No, consumers will not care and will only remember that it performed like crap.
True. Anyone who thinks that most people think about these products the way posters on forums do is seriously delusional. People that know from 40% to 200% of what we do comprise 10% of the tablet market if that, any size or power. Very few people know or care about anything except if they'll get their money's worth. They care not about HTML5 or HTML55, or anything except if it works OK.
These will sell or not sell based on what their neighbors say is great or sucks.
It's what they've been taught - That specs tell the story. Pick up Best Buy's sales ad tomorrow and see how they market PCs and Android phones: Ghz, GB, Robots, and explosion.
Also, sci-fi gladiators fighting robots with explosions. That is how the Verizon Droid is marketed on TV.
True. Anyone who thinks that most people think about these products the way posters on forums do is seriously delusional. People that know from 40% to 200% of what we do comprise 10% of the tablet market if that, any size or power. Very few people know or care about anything except if they'll get their money's worth. They care not about HTML5 or HTML55, or anything except if it works OK.
These will sell or not sell based on what their neighbors say is great or sucks.
Period.
I believe that many of these (Fires, Kindles and PlayBooks) will be little-thought/effort-given Christmas gifts...
And 50% will be returned or get a store credit...
...works out slightly worse than giving a gift card... From a store where the recipient does't normally shop!
Yes... But Silk's potential is for millions of popular page requests from identical devices to a concentrated set of servers.
Amazon could continuously determine, say, the top 10,000 page requests and continuously reload, render and cache those pages -- so that 80% of Silk requests could be delivered, preformatted, from the existing cache.
Potential schmotential. First, Internet caching servers are nothing new. Secondly, anything with that many page views tends to be highly dynamic web pages, say, CNN or twitter. There's no point in caching stale copies of those. Third, unless it has already cached it, the intermediate server is another network hop and processing node that stands between the web browser and the originating server, so that would be expected to add latency. Theory is nice, but real world numbers are what matter, no?
So let's say there's no net gain (some websites are faster, some are slower). How does running extra unnecessary servers to process Silk requests beneficial? It's costing someone money to run those servers in a data center, and unless the energy is from renewable sources, it's also contributing greenhouse gases too.
Potential schmotential. First, Internet caching servers are nothing new. Secondly, anything with that many page views tends to be highly dynamic web pages, say, CNN or twitter. There's no point in caching stale copies of those. Third, unless it has already cached it, the intermediate server is another network hop and processing node that stands between the web browser and the originating server, so that would be expected to add latency. Theory is nice, but real world numbers are what matter, no?
So let's say there's no net gain (some websites are faster, some are slower). How does running extra unnecessary servers to process Silk requests beneficial? It's costing someone money to run those servers in a data center, and unless the energy is from renewable sources, it's also contributing greenhouse gases too.
Totally disagree! If you can continuously cache/refresh the most reqrested (dynamically determined) web pages then deliver them from a few servers to millions of clients you have gained performance, reduced bandwidth...
Obviously, with 50,000 Fires in the field, it's overhead... But with 5-10 million Fires it would be pure gravy if 80% of up-to-date web pages could be served from teh caches.
Edit: As it is, any popular web page has been updated many times before/as it is served, downloaded (scripts, styles, etc) and rendered on a less-powerful client.
If a cached, formated (no tags) page is delivered from an up-to-date cache... I suspect the latter would deliver a more recent result.
No, consumers will not care and will only remember that it performed like crap.
Yup. I was in the telco shop yesterday. Showed a friend Siri on the demo 4s. Worked on mark bringing up the various things I was asking for (which surprised me a bit cause it isn't perfect). Then while waiting in line I played with a string of "giant" screened android units from HTC, Samsung and Moto. and from the first touch they performed poorly. Scrolling stutters, misreads of touch input with slightly mysterious and visually poor interfaces. The couple of Win7 phones were way smoother and responded to input correctly and logically.
Thing is from the first G1 I saw through to now all android units I have played with or studied others using have been clunky marignal devices.
