Not for me
The iPhone is undoubtedly a wonderful product, but it's simply far too large to be carried in my pocket comfortably. Also, I prefer a proper keyboard with buttons. So I prefer a smaller, specialist phone.
38 posts • joined 5 Jul 2007
Goat Jam said: "Why "rape" (ie a few minutes of having sex with someone against their will) is considered to be a crime far more heinous than murder (ie taking someones life away permanently) So, it's OK to have games depicting the violent, bloody, senseless murders of countless strangers. Now, I'm not for one minute condoning rape, but bugger me if that isn't a case of screwed up priorities."
The simple answer is that - ignoring what some people are saying on this forum - murder is a worse crime than rape (fairly obviously), and is treated as a more serious crime by the justice system.
Problem answered! Simple.
I thought "extreme porn" was fairly specific:
(a) an act which threatens a person’s life,
(b) an act which results, or is likely to result, in serious injury to a person’s anus, breasts or genitals,
(c) an act which involves or appears to involve sexual interference with a human corpse,
(d) a person performing or appearing to perform an act of intercourse or oral sex with an animal (whether dead or alive).
These acts are all unacceptable in civilised society. It's a good law. Bring it on.
I like "re-imagine". It means a more complete reworking of the story, including the tone and the visuals, bringing it up-to-date. It's not just a "re-writing". It's more comprehensive than that. Maybe including references to terrorism and more modern concerns.
Batman "Dark Knight" - best example of "re-imagining".
Do you know you're not allowed to take photos at swimming pools or school sports days anymore? Not even of your own kids? But in the recent Olympics we had 14 year old diver Tom Daley basically in his underwear and being filmed by the BBC. So it's just all double standards and nonsense. There's people in the councils & schools just jumping on the anti-paedo bandwagon and there's just no consistency or logic in their approach.
Your article said; "SQL injections take advantage of web developers who write applications that accept user-supplied data without inspecting it for malicious characters. "
Well, as a one-time victim of these sorts of attacks I can say you really shouldn't blame the website designers. I had a LOT of input validation in my code to catch SQL injection attacks, but these were so subtle and sophisticated they still got through. Instead of using invalid ASCII characters, they encoded the characters in hex and used SQL to decode them into the malicious attack - so my validation script did not pick up the characters:
Website designers are doing their best to prevent these sort of attacks, so stop blaming us - we are fighting against organised gangs in China (apparently) who are devoting masses of manpower to creating extremely sophisticated attacks. STOP BLAMING THE VICTIMS!!
Jim C says: "Is it just me, or is there a flaw in your argument"
Yeah, I thought the same thing. A new search engine based on different principles to Google would not be fooled by all the spam sites which have been optimised to appear high on Google listings. Instead, the everyday sites with useful information (but no spam links or other tricks) would appear higher.
Nobody posting here seems to be picking up on the point that IE8 is going to break a tremendous amout of sites out there (which won't have this special tag). I specifically don't use Firefox because it breaks so many sites. I mean, you can moan all you like that those sites should have been coded to standards, but at the end of the day I don't give a toss about your beloved standards - I just want to browse to a site and for it not to be broken.
NO CONSUMER GIVES A TOSS ABOUT YOUR BELOVED STANDARDS.
IE8 will break many sites. This is a bad thing.
J said: "There is a seedy element to some sex work - one which I can't help feeling would be significantly reduced if not eliminated by proper regulation."
Yeah, maybe. I can't help thinking a lot of men are attracted to the seediness, and they probably wouldn't bother going to a smart, council-controlled brothel. It's like cannabis or CB radio - once you legalise it, its popularity drops right off, which is maybe a good thing.
It's a strange thing, because we do have de facto brothels in every city right now, so called "health clubs" or "saunas". They advertise quite openly in papers. The police generally turn a blind eye. I suppose as long as they're not employing girls against their will (sex slaves) then it's not so bad. It's important to clamp down on the sex slave thing - that's awful.
J said: "But whatever my or your feelings on sex work, many people feel perfectly comfortable performing it, and that being the case who are you or I to stop them?"
I think very few women in the sex trade would continue selling sex if they had any other option, i.e., it's not a "lifestyle choice" as you suggest. They're just down-and-dirty low-paid soul-destroying jobs. Many have drugs habits. Many are smuggled in from Eastern Europe. These women aren't doing these jobs for fun. They need help to find something more productive to do with their lives.
