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


Forgot your password?
Trust the World's Fastest VPN with Your Internet Security & Freedom - A Lifetime Subscription of PureVPN at 88% off. Also, Slashdot's Facebook page has a chat bot now. Message it for stories and more. ×

Comment Re:It's Math but how (Score 1) 123

affordable smartphones had been around for years before apple made a smartphone.

furthermore, it never was even a market leader in quantities.
what was needed for the apple version, inventionwise, was nothing.

entirely evolutionary.

what was necessary from apples side was screen costs to go down enough and component costs to go down enough so they could sell you a 200 dollar device for 1200 dollars on a contract. that was the real magic of the first generation iPhone - selling a smartphone that lacked actual natively running apps, that had a lackluster resolution screen even for the time, for about 1200 dollars unsubsidized(yes thats how much a launch iPhone cost the people making 2 year contracts at the time).

a long rant about the american/global phones market at the time and how reading forbes ruins your global market leader company:

the american phone market was always twisted, especially in smartphone category - as for years yanks had been buying smartphones(palm treos, windows mobiles. blackberries) with price tags north of 1000$ without knowing that they were that expensive due to the network contracts hiding the costs of the devices(incidentally smartphone adoption in usa was low due to high costs of data plans and still is). rest of the world was dominated by symbian/nokia which provided smartphones with multitasking, web, etc. with phones in the 100 to 600 dollar price range.

you know what started the fall of Nokia really? it wasn't iPhone directly - it was iPhone being featured again and again on american magazines which made the board of Nokia think that they had lost the race and decided to aggressively "focus" on the american market - at this point symbian smartphone sales were still growing. as part of that strategy they decided to hire an american CEO, that american CEO then thought that symbian didn't matter and made a public speech declaring it dead at THE SAME TIME THE YEARLY SHIPMENTS WERE AT AN ALL TIME HIGH. the shipments had not even started to decline before the ceo publicly announced to not buy them anymore. the very same month they were at an all time high - moar money than ever from smartphone shipments for them! so why did he do it?

the board believed forbes more than they believed their own numbers of what people were actually buying globally. Nokia had put huge amounts of developer resources to pleasing american operators for no practical reason at all - as if at&t would have known what the phone needed to have in order to sell(they didn't know). hiring elop came during this focus on american market and american operators, because the light heads in the board thought that the american market was important for them(it wasn't, really).

thats such a huge amounts of fail that it's almost impossible to comprehend and bordering on sabotage, unless you look at the mindset at the people in charge: they were reading american business magazines and believing what was being written in them so they burnt about 20 billion dollars worth of company to ground and put a global brand leader name into an icebox for years.

iPhone as a device was more of a disaster for blackberry as blackberry was also a 1000 dollar device manufacturer that sold on the same markets to the same people, those markets being markets where people bought the phones along with the contract subsidized so that they never knew the real price of the device vs. service.

the biggest trick with the launch of the iPhone was selling it such a high price successfully - that was jobs magic with it.

the biggest trick with getting developers on board iPhone was deceptively simple: offer them a decent cut of the sales of the apps and ask _only_ 100 bucks to be a developer. simple.

but wait, for nokia you could develop and publish for free! well, kind of. if you wanted the app to be sold on operator sales channels and the like, you paid up your arse for it. if you wanted to use any of the more interesting api's you paid 700 bucks for signing - per update. if you wanted the even more interesting api's you paid nokia developer "club" fee, gave drinks to a bunch of people for a year and HOPED you would get the permissions.

then they were apis nokia gave only to middle management best buddies in exchange of bri.. personal parachutes(wifi sharing was built into the platform but the user interface for it was a 3rd party application. nokia ever gave the api to use to that one 3rd party developer, who asked money if you wanted to enable crypto. asking money of something that nokia built into the operating system already.).

so yes, the share of the profits of the apps that apple was willing to give the developers was a very fair one when compared to the general market at the time and the 100 bucks entrance fee was peanuts compared to general market(operator sales channels, mobile payment/licensing providers) at the time. they made being a developer being super cheap whilst they made buying the devices five times more expensive than an average smartphone.

also nokia could just as well have just hopped into the low cost android market - well, they actually did! they sold the nokia x line of phones very successfully in asia and emerging markets before microsoft put a stop to that. nokia x was the best - and cheapest - nokia I ever had - and due to various reasons I've had access to almost all nokia smartphones made between 2003 and 2013. it's not a matter of IF nokia could have made an android phone and went with that route: they successfully proved that they could make one very cheaply and that it would sell very well.. some people think thats why MS bought nokia, to prolong the windows phone by just 2 years.

Comment Re:written in Go (Score 1) 54

Given Go is a mainstream language without anything unusual about it, and given that's pretty much well known, I'd say most programmers wouldn't consider it a barrier. The programmers that do? Probably the people who aren't going to contribute to an open source project in the first place.

