@Proton2: Some crank science denier's really not a dependable source for interpretation of scientific data. Nice try though.
Apple is going to have a harder time differentiating itself unless they move into a different category other than smartphones and tablets. The other device makers received the memo that people like shiny, purty things. Apple knows that they can't win by just out-thinning the competition any more. There's a point of diminishing returns, and they've already conceded that battle in the latest releases of the iPhone and iPad. The iPhone 4S is nowhere near the thinnest smartphone anymore, and the New iPad actually got fatter than the iPad 2.
With the iPhone 4S, they've already had to resort to a software feature (Siri) being the primary selling point rather than some hardware improvement.
The New iPad did have much improved hardware specs over the iPad 2, because they had to go thermonuclear with the pixel density. The iPad 2 was way behind the high-end Android devices in this regard, and with the New iPad, they've pretty much topped out. How could they possibly position a product that's "Even Better than Retina Display"? "It's so magical your eyes won't even know how much better it is!" There's really no going higher with pixel density, and everybody has access to the same display supplier (i.e. Samsung Display) as Apple does.
So what direction does Apple go? More form factors for the same device? Add new components like NFC, which other OEMs have already done, to their devices? Add new crazy components that nobody else has thought of--a built-in blood sugar monitor for diabetics, a built-in barometric pressure gauge to forecast the weather, etc.?
Yeah, but he actually seems to think that's OK. In his society we all either keep our money under the mattress (or more likely in physical goods we can exchange for other goods) or we simply work effectively for the "banks" by handing them everything we ever earned and hoping that their good and generous nature (or something) will mean we get looked after.
It's a bit like feudal Britain in many respects. And wouldn't that be great?
The basis for all of his arguments (about virtually anything) is that things fix tend to fix themselves. He doesn't want to spend any money on preventing AGW because the Earth will eventually heal itself. Never mind that it could take 100,000 years for that happen. In the end, it will all be good, so in the mean time, let's burn as much fossil fuel as possible.
He doesn't want any regulations to prevent global economic meltdown and complete collapses of banking systems. Capitalism will fix itself, and world economies will be restored. Never mind that it may take decades for the world economies to recover. In the end, it will all be good.
It doesn't matter that millions or billions of people have to suffer before the Earth's climate or the world's economies recover. I'll be damned if I'm one of those that will have to suffer. I'm too * smart to let that happen to me. So lets eliminate all regulations and party like it's 1999! Huzzah!
@Maddus Mattus: Living in a western society is really not for you. You really do need to consider moving here as we've mentioned many times before. Government completely out of your hair, and capitalism exactly the way you want it. No need to pay extra for green energy. No bailing out banks. No need to worry about patents stifling competition. No national government to take your money by force.
Aug 31, 2012 at 11:36 PM
No, you're wrong because you're wrong. My point is that your arguments are never consistent, and you contradict yourself often.
Do you need an extern in the declaration in the Foo.h file?
extern __declspec(dllexport) void FooFunction();
And you might want to change this:
Aug 31, 2012 at 12:03 PM
Here is a clear case where the end result is the only thing that matters to you rather than the intent or the original ideals of the system, so you want to trash the entire system.
Yet, you cling so tightly to the ideal that the capitalist system fosters competition when in reality it creates oligarchies, which by and large are WORSE than monopolies (i.e. effectively monopolies with the regulatory cover of not being an actual monopoly).