deanb

Yeah it's 1st, thought I'd tweaked it since. Yeah I fucked my maths on when the next-next weeks TV paper (aka "next week: doctor who"). No longer a "fuck" too since it's a normal weekend n not in middle of nowhere. As for "Pond Life" it's a sort of "what the Ponds did while away from the Doctor and off making perfume leading up to Asylum of the Daleks".

If you have a phone, and it is not on contract nor is it topped up. Just a phone, a number and a sim, you can be sent a thousand texts and called for days solid and it will not cost you a penny. You can even ring 999. The only person that pays is the one sending texts and ringing people. And while it may only be on the low end contracts and PAYG phones that you're charged an individual fee, you've said yourself that even on a high-end contract you're still paying to receive texts just it's as an unlimited thing as part of the contract fee.

TFG wanted to know of a good modem router. I said his ISP could supply one. Ethan said in america you have to pay $10/month for one. I pointed out how in UK you get given the router, it'd be stupid otherwise. Ethan clicked that it probably a US/UK thing to be charged for every little thing. I made an offhand comment that yeah very much so, much like being charged to receive texts. Then Ethan has spent a while clarifying I don't know what. And yeah I've just being waiting for it to spin out then I can shift the thread over.

So then the "receive texts" service is included in the basic charge that you're charged monthly, just like here. Which was my point. But we are not charged to receive texts. That is my point. There is nothing charged for to be included into the contract cost.

We only charge for sent texts.

I have beaten PvZ. Was meant to do it tonight, but ended up on netbook so booted up PvZ now instead of my current plan of polish off FFXIII (which will hopefully be appearing on here soonish).

So the high end plan doesn't include the cost of receiving texts, but it does include all the services of which receiving texts is not one of these services?

The high end plans include the cost of receiving texts.

I'll take that as a hint. I guess I never cared for the game so upon initial reading I hadn't spotted it was spoilerific.

So now that the case is kinda wrapped up, the jurors are speaking. They really shouldn't. For those not up to speed they found that Samsung infringed and came up with the $1billion figure with 21 hours of deliberation over 3 days. Up to now we've found out that: The jury awarded damages to Apple of ~$200K over the Galaxy Tab. A device they jury had found to not be infringing. Similar for the sum of $2million for the Intercept. The Jury Foreman is a patent holder himself and "wanted to send a message to the industry at large that patent infringing is not the right thing to do, not just Samsung". Which sounds like he was trying to push his own agenda as a patent holder than as a jury member on a Apple vs Samsung case. One of them is a projects manager with AT&T. The company that exclusively supplied iPhones in US. Pretty much all of them that have spoken up have said they'd decided early on that Samsung had infringed. There's a lot of legal folks kinda confused on how the verdict was reached so fast, and how some devices that do look pretty much like iPads n such were deemed to not infringe on trade dress, but devices with keyboards n such did infringe. I've a feeling Samsung may have been banking on an incompetent jury (They picked them as best I can tell, I don't know full legal stuff). Does help with the appeals if they can get the verdict overturned. Anywho some reading material of analysis and interviews: http://news.cnet.com...ror-speaks-out/ http://arstechnica.c...send-a-message/ http://www.groklaw.n...012082510525390

Minimum wage is going up to £6.19 in October. That's for 21 up (lower for 16 n 18). Which works out $9.80. So theory numero uno kinda goes out the window. Also I doubt restaurant/bar is the only one with a minimum wage job. (Then again looking into it it seems some states allow employers to not pay wages, or pay lower than minimum wage, if staff receive tips. Which seems a bit iffy. Also seems there's some dodgy tax avoidance around it too). To me it kinda seems like a sort of thing along par with the whole "need to get a diamond engagement ring worth 3 months wages" type thing, just a bunch of snazzy marketing until it became the "done thing".

It's still there (and still there with the high end plans technically too)

I don't get the concept of tipping. Why does it exist? Why is it seemingly just restaurant/bars? Why don't you tip folks at the checkout? Why do some places seem to add a tip on your bil automatically? Why don't people seem to get outraged at that?

Yes getting charged to receive them (as opposed to only the sender being charged)

You guys get charged to receive text messages, yeah it's a US/UK thing.

