[freudling]

I'd like to hear from you... who here actually reads all of voodoos posts? Actually, which category do you fit in:

1. I just skip past it
2. I don't make it past the first sentence
3. I skim read it
4. I read the whole thing!

Or, should I do another thread that is a vote?

[Laminar]

I'm 2.

[imitchellg5]

Should have been a poll.
He lost me when he started talking about capitalism.

[turtle777]

Voodoo who ?

-t

[freudling]

LOL.

[freudling]

Ebook sales in the US double year-on-year, paper books suffer double-digit losses -- Engadget

[Spheric Harlot]

Originally Posted by freudling 

Ebook sales in the US double year-on-year, paper books suffer double-digit losses -- Engadget

*ahem*

Originally Posted by Spheric Harlot, three days ago

Oh! How timely:

US e-book sales spike 115 percent at start of 2011

E-book sales have better than doubled year-to-year, the Association of American Publishers said. A new study put out on Thursday saw e-book sales surge 115 percent in January to produce $69.9 million in revenue versus just a year ago. The rush came as regular hardcover books lost 11.3 percent of their revenue to hit $49.1 million, paperbacks fell 19.7 percent to $83.6 million, and "mass market" books plunged 30.9 percent to $39 million.
Books on CD or tape were also down slightly, as were textbooks and academic books. Only religious books grew, the AAP said.

This is US-only, and they're leaving out religious books and books on tape.

But $70 million vs. $170 million for the rest of the market is, um, not insignificant.

Not even two years later.

[voodoo]

Originally Posted by freudling 

I'd like to hear from you... who here actually reads all of voodoos posts? Actually, which category do you fit in:

1. I just skip past it
2. I don't make it past the first sentence
3. I skim read it
4. I read the whole thing!

Or, should I do another thread that is a vote?

You've been arguing with me without reading my posts! While that explains a lot of the obtuseness and constant misunderstanding and misinterpretations, it is by far the dumbest thing I've heard.

Another mirror experiment; go in front of the mirror and say: "I've been arguing on the internet with some person I don't know and I didn't even read his posts!"

Which means every single post you made was a meaningless knee-jerk reaction to what you imagined I was writing. I realize that arguing on the internet is more often than not a futile experiment, but rarely have I seen someone admit so blatantly that the effort is so wasted and misguided that it borders on complete nonsense.

[voodoo]

Originally Posted by freudling 

Ebook sales in the US double year-on-year, paper books suffer double-digit losses -- Engadget

170 million dollars of 35000 million dollar market. Yeah it's time to pat yourself on the back, you clearly show that ebooks are a complete flop. Thanks for that! (though God knows why you want to make my point for me, but thanks anyway)

[freudling]

Originally Posted by voodoo 

170 million dollars of 35000 million dollar market. Yeah it's time to pat yourself on the back, you clearly show that ebooks are a complete flop. Thanks for that! (though God knows why you want to make my point for me, but thanks anyway)

Nope, you're wrong. Period.

Ignore now...

[voodoo]

Originally Posted by freudling 

Nope, you're wrong. Period.

Ignore now...

How would you know, you don't read my posts

[imitchellg5]

35,000 million?

[olePigeon]

Originally Posted by imitchellg5 

35,000 million?

35 trillion... which seems like a lot.

Edit: Or is that 35 billion?

[freudling]

Originally Posted by olePigeon 

35 trillion... which seems like a lot.

Edit: Or is that 35 billion?

35 gazillion?

[Spheric Harlot]

It's a 35 billion* WORLDWIDE market, if you include religious books.

This article specifically excluded both, but details like that never seem to matter to people who throw sales numbers from 2009 into a discussion about the future potential of a newly emerging technology.


*) it makes sense to call it 35,000 million, as in many places, that would be "35 milliards", while "35 billion" is 35 million million.

[voodoo]

Originally Posted by olePigeon 

35 trillion... which seems like a lot.

Edit: Or is that 35 billion?

thirty five thousand million, that's 35 billion, yes.

..... numbers from 2009. And now for correcting the nigh incoherent, and (as so often) completely wrong blather by Spheric, here above.

