Respectfully disagree - Compete and Alexa both depend on toolbars, and no techie in his right mind wants to install such a thing. Quantcast doesn't use a toolbar, but it's heavily biased towards Quantcast-aware publishers who place the QC script on their pages. Long story short: these sites are bad for measuring traffic, but especially bad for measuring tech / power user / early adopter traffic.
45% might even be understating it. Android's share of the smartphone market is already around 30% in the US (http://www.eweek.com/c/a/Mobile-and-Wireless/Android-Tops-iO...). That's a bigger piece of the pie than either iPhone or RIM. Unless Apple aggressively targets the low end, a majority Android share (50%+) of the smartphone market shouldn't surprise anybody.
I had a chuckle at this. The use of "pointy-haired" was at least creative. And yeah, I believe parents have the right to spy on their kids, especially when it comes to the net. Largely, I'd add, because of people like you (trolls).
Yeah, I completely agree. I'm sure he doesn't need my or anybody else's money or respect. But I wonder if the message he's trying to get across is the one that's actually getting across. Looking at it from a gaming standpoint, can his play here can ever have a positive expectation?
Not only that, but there are legit reasons to include a keylogger as part of a laptop build out. Every computer has, or should have, this kind of auditing capacity. The question is a) whether it's turned on by default and b) whether any information is being transmitted on the sly. In all likelihood, this was either some sort of mistake, or the keylogger is intended for use by the computer's owner -- not by Samsung.
EDIT: Sorry for scaring people. Listen, I HATE keyloggers and other invasive software. Here:
My point was that I can see a legit need for low-level auditing by whoever owns the PC. Including such a package that's turned off by default, might be better than forcing a worried parent to sift through 12 keyloggers on Google, half of which are malware, a quarter of which don't work, in order to find out if her 12-year-old is composing YouTube dances and uploading them to 4chan.
Difficult to see how publicizing this stuff could be beneficial for Mr. Allen. At that level, and sitting on top of a multi-billion dollar fortune, it almost never behooves you to say anything negative about anybody -- least of all one of your former partners. I also think complaining about not getting a bigger share of MS stock, when you've got 14 billion in the bank...not exactly the stuff of which Jedi are made.
It would add a little oomph if you could add some sort of subtle visual tracking (in the CSS for example) to highlight the stuff that moves. Between refreshes it's often hard to see what's changing.
I think most blog comment forms have a "website " field for a reason, though. There's a tactic quid pro quo there. Leave a comment, add value to the discussion, maybe a few people will click on your link. And the vast majority of bloggers I know are happy to get comments. A well-placed comment on an unknown or up-and-coming blog can make the author's day.
Not until well after their IPO and the bubble bursts on the absurd 40, 50, 75 billion-dollar valuations we're seeing now, IMO. Entering search actually brings on some risk, because if they screw it up, or if it doesn't take, a lot of Facebook's future equity goes up in smoke.
He's publishing online; of course he wants eyeballs. But not many people know that the Nook can do double duty as an entry level tablet, with access to the full Android market. Given the cheaper price, I'd say this is a worthwhile article, in the sense that it will probably steer certain people away from overpaying for designer tech they don't need.
Strictly by the numbers: iOS/iPhone is one of the least rewarding platforms/devices to target -- when revenue's the goal. These apps don't perform well vis a vis, say, boring old Windows or iOS/Mac or, increasingly, Android apps. If you're thinking about getting into iOS development with an eye towards Angry-Bird style profits, please read this first (and then the other dozen pieces of research on the same topic):
That number times $1.95 per paid app gives the 'most typical app' the total revenues in its lifetime - the full two years of App Store existence - of $1,948 dollars. This is before Apple takes its cut of 30%, so we are left with $1,363 over two years or $682 per year. This is so 'successful' that half of all of the developers of the 164,250 apps - will actually earn LESS THAN THIS. Before you start to cry, remember, there is that Angry Bird game that had 4 million paid downloads and the Bewelled 2 game with 3 million paid downloads. Thats your math there, they are totally skewing the averages, and you are stuck in the 'long tail' indeed. Half of all developers will earn less than $682 per year. Do you still think this is a good business idea?
EDIT: The mathematics are a little depressing, just something to keep in mind. Certainly a successful app is a successful app. Getting there on iOS seems to be a lottery proposition.
Paul, granted that it's sort of a part of your job to shill for Chrome, and granted that Chrome is a better browser than IE in its current state, but why all the hate for IE8 specifically? Most devs I know who've spent time with the IE lineup would prefer 15 years of IE8 to another 1 year of IE6. End of story, so far as that goes. (OK, I'm exaggerating a bit, but not much.)
And the "only" solution is hardly getting them onto a new browser. Moving them to say, Firefox, is only one solution. Another solution would be for MS to produce a standards-compliant browser. IE8 and IE9 are both major steps in this direction. Of course, Chrome itself isn't 100% compliant, and had the advantage of being developed much later in the game, against a well-framed open source stack. And of course, Chrome borrowed all sorts of tricks from IE...
Anyway, there are at least 3 or 4 good solutions for that crowd, only one of which involves Chrome. By the way, I use Chrome and Firefox exclusively. I dislike the piling-on against IE for piling on's sake. To represent IE8 as another IE6 is a little disingenuous, IMO. For what it's worth.
affecting companies like Amazon, and companies like SalesForce that have made a significant investment iOS investment, one has to wonder whether building iPhone apps is safe
This. iOS remains, by the numbers, one of the worst places for freelance developers to spend their time. Profits are diminutive in the average case, and app store policies impose additional risks that have forced entire shops to leave the iOS ecosystem or change how they do business inside it.
I felt the same way, but I interpreted it as the writer's subtle mockery of his earlier "hotshot" self. Towards the end he notes that he made no money off the deal, and that he deserved to make none.
Very true and Facebook didn't pioneer the use of real names, either. Not by a long shot. Come to think of it, I can't think of a single feature Facebook truly, actually pioneered -- I can think of a great many they popularized.