its this sort of attitude that makes the Technorati look like myopic fools. "The data must be free!".
The whole Internet as a commune thing was something of the 1990s, the Internet has moved on sadly there are lot of supposedly intelligent people that haven't. We already have DRM protecting video content (Widevine, Playready etc). They work with custom plugins which restricts the platforms they are available to. There is the potential here to have a standard decoding mechanism that will be easy to port and allow content to be more widely available.
I always wondered why SSH made just a fuzz about storing a site's certificate and warn of changes, but didn't put such a great emphasis on verifying host names or certification chains, but almost every other channel will just happily and silently accept a modified certificate.
Replacing that "This certificate is self-signed!" pop-up with a "This certificate is new or changed, please verify this MD5 hash on a trusted website: XX-YY-ZZ!" would probably increase security by an order of magnitude.
Also do this for background operations, like operating system fixes, virus scanner updates and may even MD5 downloads.
Given that certificates expire, often yearly, do you really think that this would be a useful thing to do? Think about it for a minute...
The majority of people don't know much about certificates other than the nice little GUI change to show that a site is validated ok. If you start popping up dialog boxes telling them that a certificate has updated at fairly regular intervals what are they going to do? Check the certificate to make sure its valid, or just click the box away? If people get used to getting a message about certificates that basically says everything is ok there is more chance that they'll accept a true certificate warning message and end up compromised.
Just like the "unlock gesture" in the new Windows stuff, this is a replacement for a 4 digit PIN, not for a real password. This break seems harder and more time consuming than brute forcing a 4 digit PIN, so it's fine.
Anyone who actually cares will have forensic tools that will just immediately present the data anyhow - for any consumer device, physical access is access to the data, eventually.
It's a little more than that. Once unlocked the fingerprint can be used to authorise the iTunes and App stores
Let's face it, Apple has a good product in the iPhone. The problem is that they aren't listening to the customer base and therefore they are allowing the competition to either catch up or maybe in some instances go ahead. I believe the public has stated loud and clear that they want bigger.
If you go down the route of listening to the customer and focus groups you end up with a mess. Apple has been there in the past.
On the comment that the public has stated that they want bigger. Is this really true or have you been watching too many Samsung adverts? I see more iPhones around than large screen Android phones, and more small screen Android phones than either.
I also have never used a case on my iPhone(s). I've kept them in my left pocket with nothing else. I've dropped them on occasion but, as yet, they are fine. They aren't as fragile as the prevailing thought, or case manufacturers, would have you believe.
As to the other, you'd have to ask my girlfriend. It's not my place to comment
Except those of us old enough to remember the Microsoft bailout.... When Apple clearly didnt know what they were doing but instead were rehashing product lines over and over...
~sigh~ It wasn't a bail-out it was a a deal whereby MS got access to Apple's patents and Apple got to $150m and a promise to maintain development of Office on the Mac. The money wasn't a token amount, what was important was the statement from Microsoft that they thought that Apple would be around for a while.
Apple didn't know what they were doing at the time. Jobs had a vision though and the commitment from Microsoft gave him breathing room to release the iMac. The rest is history.
~sigh~ this is addressed in the first paragraph of the article. I guess it was too easy just to jump on that fairly minor point though rather than actually comment on the article at length. Slashdot at it's worst.
~sigh~ have you read the article. KDE/Linux doesn't have the image formats built into the OS. It's one of the things OS X does right.
Don't worry about it and drop back. As long as you're keeping speed does it matter?
Stopping someone cutting in front is a pretty bone-headed excuse for tailgating.