Too early to say that. Depends solely on the sound quality.
-10 karma · joined February 15, 2016
I'm based in Helsinki, Finland and Shanghai, China (50/50). Two very different countries in all aspects. In both countries government used to regulate taxis and today China does not anymore but Finland still does.
In Finland taxis are very new (BMW, Mercedes Benz, Audi, Tesla etc.) and expensive (supported with tax payers money) and they are REALLY expensive to take. Way too expensive. This may sound ridiculous, but in my home town (major Finnish city) during the weekends it was common for people to walk home 7-10km after the night out, because taxis are so expensive. They are not seen as normal transportation service but instead more as a luxury service that you have to carefully consider before taking. They are still very safe, clean, have their own Uber-like app etc. Finns have demanded many many years (long before Uber) for the taxi-monopoly to be destroyed, but the government has happily turned a blind eye to them. Ubers in Finland are usually Toyotas or Volkswagens, quite new and clean. Prices are only 50-60% of traditional taxis.
So what about China? Taxis are old/medium-level volkswagens, little dirty, driver may be smoking inside the car, quite safe but there are many people playing with the meter or overcharging in some other ways. Some drivers are also really greedy and arrogant: They may ask you where are you going before letting you into the car and if they don't like the route they'll not take you. Anyway they are relatively affordable for average people in China. When Uber and it's Chinese competitor DiDi came to the market, the government was confused at first but later legalized them when they realized that competition will benefit all in the long run. Now? Uber and Didi are extremely popular, significantly cheaper than traditional taxis, clean, safe and no more people have to worry about getting bullshitted with the cab fare.
So once again Uber made things better for all. Sometimes breaking the law in not only acceptable, but required for a greater good and change to happen. In Finland however it might take a while since the government is still living in their 1950s mentality and currently hunting down Uber drivers and suing them.
Some might say it's wrong that Uber is putting all the responsibility on the driver. You know what? It's not. They know what they are signing up for and besides if Uber as a company was responsible for every single incident all over the world in every country, the company wouldn't exist anymore. No investor money could cover all those fines. The current way is the only way Uber can exist and only way the change can happen.
You will surely need it.
All systems have had and still have security flaws. There is a world of difference between having a unknown vulnerability (which affects and will affect all platforms) and intentionally spying on users and stealing their information.
- What about lack of all the Linux/OS X GUI software?
- What about lack of all the UNIX OS features?
- What about all those billions and billions of Windows malware, viruses, adware etc.
- What about all the spying and restrictions that Microsoft has integrated into the Windows? (e.g. cannot block Microsoft spy server in the hosts-file, forced updates etc.)
- What about the fact that OS X and Linux have always been at least decent from developers point of view but Windows has always had problems and then things like Vista and Win8 happen.
- What about the advertisements served to you in the login screen?
- What about all the future shit MS will throw at you?
- Other stuff can't remember now
If and IF this will actually work out well, I would say this finally makes Windows usable for software development however I don't see any reason why anyone would change from UNIX based system to Windows unless they plan to make even bigger changes in the future...( like rewriting whole Windows to be UNIX based for example. :) )
You are welcome Apple.
:D You most definitely are or you somehow managed to mix iPhone and Android in every single sentence. Most of the stuff are not even opinions, they are just simply wrong information/lies.
"The user interface (which it was supposed to shine at) is just bad. I can never find items I'm looking for. I had to read an article to find out how I'm supposed to turn on the Hotspot feature (And it actually seemed like editing xorg file!)"
If you are serious about this I gotta say I'm speecless. It's actually amazing you were able to turn on your computer and open the web browser since it take just as much as turning on that hotspot: Pressing a single button...
This doesn't look any different. Someone already said it, but the fundamental problem with these are that it's extremely hard to build big and complex software without making it look like a huge mess. In a normal programming you can always call any part of code and make any number of instances and put them almost anywhere you want with very simple, logical and linear code which is executed in a normal standard prodecure (= line after another). With this almost everytime you make some changes you'd have to rethink the whole program flow and move all the components/blocks to different places and there are millions of lines going all around the place.
1/10, will fail.
It's almost the same thing why these days almost all developers and companies prefer OS X. Because it's the only one that gets the job done without unnecessary and non billable issues and still has awesome software support.