Posts by Torquemada28 9 publicly visible posts • joined 4 Nov 2009
"The Aquatic ape hypothesis of Elaine Morgan is much more likely.
Right or wrong it's a thought provoking read anyway.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elaine_Morgan_%28writer%29"
.
.
Here's a link to provoke a little more skeptical thought.
http://skeptoid.com/episodes/4357
Brian Dunning FTW!
I have extensive experience with iPhones and Android and prefer Android by far. That is my opinion but it's based on my satisfaction when using both devices. How many of those involved in this survey has experience with a different phone? Most people I know who own an iPhone have never looked at a high end Android handset in any detail so their "satisfaction" is generated in a vacuum. If you ignore everything else on the market, of course the iPhone is the best phone in the Universe. In contrast, most Android owners I know have either owned, used or have been exposed to an iPhone and have made a conscious decision to buy an Android. I suspect that if all the respondents with iPhones had used a Galaxy S2 or similar phone for any length of time, their perceived "satisfaction" with their iPhone would be diminished and would be at a similar level to the Android users.
Also, comparing the user satisfaction of people using the iPhone with the user satisfaction of someone using a low-end budget Android handset is disingenuous to say the least. How many of the Android users owned a handset with similar or better specs than an iPhone?
The differences and similarities between an iPhone and any of the Android handsets is about the same as the differences between a Ford and a Toyota. Ford came up with the Model T before Toyota existed but if they claimed that they owned the basic design and Toyotas should be banned from sale because they have 4 wheels, we would be justified in calling that retarded. If you think that Android and iOS look and work the same, why don't Apple fanbois use Android and vice versa? If they're so similar, why is there such division among phone users?
Personally, I think Apple should spend less time in court and focus more on being innovative. That is how you become competitive in a crowded market, not by resting on your laurels and trying to prevent the competition from bringing innovative products into the market. If nothing else, it makes Apple look like whiny bitches who can't compete in the marketplace.
Why do you make a distinction between "legitimate" purposes and "commercial" purposes in this case? Whilst Google may gather this data to make money, the end user isn't paying for the service and is most likely using it for their own legitimate purposes. To boil it down; Google isn't selling pictures of your house. They provide a free service which has as many legitimate uses as any official survey pictures; probably more.
As for privacy, I don't understand your argument for a few reasons.
1) You claim that google violated your privacy by getting "a pretty good interior shot through my front window". Since you were the one who opened the curtains, you were apparently happy enough for anyone walking past to see inside your front room. How is that significantly different from someone "virtually" walking past your house using streetview?
2) Your ire is increased because "my two children both under the age of six were clearly visible through the window". Are you in the witness relocation program? Do you make them wear burkas when out in public? Is there some reason why you are offended by people looking at your children? Surely, there are more strangers that would see your children out in public every day than would ever see them on streetview. If you're concerned that it shows where your kids live, you'd find that it's not really hard for someone to discover that without streetview; maybe by walking past when they're playing in the front room with the curtains open. ;)
Also, your contention that you own the copyright to any image of your house and that a commercial entity must ask permission and financially compensate you, is just plain wrong. I can walk up to you in the street and take your picture without your permission and I don't have to pay you anything if I then sell that photo. That's because the copyright is held by the photographer, not the subject of the image. If google blurs or otherwise obscures an image at your request, don't mistake this as a right you're exercising. They do it in good faith, not because they have a legal obligation due to you holding the copyright.
"Here in the UK I think most people were aware that..."
How many people do you personally know who were aware of this? How many people live in the UK?
Maybe you should "think" about using a larger sample size before making such general statements. In any case, the judgement wasn't determined by the volume of consumers who were misled; it was determined by its potential to be misleading to consumers.
The ACCC and the Federal Court don't give a rat's fuzzy little butthole about technical specifications. The only issue here is whether Apple's claims would be misleading to the average consumer. There is only ONE network in Australia that is marketed as "4G" which means the consumer has a reasonable expectation that any product that claims to be "4G compatible" will be able to connect to the network they understand to be "4G". It's unreasonable to expect the average joe on the street to be well versed in the technical definitions and specifications of cellular data communications before they purchase a mainstream device like an iPad.
It's totally unreasonable to expect your average punter buying an iPad to be aware of the differences between a 4G network overseas and what is marketed as "4G" here. Technical specs can go fuck themselves; all the ACCC cares about is how an average consumer will interpret the claim that the new iPad is "4G" and if that means they would assume it will connect to the network that Telstra is marketing as "4G", then Apple needs to comply with our laws.
@hikaricore
Maybe you should look in Installation & Upgrades on Ubuntu Forums. Plenty of very annoyed people there, enough for a lynch mob in fact. My warning is that if you have either Vista or Win7 and want to install Karmic to dual-boot, GRUB2 is likely to break the windows bootloader and you won't be able to boot into windows. Win7 + Karmic = Boot Fail. You have been warned.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2025
