71–80 of 149 posts
Is it that the developer of the OS is offering users a free better version and the OEM is preventing its users from benefiting? Why would Samsung do this? What could their incentive be?
I don't understand, why is Samsung pulling stunts like this all the time? It would make sense if they were trying to get up the ladder but they are already there, they hold an unquestionably large market share of Android. Things like these won't do any good in the long run but only prompt consumers to actively avoid the brand. Some of the things that really surprises me: [1] http://gizmodo.com/samsung-rigged-the-s4-t…
The gamepad is a complete non-issue. It is as similar to the xbox controller as the xbox controller is to the dreamcast controller, which in turn is similar to... It is the rounded rectangle all over again.
The shape is totally different. I don't get it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's really hard to find the correct middle-ground. Would you prefer if Windows worked like iOS where there are serious limitations on what apps can do in the background and where every application has to go through a central authority for vetting? Or do you propose a solution that gives both freedom to the user while also not allowing something like this to happen? Yes, there are whitelisting solutions (built into t…
Or you know, place the ability to disable Windows Update behind policy restrictions and UAC rather than being openly editable in the registry? With policy restrictions, corporate installations could deny all attempts to disable the service. In non-corporate environments, this should at least require a UAC prompt. While too many users would likely click through without understanding, at least knowledgeable users would…
If Samsung blocks the Windows 10 "important" nagware patch KB 3035583 that installs autimatically on Windows 7-8.1 (except on PC with Domain/AD) than it's a service to the user. It replaces the Windows Update dialog with an Windows 10 advertisement and it adds a second start button to the startmenu that lauches an advertisement app. If you click the wrong button it will automatically download Windows 10 in the backgr…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's really hard to find the correct middle-ground. Would you prefer if Windows worked like iOS where there are serious limitations on what apps can do in the background and where every application has to go through a central authority for vetting? Or do you propose a solution that gives both freedom to the user while also not allowing something like this to happen? Yes, there are whitelisting solutions (built into t…
> Would you prefer if Windows worked like iOS where there are serious limitations on what apps can do in the background and where every application has to go through a central authority for vetting? I've thought about this for a while, and honestly, for desktops/notebooks/tablets? Yes. Maybe not just one App Store like iOS, but at least sandbox all possible non-os code similarly to ChromeOS, in a way that's on by def…
I don't understand. Why not just reinstall the operating system from blank media? If you get a new machine, you'll have to reinstall your user-applications and data anyway?
I don't understand, why is Samsung pulling stunts like this all the time? It would make sense if they were trying to get up the ladder but they are already there, they hold an unquestionably large market share of Android. Things like these won't do any good in the long run but only prompt consumers to actively avoid the brand. Some of the things that really surprises me: [1] http://gizmodo.com/samsung-rigged-the-s4-t…
But they're a hardware company first and foremost. Most hardware companies tend not to be great software companies. The company culture just isn't designed for producing great software. See also: Sony.
I can't think of a single piece of software made by Samsung that gave me anything other than a thoroughly negative experience. Even their phones function best when they are not burdened with a Samsung ROM.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Their new PR line is they've changed and they are sorry, but they have certainly NOT changed and they are NOT sorry: http://techrights.org/2015/05/29/microsoft-vs-india/ Their recent "good moves" (open sourcing .NET, etc.) are simply an attempt to maintain relevance in the face of declining market share. If it results in regained market-share, they will likely bait and switch, and of course, they might as well get so…
First, why would you expect Microsoft to not lobby against laws that prevent it from effectively competing? Second, Why is Microsoft lobbying for non-restrictive purchasing standards bad? It's very clear to me that this has little to do with weather the competition is FOSS - and more to do if the competition can only be indian made software. Buy $country First laws have long been recognized as anti-competitive, prote…
Because people generally don't choose the superior product?
I don't quite understand why this is fucked up. Could someone elaborate? (I'm not doubting that it is fucked up at all. I would just like to understand it) Is it that the developer of the OS is offering users a free better version and the OEM is preventing its users from benefiting? Why would Samsung do this? What could their incentive be?
Would you like winodws xp blaster boxes to return.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Their new PR line is they've changed and they are sorry, but they have certainly NOT changed and they are NOT sorry: http://techrights.org/2015/05/29/microsoft-vs-india/ Their recent "good moves" (open sourcing .NET, etc.) are simply an attempt to maintain relevance in the face of declining market share. If it results in regained market-share, they will likely bait and switch, and of course, they might as well get so…
First, why would you expect Microsoft to not lobby against laws that prevent it from effectively competing? Second, Why is Microsoft lobbying for non-restrictive purchasing standards bad? It's very clear to me that this has little to do with weather the competition is FOSS - and more to do if the competition can only be indian made software. Buy $country First laws have long been recognized as anti-competitive, prote…
I wouldn't expect Microsoft to not lobby because I don't believe their PR that says that they've "changed" and are now "pro open source".
>It's very clear to me that this has little to do with weather the competition is FOSS
So which part of the Indian policy that (briefly) favored open source was not about favoring open source software?
>FOSS of more often then not superior on its merits alone, why does it need a protectionist anti-competitive law to help it compete?
This should be made policy because this is a long-term strategy to prevent lock in, and because it's much harder to bribe a high level official than it is a low level official.