I'm always amazed when people make derogatory comments about elected officials. Seems like the bigger the landslide defeat the louder they critize. It is not like he is any different than last time he was governor. The voters knew full well what they were getting.
Democracy has its advantages and disadvantages. Unfortunately for Repulicans, mostly disadvantages because they are in the minority.
I'm always amazed when people make derogatory comments about elected officials. Seems like the bigger the landslide defeat the louder they critize. It is not like he is any different than last time he was governor. The voters knew full well what they were getting.
Democracy has its advantages and disadvantages. Unfortunately for Repulicans, mostly disadvantages because they are in the minority.
Agreed.
But a question - are Republicans really in the minority? Particularly outside of regions where the educated masses live?
But a question - are Republicans really in the minority? Particularly outside of regions where the educated masses live?
The undecided are the biggest factor in all regions and they are primarily motivated by current events which is why it is essential for Republicans to try to put the blame for economic struggles on the Dems totally denying any responsibility, even though the whole system colapsed under their watch and was a problem the current adminstration largely inherited due to Republican mistakes.
To all those accusing Google of copying Apple, consider this:
Did Apple copy Google (and many others) by entering the Cloud computing field?
Did Apple copy Google with its iOS5 notification scheme?
Did Apple copy Google by adding speech recognition (even if they executed it better)?
Copying doesn't matter if it doesn't violate others rights.
Did Apple violate the intellectual property rights of others by doing the above?
"Voice Control" was released well over 2 years ago, in iOS3, by the way.
Has Google kept out of the smartphone manufacturing market because they'd be violating many more Apple patents?
Did Google stop selling smartphones on-line because they'd be in violation of the Video Privacy Protection Act of 1988--the same act Netflix was hoping to avoid violating by splitting off its mail-order business?
You'd want such a system to automatically close doors and seal them because air traveling from one room to another can cause the HVAC system to "fight itself" trying to keep one room warm and the other cold.
But realistically, how much variance do you have from room to room in a house? I think you can over complicate the whole thing. I have a basic programmable unit and I never need to adjust a thing except when I go on holiday. I love the look of this system but I suspect it tries to creta a need. It's like a dishwasher. It's great to have 24 programs but I suspect 90 percent of people never change program. The once that do only select rinse or power wash once in a while.
I have a basic programmable unit and I never need to adjust a thing except when I go on holiday. I love the look of this system but I suspect it tries to create a need.
But is your system programmed optimally? If you stick to the same schedule on a weekly basis maybe it is, but as they note most people don't set their programmable thermostat and those that do still have to fight with fluctuating schedules that won't get updated to the thermostat.
I think Nest is the future. That doesn't mean that all will be so attractive or expensive. I see no reason for others to not already be copying how Nest works so they can cash in on this other premium and budget models the same way programmable thermostats took over the average home after first being a very expensive.
To be fair, why isnt the Senate committee grilling Apple with its monopolistic market share of the Tablet market?
Because unlike Google with Search, Apple doesn't dump free services to drive out competitors and then jack up the prices.
Most recent example - Google Maps API - was free, now through TOS change huge impact to those using Google Maps API.
Quote:
Double standard?
No double standard, just ignorance of what should be simple concepts such as "Monopoly"
Quote:
Dont get your hopes up too high Apple fans, because the yard stick to a competitive landscape in the eyes of the Senators is anyone having greater than 90% of any market is deemed a monopoly.
Ridiculous. If anything, when there are demonstrated and egregious examples of truly monopolistic behavior the government is often way more in the "too little, way too late" camp - i.e. Microsoft with DOS and Windows (DOS isn't done until Lotus won't run)...
Quote:
Apple should be next on target.
For idiotic, rampant and completely baseless speculation? Too late - we are already here
I switch to Bing every now and then and it is getting better.
I switched to Bing last much and it's far more useful. First of all, the number of blatantly ad-placed results are dramatically less!
Every once in a while I will cross check with a Google search, but I have yet to find any compelling reason to switch back to Google. Other than forgetting and going there out of habit
That you would state that just shows how either completely ignorant you are, or deliberately obtuse you are being.