Well Spheric, correcting you is easy enough (as usual), obviously the figures I quote are indeed the WORLDWIDE market, if you include religious books AND textbooks in the year 2009. As if anyone was trying to deceive you. Perhaps you simply didn't read what I wrote, we'll call it the "freudling-syndrome". Allrightythen.

I can't even begin to describe how dumb logic (using that word very loosely) it is to claim numbers from as faaaar back as 2009 are irrelevant, Spheric. It's really beyond words. "Throwing sales numbers into the discussion"... how dare I? Indeed.

So the American market has grown in 2010, whoop-dee-do. The point was that even a good percentage growth of the puny (oh yes) ebook market in America is irrelevant considering the mass of the 35 billion USD worldwide paper book market - and the thing is, the American market is more or less *all* of the ebook market worldwide.

There's no hidden German (or even Prussian) ebook market that would affect those American numbers to make them relevant.

Then there is the completely absurd notion that one shouldn't discuss past sales performance when talking about "about the future potential of a newly emerging technology". I'll let you ponder yourself, why that is so fantastically absurd - or even of Baghdad-bob like quality.

Ebooks are not an emerging technology, btw, unless you never use anything but Apple sanctioned products. "Oh, but they're the only ones who are doing it right!"

[freudling]

Who is this?

Google Image Result for http://www.dadwagon.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/ObviousTroll.jpg

[Don Pickett]

Let 14-year old explain the future to you.

J-P Teti (The iPad is 99% more open than any other computer)

[nonhuman]

Originally Posted by Don Pickett 

Let 14-year old explain the future to you.

J-P Teti (The iPad is 99% more open than any other computer)

I was just reading that. It's an interesting take and, at the very least, I think he does a good job of explaining the perspective of the average user (read: none of us).

[turtle777]

Originally Posted by Spheric Harlot 

*) it makes sense to call it 35,000 million, as in many places, that would be "35 milliards", while "35 billion" is 35 million million.

What ?

35 Billion is always the same in English language, there is no ambiguity about it.

It really doesn't matter what other languages call a Billion, if the linked article and discussion here is in English.

-t

[imitchellg5]

How about we just use numbers and terminology like every other English speaking person in the world, k?

[nonhuman]

Originally Posted by turtle777 

What ?

35 Billion is always the same in English language, there is no ambiguity about it.

It really doesn't matter what other languages call a Billion, if the linked article and discussion here is in English.

-t

Untrue. In the UK billion is sometimes used to mean 10^12 (1,000,000,000,000) instead of 10^9 (1,000,000,000). Though I don't think it's that common anymore.

Originally Posted by Don Pickett 

Let 14-year old explain the future to you.

J-P Teti (The iPad is 99% more open than any other computer)

This should be required reading for anyone that posts on a Mac forum. People who post here often think that Apple and other companies design products for us. Nothing could be further from the truth.

[turtle777]

Originally Posted by nonhuman 

Untrue. In the UK billion is sometimes used to mean 10^12 (1,000,000,000,000) instead of 10^9 (1,000,000,000). Though I don't think it's that common anymore.

What do you mean by "sometimes"?

Is it the same people that say "should of" and "intensive purposes"?

-t

[turtle777]

Originally Posted by imitchellg5 

How about we just use numbers and terminology like every other English speaking person in the world, k?

Sure, let's make it $35,000,000,000. And the US debt is around $14,000,000,000,000, whereas total debt (incl. unfunded off balance sheet items) is around $150,000,000,000,000.

Surely this is more clear than saying $35 Billion, $14 Trillion and $150 Trillion

-t

[Spheric Harlot]

Originally Posted by turtle777 

What ?

35 Billion is always the same in English language, there is no ambiguity about it.

It really doesn't matter what other languages call a Billion, if the linked article and discussion here is in English.

English mother****er, do you speak it?

milliard |ˈmilˌyärd; -yərd|
noun Brit.
one thousand million (a term now largely superseded by billion).
ORIGIN late 18th cent.: French, from mille ‘thousand.’

[Don Pickett]

Originally Posted by nonhuman 

I was just reading that. It's an interesting take and, at the very least, I think he does a good job of explaining the perspective of the average user (read: none of us).

True.