I am savvy enough and not idle consumer but from first touch it is clear what is crap. I would gladly choose a Win7 device if I could not select an iDevice. Android might have another 5 years before it presents as usable.
Just for balance the RIM devices, well I think they were fake plastic mockups. So they responded pretty much as they would if you bought one.
Too much profanity for an intelligent conversation!
I disagree. Profanity does not diminish the merits of a good argument and the numerous valid points that have been laid forth. Puritanical people might find such language objectionable, but profanity is a common part of language that is used daily by virtually everybody. Even such writers as Shakespeare were fond of vulgar words. It is virtually impossible for me and it would also not be very satisfying to write anything about Android without at least a bare minimum of profanity included.
Also, I'm guessing that quite a few Kindle Fire owners will choose to sign up for Amazon prime, so in those cases, it's at least $280.
And a refurbished iPad 2, which is as good as new (Apple's refurbished products are first rate) can be had directly from Apple for $450.
If I were really, really poor, I'd rather pick up a used iPad 1 than spend $200 for a Kindle Fire.
But with Amazon Prime, a customer gets access to streaming movies and 2nd day shipping for physical products. Your comparison just doesn't work comparing apples to oranges.
Profanity does not diminish the merits of a good argument…
It makes you seem far less professional, is all.
Quote:
…profanity is a common part of language that is used daily by virtually everybody.
Nope.
Quote:
It is virtually impossible for me and it would also not be very satisfying to write anything about Android without at least a bare minimum of profanity included.
Then, and I say this with a staunch, unblemished record of being, myself, an Apple Evangelist (to which many an Apple fanboy and troll alike can attest ), take a chill pill.
There's absolutely nothing wrong with a large bias toward Apple. There's something wrong with finding absolutely no fault in Apple, and there's definitely something wrong when one has to behave like the raving fools that surrounded me in college (A "Christian" university, at that. SO much swearing. ) to get one's point across about competitors.
For example, I like Windows Phone 7. It's incredibly clean and crisp in its design, and it's quite responsive on all the hardware with which I've had a chance to play. However, it lacks many, MANY features that have become so integral to iOS, has a far sparser selection of third-party apps, does not integrate as fluidly with its surroundings as iOS devices do with iTunes and its Stores, and the OS itself doesn't have any soul to it.
Yes, it's gorgeous. Yes, there might even be some things in it from which Apple can learn. But I don't feel it when I use it. The definition of feel here is hard to describe, but you know it when you experience it. It's not necessarily utilitarian or spartan, it just doesn't have any heart.
I'm glad it exists; once Android capitulates, it will step up to fill the void quite nicely, and I see it growing into a fine competitor for Apple. For once, Microsoft has done beautiful work without copying anyone else to do it.
It just has no heart.
Now, see? No swearing. I've not only established iOS' superiority, but I've also managed to take a subtle jab at Android and point out flaws in Windows Phone 7 while giving it a healthy amount of praise as the well-designed second-banana it is. Such praise shows that, while I prefer iOS over both alternatives and Apple's ecosystem over Windows' and Google's (lack thereof), I am not a "blind follower of The Fith", as the anti-fanboys would say.
This device is more like a toy compared to the iPad. It really doesn't measure up. One thing I have noticed is that it has no email capability. I would think if you have internet access and you brows the web you should be able to get your email as well.
But with Amazon Prime, a customer gets access to streaming movies and 2nd day shipping for physical products. Your comparison just doesn't work comparing apples to oranges.
I agree with what you write, but I wonder what percentage of Fire owners did opt for that option.
The point I'm trying to make is that the Kindle Fire seems to be a very poor tablet, though it does seem to excel at one thing, being a portal for Amazon's store and their services. I also find it strange that the kind of people who would sweat over a couple of hundred dollars have all the extra cash lying around to be buying stuff on Amazon.
Totally disagree! If you can continuously cache/refresh the most reqrested (dynamically determined) web pages then deliver them from a few servers to millions of clients you have gained performance, reduced bandwidth...