Well Virgin threw one my way (at zero cost and I still have it actually, no fucking idea what to do with it, only works with Virgin Media anyway) and my mum has a Talk Talk one too and my aunt a BT hub too. I assume other ISPs throw on in too, it'd look pretty weak if they didn't. And yeah they're all modem-routers (apart from my initial Virgin one years back which was just a Netgear router plugged into a Virgin modem..which I also still have knocking about). So I assume TFG can ring up, say his router is dying and get a replacement. p.s kinda stupid to charge for the modem used by your customers to access your services.

Does your ISP not supply one?

I don't know. I don't even know if it's built into iOS, afaik OTA stuff is still fledgling on iOS.

What's funny is that earlier that day the South Korean courts had sided against both (though not on trade dress, but did include the bounce back patent). http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-19364875 The fines they both got is great. tens of thousands instead of $1billion. Shows a fair bit of comparison. (Of course in the UK we've just gotten in the habit of just not even letting them get to court) Also I edited my previous post, maybe a bit too slowly.

Yeah there's was a fair few gut parts like the pinch to zoom. Part of the reason folks are having a go at the jury is because across the board (beyond iPad/Galaxy Tab stuff) they found Samsung to be in breach of "Apples" pinch-to-zoom stuff n all that, yet found Apple to breach fuck all of Samsungs technical patents. Which folks have hated on cos it meant the software patents were enforced but the..proper(?, whatever the fuck you'd call em) patents were ignored. The video is running like shit for me (netbook) but from what I could gather through the jerkinees it's just a bunch of lockscreen n app drawer skins, which there exists trillions for Android. What's funny is that my old Sense n CM on wildfire had the kinda "swipe to unlock" stuff, but my current Samsung* (and my mums too) have a sort of circle you swish about (or you can do face unlock n such too). As for the document of "make it like apple" I bet if you were to go through the files of every other phone manufacture they'll all have similar stuff. It's called market research, SWOT, etc. Bet you Apple have plenty eyeing up stuff like the Notification Shade, facebook n twitter integration, etc (I'm not quite up to date of all of iOSes latest 100% organically innovated features). If Samsung wanted to wholesale Apple they could have done, but there's tons and tons of parts of Touchwiz that just aren't anything alike to how iOS is and looks. My apps don't shake when I delete one, I don't slide to unlock, and maybe just something to do with my phone but there's tons of Widgets plastered up on first boot too. And as noted earlier back the Samsung app icons are all their own design, this kind of squished square look: btw you guys seen some of the phones. It's not purely about trade dress (and if it is the jury was fucking blind) The Samsung Captivate The Samsung Continuum Samsung Epic 4G Samsung Galaxy S Galaxy SII *kinda realise I'm technically bias, but it's worth noting my current samsung would only be confused with an iPhone if you were 5 foot away and my phone a further 5 foot on from that. Oh n my mum has a Galaxy Ace, one of the phones in the trial.

It's built into the Play market. It's not an Android thing, the Android thing by default not allowing sideloading of any apps, there's no blacklists or whitelists. However should I install something via the Play market, they yes it can be remotely installed and uninstalled either by me, or as shown here, by Google. It's one of the features of the Play store.

@fuchi: pretty much all android launchers have a dock. Those that don't it's more option to disable it than not having one in first place. I'm not really seeing what makes the Lumia 900 any different, it's still a black rectangle with a central button at the bottom. Just Nokia n MS are huge and established in the smartphone sector. If apple had their way androids would look like the Nokia 7600. I don't understand the bounce back though. My samsung has a blue glow when you go beyond. Closest I've seen to bounceback is the homescreen on my old phone, but the samsung launcher loops. It is of course a big sign that patent reform needs to come, sooner rather than later. One thing though is, the case may ultimately be for naught. Samsung are still thundering on past Apple, and Android even more so. Apple exist in a market were they reckon one size will fit all, but Samsung have such a wide range of devices that Apple couldn't hope to outsell or block them all, and now they've gotten Samsungs name plastered all over the newspapers pretty much saying that Samsungs are on-par with iPhones. A legally indiscernible knock-off, and at half the price and all the functionality.

Play market has had the ability to remotely install and remove for a while. It's my preferred method of install. That's not what MS is doing, they're tracking installs of what you put on. And in a somewhat insecure way too.

Android does nothing like this. By default it blocks non-market apps then points you to a setting to disable this behaviour. The new OSX has gatekeeper which blocks instillation of non mac store apps and tells you to delete them. Microsoft could do it those ways and retain similar level of safety and scare tactics, there's no need to send data on every program you install beyond misguided market research plans.