101–107 of 107 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You're kidding me with the analogies. Seriously? "Google" is not a person/individual. I'd definitely place _why, brad fitzpatrick, and zed shaw as POSSIBLE equals to einstein and tesla, but that would still be a stretch...
""Google" is not a person/individual." Neither was "Edison".
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I didn't mean that people ignore instances when Microsoft fails. I meant that failing is an accepted part of Microsoft's DNA. People didn't like Vista, but putting out an (arguably) busted OS didn't seem out of character for Microsoft.
That's just lowered expectations. They just don't put out quality innovation products and we're all used to that.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
""Google" is not a person/individual." Neither was "Edison".
Thomas Edison? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Edison
"Edison was legally attributed with most of the inventions produced there, though many employees carried out research and development under his direction. His staff was generally told to carry out his directions in conducting research, and he drove them hard to produce results."
So, when you read "Edison invented such and such", it really means that the people working under him invented such and such. So, it really is similar to the way "Google" is inventing lots of interesting things. The difference is Larry and Sergey refrain from claiming that they personally invented everything that comes out of Google.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How was Surface a success where Wave wasn't?
We can't really talk about the sucess or failure of Surface, actually. Microsoft sold a few of them at $12,000 each to hotels, luxury stores, etc... but never intended to make it a mass-consumer product.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you want to argue that we should take the long view with respect to Chrome and Android making money, then I would counter with needing to take the long view with respect to their being a success as well. The OP was (IMO) correct - a product's success, when done by a private company, is whether or not it improves the company's bottom line. I don't think that that claim can be made about Chrome or Android at the mom…
You should read some material on microeconomics and about complementary products. That's not arguing, it's how the economy currently works. a product's success ... is whether or not it improves the company's bottom line Microsoft controlling the platform through Windows and IExplorer hasn't improved their bottom line? RedHat paying high wages to highly skilled kernel hackers to work on (get this, open-source software…
It's important to read what is written, not what you think is written ;) (yeah, I find the winky smiley annoying when it's placed after a condescending remark)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You're kidding me with the analogies. Seriously? "Google" is not a person/individual. I'd definitely place _why, brad fitzpatrick, and zed shaw as POSSIBLE equals to einstein and tesla, but that would still be a stretch...
""Google" is not a person/individual." Neither was "Edison".
So which is the original reference to: "edison the co." or "thomas edison"?
Edit: "edison" wasn't even mentioned in the original post???
BTW, when is Google going to allow third party developers to enhance its core search results via a search API? Such an API would allow third party developers to add Wolfram Alpha like features among other things right into the core Google search.
I think they used to do this - I could swear that I used to have a third-party plugin that I "installed" on my Google account that would show me JavaDocs whenever I Googled a Java class name. It hasn't shown up in about 3 years, though, and I haven't found any trace of it in the code I work with (which should be right around that area of the page...), so maybe it was discontinued.