@Chris Miller
The reverse takeover seems to happen every so often.
Eg Apple buys NeXt, but look a few months later and its the next people in charge.
467 publicly visible posts • joined 2 Jul 2008
Screen (biggie), extra memory, patent/ license fees for various things, telephony chips and radios, battery, integration costs and testing.
I can't imagine the processor is actually that big a cost out of the £500, although a modern armv7 will be quite a bit more than the armv5 they are using here.
I believe that one of the things keeping the costs of these down are that a couple of the broadcom chips that power the device are being sold to the project at manufacturing cost, as an employee or two of broadcom are working on the project.
I do wonder if this could be adapted into a basic android phone somehow. Anyone know how expensive telephony radios/ processors are?
ANYWAY, moving on. Mr Dawson, you're one of the millions of random ad clickers that help promote the kind of ad you're bitching about -nothing concerning 'supporting the site" or any other self-righteous excuse you may have - u doan no how 2 deal wit ur chit, dat's all.
----
Its written down now, who am I to argue?
Is this a lead up to a 'yo mamma' joke?
That awkward moment when you realised you just complained about distractions from your user experience on a site for the tech-literate?
----
Ahem.
Given that this is an ad supported website (didn't realise that did you?), and I quite like the website, blocking the ads is kind of counter-productive, dont ya think? hmm?
I even click on them, and heaven forbid, even show some interest in the products. I like the website, so I support it, not like you freeloaders/ bloodsuckers eh?
Just stop the adverts bouncing the article around and I'll be happy!
I have to agree here.
'Lazy parenting' ? Quite a value judgement there, care to back up the 'undeniable' part?
When you have kids, you try to teach them to understand temptation and how to resist it.
However you certainly do not put temptation that they are unprepared for in easy reach. This is bad parenting.
If the 14 year old can't go through the night without playing daft games on his phone, you either take it away or disable the function, as this application does.
Talking to him and trying to convince him of the error of his ways won't work, he's 14, the temptation will be too strong and you should simply remove it until he is capable.
You have to treat them as children, because _that is what they are_, to do otherwise is doing no-one a favour, least of all them.
They're investing, they'll get a good return on the investment (just like the canadian/ australian/ everywhere pension funds can already do!)
It means they can invest it things other than the stock market, so meaning they aren't tied to the lottery like conditions there at the moment (as they have been)
This is a GOOD THING.
you mean at a price near enough to zero that people won't think anything of avoiding downloading it for free?
---
I think I agree with the post above. Its not a rush to the bottom.
The biggest problem with the music industry when napster came of age was that you couldn't download a track and play it on an MP3 player, or on winamp (remember!) without jumping through loads of hoops, if you could get it at all.
It was a pain in the rear to do.
Napster and its ilk were much, much easier.
I happily downloaded music when I wanted it, as it was easy. Every so often I bought an album of a band I liked, but never singles. What would be the point?
Now, however, I buy all my music. I have a spotify subscription for my daily rock fix, and then I buy all music I actually want on the various online shops (I'm a bit of a tart when it comes to that).
The point is, its now easy. Very easy, to buy music, so I do. I'm sure that I will be getting the real thing, at a proper quality (I know about spotify, don't go on). P2P downloading is now harder than buying it, and the product is not of the same guaranteed quality, so, they've made a better service.
I think this is what the above poster was getting at. Its not a rush to the bottom (although some will always be cheap to the point of being criminal). It needs to be a rush to the top. If I want to read a book on my phone, let me do it and charge me for a top quality experience. I'll pay, i think most other people would do too.
Its about charging people to do what _they want to do_.
The basic premise of business, in fact.
Microsoft gets sued for its integrated web-browser, but NEVER prevented its users from downloading and using another. I'm still in disbelief how Apple has still not been sued for the locked down environment it commands over people who seem blinded by flashy fashion focused shells. I don't deny the simplicity....but I will NEVER give my freedom of choice away as all Apple IOS users have.
-----
The all important difference between Microsoft and Apple is that Apple has never abused a monopoly position.
It may have abused its customer base, who knows... (I don't care).
The fact is they do not have a monopoly in _any_ area. The have a commanding position in smartphones, certainly and an even more commanding one in portable music players.
These are not monopolies though, and never have been.
The fact that they have effective competition means that customers have a real choice. Once that is in place, the monopoly regulators don't really care what a company does to its customers.
There's an interesting discussion to be had about what 'freedom' is. It is certainly not absolute, eg, I am not free to randomly beat people up.
So, there are degrees of what we call freedom, with a corresponding compromises in what we are permitted to do.
iOS users have traded the ability to do certain things for the advantages of the platform. Its is not something I would do, but I certainly don't think its a ridiculous position to hold.
Yes, all very true; and I too don't really have the energy for a long drawn out pluralisation debate.
That said, I put it to you that the majority (microbiologists notwithstanding) would use the word 'bacteria' as both a singular and plural; so the use of 'bacteriums' is really a moot point, given that english has 'singularised' (for want of a better word) the latin plural.
-----
"there is no 'correct' systematic way of pluralising a word that has originated in another language."
Yes, I agree and happily concede the point.
Interesting points.
I've found that the best testers simply have a different mindset than is common in development.
Programmers tend to like making things. This doesn't always fit well with shaking bugs out of software, either their own or someone elses.
The best testers are malicious bastards that take great pleasure in pushing a million items of data into something that was specced for 10k and gleefully reporting that it fell over.
The world needs all kinds.
I've used GWT extensively, and I would certainly agree with the advantage being the same language on client and server.
It just struck me how similar the description of the way Dart is supposed to run is to the way GWT works.
Maybe its just that they know how to do the whole compilation to JS thing (and quite well), so they are doing it again with this newcomer.
And yes, Mr Anon, 4/10 for observation ;-)
I had a cd disintegrate at top speed inside the drive.
It blew chunks of disc and parts of the drive out the front of the enclosure. Wrecking it all and scattering debris for a few feet.
The disc was a copy of battlefield 1942, which i was playing at the time, giving surprisingly good effects!
It was a damaged disc, having a crack in the transparent inner portion. Maybe something similar here?
Organically made diesel, using farmed bacteria, would be made by drawing carbon and hydrogen from the air.
This makes it carbon neutral. Even better, the same tech could be used to create fixed carbon, making the process a net reducer of carbon.
Fossil fuels are only considered bad because they are releasing carbon that's been trapped for a long time.
Otherwise, they are a nice, dense energy source that can be easily transported.