Which is it?
Because his points are far from off topic. They go to the old adage that matters the most - especially for understanding motivation of why people or organizations do things: "Follow the money".
Not agreeing that iPad is a monopoly. But playing devils advocate- windows was in trouble for using IE exclusively and not installing any other web browser (although you could download it later).
Actually, a very important point of clarification - Microsoft PREVENTED OEMs from installing other browsers. Even if the other browser makers wanted to pay them - otherwise Microsoft threatened to cut them off from being able to source Windows - basically putting them out of business.
Apple does no such thing. There is only one configuration of an iOS device and it's the same for all users, and you can easily download third party software out of the box.
Quote:
iOS 5 on iPad and iPhone only use safari exclusively... So that is a pretty similar parallel.
Except for the part about MS threatening to basically bankrupt an OEM by not selling them Windows if they bundled third party browsers with their computers.
Quote:
Either way, I'm not a fan of anti-trust stuff... Kind of bugs me on a philosophical standpoint (no need for someone to argue their point)
Well, you should be a fan of it. Because while I don't think it needs to be tossed about as casually as it is in forums like these, the fact that it exists does keep companies at least a little in check. Just go back and read earlier American history re:Standard Oil and you will see the necessity of anti-trust (and I am DEFINITELY not a big-governmant person - I am for a weak central government as advocated by our constitution and the founding fathers)
Copying doesn't matter if it doesn't violate others rights.
Did Apple violate the intellectual property rights of others by doing the above?
"Voice Control" was released well over 2 years ago, in iOS3, by the way.
Has Google kept out of the smartphone manufacturing market because they'd be violating many more Apple patents?
Did Google stop selling smartphones on-line because they'd be in violation of the Video Privacy Protection Act of 1988--the same act Netflix was hoping to avoid violating by splitting off its mail-order business?
You're absolutely right, of course - rights are important. That brings up an example I have cited here before: iBooks, which looks like Delicious Library. The developer of that latter certainly felt his rights were violated, and did not receive recognition or compensation from Apple: http://twitter.com/#!/wilshipley/status/8289716016
What's my point? Very simple - Apple is hardly merely a victim when it comes to willful violation of IP rights. Sometimes, they buy their way out of it after the fact. Sometimes, they don't even bother.
That you would state that just shows how either completely ignorant you are, or deliberately obtuse you are being.
Which is it?
Because his points are far from off topic. They go to the old adage that matters the most - especially for understanding motivation of why people or organizations do things: "Follow the money".
So which is it - Absolute D? Are you ignorant or obtuse? Oops, sorry, I got it wrong. Are you completely ignorant or deliberately obtuse? It has to be one or the other. It cannot be partly ignorant or inadvertently obtuse. Which is it? Inquiring minds want to know!!
The undecided are the biggest factor in all regions and they are primarily motivated by current events which is why it is essential for Republicans to try to put the blame for economic struggles on the Dems totally denying any responsibility, even though the whole system colapsed under their watch and was a problem the current adminstration largely inherited due to Republican mistakes.
*Undecided* has to do with voting. I'm thinking of card-carrying Republicans. Now, this group is going to be lower than 50% of Americans and is therefore a minority in that sense. But I am thinking of minority in the qualitative sense of how small are they, in reality? How many Americans believe in lower taxes, rights to owning machine guns, abolishing abortion, allowing oil rigs all along the coastlines, removing all environmental regulations, etc.?
You're absolutely right, of course - rights are important. That brings up an example I have cited here before: iBooks, which looks like Delicious Library. The developer of that latter certainly felt his rights were violated, and did not receive recognition or compensation from Apple
What intellectual property rights did Apple violate with iBooks? Answer specifically in terms of the law, not how the Delicious Library author feels.
Quote:
What's my point? Very simple - Apple is hardly merely a victim when it comes to willful violation of IP rights. Sometimes, they buy their way out of it after the fact. Sometimes, they don't even bother.
There is simply no comparison between Apple and Google.
