Loading User Information from Channel 9

Something went wrong getting user information from Channel 9

Latest Achievement:

Loading User Information from MSDN

Something went wrong getting user information from MSDN

Visual Studio Achievements

Latest Achievement:

Loading Visual Studio Achievements

Something went wrong getting the Visual Studio Achievements


Ray7 Ray7
  • Windows 10 (metro?) is butt-ugly



     It's like someone offered Microsoft a glass of Apple kool-aid; MS stole the barrel and drank the whole damn lot. 

    There are two reasons for this:

    1. Battery life, apparently. 
    2. Designers prefer a neutral UI as it makes it easier to work with colours. 

    I like like the idea, but the grey is really too much.  A little bit depressing, I think  


  • Impressions after watching Anders TypeScript talk

    If you asked him he'd probably say, "Just ... just let it go, okay?"

    The companies had a choice. They could roll over, or they could fight. They chose to roll over. And we're not talking the garage outfits here; we're talking the likes of Samsung

    But yes, I wish more places I worked would adopt Typescript.

  • 101 ways to save Apple


    Then I read it and realised that Apple had followed at least thirty of the suggestions.



  • Android Apps to run on Windows Phone


    This is what IBM should have done with OS/2 ...


  • Android Apps to run on Windows Phone

    , Bas wrote

    I don't get Paul Thurrot's doom and gloom. He says Android apps on Windows would be a defeat and make Windows irrelevant, and the reason he gives for this reasoning is... they'll look ugly? Seriously?

    He's right, which is why I think this isn't going to happen.

    Remember OS/2? IBM thought it would boost its popularity if it could run native windows applications. What actually happened was that the few developers that supported it dropped their native OS/2 apps and switched to Windows development.

    "Well, folk can just run the Windows version, can't they?"

    I really can't see Microsoft turning their mobile platform into an advert for Android development.

    Thurrott's has landed some of the biggest scoops in the IT press, but I think he's got this one wrong.

  • the next 5 years is crucial to MS.

    , ScanIAm wrote

    Yeah, I'm not entirely convinced that there isn't something fishy going on with Apple's numbers.  I'll fully admit that I have nothing concrete to back it up,


    Then you should really stop there :D


  • Tablets are dying

    Not so much dying as settling I think.

    The iPad had explosive early sales because it was the first time anyone had got the tablet right. They had fairly decent upgrades, but at the end of the day, most people use them to surf the net, read books and watch videos. There's simply no reason for people to upgrade them as often as they do a phone. I think the revenues will fall further and then level off as folk settle into a regular upgrade cycle – probably a new iPad every five years or so.

    If Apple wants to get the sales moving again then they'll need to start pushing it into other markets, but as long as it's Apple products squeezing iPad sales then they're probably not going to worry.


  • the next 5 years is crucial to MS.

    , Bass wrote

    I remember when Apple was on the brink (and REALLY REALLY REALLY REALLY REALLY REALLY wish I invested even a tiny bit of money in AAPL shares at the time).

    Easy to say with the benefit of hindsight. When Jobs took over, the company was pretty much on the brink. Who in their right mind would put money into them?

    People thought they would go bankrupt. But instead they went all the way to having the largest market capitalization of any company in the world. By a large margin.

    Stop and think about that. It's insane.

    Apple almost made $200 billion dollars last year. And that's not from being some huge conglomerate - that's from selling like four major products. What in the actual f*ck?

    Yesterday's quarterly figures are ridiculous. The company is basically printing its own currency. 


  • just tried the iWatch.

    , Bass wrote


    Rolex makes $7.5 billion dollars selling watches that mostly tell the time, and they are not the only company making luxury watches.

    Apple is basically saying, this is a designer watch from the future. It's not suppose to be cheap, it's a designer watch, hell at $350 it's an incredible bargain for a designer watch. Apple can pull this off because they are considered a designer brand in many people's eyes.

    Quite frankly people will buy this thing and they will love it too, because as magicialclick "biggest MS fanboy" admits, Apple's products produce profound emotions of quality like no other electronics company can. Really there is only two type of electronics companies, Apple and companies trying to be like Apple.

    Yes, the tricky thing for all of us is to look at this from a non-techy point of view, though you seem to have managed to do it quite admirably.

    Apple designs their products in a rather peculiar way. 

    Most companies build stuff  and then put a case around it. Apple builds the case, then tells its engineers that they need to fit everything inside it.  :|

    This does mean that they have to come up with novel ways to tackle problems that have been tackled before, which leads to the often recited meme that Apple doesn't innovate. They actually do, but it's in areas such as component design, materials and manufacturing, not necessarily in the final product.


  • just tried the iWatch.

    , bondsbw wrote

    That old first-gen Apple Watch will show its scratches, dings, all those times you ran into the door frame with it, that time you wore it while playing baseball or football and you hit the ground with it, and so on.

    One thing that bloggers have latched on to is that there are millions to be made destroying Apple kit online. We've already had quite a few videos testing the durability of the Apple watch.


    They used the Mohs scale of mineral hardness to decide what to drill the screens with. They found the Sport screen was scratched by an 8-rated pick, which is a solid result. This also indicates it takes a very abrasive material to scratch the screen. The Watch, meanwhile, was able to tolerate 9-rated pick, which is the equivalent of a masonry drillbit. We should note that DisplayMate found the Ion-X screen less reflective than the more durable sapphire crystal, so Watch Sport owners have a small advantage in bright sunlight.

    The surprising thing is that the watch seems to be fairly waterproof (though the touch display won't work in the swimming pool).

    The stainless steel watch will scratch (as the videos have shown) but they also show that the scratches can be buffed out with a bit of elbow grease.

    So it's another $350 next year, and another the year after.  (But it's not just $350, of course... you might get a more expensive model or band or some other accessory.)

    I don't think so. You're equating the purchase cycle for the Apple watch to an iPhone, which tends to get upgraded when the contract expires. This will get upgraded in the same way that people upgrade iPads – which is not that often if Apple's latest sales figures are anything to go by. Most people will stick with the watch for a few years. unless Apple radically changes the internals. 

    Guesstimates put the sales figures for the first day at over a million units in the US alone. If this is true then that would make the Apple watch their most successful product launch to date. If the watch sells well then Apple will (being Apple) wait longer to upgrade the internals.

    Also bear in mind that Apple designed its own system on a chip (the S1) which plugs in and out.

    It would be easy enough for them to offer an upgraded chip. If they do this, it'll be for the top-flight watches only (and even then I'm doubtful).


    Meanwhile, customers waiting for their Apple watches are pretty annoyed that bloggers are buying them just to smash them. Still, it's good to know what kind of punishment they can take.