Obviously, with 50,000 Fires in the field, it's overhead... But with 5-10 million Fires it would be pure gravy if 80% of up-to-date web pages could be served from teh caches.
Edit: As it is, any popular web page has been updated many times before/as it is served, downloaded (scripts, styles, etc) and rendered on a less-powerful client.
If a cached, formated (no tags) page is delivered from an up-to-date cache... I suspect the latter would deliver a more recent result.
The problem with caching as done by Silk is that the (purely) theoretical speed benefits to the user are all lost on the niche user of this $200 product. It's a twist on a well worn axiom, in this case that the caching already taking place at the device is enough as far as where this niche user goes, and for the advanced user looking for an accelerated experience, Silk style caching won't be enough. It's ALL about data collection, and unless Amazon can make everyone go "WOW" when Silk is turned on they've got a tough sell pushing it on people who either don't care about it or are too difficult to impress.
But again, the theoretical faster experience is completely secondary to the data mining, and Amazon is pounding the speed issue in the press because it's the only way to sell these things to the people who usually opt for the least privacy intrusive option, but also because, well, who from Amazon is going to give a decent story about what a great data mining system they've come up with : )
That may very well be true. However, I am not a professional and I am certainly not trying to represent myself as one. I am not connected to the tech industry in any way, shape or form. I am a professional in my particular profession, but that is not really tech industry related. I am merely a commentator here and a guy with a few opinions.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
Nope.
Tape-recorded conversations find that roughly 80?90 spoken words each day ? 0.5% to 0.7% of all words ? are swear words, with usage varying from between 0% to 3.4%. In comparison, first-person plural pronouns (we, us, our) make up 1% of spoken words.[2]
^ Jay T. (2009). The Utility and Ubiquity of Taboo Words. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 4:153-161. doi:10.1111/j.1745-6924.2009.01115.x Entire document
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
Then, and I say this with a staunch, unblemished record of being, myself, an Apple Evangelist (to which many an Apple fanboy and troll alike can attest ), take a chill pill.
There's absolutely nothing wrong with a large bias toward Apple. There's something wrong with finding absolutely no fault in Apple, and there's definitely something wrong when one has to behave like the raving fools that surrounded me in college (A "Christian" university, at that. SO much swearing. ) to get one's point across about competitors.
For example, I like Windows Phone 7. It's incredibly clean and crisp in its design, and it's quite responsive on all the hardware with which I've had a chance to play. However, it lacks many, MANY features that have become so integral to iOS, has a far sparser selection of third-party apps, does not integrate as fluidly with its surroundings as iOS devices do with iTunes and its Stores, and the OS itself doesn't have any soul to it.
Yes, it's gorgeous. Yes, there might even be some things in it from which Apple can learn. But I don't feel it when I use it. The definition of feel here is hard to describe, but you know it when you experience it. It's not necessarily utilitarian or spartan, it just doesn't have any heart.
I'm glad it exists; once Android capitulates, it will step up to fill the void quite nicely, and I see it growing into a fine competitor for Apple. For once, Microsoft has done beautiful work without copying anyone else to do it.
It just has no heart.
Now, see? No swearing. I've not only established iOS' superiority, but I've also managed to take a subtle jab at Android and point out flaws in Windows Phone 7 while giving it a healthy amount of praise as the well-designed second-banana it is. Such praise shows that, while I prefer iOS over both alternatives and Apple's ecosystem over Windows' and Google's (lack thereof), I am not a "blind follower of The Fith", as the anti-fanboys would say.
I agree that criticism can absolutley be written without profanity, and you have provided an example of that. But I'm sure you would agree that we all have our own particular style and tastes when it comes to different things, and I am simply a profane and blasphemous person. I guess that's just how I roll.
Not that I'm comparing myself to Picasso, but would you criticize him for having too much blue in his pictures?
This device is more like a toy compared to the iPad. It really doesn't measure up. One thing I have noticed is that it has no email capability. I would think if you have internet access and you brows the web you should be able to get your email as well.
Quote:
Originally Posted by easy288
Browser based email is possible.