So, why is "big government" (that the citizen has some modicum of control over), a bad thing and "big corporations" (which the citizen has no control at all over), "good."
I don't really expect you to answer anything reasonable here as your comment about how we control companies "through our dollars," shows a rather complete lack of understanding about politics and economics. I'm just pointing out the giant gaping hole in your argument/ideology with the arctic wind raging through it.
Americans are always going on about the evils of big government but they let huge, un-elected corporations rule the country (and most of the rest of the world), essentially unchecked and without even guidelines as to how these entities are supposed to act, let alone actual rules and regulations.
Americans are always also going on about "freedom" and letting the people decide what they want to do for themselves, but individual american citizens have demonstrably fewer freedoms than European or Canadian citizens, and no protection at all from corporate "mega-citizens who actually enjoy more rights and freedoms than the people themselves.
Most of the people here aren't seeing Schmidt's point. By using Siri people are bypassing the ads that google serves up which is Google's main moneymaker. The fact that siri uses google for data is immaterial.
Most of the people here aren't seeing Schmidt's point. By using Siri people are bypassing the ads that google serves up which is Google's main moneymaker. The fact that siri uses google for data is immaterial.
They see it all right. In fact, in another thread, many people were climbing over each other to claim how this is Apple's entry into search and how brilliant this was.
But they have to speak out of a different corner of the mouth here because the Apple fanboy guidebook stipulates that one must not agree with Eric Schmidt.
Most of the people here aren't seeing Schmidt's point. By using Siri people are bypassing the ads that google serves up which is Google's main moneymaker. The fact that siri uses google for data is immaterial.
1) Schmidt's point was to try to get the antitrust committee from seeing the dominance of Google's search. Whether Google has an ill-gotten advantage or abused their position I can't say.
2) As previously noted Siri isn't pulling up any Google searches. The only thing that is pulling from Google is Maps, which is a separate set of APIs that is already built into the iOS Maps app.
Comments
You forgot to mention... Governor Moonbeam *
I'm always amazed when people make derogatory comments about elected officials. Seems like the bigger the landslide defeat the louder they critize. It is not like he is any different than last time he was governor. The voters knew full well what they were getting.
Democracy has its advantages and disadvantages. Unfortunately for Repulicans, mostly disadvantages because they are in the minority.
I'm always amazed when people make derogatory comments about elected officials. Seems like the bigger the landslide defeat the louder they critize. It is not like he is any different than last time he was governor. The voters knew full well what they were getting.
Democracy has its advantages and disadvantages. Unfortunately for Repulicans, mostly disadvantages because they are in the minority.
Agreed.
But a question - are Republicans really in the minority? Particularly outside of regions where the educated masses live?
Agreed.
But a question - are Republicans really in the minority? Particularly outside of regions where the educated masses live?
The undecided are the biggest factor in all regions and they are primarily motivated by current events which is why it is essential for Republicans to try to put the blame for economic struggles on the Dems totally denying any responsibility, even though the whole system colapsed under their watch and was a problem the current adminstration largely inherited due to Republican mistakes.
To all those accusing Google of copying Apple, consider this:
Did Apple copy Google (and many others) by entering the Cloud computing field?
Did Apple copy Google by adding speech recognition (even if they executed it better)?
It's a slippery slope.
Was Apple iTools launched in 2000, "cloud" computing?
Hey look, a talking computer
To all those accusing Google of copying Apple, consider this:
Did Apple copy Google (and many others) by entering the Cloud computing field?
Did Apple copy Google with its iOS5 notification scheme?
Did Apple copy Google by adding speech recognition (even if they executed it better)?
Copying doesn't matter if it doesn't violate others rights.
Did Apple violate the intellectual property rights of others by doing the above?
"Voice Control" was released well over 2 years ago, in iOS3, by the way.
Has Google kept out of the smartphone manufacturing market because they'd be violating many more Apple patents?
Did Google stop selling smartphones on-line because they'd be in violation of the Video Privacy Protection Act of 1988--the same act Netflix was hoping to avoid violating by splitting off its mail-order business?
