Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed


Forgot your password?

Comment Re:Too little, too late (Score 1) 262

I guess it's only a legal issue if they make claims based on anything but the lowest common denominator. If they advertise 6 hours of battery and some people are lucky and get 8, then it's ok... unfortunately the customer still feels shafted if his friend's identical model performs better.

Of course, this is Apple we're talking about. They provide little in terms of product specs, and I think they do it just so they can be flexible in this way.

Comment Re: Continuum could be a big hit... (Score 1) 88

If you are at home or work then you already have a computer.

Computers age out. This may replace both your next computer and your next phone with one low-cost device. And you can still use your existing monitor(s) and keyboard/mouse.

Of course this isn't sufficient if you need a powerful PC, but it could replace typical usage where the most demanding applications are Office or your web browser.

Comment Re:Continuum could be a big hit... (Score 1) 88

But they are too scared to push people off ancient technology.

Agreed though I can't really blame them, they get raked over the coals any time they try. They broke BC with Vista's security and driver model changes, now look what reputation Vista has. They tried to to introduce a more modern UI with Windows 8, same result.

Comment Re:weakly disguised hit-piece (Score 1) 328

I'm not a huge fan of Apple but are you seriously trying to bring back this old argument?

No, they didn't invent computing or touch screens or cell phones or fingerprint readers or most of the components that are part of the things they sell. But the value of what they sell, to those who buy them, is greater than the sum of parts.

Just look at cell phones before the iPhone and ever since. Every major phone since 2007 has a very similar design. If Apple didn't invent a good design, then why was it nonexistent before Apple did it and copied by everyone since?

Comment Re:if this is the spearhead of human colonization (Score 2) 150

With Phobos being so close to Mars, setting up a station there could be useful beyond just a stepping stone onto Mars.

We could send robots onto the surface that could be directly and nearly instantaneously piloted by humans that are stationed on Phobos. Essentially it could be a form of telepresence without the dangers and difficulties associated with actually landing on Mars.

Comment Re:We've been to Mars already (Score 1) 150

A probe might be able to collect more data if it knows what it is looking for.

Humans are resilient and given enough arbitrary tools can often adapt and figure out how to collect data that was not originally built to do. A combination of a human and a probe will allow a mission much more resiliency. A human mission would likely place high value on the human returning to Earth, so bringing samples back home is more likely. It would also provide the opportunity to do medical research about living under conditions that would be useful for any long-term colonization.

Comment Re:Something tells me... (Score 1) 109

Actually his quote says that they "have a clear digital agenda". I suppose editing is also out of the question too.

Regardless, my point still stands. He wants the U.S. government to have a "digital" agenda, which can be almost literally anything.

The US has already stated that it wants broadband to be a utility. It subsidizes cellular network growth in rural areas. It provides export restrictions on cryptography. It funds GPS. It provides incentives to local governments to expand the use of technology for initiatives such as highway safety. DARPA funds autonomous vehicle research. All of those are examples of digital agendas, so saying the US has none is a blatant lie. And state and local governments fund many of their own computing technology initiatives, which should be included as well.

So again I point out, the article is useless as it provides no actual information and uses buzzwords that were popular in the 80s.

Comment Re:Something tells me... (Score 3, Interesting) 109

This article, published on a UK site but lamenting US policy, fails to explain anything at all. It uses the words "digital" and "digitise" as vague terms to describe computing technology.

To say that the US has no computing technology policy is ludicrous, considering the US built much of the policy that has been applied in countries around the world, so it would be helpful if the article can provide at least one example of what is deficient in the US. But that appears to be too much to ask.

Comment Re:Yep (Score 1) 166

The choice you are describing is between "I want to throw my vote away" and "I want to make sure the worst person doesn't get elected". Sure, it is a choice, but it is certainly not the choice that is advertised.

I suggest watching this video series, it explains the problem and some potential solutions:

Comment Re: Non-removable apps (Score 1) 151

Actually Android is over 70% of the global market, and around 65% of the US.

Anyway, I don't really think that bundling should use be illegal anyway (so long as competitors are allowed in). There is nothing wrong with saying that your product is the combination of several functionalities. After all, almost every app has at least 2 functions, and it would be silly to say that the difference between legal and illegal apps is whether one or two home screen buttons exist to access both functions.

He's like a function -- he returns a value, in the form of his opinion. It's up to you to cast it into a void or not. -- Phil Lapsley