You don't want an email client for too much on a tablet with such limited storage anyway. All it does is fill up mailboxes on what little space you've got on the device, and they want you to use the storage for content. They assume you'll use the browser for email.
But just get an email client and use it, if need be. There are plenty.
Then, and I say this with a staunch, unblemished record of being, myself, an Apple Evangelist (to which many an Apple fanboy and troll alike can attest ), take a chill pill.
There's absolutely nothing wrong with a large bias toward Apple. There's something wrong with finding absolutely no fault in Apple, and there's definitely something wrong when one has to behave like the raving fools that surrounded me in college (A "Christian" university, at that. SO much swearing. ) to get one's point across about competitors.
For example, I like Windows Phone 7. It's incredibly clean and crisp in its design, and it's quite responsive on all the hardware with which I've had a chance to play. However, it lacks many, MANY features that have become so integral to iOS, has a far sparser selection of third-party apps, does not integrate as fluidly with its surroundings as iOS devices do with iTunes and its Stores, and the OS itself doesn't have any soul to it.
Yes, it's gorgeous. Yes, there might even be some things in it from which Apple can learn. But I don't feel it when I use it. The definition of feel here is hard to describe, but you know it when you experience it. It's not necessarily utilitarian or spartan, it just doesn't have any heart.
I'm glad it exists; once Android capitulates, it will step up to fill the void quite nicely, and I see it growing into a fine competitor for Apple. For once, Microsoft has done beautiful work without copying anyone else to do it.
It just has no heart.
You're such a gentleman.
But sometimes, methinks, Apple-tards need grow a pair.
The mods may not agree, heck they may even disapprove, but it's worth noting that Apple ][ is one of the rare ones that at least has one.*
They have the whole Kindle, Nook, and iPad line ups at Target, including the Kindle Fire. I played with the Fire for about ten minutes. That certainly doesn't make me an expert, but I can tell you this: as an iPad user, I would go nuts trying to use the Fire. It is way under powered for a multi-media device. You can touch the screen, and the device doesn't respond. You touch it again, and sometimes it responds. It is very sluggish.
I actually found the newer Nook to be more responsive. Spend two hundred more, and get the iPad if you want a real media device. For reading books, the Fire is a step backwards, a the e-ink if more enjoyable for reading for long periods of time.
As for upgrading to Android 4.0, I doubt that will happen anytime soon. Amazon can't call the device a Android device because it doesn't use Google Apps. Google likely isn't a big fan of the Fire because Amazon cut it out of the loop. In return, it can't use the newer versions of Android.
Totally disagree! If you can continuously cache/refresh the most reqrested (dynamically determined) web pages then deliver them from a few servers to millions of clients you have gained performance, reduced bandwidth...
Obviously, with 50,000 Fires in the field, it's overhead... But with 5-10 million Fires it would be pure gravy if 80% of up-to-date web pages could be served from teh caches.
Yeah, but that's still a rather hand-wavy argument. It's all based on "but, ifs" that current benchmarks don't seem to show.
Tell you what, when they get 5-10 million Fires and teh caches serve pure gravy, be sure to rub it in my face, k?
The problem with caching as done by Silk is that the (purely) theoretical speed benefits to the user are all lost on the niche user of this $200 product. It's a twist on a well worn axiom, in this case that the caching already taking place at the device is enough as far as where this niche user goes, and for the advanced user looking for an accelerated experience, Silk style caching won't be enough. It's ALL about data collection, and unless Amazon can make everyone go "WOW" when Silk is turned on they've got a tough sell pushing it on people who either don't care about it or are too difficult to impress.
But again, the theoretical faster experience is completely secondary to the data mining, and Amazon is pounding the speed issue in the press because it's the only way to sell these things to the people who usually opt for the least privacy intrusive option, but also because, well, who from Amazon is going to give a decent story about what a great data mining system they've come up with : )
I agree with all this... But I like the Silk concept... For several reasons -- especially the ability to isolate the user from undesired content and tracking...
I expect I would opt for Amazon tracking over Google tracking.
