Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:Essentially yes, you do (Score 1) 322

by SuperKendall (#49796611) Attached to: The Tricky Road Ahead For Android Gets Even Trickier

Hahahaha more powerful than having the source code,

Do you never tire of beclouding yourself?? I suppose not...
Well for the MENTALLY SLOW HERE I WILL EXPLAIN IT REAL CLEAR LIKE.

On iOS, you can easily change the OS AND APPLICATIONS.

On Google you can only change easily what you have source for, which is the OS - not applications.

So I'm pretty sure even the most addle-braned can understand one is greater than two...

I leave any response to your own fevered mind, I shall not read it.

Comment: Re:Competition works better (Score 1) 229

We went to the moon because we were in a (cold) war with the Soviet Union at the time.

We started to the moon because JFK needed a spectacular - but once the cost estimates started coming in, he started seriously considering backing off. We went to the moon because JFK took a bullet to the head allowing LBJ to push it (and the associated pork) as a monument to JFK.
 

Once the Soviets cancelled their moon missions, so did we

Apollo was essentially cancelled in the budget battles of '65-'67. The Soviets didn't get serious about their lunar programs until around '66-'67. (And most of them weren't cancelled until '72 or so.)

Comment: Large change with app permissions (Score 4, Insightful) 67

They talk about how it's a stability release, but if you are going to compile your application with the newer dev tools you are going to have to do some work adapting to the iOS style permission model.

I'm really glad to see Android adopted this model, the previous model made no sense from any standpoint - it was worse for the users, and worse for security. Now that Android will ask for permission when you actually want to use some protected resource, they can make a way more informed choice if they should allow it or not - and on the fly decide an app can access some things and not others (say allowing Contacts but not location).

It's just a shame the older style permission model will be supported for some time to come, as it greatly eases the ability of spyware to operate on Android.

Comment: Being Number 1 may = less progress. (Score 2) 229

If you are competing to be #1 there are two strategies.
Make sure you perform better than the rest.
Make sure the rest performs worse than you do.

If your goal is to be #1, the easier strategy will be the one taken.

If say the US is more focus on just advancing then being #1 then our efforts will be to build up other countries, and at the same time we will grow much further.

Comment: Essentially yes, you do (Score 0) 322

by SuperKendall (#49792249) Attached to: The Tricky Road Ahead For Android Gets Even Trickier

Oh? So you have the source code? Snicker snort.

Your ignorance is no laughing matter.

Because of how easy Objective-C is to pull compilable headers, and how easy it is to extend any class and override any method (swizzling), you have everything you need to change ANY app or system process even though you don't have all the original source code. It's lots more powerful than just having source code for the OS and not apps...

Its' really too bad you can't understand how much more powerful this is to actual hackers.

Comment: Re:Android to iDevice (Score 0) 322

by DerekLyons (#49791701) Attached to: The Tricky Road Ahead For Android Gets Even Trickier

Hence the walled garden and "ecosystem" approach by apple. There are many people that don't want to figure out which phone/tablet/laptop is good and bad. They know if they buy an Apple product it will be good. They don't sell junk. Sure it's overpriced if you compare specs to Android phone/tablet or Windows laptop but you also don't need to do hours of research to see if the product you are looking to get sucks.

This. It's not about being l33t or a hipster or any of the other patronizing bull so often tossed about here on Slashdot.

I bought my first iPhone because (at the time) the app that finally caused me to pull the trigger and move up to a smart phone was only available on the iPhone. I've replaced it every two years since (buying one version back on sale when the new version comes out) and plan on continuing to do so for the forseeable future. Why? Because it Just Bloody Works. I come home, plug my new phone into my (Windows) computer, open iTunes, and with a few clicks my new phone is identical to my old phone. In, out, and done.

My experience in buying my Android tablet just confirmed that this was the way to keep going. Didn't want an iPad, because they were too expensive for modest needs... and trawling through dozens of models and hundreds of reviews trying to discern the truth ended up being a massive PITA.

Comment: The Tesla power wall IS NOT good for Solar! (Score 1) 487

by LWATCDR (#49791649) Attached to: How Tesla Batteries Will Force Home Wiring To Go Low Voltage

The Tesla Powerwall IS not that big of a deal and not the solution for Solar!
The 10kwh Powerwall is only good for 50 cycles a year! It is more of a house size UPS. The 7 will work for daily use but it is more expensive per kwh than the 10 and even Solar City is not going to sell the 7.
The Tesla power wall battery still sucks. It does suck less than other battery packs but only a little. The big improvment is one of packaging and frankly hype.
I know that this is going to go counter to the Church of Tesla's teachings but even the Model S really does not count. It is a 100K car for the very rich. Another fact is the simple truth that the Tesla car company is not successful car company yet. It has yet to make a profit.

No we do not need to move to low voltage wiring in our homes because of the "success" of the Powerwall. The Powerwall is the the solution to the solar production/demand problem. And frankly in most homes the biggest power users are things like AC, Hot water heaters, dryers, stoves, refrigerators, and so on. All of which work just fine on AC and I for one do not want to have to have a bus bar the size of my arm running to my dryer so it can work on 12 volts.

Comment: Re:oh the Irony (Score 3, Informative) 487

by Shakrai (#49791459) Attached to: How Tesla Batteries Will Force Home Wiring To Go Low Voltage

DC has very rapid power loss over any kind of distance.

No it doesn't. Losses are related to current, not AC vs. DC. A higher current in the same sized conductor equates to higher loss. You can get around this by raising the voltage (traditionally easier with AC), thus transferring the same amount of energy with less current, or you can increase the size of the conductor. DC can actually transfer more energy than AC on a similar sized conductor because it doesn't have to deal with skin effect.

I could link all of these terms to applicable articles for you but I'm feeling lazy and this is all common knowledge stuff anyway.

A CONS is an object which cares. -- Bernie Greenberg.

Working...