A good bit of my work has had me interacting with average users, including the kinds of people who don't understand you have to empty the trash after you put something in it, and the guy who thought his printer was broken because it had run out of magenta ink. . .

[turtle777]

Originally Posted by Spheric Harlot 

English mother****er, do you speak it?

milliard |ˈmilˌyärd; -yərd|
noun Brit.
one thousand million (a term now largely superseded by billion).
ORIGIN late 18th cent.: French, from mille ‘thousand.’

Sorry, dude, but the use of the long scale was abolished over 35 years ago.

Originally Posted by Wiki

For most of the 19th and 20th centuries, the United Kingdom uniformly used the long scale,[3] while the United States of America used the short scale,[3] so that usage of the two systems was often referred to as British and American respectively. In 1974, the government of the UK switched to the short scale, a change that is reflected in its mass media and official usage.

So, unless you lived for the last 37 years under a rock in the UK, you shouldn't be confused.

-t

[Spheric Harlot]

Awesome.

The next sentence following your quote begins "Although some residual usage of the long scale continues in the UK…"

And for the record, I spent the earlier part of the last 37 years on a rather remote-ish rock of the British Commonwealth, so it's not just my German roots that inform me of the terms' ambiguity.

And further, for the record: Frankly, I don't really give a shit. I would have written (and, in fact, DID write) "35 billion".

I can only assume that the Long Scale was new to you, so be happy you lurnt something today, and I'll be happily not caring as I watch a nucular reactor irradiate my old schoolfriend's parents' home.

[imitchellg5]

Originally Posted by turtle777 

Sure, let's make it $35,000,000,000. And the US debt is around $14,000,000,000,000, whereas total debt (incl. unfunded off balance sheet items) is around $150,000,000,000,000.

Surely this is more clear than saying $35 Billion, $14 Trillion and $150 Trillion

-t

I said numbers AND terminology. Which means $35 billion. Good grief.

[Shaddim]

DailyTech - Tablets to Continue Assault on PC Market

What's that sound? It's the sound of the PC market shifting. Did I say 5 years? Make that 3.

Still loving my iPad, BTW. I can't remember when I last used my MBP.

[ghporter]

Is the "post PC device" now just a lighter, cheaper surfing and game device? That's the impression I'm getting...

[Spheric Harlot]

That's mostly what computers have been for a large part of the general populace for a while now.

[Paco500]

Originally Posted by turtle777 

Sorry, dude, but the use of the long scale was abolished over 35 years ago.



So, unless you lived for the last 37 years under a rock in the UK, you shouldn't be confused.

-t

As a regular listener to BBC Radio 4, I can say that it is still ambiguous enough that many presenters say "20 thousand million" rather than "20 billion" and when a guest uses the word billion, the host will often clarify which billion they mean. It's not as out of use as you might think.

[Waragainstsleep]

Originally Posted by Paco500 

As a regular listener to BBC Radio 4, I can say that it is still ambiguous enough that many presenters say "20 thousand million" rather than "20 billion" and when a guest uses the word billion, the host will often clarify which billion they mean. It's not as out of use as you might think.

Yes, Radio 4 does do that, but precisely because many of its listeners are old enough to still use the outdated version. Its just what they are used to.

Post-PC is just marketing hype, but its very clever since the generic term 'PC' has long been hijacked to mean 'Windows PC'. 15 years ago it meant 'IBM-PC', shortened from 'IBM-PC compatible' 20 years ago going back to the original 'personal computer' 30 years which covered any kind of computer from Sinclair, Amstrad, Acorn, Commodore, IBM, Compaq and whoever else and as everyone here knows, the original personal computer was an Apple. Microsoft deliberately or otherwise claimed the term 'PC' for themselves. Apple knows that if they maintain market share long enough then iPad will probably replace the term tablet, like iPod replaced (the catchy) MP3 Player. Post-PC is just Steve Jobs getting back at Microsoft stealing the PC by using the term to dismiss all the competition.

