Would this mean that portable USB powered Hard Drives are also prohibited? And also what about a spare battery?
As these guys routinely lie about what they do can we believe that they have dropped this program?
If they fire their ceo by telephone, just how do and will they treat the rank and file employees? Does the Chairman know what damage he has just done to Yahoo as a 'place to work"' by acting in this manner? By all means replace a senior exec, if that's necessary, but do it in a formal and respectful manner, or suffer the widespread consequences amongst your employees.
I am presuming that you are British? In the UK being "arrested" merely means being questioned. It has little to no long term consequences. In other countries being "arrested" means actually being formally charged with an offence. An ""arrest" record stays on your record forever and many job interviewers specifically ask if one has ever been "arrested". As this is a public record it means answering it in the affirmative and hoping that the interviewer listens to your side of the experience. But many would just move on to another candidate. Thus an arrest record can be devastating.
Business 101 lesson is to treat your most valuable asset, your customer, with respect. Hiking rates 60% all of a suddden and then having you PR say: " 'We knew there would be some people who would be upset" is astoundingly disrespectful and followed up with with "we don't care if your upset" comment. Amazing. If Netfix wants to increase prices in this manner it's their perogative and they intrinsically accept the risk of losing some/many customers not because they can't afford you pricing, but rather because they dislike being treated as dispensible commodities instead of loyal customers. The point is they could have come out and communicated to customers that the existing rate was for a transitional period while the streaming offerings grew in range. Now that point has been reached they wish the separate products to stand alone in pricing so that Netflix is more properly remunerated in the future. You might still lose some customers, but this way you would not alienate many and suffer extremely negative PR. Whosoever signed off on Netflix's approach to this matter needs a long course in remedial learning on how to keep your customers happy and feeling respected and wanted while at the same time adjusting prices upwards. It's NOT that difficult.
The physical edition of the NYTimes costs the reader/subscriber around $48 for the same paper which can now be delivered digitally to ones Tablet for $20.00. (I make the presumption here that the daily digital edition can be downloaded to ones tablet rather than necessitating an always online link). This is a saving of $28.00 per 4 weeks which over a year is a saving of $364.00 which can be put towards the cost of buying a good tablet. I don't know the internal math, but printing and distributing the physical paper must eat up quite a lot of the $48 charge, so it's quite likely that the NYT ends up with a similar net revenue and they get a better way to distribute to more potential subcribers outside the Metroplitan NY area, so perhaps their worldwide subscrber base will expand.
We have seen court cases were the Judge was entirely ignorant of even the most basic workings of the internet. So many users of VCRs wer/aree unable to program their machine so that the blinking 12:00 light stayed on. Does this Judge and others really think that everyone who buys and uses a wireless modem understands how to and is capable of changing or setting up security parameters on such a modem. I think NOT.
As my headline says if the new music doesn't interest people why by the CDs? Me. I prefer to have hardware (CD) back up for all my music.
Sorry to ask this, as it's so eay to offend. IF God created man, to always live on earth i.e. everyone coming back to earth after Jesus Christ returns it bewgs a simple question. Where and how will everone live on a totally over populated single planet with no personal space and no room to grow food? Or is the "easy" answer that there are really so few "decent" people that in reality the returning few will have more space than today?
I doubt that Sprint charges Amazon more than a very small amount of money per Kindle activated. After all the minor usage of Sprint's data network, to downloan a book, hardly uses any capacity on the network. When the individual fee is multiplied by the numbers of Kindle it's a nice bonus payment for Sprint to receive. Overall it would not surprise me if Amaon breaks even on the Kindle hardware. That makes it a terrifice deal as a driver of ebook sales for them.
My comments related to the fact that Fox has a history of playing new series "out of sequence" giving a very false impression of a series. This did happen to me with Firefly...so I switched off. Much later I found out the real storyline and had to buy the DVDs to see the series in the right order. By then the series had already been cancelled. Whether one individially likes a particuar series isn't the point. What is the point is that showing eps out of order creates plot confusion and IMHO makes potential viewers turn to another channel. Having huge weeks of gaps between first run episodes also causes viewers to seek other shows. So I kmention of Firefox was not intended to create a discussion on the individual merits of that series, rather the way in which it was shown helped its downfall and cancellation.
Actually that series was called "Firefly" and the one episode depicting cattle being transported was played out of sequence and helped create missunderstandings about the premis of the series. That was the whole point of my reference.
The sad thing is that Fox has financially backed and brought numerous very innovative shows to the TV screen over the last 15 years. The problem is not in the sourcing or early backing of shows, more it is that they (Fox) insist on too much control over the airing/scheduling. They unilaterally decide to air shows in the wrong order for the story line. This confuses viewers who then take more time to "get into" a show and then Fox kills the show because instant ratings were not achieved. Firefly was a classic example of this. They put promising shows like Fringe on hiatus for no good reasons so fans move on to view other shows, which are aired more consistently and then don't return immediately to the early hit show which loses viewership and then becomes a sudden candidate for cancelation. The weird thing is that THIS trend of poor management of shows is so clearly seen and understood by outsiders and NOT by Fox as they do not change their style.
Instead of filling in an "I95" on the plane one has to spend a few seconds giving the same details on line once and it lasts a couple of years.... What's the big deal to this? It actually saves time if you visit more than once in 2 years. Sometimes the planes run out of paper I95s and create more inconvenience. A while ago I visited Australia and had to apply for a paper visa, in my passport, via one of their embassies. If I had been given the choice of doing it all online I would have jumped at the convenience. Move along people. Borders and immigration stuff exists worldwide. What the US does today the EU will do tomorrow and vice versa. That's the world we live in.
Jobs is a one of a kind visionary corporate leader, who sees the big picture and can define a course for Apple to remain innovative and profitable. Remember that the iPod was a loss maker when first introduced! Now that's the good news for Apple. The bad news is that such leaders seldom leave any room for a second visionary leader in the wings. This type of leader demands creative freedom, to run with their ideas, without being second guessed all the time by someone with perhaps a divergent view of the future. Both may be valid visions, but two separate approaches can seldom coexist in corporate life, especially when producing cutting edge electronics. Ergo the possibility of replacing Jobs with a new innovative leader from within the existing Apple structure isn't good. The next level is probably filled with more corporate talents, to round off Job's weaknesses, rather than visionary leaders "in waiting". When Apple gets serious, about the eventual successor to Jobs, look for moves to buy smaller innovative companies with CEOs who want a bigger opportunity within a few years. Just my 2 Cents.