Why do I say this? Well, because you either love programming or you don't. If you do, then yes, open source is interesting to you, and no, you're not going to be put off by having to use a language you're only 90% familiar with (because, like I said, for non-LISP/Prolog/etc programming languages, you're already 90% familiar with them), you'll consider that a feature, not a bug.

What might put a programmer off contributing to a project because of the language is if the language is unpleasant or a chore to use, not if the language is not something they've used before. But Go isn't that either.

I'm a developer too. I've been in this profession for nearly 25 years, and been programming since I was 10 years old. If something can be modified and the source is available, I tend to play with it, regardless of the language. I really suspect most of us are the same way. Those who aren't... well, do you think they're really interested in open source?

Comment Re:the laws may take 3-5 years to get rid of drive (Score 2) 110

Quite, the same thing happened when they started to introduce human driven motor vehicles in place of the horse powered vehicles in the late 19th Century. A few lawsuits later, and nobody wanted to drive cars any more because of the risk. That's why we're stuck with horse and buggies in 2017, and nobody has gasoline or electrically powered motor vehicles.

(The concept you're looking for is "Insurance".)

Comment Re:written in Go (Score 2) 54

I don't think real developers care. As long as it's not written in LISP or some other language that's radically different from normal paradigms, and as long as the development environment is just a matter of checking some options in their favorite IDE, most programmers will be entirely happy.

You grossly underestimate the ability of decent programmers to switch from language to language. What we care about is not whether a language is rarely used, but whether it can do what we need it to easily and quickly - and whether the libraries are easily googlelable of course.

Go is a mainstream language, if a little basic. It's fine. That won't be the problem.

Comment well.. not exactly and how you can rat out bullshi (Score 4, Insightful) 123

really, no.

the hardware enabling comes first. what you do with it comes second. there are inventions and then there are what you would call obvious ideas.

most visible advancements come from the latter while it's inventions and things that enabled those inventions which enable them.

for example, if there had not been apple, if there had not been nokia, you would still have that mobile phone - what these companies have mostly done is just applying inventions that enabled their devices to be made, like the transistor and so forth.

information theory therefore comes second, it's about what you do with them - but it is something that was born out of need for it due to other inventions already existing.

as obviously you are working mostly in applications of electric devices and what you can do with them, information theory is more important for you, because you aren't really trying to design a smaller chip and break chip manufacturing minimum size limits, in which case you would find the physics research to have been way more valuable for you - and without those devices that are enabled by science you wouldn't be using them for engineering solutions using them.

shannon seems mostly having been interested in the logic side of things: If you have a machine that does this and this what will be the logical conclusion that you can do with it - people like this are far more likely to pop up rather than the kind of people who come up with the new device itself - for example an internal combustion engine meant quite a lot of changes to the world, once you had that it didn't take quite as much imagination to use it for something as it did to actually come up with a design for a working motor - but once you had the motor it would be obvious to use it to generate electricity, to drive cars, to drive boats and so forth.

incidentally this difference is how you can smell bullshit sellers a million miles away: if someone is selling like a perpetual motion machine that makes water or a car that runs on water, you need to ask yourself: why isn't he applying it to such and such.

the thorium car from a while back for example: who fucking cares if it can run a car forever when, if they had a working model for the power source, they would be using it on a car as the last thing on earth making the whole design and articles about it utterly stupid. Having the power generating unit would change the whole world and the cars would be the last thing to change, so why try to sell the idea as a car engine as the first thing?

Comment Re:Only a penny a page, duplex? (Score 1) 5

I'll be better able to figure it when the cartridge is empty. The savings come from not having to pay eight or ten bucks for copies that I'm proofreading.

They're already online as free e-books, HTML, and PDF, with printed copies available at a price.

Comment Cataracts and Suse (Score 1) 6

IIRC you're Canadian (if in the US you'll need insurance) and should be able to get CrystaLens implants for an extra $2,000. They cure nearsightedness, farsightedness, astigmatism, and cataracts.

I ran Suse back in 2003 and liked it, but moved to Mandrake because my TV didn;t like it; I was using the TV as a monitor with an S-video cable. Still trying to find a distro that will run on an old Gateway laptop.

Comment Re:Hmm (Score 1) 403

I'd be enormously surprised if Chinese businessmen working in manufacturing industries dependent upon American and European clients aren't interested in news relating to how easy it'll be to export to the US and to European nations in the near future. I would, absolutely, expect them to show more interest than they've done in the past given the ramifications for Trump, who appears to oppose the degree of international trade we have, and Brexit, which will change the relationship of nations and thus have massive ramifications for trade.

Just because the "average" Chinese person doesn't care, doesn't mean that a significant minority will suddenly have a lot more interest in US and European events than they did previously. With China being a fairly populous country, you'd expect that to amount to a lot of new readers.

Slashdot Top Deals

"There is no statute of limitations on stupidity." -- Randomly produced by a computer program called Markov3.