You'd want such a system to automatically close doors and seal them because air traveling from one room to another can cause the HVAC system to "fight itself" trying to keep one room warm and the other cold.
But realistically, how much variance do you have from room to room in a house? I think you can over complicate the whole thing. I have a basic programmable unit and I never need to adjust a thing except when I go on holiday. I love the look of this system but I suspect it tries to creta a need. It's like a dishwasher. It's great to have 24 programs but I suspect 90 percent of people never change program. The once that do only select rinse or power wash once in a while.
I have a basic programmable unit and I never need to adjust a thing except when I go on holiday. I love the look of this system but I suspect it tries to create a need.
But is your system programmed optimally? If you stick to the same schedule on a weekly basis maybe it is, but as they note most people don't set their programmable thermostat and those that do still have to fight with fluctuating schedules that won't get updated to the thermostat.
I think Nest is the future. That doesn't mean that all will be so attractive or expensive. I see no reason for others to not already be copying how Nest works so they can cash in on this other premium and budget models the same way programmable thermostats took over the average home after first being a very expensive.
To be fair, why isnt the Senate committee grilling Apple with its monopolistic market share of the Tablet market?
Because unlike Google with Search, Apple doesn't dump free services to drive out competitors and then jack up the prices.
Most recent example - Google Maps API - was free, now through TOS change huge impact to those using Google Maps API.
Double standard?
No double standard, just ignorance of what should be simple concepts such as "Monopoly"
Dont get your hopes up too high Apple fans, because the yard stick to a competitive landscape in the eyes of the Senators is anyone having greater than 90% of any market is deemed a monopoly.
Ridiculous. If anything, when there are demonstrated and egregious examples of truly monopolistic behavior the government is often way more in the "too little, way too late" camp - i.e. Microsoft with DOS and Windows (DOS isn't done until Lotus won't run)...
Apple should be next on target.
For idiotic, rampant and completely baseless speculation? Too late - we are already here
I switch to Bing every now and then and it is getting better.
I switched to Bing last much and it's far more useful. First of all, the number of blatantly ad-placed results are dramatically less!
Every once in a while I will cross check with a Google search, but I have yet to find any compelling reason to switch back to Google. Other than forgetting and going there out of habit
Surprisingly off topic.
That you would state that just shows how either completely ignorant you are, or deliberately obtuse you are being.
Which is it?
Because his points are far from off topic. They go to the old adage that matters the most - especially for understanding motivation of why people or organizations do things: "Follow the money".
Not agreeing that iPad is a monopoly. But playing devils advocate- windows was in trouble for using IE exclusively and not installing any other web browser (although you could download it later).
Actually, a very important point of clarification - Microsoft PREVENTED OEMs from installing other browsers. Even if the other browser makers wanted to pay them - otherwise Microsoft threatened to cut them off from being able to source Windows - basically putting them out of business.
Apple does no such thing. There is only one configuration of an iOS device and it's the same for all users, and you can easily download third party software out of the box.
iOS 5 on iPad and iPhone only use safari exclusively... So that is a pretty similar parallel.
Except for the part about MS threatening to basically bankrupt an OEM by not selling them Windows if they bundled third party browsers with their computers.
Either way, I'm not a fan of anti-trust stuff... Kind of bugs me on a philosophical standpoint (no need for someone to argue their point)
Well, you should be a fan of it. Because while I don't think it needs to be tossed about as casually as it is in forums like these, the fact that it exists does keep companies at least a little in check. Just go back and read earlier American history re:Standard Oil and you will see the necessity of anti-trust (and I am DEFINITELY not a big-governmant person - I am for a weak central government as advocated by our constitution and the founding fathers)
Copying doesn't matter if it doesn't violate others rights.
Did Apple violate the intellectual property rights of others by doing the above?
"Voice Control" was released well over 2 years ago, in iOS3, by the way.
Has Google kept out of the smartphone manufacturing market because they'd be violating many more Apple patents?
