One more note: When we lose power, it's usually on the -leading edge- of the storm. (True for the Derecho, for snowstorms and for hurricanes.) Thus a credible analysis has to assume this as 'worst case'.
After the Derecho, we had some sun and some partly cloudy days. During "Sandy" we were in cloud for about 3 days (fortunately -we- didn't lose power then.) There are lots of places in the US and Canada that get less sun than we do.
Last time we lost power ("Derecho" storm in late June in Northern VA) we were out for about 80 hours. Our power requirements included air conditioning for that period (it was hot and muggy.)
1. How much storage (batteries) would we need to have 4 days worth of power available to us for a grid failure?
2. How many square feet/meters of solar panels would be required to charge those batteries before the storm?
3. What would be the recovery time once the stored current was exhausted?
And then there's the economic questions:
4. What would the batteries cost (taking into consideration substantial increased demand for rare earths, etc)?
5. What would the solar cells cost (also taking into consideration substantial increased demand for rare earths, etc?
Finally
6. Compare that cost to the installation of a conventional generator, either gas/diesel powered or natural gas/propane powered (and I'll grant you some appropriate 'market trade rate' penalty for the carbon produced by the generator.)
EMACS
Not authoritative, but not good for MSFT: http://www.theverge.com/2012/11/16/3655882/windows-8-pc-sales-reportedly-well-below-microsofts-internal-projections
Fair enough! We'll have to wait for actual numbers, then.
When you think about the innovation at Microsoft I can't see a decline. Rather Microsoft is drawn into the economic turmoil and will experience slower growth rates. I am a PC! Microsoft should reinvent itself and beat Apple with an open source strategy. That would win the hearts and mind of the ubergeeks.
On what class of platforms? PCs? I don't think so... That's the big change that's happening; the PC is not dead, but its growth is severely limited.
And it's not "ubergeeks" who buy most machines and make profits for hw/sw vendors, but consumers and corporate CIOs.
The specific quote is "modest", and I agree with the characterization of " 'modest' is to Ballmer as 'poor' is to a neutral observer" (particularly when compared to Apple or Android alternatives.)
Depends on when you want to start the clock: Product Development or Product Introduction? I see your point from a introduction/marketing perspective, but I also suspect that Apple would have introduced the iPad when it did (because it was ready) even without the "threat" from Netbooks.
Actually, not true. Apple started work on tablets long before there were Netbooks (and before the iPhone.) The MacBook Air is Apple's response to Netbooks.
However, there is certainly a bit of serendipity (at least) about the timing of the iPad introduction with respect to the push by PC hardware makers for NetBooks. What both NetBooks and tablets revealed is substantial consumer discontent with conventional (mostly Windows) laptops for many uses.
On another topic I cited the 'horns effect' - the opposite of the 'halo effect,' saying that Microsoft runs risks with Windows 8 tablets. If Win 8 Tablets (particularly the ARM version that will not run conventional Windows applications) don't meet consumer expectations, the cost to move to another tablet (iPad or Android) is pretty low. And that ill-will could well spread to other Microsoft products, particularly laptops but also phones.
>A larger investment in STEM yields higher returns, so subsidies can be higher.
The problem is the Government is not the (direct) recipient of those returns. Let those who reap the returns pay the subsidy. Without getting political (I've had quite enough of that for at least 4 years), government is not the solution for all problems, particularly for problems where business can provide a solution.
Shouldn't schools charge more for degrees that cost more?
Depends on if you want more of them or not. Making science-based degrees more expensive means we're going to have less of them. That's a bad thing.
That assumes the market won't pay more for those more valuable degrees. A big part of the problem here is education doesn't really behave like an open market.
Shouldn't schools charge more for degrees that cost more? Science requires expensive labs.
Now if institutions, both public and private, want to subsidize those costs, that would seem to be a more economics-based approach.
http://www.thestreet.com/story/11749058/1/is-microsofts-ceo-steve-ballmer-crazy.html
Adding up sales of iPads, Kindles, Nooks, Android tablets, etc, and then saying "none of these people -wanted- what they've bought" (particularly in the face of people upgrading their devices) -really is idiotic-.
To me that's the real counter-argument: Lots of people have bought more than one tablet, which means they must have found utility in the concept and the product. (Claimer, my wife's on her 2nd iPad device and my mother loves the hand-me-down 1st gen iPad. Me, I'm sticking with my MB Pro because I want a full size tactile keyboard.)
The argument about Microsoft's marketing approach in the cited article is also relevant: Microsoft should sell its tablets on the basis of what you can do with them, rather then on some pseudo-demand buzz.
p.s. I think Microsoft's Surface is notable/worthy because it's not such an obvious clone of the iPad. That doesn't mean I want one, it means I'm crediting Microsoft with "thinking different"
This is the most significant concern raised by the article, and I think it's legitimate. That's why I continue to buy backup drives and keep my data local (except for the backup at my friend's house.)
At a minimum, we need warranted Service Level Agreements with cloud providers, that include guarantees with penalties when access to their services (cloud based apps or data) fails. "Sorry about that, we won't let it happen again" ain't good enough.
Today is a good day for information-gathering. Read someone else's mail file.
