Siri : 42
I think the difference in computing power is obvious!!!
The iPod was and remains a great device but it's usefulness is going to be short lived
I have to correct you here. iPod's have never been useful and never ever sold for that reason. At any point in the iPod history I could buy devices that were half the price, had expandable storage, had voice recording directly to mp3 and always an FM radio. In addition, they functioned on a common AAA battery that brought the advantage of not having to replace the product when the battery ran out. (which happened after 1 year on the single iPod I ever owned.)
iPod's (as well as all other Apple products) always sold because they were and still are marketed as cool. That also explains why Apple products had and still have so little traction in the business markets. Don't bring the iPhone as an argument. I don't know of too many businesses that equip their employees with iPhones. Maybe the executives, but those are a small group. Most employees whom get a company phone still get something waaaay cheaper than an iPhone.
just that it was fairly unusual
That may be the case for very small shops. For big shops, their gonna' buy bare even if planning to install Windows onto them simply because big shops tend to avoid OEM installs and just drop their self made images on. Also, big shops typically buy the licenses through various volume license programs because they get savings that way. It's really impossible to say what get's Linux and what gets Windows in the end. Many machines in my server rooms have jumped over from Windows to Linux after a while.
With certainty I see more and more Linux boxes in data centers. Particularly since the recession hit and FOSS has gained a whole lot of interest ranging from small to big businesses. At some point I thought this recession was going to be a boost for FOSS but I guess the communities missed the opportunity.
Still, that does not tell anything. My server room has shifted from predominantly Windows to predominantly Linux in the last 2 years. But that's obviously not a measure. Nothing really is because Linux doesn't sell much so in many cases you cannot speak of a market share to measure. On the desktops, you can get a very off count by looking at browsers hitting a certain site but that's limited to the users of the site and to those users that do not configure their browser not to report such data. Servers, and particularly Linux servers have very little to do with web browsing (as it should normally happen in a secure environment).
All these market share analysis are nothing but waste of time. They're never accurate and can never be verified. Each company will have someone create a favorable report for them. If you really want to know how well a company is doing at the moment look at their stock, earnings and financial reports. This is exactly what the story is about. Apple seems to have surpassed Microsoft in value. That's still not much of an indicator as to which company provides better quality products. It may indicate which company has a better marketing strategy at the moment.
and I believe that time can come again!
...possible! I did hear talk about a second coming. No, wait, that was about something else I think.
The most important thing in schools nowadays seems to be saluting the flag and singing a national anthem.
While I guess a comeback in education quality is possible (at least in theory), my advice is, don't hold your breath.
According to the survey (PDF), 84% of tablet owners play games, ahead of even searching for information (78%), emailing (74%) and
So, if I get this right, 236% of table owners play games, search and e-mail... Also 150% of my salary goes to charity. The portion above 100%. I think it's high time journalists understood that in a statistical distribution of this kind it's imperative to total 100% to make the story even remotely credible or realistic. No matter how I turn this it can't make sense.
Having that said, if the article was trying to point out that tablets are primarily used to: play games, web search, e-mail and news, social networking, consume media and read, all I can say is: Yes, we knew that, those are the primarily intended uses of tablets. This is a perfect example of an "I ran out of news" article. Just state the obvious and trow some hokum statistical numbers over it. I tend to suspect this is coming from the new and flourishing field of bellyology (scientific argument originating in the belly) which can easily provide strong arguments in any field.
In either case, I won't expect journalists to have an understanding that the 136% of the people counted in just the first three categories don't exist.
There is no direct evidence that Foy's wife was infected through sexual contact, but the circumstantial evidence is strong.
Would it be possible that the virus got transmitted by direct contact of open wounds on the two? (Like scratches, sores, etc....). I would not exclude the possibility
I work in life sciences and I know for a fact that in order to have scientific proof for something like this you would need to have it confirmed in a quite large number of subjects. A single suspected instance of the transmission is far from being a scientific discovery .
I have to agree though, it makes for a good, attractive title. Coming up next on sciencemag.org: "Sex uncovers wormhole! A scientist finds that after having had sex for 10 hours he traveled backwards in time to find himself at only four minutes after having started....". Stay Tuned.
Logic is a pretty flower that smells bad.