Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop


Forgot your password?
Get HideMyAss! VPN, PC Mag's Top 10 VPNs of 2016 for 55% off for a Limited Time ×

Comment Re:Incorrect (Score 2) 167

Why dont you just fuck off already? Why should a company be charged anything to bring its money home?

Umm, let's see. Because the USA provided the infrastructure that allowed them to exist in the first place let alone making billions upon billions of dollars. People, and corporations like to put out this idea that their earnings sprung from barren rock on an island somewhere in the Pacific Ocean. Corporations can make money because nations (actually the tax payers in those nations) allowed them to.

Comment Re:Incorrect (Score 2) 167

they just consider (rightfully) the current rate to be exorbitant.

Oh really? They think they should pay less taxes? Shocking I say. Just shocking.

People (and companies) will do the right thing as long as it does not hurt TOO BADLY to do so

Are you serious? Corporations aren't people. Concepts like the "right thing" are absolutely meaningless. People (and companies especially) will pay as little as absolutely possible including NOTHING if they can find a way to get away with it. How do you think that conversation is going to go?

"Hey Apple, you owe $200B, but we will let you pay only $100B. For that $100B, you get a T-shirt that says 'I did the right thing!'. Or you can keep stifling us with your army of lawyers. What do you think?"


Comment Re: Look for a vast increase in donations to Clint (Score 4, Insightful) 167

When Apple does it, it pays Japanese Sales Tax, Japanese income tax (for that entity ( the local Apple subsidiary)), and then American income tax on top of that, three taxes.

The reason they pay American income tax is because the USA provides the infrastructure that allows them to exist in the first place. By "USA", I mean mine, and yours, and everyone else's tax dollars.

If you are suggesting that we should provide the infrastructure for Apple and it's execs to make billions of dollars and not expect them to kick back, you are nuts.

Comment Re:Sad but unavoidable (Score 1) 162

When you are trying to get the latest chipsets and sensors and screens at the cheapest possible price (because consumers are demanding $99 fully featured smart phones) you don't have that option. When consumers are looking at two options and one has a 4k screen, and the other has a 1080p screen that uses open source drivers, what do you think the choice will be?

Since you obviously know more about this and I, maybe you could let me know what big name smart phones or Android devices are built in this manner. Please make it one that has shipped 100k's of units. Or maybe your point is that while every major vendor is doing it wrong, you know better and really should be running all of these companies?

Comment Re:Sad but unavoidable (Score 1) 162

they could still maintain control over the "overall experience" of the "brand" through OEM Licensing Agreements.

Well good, they already do that.

It's not the brand, or the experience that's the problem. It's the nitty gritty development and testing and patching of the OS against each and every unique device they develop. Someone has to pay for that to happen.

they can again use The Power Of The License to force the OEMs to strongarm the Carriers.

The Android way is to provide options. If you want timely updates, pay $800 for a Samsung device. On the other end of the spectrum is the $99 Moto E. Pray for your updates. Your choice.Personally I'd rather have options than a world where Samsung was the only Android device manufacturer.

Comment Re:Fuck you Motorola/Lenovo (Score 0) 162

This is slashdot. If you think people want updates to get that lovely new software smell then you don't belong here.

Tell me, can you link to any wide-spread loss disturbance caused by an Android security flaw? Not an article written by researchers that did a bunch of stupid shit like rooted their device and installed a random APK they downloaded from the web AND disabled the install from unknown sources block and visited a bunch of sketchy pr0n websites using HTTP.

Of course it's good to get security patches, but this mentality that sky is going to fall if you don't get them day one is silly.

Comment Re:Sad but unavoidable (Score 1) 162

almost next to nothing

It's fun to think you know more than the thousands of people who's jobs it is to manufacturer and ship software for devices. I mean really, if it was a matter of hiring one guy for a few months, common sense would lead you to believe they'd just do that vs. facing the bad press. Common sense would lead you to think that it's maybe more of an ordeal than armchair software developers like to claim.

Well, I would invite you to talk with someone that actually does this sort of engineering. Getting AOSP up and running some basic apps is fairly easy. Getting a performing, stable OS with good battery life is very hard. It's an operating system. Imagine the scope of testing to certify a release. Android changes *a lot* between releases. Every single change you made in the previous release needs to be ported to the new release and tested. And it's more likely than not that the files have changed and it's not simply applying a patch. If you are unlucky, the kernel changes and you need updated version of your drivers. Sometimes you don't even have the source for those so you need to go contract with chip maker or a 3rd party to rework the drivers.

Now consider that every year you ship 8 new devices. Every year there are 8 more devices you to execute this process. 8 more devices for which in every year subsequent to the sale you have zero return on investment. So in three years, you are managing 24 major software releases of new operating system in a year (estimating, a new major version of Android each year). On top of that, a batch of security patches each quarter, that's 192 minor releases in a year.

Getting an idea of the scope?

P.S., maybe there's a reason CM went belly up on the plan for roll vendors' Android dists for them?

Comment Re:Sad but unavoidable (Score 1) 162

I'm sure that "Vendors" wanted the ability to make "Customizations" to the iPhone,

They sure did and Apple told them to suck it. That's why Android exists. It exists because carriers wanted control that Apple wouldn't allow them.

It's just that Google COULDN'T CARE LESS about anything other than Datamining

And, what's your point? Right, their Google Apps (which aren't part of Android) do the datamining. As long as the vendor includes those, which they are bound by contract to do, Google doesn't care ... beyond the fact that they want Android do have a good name so it can continue to be a vehicle for Google Apps.

Google could end this RIGHT NOW. But they won't. Ever ask yourself why?

I don't need to ask, I know.

For starters, the vendors wouldn't let them. They want to customize the OS to their own desires, among other things adding in their own data mining hooks. But the main reason is they simply couldn't engineer it. Android isn't Windows XP. You don't just dump the bits and it includes drivers for every hard config under the Sun. Every Android dist is customized to that specific hardware. Creating a performing, stable Android dist for even one hardware config is an massive task.

Slashdot Top Deals

Uncertain fortune is thoroughly mastered by the equity of the calculation. - Blaise Pascal