The smartphone market has rapidly gone from 128MB RAM devices to (at least) 1GB devices. It's no wonder that earlier devices suffered a bit under later OSes. But I think this phenomenon has passed. Now new OSes don't really slow down. I don't see anything bad with my iPhone 5 and IOS8.
Yeah, it got a few years of updates. Apple made the mistake of only giving it 256M of RAM so it couldn't get any more updates. That was a mistake, but having made the mistake I can't blame Apple for not doing the impossible. They've been generous with the iPad 2 though.
I served papers on someone by email when I couldn't do it in person. This isn't particularly surprising.
Well... in most circumstances the GPU will only help graphics related performance. That's only impressive when you wanted better graphics performance, and not general performance. You can't offload anything onto the GPU. Only certain specific types of things, and certain math.
Anyway, this whole article is premature. The benchmarks may not even be iPhone 6, they may be spoofed. They are only one benchmark. Let's wait see what real analysis reveals. Whatever the answer I doubt it will hurt sales.
Ha ha. You should say there is a Start button on your punch card reader, and you pressed it, but the card got jammed.
I was wondering about that. Do the Supremes hold secret court too under these circumstances?
I thought part of the whole point of the Supreme court was to establish important legal precedents. Can you do that when it is all secret? Because to use the precedent, the whole legal community needs to know all the juicy details.
Secret courts are the biggest threat to a functioning democracy that one could possibly conceive of.
It's not quite the same thing. Disclosing that the fine is from the NSA is not incriminating. It ITSELF is the crime. In your example, revealing your source of income is not a crime. Rather it would reveal a previously committed crime. So I'm not sure that failing to reveal financial information in line with public company laws falls under the heading of not incriminating yourself, because your having paid government fines is not a crime, so you can't incriminate yourself in that way.
You could just as much argue the opposite way. Revealing financial information about public companies is required under the law. Free speech is allowed under the constitution. Therefore, the NSA can get fucked with their secrecy orders. You're still left with one legal principle against another.
It would have been nice to see them try that, but realistically, it would be in contempt of court to just say, it's ok we'll pay the fine, so go away. The executive would end up in jail, and someone would be appointed to tow the line. Nothing would have changed in the end.
I agree it's a problem, but what's the alternative? Politicising the judiciary with elections has problems too.
It's a legitimate question though.... If Yahoo had held out and paid the fine, what do they say on the next financial conference call to Wall street about where the money is going? Do they say they are being fined by an unspecified government agency that they cannot specify for reasons they are not allowed to state? Are they allowed to say that? Are they allowed to NOT say where it is going under public company financial disclosure laws? Me thinks these laws would come head to head.
So to ask a stupid question... since Android contains Chrome, and now Chrome contains Android, why are they different, and/or why do they need to be different?
Oh the irony. The NSA are dishonest from the leader on down.
If you're a leftie, you're holding it wrong.
Lefties should have their knuckles smacked until they repent.
It's splash proof. i.e. it can withstand casual exposure to water.
Battery life: I think there was some mention of charging it overnight, so you can assume I think 1 day of battery.