Comments
No, consumers will not care and will only remember that it performed like crap.
True. Anyone who thinks that most people think about these products the way posters on forums do is seriously delusional. People that know from 40% to 200% of what we do comprise 10% of the tablet market if that, any size or power. Very few people know or care about anything except if they'll get their money's worth. They care not about HTML5 or HTML55, or anything except if it works OK.
These will sell or not sell based on what their neighbors say is great or sucks.
Period.
It's what they've been taught - That specs tell the story. Pick up Best Buy's sales ad tomorrow and see how they market PCs and Android phones: Ghz, GB, Robots, and explosion.
Also, sci-fi gladiators fighting robots with explosions. That is how the Verizon Droid is marketed on TV.
True. Anyone who thinks that most people think about these products the way posters on forums do is seriously delusional. People that know from 40% to 200% of what we do comprise 10% of the tablet market if that, any size or power. Very few people know or care about anything except if they'll get their money's worth. They care not about HTML5 or HTML55, or anything except if it works OK.
These will sell or not sell based on what their neighbors say is great or sucks.
Period.
I believe that many of these (Fires, Kindles and PlayBooks) will be little-thought/effort-given Christmas gifts...
And 50% will be returned or get a store credit...
...works out slightly worse than giving a gift card... From a store where the recipient does't normally shop!
Yes... But Silk's potential is for millions of popular page requests from identical devices to a concentrated set of servers.
Amazon could continuously determine, say, the top 10,000 page requests and continuously reload, render and cache those pages -- so that 80% of Silk requests could be delivered, preformatted, from the existing cache.
Potential schmotential. First, Internet caching servers are nothing new. Secondly, anything with that many page views tends to be highly dynamic web pages, say, CNN or twitter. There's no point in caching stale copies of those. Third, unless it has already cached it, the intermediate server is another network hop and processing node that stands between the web browser and the originating server, so that would be expected to add latency. Theory is nice, but real world numbers are what matter, no?
So let's say there's no net gain (some websites are faster, some are slower). How does running extra unnecessary servers to process Silk requests beneficial? It's costing someone money to run those servers in a data center, and unless the energy is from renewable sources, it's also contributing greenhouse gases too.
Potential schmotential. First, Internet caching servers are nothing new. Secondly, anything with that many page views tends to be highly dynamic web pages, say, CNN or twitter. There's no point in caching stale copies of those. Third, unless it has already cached it, the intermediate server is another network hop and processing node that stands between the web browser and the originating server, so that would be expected to add latency. Theory is nice, but real world numbers are what matter, no?
So let's say there's no net gain (some websites are faster, some are slower). How does running extra unnecessary servers to process Silk requests beneficial? It's costing someone money to run those servers in a data center, and unless the energy is from renewable sources, it's also contributing greenhouse gases too.
Totally disagree! If you can continuously cache/refresh the most reqrested (dynamically determined) web pages then deliver them from a few servers to millions of clients you have gained performance, reduced bandwidth...
Obviously, with 50,000 Fires in the field, it's overhead... But with 5-10 million Fires it would be pure gravy if 80% of up-to-date web pages could be served from teh caches.
Edit: As it is, any popular web page has been updated many times before/as it is served, downloaded (scripts, styles, etc) and rendered on a less-powerful client.
If a cached, formated (no tags) page is delivered from an up-to-date cache... I suspect the latter would deliver a more recent result.
No, consumers will not care and will only remember that it performed like crap.
Yup. I was in the telco shop yesterday. Showed a friend Siri on the demo 4s. Worked on mark bringing up the various things I was asking for (which surprised me a bit cause it isn't perfect). Then while waiting in line I played with a string of "giant" screened android units from HTC, Samsung and Moto. and from the first touch they performed poorly. Scrolling stutters, misreads of touch input with slightly mysterious and visually poor interfaces. The couple of Win7 phones were way smoother and responded to input correctly and logically.
Thing is from the first G1 I saw through to now all android units I have played with or studied others using have been clunky marignal devices.