Paul Stimpson said: "Sex Worker is a job title, not a character flaw. I find it offensive that your attitude seems to denigrate all the honest people working in adult industries worldwide. People have sex and many of them enjoy it. A healthy and honest attitude towards sex important for individuals' development."
There's absolutely nothing wrong with sex, but there's plenty wrong with "sex work", be it prostitution, exploitation of women, or appearing on a web cam for some dirty old man to w@nk off.
OK, so the spaghetti tree in the 1960s was quite funny, but now every single news website feels the need to post some "hilarious" April fools joke. It ain't funny, it's tired. It's like saying the same joke on the same day every bloody year. Why don't they just so their job and post proper news instead?
From a developer's point of view, I actually think IE6 performs better than the standard in one respect. If you have a fixed width on a div in IE6 then then div will still stretch to contain its content if the content exceeds the width (hence avoiding breaking your page). However, in the glorious "standards complaint" IE7 and Firefox, if your div's content exceeds the div's width then the content breaks out of the div - thus breaking your page. So in that respect, IE6 is more robust.
I agree with Alistair: "Anyone suggesting that people should make W3C compliant sites and tell IE users to switch has obviously never made a web site in return for money, because telling 30-40% of your audience to piss off is not something favoured by any client I've met."
Absolutely. The arrogance of web designers bugs me. Firefox is slow. A ***lot*** of sites break in Firefox. I don't want to use Firefox and view a load of broken sites.Fix your bl***dy sites so they work in IE6 and stop bl***dy moaning.
It's not a satellite. I shouldn't even be posting this here. But it's not a satellite.
I received an email. A friend of mine works in Fylingdales. They picked up this object a couple of months ago when it entered the solar system. Even at that point they could tell it was headed for earth. They have NO IDEA what it is. It's not a meteor. Visual contact has not been made but it appears to have a regular geometric shape. Initial rumour at Fylingdales was some sort of "first contact" scenario, with quite some excitement. However, the mood has changed and they now view it as a threat - a serious enough threat to take it out before it arrives. The satellite story is a cover. It's frightening the hell out of my mate.
This "Anonymous" group sounds lilke a bigger bunch of nutters than the Church of Scientology. I agree with Andreas Hendal-Lund: Anonymous denial-of-service attacks are only going to make people sympathise with the Scientologists.
Frankly, give me a Scientologist to an anonymous denial-of-service hacker anyday, thank you.
Well, he's right about Facebook and Google. Facebook is just a trendy fad for kids (probably disappear in a couple of years) and Google admit they do process your personal information in your emails. How do Google get away with it so easily? Why isn't the Reg attacking Google instead of attacking Steve Ballmer attacking Google?
I'd just like to agree with the comments of Norman above: "MS seems to have moved away from a very important principle of programming ever since Window 2000. Keep It Simple, Stupid! Each operation system has in succession gotten more complicated."
So true. Windows is so phenomenally complicated. If you try any advanced modifications you inevitably have to try 20 different approaches, and you're just happy when it eventually works. You just leave it alone. You don't know WHY it works, and you don't know why the other 19 things you tried DIDN'T work, you're just relieved it's working. That's no way to go about business. That's hopeless.
I suspect everyone is going to change to Apple or Linux, but it won't be a progressive thing (you can't have 50% or people on Windows and 50% on Macs - the incompatibility that would introduce would make that a painful situation for everyone). Apple will increase market share until a tipping point is reached, and then we'll get a massive overnight change - a swing. Then maybe it'll go from 90% Windows, 5% Apple to 90% Apple, 5% Windows in just a few weeks.
"..that the use of 'Jesus Christ!' as a term of exclamation or as a swear word will be illegal from October onwards? Geniune question."
As a Christian, I find casual blaspheming around the office really offensive and unpleasant. Of course, it shouldn't be illegal (we don't want to end up like Iran), but I wish the ignorati who use casual blasphemy without thinking who they're offending whould shut the f*ck up. I wouldn't insult your mother or your wife in the workplace, so you don't insult something I care about. It's not a legal issue, it's just behaving decently and with respect in the company of others.
I see The Reg are not exactly leaping to this guy's defence: "Needless to say, Dible was fired shortly after the reports hit the news." - treating it like a funny story.
