The differences between the 5 and 5X are minor and in no way justify why the 5 can not run the new version of Android. It was a business decision not a technical decision.
I don't know how much number crunching was actually involved here. I suspect the problem comes from using a spreadsheet as a database. Because databases are, you know, hard.
It was user error, not a spreadsheet problem. Prefacing the names with a ' would have identified them as a string not to be interpreted as numeric or date. If the researchers couldn't manage this do you really think they could have used a database?
That said, yes spreadsheet are overused and abused.
I rarely do dual monitor with my laptop at home or work.I typically plug in a keyboard, mouse and monitor and the closed laptop is pretty much a "desktop". My normal desktop just appears on my external.
Pardon the overloading of "desktop". My laptop is pretty much a "desktop PC" when I'm at my desk and my normal "UI graphical desktop" just appears on my external monitor.
My "serious" work is coding and I no use for a external monitor. I never game, though. Not interested.
A software developer without an external monitor, that is unique. I've known few developers that didn't want a larger screen. Using the laptop display a compromise for mobility, but when at home or office an external monitor is quite common.
Are you still in school or something? That would make going completely mobile a little more understandable.
The 5 and 5X are very different, especially when it comes to things that matter. I don't even know how you can claim they're similar when they're literally two generations apart. It's practically enough time for Qualcomm to develop, launch, and stop supporting a whole product from end to end!
They are two *marketing* generations apart but in *technical* generations the 5X is a direct descendent of the 5, a sibling to the 6.
Other than being a first class engineer and proven visionary?
You are a massive retard if you think he has any vision. Jobs had the vision.
Vision exists in design, in the user experience, AND in the design and implementation of hardware and software. Woz's vision is in the later areas, Jobs' in the former.
This moron was still pushing the Apple II well after it was obsolete.
The Mac under Jobs was not successful, its eventual success only came under the stewardship of others. At the time of Jobs' ouster from Apple in 1985 the Apple
And in the early 1980s it was Jobs that prematurely downplayed the Apple II in order to focus in the Apple III, which was a major failure and helped create an opening for IBM. So Woz and the Apple
Every venture this guy has been in after he left Apple has been a massive failure.
Jobs had many failures with the Apple III, the Apple Lisa, the Apple Macintosh under his original tenure (others turned it around after his ouster), the NeXT computer, etc. The eventual partial success of NeXTSTEP as Mac OS X was a fluke of history, of Apple's two internal classic Mac OS replacement projects failing. When NeXTSTEP was standing on its own two feet it was never very popular outside of computer science labs. It was Apple's adoption, something independent of Jobs' vision, and the grafting of a Mac OS user interfaces for NeXTSTEP that made it partially successful (its core, not its original UI). Jobs' vision also failed with respect to larger screen iPhones. His vision failed with the 6th generation iPod Nano that was developed under his tenure.
Plus Jobs v2.0, the person who revitalized the Mac and pivoted from computers to phones, was a very very different person than the Jobs v1.0 that founded Apple and developed the original Mac. He spent many years learning from old and new mistakes to get from v1.0 to v2.0. Woz in contrast took off a lot of time to teach, literally, in public schools. Its silly to compare Woz and Jobs, in v1.0 days they were trying similar things, but in v2.0 days they were not and hence the comparison fails. The fact remains that in those v1.0 days is was Woz and the Apple
They may not be dead, but for the home user, they are on life support. I know few people with a desktop anymore, and no one shops for them.
You know what the exception is? Gamers. Guess who might be interested in PS3 games on a PC?
I kept my monitor set up in case I ever wanted to hook it my laptop, but never have.
For a "gamer" who only has CPU and video designed for power consumption rather than performance that would seem necessary. You probably can't drive all those pixels on the external at a reasonable frame rate. Unlike a desktop.
For non gamers who go beyond basic email and web browsing and video streaming, external monitors are somewhat popular. For more "serious" work the larger screen is a great benefit.
Most people won't ever want to move the SD card from their phone to the computer...but...Easy, just grab any open source windows EXT3 disk mounting utility for windows, reskin it, package it up in your own installer, include a GPL license with it and put it up on the "downloads" section of the support site. Then include an insert with the phone directing them to the web address on your website on where to download it.
Or license FAT and the user just plugs it in and it works.
Steve Jobs that made Apple what it was
According to Wall Street but engineers tend to feel very differently. The simple truth is that it was a partnership. Without the revolutionary hardware design of Woz, Jobs wouldn't have had such a low cost and capable machine to sell. There are engineers as talented as Woz, and pitchmen as talented as Jobs, that have not had "great" success because they never met their peer from the other side.
Similarly Jobs' success with the Mac and iPhone also relied on extremely talented engineers, required them.
Jobs was the face of Apple, not the heart of Apple. That heart lies in the engineering talent.
Low power bluetooth signal vs powering magnets that are physically driving a plastic cone? The phone's battery is powering the current ear buds. In a wireless scenario the the wireless device has its own battery.
Or the phone can just say "This SD card needs to be formatted for use with this phone. This will erase everything on this card. Are you sure?" for any non ext3 formatted cards.
And when the owners of those phones want to move the SD card to their Windows PC or Mac in order to copy the photos off of it, copy music on to it, etc?
There is absolutely no reason there couldn't be a file system that is universally readable by all OSs. Microsoft is doing this for the patent tax, and if you think otherwise, you're naive.
Of course there could be, but where is it? How much would it cost to develop and successfully promote as an industry standard? Until then there is FAT. I never said MS wasn't interested in patent royalties, just that they are not patent trolls since they actually developed the technology that others are choosing.
Backed up the system lately?