I am savvy enough and not idle consumer but from first touch it is clear what is crap. I would gladly choose a Win7 device if I could not select an iDevice. Android might have another 5 years before it presents as usable.
Just for balance the RIM devices, well I think they were fake plastic mockups. So they responded pretty much as they would if you bought one.
Too much profanity for an intelligent conversation!
I disagree. Profanity does not diminish the merits of a good argument and the numerous valid points that have been laid forth. Puritanical people might find such language objectionable, but profanity is a common part of language that is used daily by virtually everybody. Even such writers as Shakespeare were fond of vulgar words. It is virtually impossible for me and it would also not be very satisfying to write anything about Android without at least a bare minimum of profanity included.
Not exactly.
Kindle Fire is $200 and 16 GB iPad 2 is $500.
Also, I'm guessing that quite a few Kindle Fire owners will choose to sign up for Amazon prime, so in those cases, it's at least $280.
And a refurbished iPad 2, which is as good as new (Apple's refurbished products are first rate) can be had directly from Apple for $450.
If I were really, really poor, I'd rather pick up a used iPad 1 than spend $200 for a Kindle Fire.
But with Amazon Prime, a customer gets access to streaming movies and 2nd day shipping for physical products. Your comparison just doesn't work comparing apples to oranges.
Profanity does not diminish the merits of a good argument…
It makes you seem far less professional, is all.
…profanity is a common part of language that is used daily by virtually everybody.
Nope.
It is virtually impossible for me and it would also not be very satisfying to write anything about Android without at least a bare minimum of profanity included.
Then, and I say this with a staunch, unblemished record of being, myself, an Apple Evangelist (to which many an Apple fanboy and troll alike can attest
There's absolutely nothing wrong with a large bias toward Apple. There's something wrong with finding absolutely no fault in Apple, and there's definitely something wrong when one has to behave like the raving fools that surrounded me in college (A "Christian" university, at that. SO much swearing.
For example, I like Windows Phone 7. It's incredibly clean and crisp in its design, and it's quite responsive on all the hardware with which I've had a chance to play. However, it lacks many, MANY features that have become so integral to iOS, has a far sparser selection of third-party apps, does not integrate as fluidly with its surroundings as iOS devices do with iTunes and its Stores, and the OS itself doesn't have any soul to it.
Yes, it's gorgeous. Yes, there might even be some things in it from which Apple can learn. But I don't feel it when I use it. The definition of feel here is hard to describe, but you know it when you experience it. It's not necessarily utilitarian or spartan, it just doesn't have any heart.
I'm glad it exists; once Android capitulates, it will step up to fill the void quite nicely, and I see it growing into a fine competitor for Apple. For once, Microsoft has done beautiful work without copying anyone else to do it.
It just has no heart.
Now, see? No swearing. I've not only established iOS' superiority, but I've also managed to take a subtle jab at Android and point out flaws in Windows Phone 7 while giving it a healthy amount of praise as the well-designed second-banana it is. Such praise shows that, while I prefer iOS over both alternatives and Apple's ecosystem over Windows' and Google's (lack thereof), I am not a "blind follower of The Fith", as the anti-fanboys would say.
This device is more like a toy compared to the iPad. It really doesn't measure up. One thing I have noticed is that it has no email capability. I would think if you have internet access and you brows the web you should be able to get your email as well.
Browser based email is possible.
But with Amazon Prime, a customer gets access to streaming movies and 2nd day shipping for physical products. Your comparison just doesn't work comparing apples to oranges.
I agree with what you write, but I wonder what percentage of Fire owners did opt for that option.
The point I'm trying to make is that the Kindle Fire seems to be a very poor tablet, though it does seem to excel at one thing, being a portal for Amazon's store and their services. I also find it strange that the kind of people who would sweat over a couple of hundred dollars have all the extra cash lying around to be buying stuff on Amazon.
Totally disagree! If you can continuously cache/refresh the most reqrested (dynamically determined) web pages then deliver them from a few servers to millions of clients you have gained performance, reduced bandwidth...