If a tablet computer is running Windows, its a 'Tablet PC'. iPad is 'Post-PC' and therefore sounds newer and better, even if it isn't.
If this term really takes off, Microsoft might have to do what it clearly considers unthinkable for now and rename Windows.
Maybe they could hire Charlie Sheen and call it "Winning 2012"

[ghporter]

Originally Posted by ghporter 

Is the "post PC device" now just a lighter, cheaper surfing and game device? That's the impression I'm getting...

Originally Posted by Spheric Harlot 

That's mostly what computers have been for a large part of the general populace for a while now.

Exactly my point. Processing serious data or performing more intensive functions has been a "high end computer" domain for quite some time, with the majority of so-called computer users really just online users and players of simple games. Who needs a "computer" when all you do is that sort of thing?

[Eug]

Well, in 2011, people still use Office, etc. which is why it's difficult to use an iPad as a primary machine.

Scratch that. You can use it as a primary machine, but you still need some sort of backup computer for your Office needs, etc. whether that'd be your laptop that sits in your bedroom. Or, if you have very light needs, you still need a "backup" computer in that you need your geek grandson that comes over with his laptop every few months to sync, backup, and update your iPad.

P.S. iOS needs multi-user support like yesterday.

[nonhuman]

I've had my iPad 2 for a couple weeks now, and am loving it. At work, I spend most of my time (as I am now) on my MacBook Pro, but at home I've barely touched my iMac since I got the iPad. Actually, for the past 4 days the iMac has been at the Apple Store for some Apple Care repairs, and I haven't even bothered to bring my work laptop home; the iPad covers 100% of what I normally do with my home computer (the sole exception being Hulu, because I refuse to pay for Hulu Plus, but the Netflix and ABC apps, plus soon the HBO Go app, have pretty much taken care of that).

The biggest drawback to going iPad-only for me, right now, is the lack of a good way to write code. I need a fully-functional code editor that has some sort of built-in integration for both Mercurial and Git. Until I've got that, the only way for me to code is to use Panic's Prompt (a freaking awesome SSH client) to SSH into a server and edit remotely. That totally works fine, it's just less than ideal and requires a network connection. A Python interpreter would also be awesome.

The only other major issue is the minimal screen real estate. Right now I'm using three 'monitors'. The 15" MacBook Pro screen, a 20" external monitor, and my iPad for email.

Fortunately both of these issues are ones that will, no doubt, be solved in the next year or two. An android tablet could probably be used as a full dev environment right now, and the iPad already supports multiple screens, just not quite in the way that I'd want.

[nonhuman]

Originally Posted by Eug 

Well, in 2011, people still use Office, etc. which is why it's difficult to use an iPad as a primary machine.

Scratch that. You can use it as a primary machine, but you still need some sort of backup computer for your Office needs, etc. whether that'd be your laptop that sits in your bedroom. Or, if you have very light needs, you still need a "backup" computer in that you need your geek grandson that comes over with his laptop every few months to sync, backup, and update your iPad.

P.S. iOS needs multi-user support like yesterday.

There's always Pages and Numbers for iPad, and Google Docs. (I have no idea if these are adequate replacements for most people; I almost never touch Office.)

[Eug]

Originally Posted by nonhuman 

There's always Pages and Numbers for iPad, and Google Docs. (I have no idea if these are adequate replacements for most people; I almost never touch Office.)

They are not, unfortunately.

Anyways, I was just using Office as a big example. The iPad is just ill-suited for productivity in general in its current form, and even most light users need to do some productivity type stuff on their main computers.

---

BTW, I was just thinking back to that that TV show, Star Trek: The Next Generation. Lots of pads in that show, but it's interesting that that they predicted well how these pads would be used. They were mainly consumption devices in that show (reading reports, searching the online databases, etc.), with most of the major work done elsewhere.

[Spheric Harlot]

Originally Posted by Eug 

P.S. iOS needs multi-user support like yesterday.

Funny - it just occurred to me that iOS HAS full multi-user support.

It was eye-opening when I realized how it works. Here's how:

"My wife and daughter are completely hogging my iPad. Give me another one."

I'm serious. It's scary effective.

[Eug]

Originally Posted by Spheric Harlot 

Funny - it just occurred to me that iOS HAS full multi-user support.

It was eye-opening when I realized how it works. Here's how:

"My wife and daughter are completely hogging my iPad. Give me another one."

