Are you ever going to return to this? Sure, I can imagine that kids might not need as much help these days; for those of us who stopped our family VCRs from blinking 12:00, I've always thought that my kids are going to have something similar as they get older with me. But still, do you think you would ever do this again?
In an apartment building, most likely the button does function.
In an office building, most likely the button is disabled. Specifically, the button is disabled by the operator switches (usually those fire marshall keys below the buttons) since they do need to control the doors in some situations. On some of the more advanced elevator systems, I think they might work after a period of specified delay (just an observation).
I forget where I read about this, but it was in the same article explaining how most of the cross walk buttons in NYC aren't even hooked up though at one time they were; when the systems were computerized and synchronized with the rest of the grid, the cost of removing the buttons outweighed the small perceived benefit of having people think they're making a difference.
Sure, for 95% of the users out there, they'd never notice and think that Office 2003 is fast enough. However, start working with a several hundred page document in Word. Any time you do anything, you'll see that it drags to a crawl.
Next, take a spreadsheet that includes thousands of rows across multiple sheets with references and calculations across them. You'll discover that 2003 was single threaded and can take 20 minutes to calculate a sheet (ever wonder why there is the option to disable automatic calculation?). Introduce Excel 2010 (never tried 2007) and you'll see that it will happily parallelize the problem across all CPUs.
Why? Because if you put on your headphones after taking a shower these headphones will seal the moisture in your ear and if you don't keep both your ears AND headphones clean (I mean wiping with alcohol or something), it will create a perfect environment for an ear infection to form. I had two painful ones before I realized it was the headphones and switched to a different design.
It is a shame since you can hear everything beautifully with these kinds of headphones. I've realized it is either buy some cans (read: large whole ear covering kind) or "fits in your ear" type buds (like what comes with an iPod) for the best and least infection prone experience.
I have an early 2008 model and I think it is great, but after realizing that the only real upgrading I could do within a reasonable budget was RAM and hard disk (graphics card is price locked for Mac-usable ones), I think I'm fairly relegated to getting an iMac instead next time.
The big difference is that if I actually make a phone call on that device, it costs me about $0.50/min domestic, and add on the roaming charge for international (e.g. about $2/min in the UK, $4/min in Poland, etc.)
Battery life? half a day if I'm lucky.
I've had a BlackBerry since the 950 "belt clip 2-way pager with a AA battery" (circa 1999). Always from the company, never personal purchase. I've never had a battery that bad. You either have a defective battery or you are killing it with how you're draining or charging it (and this would go for ANY rechargable battery in ANY phone).
I will admit that my current Torch 9810's battery just got replaced at the AT&T warranty shop since it would no longer take a charge after letting it completely drain over 4 days. Device and battery isn't 7 months old. However, I have read on the forums that the F-S1 battery (which I think is only the Torch 9800 and 9810) seems to have had a bad batch or two out there. Funny though, it would hold a charge for 3 days with usage even though they said it was bad.
Usability? It freezes for minutes at a time.
This I won't argue too much with. I've had my 9810 freeze for 20 seconds at times for no reason. Memory management? Heavy garbage collection? No idea. Certainly not as fluid as my iPhone, but minutes? I think you're exaggerating.
Microphones...still used everywhere, they've just changed their shape.
Shh! I think there's one hiding in the lamp!
Damn, those suckers have gotten small...
1024*768 was pretty much the standard in 1999. Though a lot of idiots may have ran at 800*600 no one ran at 640 * 480 unless they were still running windows 3.0!
Actually, I knew of people running at 640x480 because "it was easier to read". Tried to show them that if they increased to 800x600 or 1024x768 they could increase the font size, but then your icons got smaller and thus the cycle repeats...
I got my
Marvelous! The super-user's going to boot me! What a finely tuned response to the situation!