Obviously, with 50,000 Fires in the field, it's overhead... But with 5-10 million Fires it would be pure gravy if 80% of up-to-date web pages could be served from teh caches.
Edit: As it is, any popular web page has been updated many times before/as it is served, downloaded (scripts, styles, etc) and rendered on a less-powerful client.
If a cached, formated (no tags) page is delivered from an up-to-date cache... I suspect the latter would deliver a more recent result.
The problem with caching as done by Silk is that the (purely) theoretical speed benefits to the user are all lost on the niche user of this $200 product. It's a twist on a well worn axiom, in this case that the caching already taking place at the device is enough as far as where this niche user goes, and for the advanced user looking for an accelerated experience, Silk style caching won't be enough. It's ALL about data collection, and unless Amazon can make everyone go "WOW" when Silk is turned on they've got a tough sell pushing it on people who either don't care about it or are too difficult to impress.
But again, the theoretical faster experience is completely secondary to the data mining, and Amazon is pounding the speed issue in the press because it's the only way to sell these things to the people who usually opt for the least privacy intrusive option, but also because, well, who from Amazon is going to give a decent story about what a great data mining system they've come up with : )
It makes you seem far less professional, is all.
That may very well be true. However, I am not a professional and I am certainly not trying to represent myself as one. I am not connected to the tech industry in any way, shape or form. I am a professional in my particular profession, but that is not really tech industry related. I am merely a commentator here and a guy with a few opinions.
Nope.
Tape-recorded conversations find that roughly 80?90 spoken words each day ? 0.5% to 0.7% of all words ? are swear words, with usage varying from between 0% to 3.4%. In comparison, first-person plural pronouns (we, us, our) make up 1% of spoken words.[2]
^ Jay T. (2009). The Utility and Ubiquity of Taboo Words. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 4:153-161. doi:10.1111/j.1745-6924.2009.01115.x Entire document
Then, and I say this with a staunch, unblemished record of being, myself, an Apple Evangelist (to which many an Apple fanboy and troll alike can attest
There's absolutely nothing wrong with a large bias toward Apple. There's something wrong with finding absolutely no fault in Apple, and there's definitely something wrong when one has to behave like the raving fools that surrounded me in college (A "Christian" university, at that. SO much swearing.
For example, I like Windows Phone 7. It's incredibly clean and crisp in its design, and it's quite responsive on all the hardware with which I've had a chance to play. However, it lacks many, MANY features that have become so integral to iOS, has a far sparser selection of third-party apps, does not integrate as fluidly with its surroundings as iOS devices do with iTunes and its Stores, and the OS itself doesn't have any soul to it.
Yes, it's gorgeous. Yes, there might even be some things in it from which Apple can learn. But I don't feel it when I use it. The definition of feel here is hard to describe, but you know it when you experience it. It's not necessarily utilitarian or spartan, it just doesn't have any heart.
I'm glad it exists; once Android capitulates, it will step up to fill the void quite nicely, and I see it growing into a fine competitor for Apple. For once, Microsoft has done beautiful work without copying anyone else to do it.
It just has no heart.
Now, see? No swearing. I've not only established iOS' superiority, but I've also managed to take a subtle jab at Android and point out flaws in Windows Phone 7 while giving it a healthy amount of praise as the well-designed second-banana it is. Such praise shows that, while I prefer iOS over both alternatives and Apple's ecosystem over Windows' and Google's (lack thereof), I am not a "blind follower of The Fith", as the anti-fanboys would say.
I agree that criticism can absolutley be written without profanity, and you have provided an example of that. But I'm sure you would agree that we all have our own particular style and tastes when it comes to different things, and I am simply a profane and blasphemous person. I guess that's just how I roll.
Not that I'm comparing myself to Picasso, but would you criticize him for having too much blue in his pictures?
This device is more like a toy compared to the iPad. It really doesn't measure up. One thing I have noticed is that it has no email capability. I would think if you have internet access and you brows the web you should be able to get your email as well.
Browser based email is possible.