Did Google stop selling smartphones on-line because they'd be in violation of the Video Privacy Protection Act of 1988--the same act Netflix was hoping to avoid violating by splitting off its mail-order business?
You're absolutely right, of course - rights are important. That brings up an example I have cited here before: iBooks, which looks like Delicious Library. The developer of that latter certainly felt his rights were violated, and did not receive recognition or compensation from Apple: http://twitter.com/#!/wilshipley/status/8289716016
What's my point? Very simple - Apple is hardly merely a victim when it comes to willful violation of IP rights. Sometimes, they buy their way out of it after the fact. Sometimes, they don't even bother.
That you would state that just shows how either completely ignorant you are, or deliberately obtuse you are being.
Which is it?
Because his points are far from off topic. They go to the old adage that matters the most - especially for understanding motivation of why people or organizations do things: "Follow the money".
So which is it - Absolute D? Are you ignorant or obtuse? Oops, sorry, I got it wrong. Are you completely ignorant or deliberately obtuse? It has to be one or the other. It cannot be partly ignorant or inadvertently obtuse. Which is it? Inquiring minds want to know!!
The undecided are the biggest factor in all regions and they are primarily motivated by current events which is why it is essential for Republicans to try to put the blame for economic struggles on the Dems totally denying any responsibility, even though the whole system colapsed under their watch and was a problem the current adminstration largely inherited due to Republican mistakes.
*Undecided* has to do with voting. I'm thinking of card-carrying Republicans. Now, this group is going to be lower than 50% of Americans and is therefore a minority in that sense. But I am thinking of minority in the qualitative sense of how small are they, in reality? How many Americans believe in lower taxes, rights to owning machine guns, abolishing abortion, allowing oil rigs all along the coastlines, removing all environmental regulations, etc.?
You're absolutely right, of course - rights are important. That brings up an example I have cited here before: iBooks, which looks like Delicious Library. The developer of that latter certainly felt his rights were violated, and did not receive recognition or compensation from Apple
What intellectual property rights did Apple violate with iBooks? Answer specifically in terms of the law, not how the Delicious Library author feels.
What's my point? Very simple - Apple is hardly merely a victim when it comes to willful violation of IP rights. Sometimes, they buy their way out of it after the fact. Sometimes, they don't even bother.
There is simply no comparison between Apple and Google.
Google is king of IP violations.
So, why is "big government" (that the citizen has some modicum of control over), a bad thing and "big corporations" (which the citizen has no control at all over), "good."
I don't really expect you to answer anything reasonable here as your comment about how we control companies "through our dollars," shows a rather complete lack of understanding about politics and economics. I'm just pointing out the giant gaping hole in your argument/ideology with the arctic wind raging through it.
Americans are always going on about the evils of big government but they let huge, un-elected corporations rule the country (and most of the rest of the world), essentially unchecked and without even guidelines as to how these entities are supposed to act, let alone actual rules and regulations.
Americans are always also going on about "freedom" and letting the people decide what they want to do for themselves, but individual american citizens have demonstrably fewer freedoms than European or Canadian citizens, and no protection at all from corporate "mega-citizens who actually enjoy more rights and freedoms than the people themselves.
Most of the people here aren't seeing Schmidt's point. By using Siri people are bypassing the ads that google serves up which is Google's main moneymaker. The fact that siri uses google for data is immaterial.
They see it all right. In fact, in another thread, many people were climbing over each other to claim how this is Apple's entry into search and how brilliant this was.
But they have to speak out of a different corner of the mouth here because the Apple fanboy guidebook stipulates that one must not agree with Eric Schmidt.
Most of the people here aren't seeing Schmidt's point. By using Siri people are bypassing the ads that google serves up which is Google's main moneymaker. The fact that siri uses google for data is immaterial.
1) Schmidt's point was to try to get the antitrust committee from seeing the dominance of Google's search. Whether Google has an ill-gotten advantage or abused their position I can't say.
2) As previously noted Siri isn't pulling up any Google searches. The only thing that is pulling from Google is Maps, which is a separate set of APIs that is already built into the iOS Maps app.