Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Re:Two screens? (Score 1) 35

I wonder if having two screens (which would show two different apps) wouldn't be better.

It would arguably be a better solution technically, but I suspect that most people want to use one app at a bigger size than two apps at once. And then you've either got content spread over two screens with stuff in the middle, or the app has to be designed around the screen layout. And that either won't be done or will be done poorly in the majority of cases.

Comment Re:Sometimes I hate the direction of tech (Score 1) 35

For me a foldable phone was the Motorola razor, the one with physical buttons. And in my opinion it was a great phone.

Yep. If it supported modern standards I'd still be using mine, and then hotspotting for a device with more screen when I needed that. Carrying two devices is nonoptimal, but so is holding a brick up to my ear, and fixing that with a headset would ALSO require carrying two devices.

Comment Financial in nature, no kidding? (Score 4, Informative) 9

In the ruling on Wednesday, the court acknowledged that Anthropic "will likely suffer some degree of irreparable harm absent a stay," but that the company's interests "seem primarily financial in nature."

Yeah, the company's interests are financial. That's what companies are for. The military's interests are also financial. People may think they're enlisting to serve their country, but they're really serving oligarchs. We have to blow up the middle east so we can rebuild it in our image — at great expense... and benefit to corporations like Halliburton who get awarded the no-bid contracts (sometimes literally, sometimes figuratively - I'm picking on Halliburton here not just because they deserve it in general, but because they were declared to be the only corporations capable of doing the job the last time around, short-circuiting the legally mandated bidding process.)

Comment Re:never? (Score 1) 44

Apple didn't want to use resistive touch which was very precise

I've owned a lot of resistive touch devices. Zero of them were "very precise". Most of them had a lot of depth so you'd struggle to pick pixels even when they were big enough to easily count. Palm Pilots and Visors, Zoomer/GRiDPad 2390, an HTC phone, blah blah blah. Phones had plastic screens because gorilla glass hadn't been invented yet. Jobs was irritated by his scratched plastic screen at exactly the right time and yes, made the right call. Yes, a plastic stylus on a resistive screen is more precise than your finger, but it's also either irritatingly tiny or you are just having to carry around more shit.

In fact, the most precise non-wacom screen device I've ever used was the capacitive glass screen on the GRiDPad 1910... also a device where a well-sighted (or near-sighted) person can count pixels, but there you can also actually touch them. But then that's got a tethered pen. I have GEOS on mine, with Graffiti. That is precise... But still not as precise as my lady's Fujitsu tablet with Wacom. That's what you'd use now if you needed precision, a radio pen. There was a company which sold an IBM 486SLC-based portable called Dauphin which had one that ran on batteries, how tragic... but it was precise. Unfortunately it was also as thick as a pretty good-sized hardback book.

Comment Re: US government (Score 2) 84

"Security weenies claim security via obscurity doesn't work, but it absolutely does if you like to use data and respect what it tells you. Check the number of security CVEs for operating systems like OpenVMS, MPE/IX, and see how they compare with Linux or Windows. By volume, the most popular OSes get the most attacks and successful exploits."

That is not security by obscurity. It's security by unpopularity.

Slashdot Top Deals

Thus mathematics may be defined as the subject in which we never know what we are talking about, nor whether what we are saying is true. -- Bertrand Russell

Working...