You don't want an email client for too much on a tablet with such limited storage anyway. All it does is fill up mailboxes on what little space you've got on the device, and they want you to use the storage for content. They assume you'll use the browser for email.
But just get an email client and use it, if need be. There are plenty.
It makes you seem far less professional, is all.
Nope.
Then, and I say this with a staunch, unblemished record of being, myself, an Apple Evangelist (to which many an Apple fanboy and troll alike can attest
There's absolutely nothing wrong with a large bias toward Apple. There's something wrong with finding absolutely no fault in Apple, and there's definitely something wrong when one has to behave like the raving fools that surrounded me in college (A "Christian" university, at that. SO much swearing.
For example, I like Windows Phone 7. It's incredibly clean and crisp in its design, and it's quite responsive on all the hardware with which I've had a chance to play. However, it lacks many, MANY features that have become so integral to iOS, has a far sparser selection of third-party apps, does not integrate as fluidly with its surroundings as iOS devices do with iTunes and its Stores, and the OS itself doesn't have any soul to it.
Yes, it's gorgeous. Yes, there might even be some things in it from which Apple can learn. But I don't feel it when I use it. The definition of feel here is hard to describe, but you know it when you experience it. It's not necessarily utilitarian or spartan, it just doesn't have any heart.
I'm glad it exists; once Android capitulates, it will step up to fill the void quite nicely, and I see it growing into a fine competitor for Apple. For once, Microsoft has done beautiful work without copying anyone else to do it.
It just has no heart.
You're such a gentleman.
But sometimes, methinks, Apple-tards need grow a pair.
The mods may not agree, heck they may even disapprove, but it's worth noting that Apple ][ is one of the rare ones that at least has one.*
*A pair, I mean.
I actually found the newer Nook to be more responsive. Spend two hundred more, and get the iPad if you want a real media device. For reading books, the Fire is a step backwards, a the e-ink if more enjoyable for reading for long periods of time.
As for upgrading to Android 4.0, I doubt that will happen anytime soon. Amazon can't call the device a Android device because it doesn't use Google Apps. Google likely isn't a big fan of the Fire because Amazon cut it out of the loop. In return, it can't use the newer versions of Android.
Complaining about people who take shortcuts to the high road is an even shorter cut to the high road.
Ergo, I win.
Totally disagree! If you can continuously cache/refresh the most reqrested (dynamically determined) web pages then deliver them from a few servers to millions of clients you have gained performance, reduced bandwidth...
Obviously, with 50,000 Fires in the field, it's overhead... But with 5-10 million Fires it would be pure gravy if 80% of up-to-date web pages could be served from teh caches.
Yeah, but that's still a rather hand-wavy argument. It's all based on "but, ifs" that current benchmarks don't seem to show.
Tell you what, when they get 5-10 million Fires and teh caches serve pure gravy, be sure to rub it in my face, k?
The problem with caching as done by Silk is that the (purely) theoretical speed benefits to the user are all lost on the niche user of this $200 product. It's a twist on a well worn axiom, in this case that the caching already taking place at the device is enough as far as where this niche user goes, and for the advanced user looking for an accelerated experience, Silk style caching won't be enough. It's ALL about data collection, and unless Amazon can make everyone go "WOW" when Silk is turned on they've got a tough sell pushing it on people who either don't care about it or are too difficult to impress.
But again, the theoretical faster experience is completely secondary to the data mining, and Amazon is pounding the speed issue in the press because it's the only way to sell these things to the people who usually opt for the least privacy intrusive option, but also because, well, who from Amazon is going to give a decent story about what a great data mining system they've come up with : )
I agree with all this... But I like the Silk concept... For several reasons -- especially the ability to isolate the user from undesired content and tracking...
I expect I would opt for Amazon tracking over Google tracking.
yeah, but that's still a rather hand-wavy argument. It's all based on "but, ifs" that current benchmarks don't seem to show.
Tell you what, when they get 5-10 million fires and teh caches serve pure gravy, be sure to rub it in my face, k?
k...