The guy lost his job because he was running a legal porn site out of hours. That's not a funny story - it's a disgrace the guy lost his job. Why isn't The Reg defending him?
My ignorant friend Mr. Mark Daniels states that Wales is not a country. In fact Wales is one of the four constituent coutries of the United Kingdom - even a schoolboy should know that. However, Wales is not a sovereign state (is that what you mean, Mr. Daniels?) and is more correctly termed a principality.
Go take your ignorant prejudice back to whichever country you come from, Mr. Daniels.
"In this post, I use MATH to prove that Apple is talking out their ass."
I have no idea what you're talking about! Apple is planning to sell 10 million iPhones by the end of 2008. Your analysis is based on the iPhone only being sold in the USA (!) - don't you realise it will be available worldwide in 2008? Apple plan to sell 1 million phones by September in the US - they've already activated 140,000. That figure will be met easily, and Apple will EASILY sell 10 million phones worldwide in 2008.
"It has no oil, no natural resources"
That's a strange thing to say - Dubai's weath was built on it's huge gas and oil resources! Though they are starting to run low.
I just wonder how environmentally unfriendly this tower was to build, all that concrete. The whole city must use so much air conditioning. They just don't give a toss about the environment
"1: The iPod and iTunes revolutionised digital music. Sorry, but that is simply not the case. Apple invented neither, they just made the interface (on the iPod at least) better. This point can, of course, be argued. But they certinatly did not revolutionise digital music."
Here's some statistics: As of January 9, 2007, over 2 billion songs have been downloaded from the iTunes Music Store. In the UK it has an 80% share of downloaded music. It's totally dominant. More importantly, it is so easy to use that it introduced music downloading to people who would never usually do it.
How can you say they didn't revolutionise digital music?
"The N95 is ugly. That is an opinion, and is not a fact. "
OK, if you want facts - it's huge, much larger and chunkier than an iPhone. That's a fact.
I'll agree about the MMS, the iPhone could do with that. I'm sure it'll come soon, if it's not in the Christmas release in the UK.
so let me get this right:-
I get an iphone that:-
has the most intuitive, revolutionary interface
has a real internet browser
ann everyone will love me
or I get an N95 that:-
Looks like a clunky brick
Will fit in my golf bag in my Mondeo
now let me think about that....
How predictable and tiresome it is for The Register to say the iPhone is "ludicrously hyped". The iPod and iTunes revolutionised digital music. The iPod had the greatest cultural impact of any technological product in the last ten years. The mobile phone market is perhaps the most important tech market there is. If Apple promises to do for mobiles what they did for digital music then this is a MASSIVELY IMPORTANT announcement. But the Register has it's usual sneering tone, down-playing the whole thing.
I wouldn't be seen dead with an N95 - I've read some stinky reviews http://www.yourmobilephonereviews.co.uk/nokia_n95_reviews.htm Apparently it hangs all the time. And it's so ugly. Nokia have really lost their way - they had the mobile market in the palm of their hand. Sony Ericsson now produce far superior, classier phones. Also, who cares if the iPhone only has 2.5G - I don't notice much of a perceptible speed increase on my phone when I move to a 3G area. It's not a big deal. I can't wait for an iPhone! Will it revolutionise the personal tech world like the iPod? Will The Register eat their sneering words? We can only hope so.
And I just think some of the anti-iPhone comments posted here are the typical responses you'd expect from tech people. Consumers really don't care if the phone doesn't have 3G. Like I say, in my experience I don't find 3G a whole lot faster than 2.5G. Tech people just look at the specs, and so they favour the N95. But consumers don't care about specs - they just see the N95 as an ugly clunky brick and see the iPhone as the coolest product on the market.
That's why technical people don't understand consumers ...
Stories like this make The Register lose credibility as a serious technological site. The iPod and iTunes revolutionised digital music. The iPod had the greatest cultural impact of any piece of technology over the last ten years. If the iPhone revolutionises the mobile market in the same way that the iPod revolutionised digital music then this is a MASSIVELY IMPORTANT development, but The Register seems to only offer playground-quality sneering about it.
Your coverage of the iPhone is frankly unprofessional. If it proves to be another cultural icon like the iPod I hope you eat your words. And even if it doesn't, you should be treating this massively significant hardware release with the import it deserves. Your sneering is juvenile.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2020