I'm serious. It's scary effective.

Aside from the implementation issues, I'm sure Apple's intent is partially this. However, they will include multi-user support eventually, as it is an evolutionary step. They question is how long they'll be able to milk the single-user iPad market before they feel it's necessary to upgrade the OS for multi-user.

[Phileas]

Originally Posted by Eug 

The iPad is just ill-suited for productivity in general in its current form,

The iPad might be unsuited for your kind of productivity, which by the looks of it involves heavy duty office work. It is perfectly suited for a whole bunch of my productivity, which can, generically, best be described as content creation.

[Phileas]

Originally Posted by Spheric Harlot 

I'm serious. It's scary effective.

I bought an iPad to share with the wife when they first came out. Next day I went and got another one, for just that reason.

[Eug]

Originally Posted by Phileas 

The iPad might be unsuited for your kind of productivity, which by the looks of it involves heavy duty office work. It is perfectly suited for a whole bunch of my productivity, which can, generically, best be described as content creation.

Perhaps, but your productivity is hardly reflective of the greater population. Not too many people need clappers, etc.

I usually don't do heavy duty office work by the way. I do mostly light duty office work, like much of the population.

[Phileas]

The clapper board app is used by our production staff, extremely rarely by me myself. Come to thunk of it, a lot of the work I do is light office work, research, design studies and sketches. I don't think our tasks would be all that different, if you'd compare them.

We do have the luxury, as a small company, to be able to choose our tools, and MS Office just doesn't feature in the mix.

[Phileas]

From tuaw.com

The Canadian Broadcasting Company is reporting that the Ottawa Hospital, which already has about 500 Apple tablets being used by health-care providers, has recently ordered another 1,800 iPads to replace paper medical charts.

Doctors at the facility currently use iPads to examine X-rays, write prescriptions and take notes during patient visits. The devices carry patient medical histories, triage information, allergy data and allow doctors to order treatment while they're still with the patient.

The hospital hopes to offset the cost of the additional iPads through replacements of old equipment, increased productivity and a reduction in errors. Ottawa Hospital CIO Dale Potter, who proposed the iPad plan to the hospital, noted that for handwritten doctor orders, "15 or 20 percent of those are missing information, or are illegible, and require human intervention." It is expected that the devices, which will arrive by July, will reduce the amount of rework required on orders that have been entered incorrectly by hand.

It's a toy!!!!!

[Shaddim]

Originally Posted by ghporter 

Is the "post PC device" now just a lighter, cheaper surfing and game device? That's the impression I'm getting...

Don't know if I'd say cheaper, I paid $2500+tax for ours, but they are lighter and more convenient than any notebook. I haven't really found anything that I can't do with it, there are apps for everything.

[Spheric Harlot]

With all respect, the Ottawa hospital story for some reason reminds me of the fact that the United States heve the most expensive and least effective health care system on the planet.

Canada isn't the US, but I still wonder whether $500 tablets are that much of an improvement over pencil and paper that the money weren't better-invested elsewhere...

[ghporter]

Pencil (or pen) and paper... Think about doctors' handwriting for a moment. Even the careful ones have crappy handwriting. More "medical mistakes" come from doctors' crappy handwriting on paper records than from nurses misreading printed medication labels, technicians improperly handling patients and equipment, and hospital-acquired infections. Combined.

Having digital access to a single, unified medical record is a patient safety issue. You can't miss a drug interaction or prior medical issue if everything is available all at one time. And with digital x-rays, the image can be produced faster, be available to all practitioners faster, and be easily manipulated to examine details specific to the discipline a particular practitioner needs for providing the very best care available.

It really IS better to have digital medical records, in terms of both patient safety and outcomes and in terms of cost. It's only the initial investment that is really expensive. And over a year or so I think the cost of the digital devices is going to be significantly lower than the cost of producing, storing, safeguarding and archiving paper records. Add to that the fact that there will be fewer opportunities for mistakes or other accidents due to poor information quality (just think about doctors' handwriting for a moment here...) so there will be fewer adverse situations. If we had, as a society, demanded "the very best recordkeeping possible" back when computers began to be widespread in business, the startup costs of digital medical records would be miniscule.