At 73GHz, the signal's going to go one room over.
we get to launch rockets without having to have a profit requirement for it!
That's why the US gets to launch big expensive, and awesome science projects like Hubble, Cassini, Voyager, Apollo, etc.., while Russia is stuck with shitty Space-X sized rockets that only has commercial appeal.
Russia is going to find out the hard way that commercial rockets are useless compared to government rockets.
when your President steals $200 billion from your country's treasure and steals it for himself.
Sucks to be you, Russia!
Apple doesn't care if they can't get to your encrypted data. If you lose your password to your encrypted iOS device and your primary computer, you're screwed.
hey look at the Republican hahahahah
Your tolerance for crap is too high.
You'll find that, once you start to pay for your content, quality dramatically goes up.
For example, I find that a lot of people consider Wikipedia to be a great source for history and science, but Wikipedia has NOTHING compared to a good history or science book. In fact, much of the articles on Wikipedia are just plain wrong. It really is low-value junk compared to higher-end paid sources.
Anyways, you get what you pay for.
It already has about 13.4% US desktop market share already.
I have no idea why Mac OS X isn't called out for being the MOST UNIX operating system out there.
Why bother making a Linux desktop, when you ALREADY have a top-notch Unix desktop environment, with origins in BSD Unix (via NextStep), a proper Unix-shell, and every other command-line tool, with the ability to run real commercial software from Adobe and Autodesk.
Additionally, it seems like Mac OS X has officially won all the developers. I don't recall seeing any developer using anything BUT Mac OS X over the last couple of years.
Unix won the desktop.. it's just called Mac OS X.
It'll probably involve a minimal contactless reader and token-transfer like Apple Pay. Don't need to transfer all phone data. (really? you think cops are going to sit around to transfer 16-128GB? lol)
A lot of the buyers really are buying them for art's sake. Wealthy people already know that they gain no additional entertainment value from it. They just want to spend their money on something that just looks cool, and their rich so why not.
It's like buying a painting - it does absolutely nothing except sit around and look interesting. Wealthy people might even show off the cables themselves with custom display kits just for the cables. It's less about it's audio quality and more about it's appearance. A lot of people find art and beauty in non-traditional areas as well - think the Nine Inch Nails "Head like a Hole" video where they're just wrapping themselves up in cables.
Also, most regular people appreciate the art of industrial design as well and incorporate it into their lives. You're not going to buy a bright pink and green cable for your home stereo if you don't want your wife to kick you out, but you'll probably buy a black one.
perhaps a binary data format, representing data in a database. This should be the next step.
None of the positive measurements are because of home-schooling itself. It's largely because of parental care and feedback on a child's education that homeschoolers provide.
In other words, if you made the REST of the public homeschool their kids, you'll find that scores, GPAs, etc.. also drop, because now you have all parents homeschool their kids, including parents that don't give a shit about their child's education.
And once you normalize the experiment, you'll find that public/private schools are much more effective than homeschooling.
This is why the top-end leaders of society are never home-schooled.
Uh. They most certainly did NOT create the smartphone sector.
There was NO smartphones before the iPhone. Speaking as a guy that used them all, everything else was utter garbage compared to the iPhone. They were garbagephones, not smartphones.
And they sure as fuck didn't do it out of "nothing".
Are you fucking kidding? Things like momentum scroll and pinch-to-zoom were made out of thin air by Apple. There was nothing like it. The audience literally gasped when Steve Jobs first demoed those things in the iPhone introduction.
Apple defined the new device, and created this market.. from scratch. They threw out every other smartphone idea, because they were incorrect and complete garbage.
THIS is the REAL mobile market that Apple created from scratch. There was absolutely nothing like it, no matter how hard the Android/MS fangirls try to rewrite history to claim that Apple didn't invent the modern smartphone industry.
If you don't believe me, then explain why Google had to REDESIGN Android after seeing the iPhone introduction? Because they knew they had a terrible design, sorta like how Google Glass is a terrible design, and how MS HoloLens is going to lose as well.
Sorry, but you are, right now, living in the world created by Apple. You AREN'T living in the world created by Google or Microsoft.
Also, you're going to REALLY hate it when I let you know that the PC itself was defined and created by Steve Jobs. Nobody but Steve Jobs thought PCs were anything more than Industrial Appliances. He was the only one that thought they would be usable by normal people - kids, grandmas, etc.. And so he defined that market to cater to kids and grandmas, and built the product to match it. Other PC vendors were strictly thinking about PCs in terms of industrial/office products. Even a company like Xerox, who should have figured it out, didn't. Steve Jobs was the ONE guy that thought you should be able to use a PC at home by untrained people, instead of at the office by experts.
So, not only did he create the modern smartphone, but he created the entire PC industry itself.
Perhaps in the next life, you nerds would have been born with a better sense of taste that would allow you to create interesting and useful products for society, But, alas, you were stuck without any talent, and so you have to live in a computing defined by Steve Jobs.
Just saw this incomplete wording. It should along the lines of: "Why do the poor think they matter to the market?"
In general, the market isn't defined by low price: people don't buy bad products, no matter how cheap they are. If you can't afford a quality product, the market just ignores you and doesn't sell to you. The price doesn't go down if you can't afford it.
This should be obvious.
> They just recorded the largest public corprorate profit... in history.
Indeed, and creating a high-quality product is the reason.
The poor (as well as many in the middle-class) generally do not understand that demand comes from the intrinsic desire to be rich and powerful. A high quality is associated with that.
You don't sell a product by saying it's for the poor. You sell it by saying it's for the rich, and this causes draws in the rest of the classes.
There is no advantage to marketing yourself as being towards the poor. The poor generally cannot create demand, because absolutely no one desires to be poor. Marketing yourself as for the poor is more likely to hurt a brand than to help it.
maintain this luxury image will kill them.
Why do poor people think they matter?