False narratives in high technology

by House Of Sims

MisinformationWeek
[Via Daring Fireball]

From page 3 of Eric Zeman’s comparison of the iPhone 4 and Droid X:

The iPhone 4 won’t support applications built in-house by businesses. All iPhone apps must be approved by Apple and are only distributed through the iPhone App Store. Enterprise app writers can develop for Android handsets, which support non-market applications to be installed. This gives the Droid X a slight advantage when it comes to apps.

Yes, if only the iPhone supported an enterprise development system that didn’t route through the App Store, that’d be a heck of a feature. I bet it’d be successful, too.

[More]

It is so easy to check one’s facts. In fact, the commenters quickly correct the writer. Yet, his article still maintains factually incorrect information.

It is one thing to make a mistake. We are all human and things get through. But, when one is discussing why one system is better than another, then one should work to get the facts right and, when it is pointed out that one has gotten facts wrong, to correct what one has written. It makes the reader wonder about all the other facts that are mentioned. Are they also factually incorrect?

As many people have said, “Everyone is entitled to their own opinions but they are not entitled to their own facts.” I wonder if his Cargo Cult World uses a sardine can to represent a cell phones? Because his Smartphone Death Match seems to have just about the same connection with reality.

Just because someone told you a lie does not make it the truth

by maureen lunn

A quote:

“It’s (Phoenix) called the kidnapping Capital of the United States” by John Kyl.

This was debunked when John McCain said it last month. It was debunked when David Dewhurst said it last month. I am sure it will be debunked again shortly.

But then, the narrative is more important than the facts for those that want to live in a world, one that is only a simulation of reality, not reality itself – a Cargo Cult World.

[Another in a continuing series of posts examining the attempts to create a Cargo Cult World, where truth is fiction and lies simulate reality.]

Calling whatever OS is current ‘Windows’ is not much of a plan

by Steve Snodgrass

Ballmer: ‘The Operating System Is Called Windows’
[Via Daring Fireball]

Ballmer tells analysts that Microsoft’s answer to the iPad is Windows 7 running on tablets (or, in his parlance, slates). On its face, if he means this in the obvious way, their efforts are doomed. The iPad would not be a phenomenon if it ran Mac OS X — and Mac OS X is better-suited than Windows for this sort of thing.

Keep in mind, though, that Microsoft is willing to call anything “Windows” if it’s a computer OS. Exhibit A: Windows Phone 7, which, as I’ve pointed out before, offers a UI that doesn’t even involve lowercase-w windows.

[More]

Windows branding could be broken. As noted, isn’t the branding way off if you call it Windows but there are no windows present? MS almost seems to name operating systems in a random fashion, just adding Windows to whatever flavor is currently popular.

Apple has substantially changed the name of its operating systems several times – System 7, Mac OSX, iOS – but MS has to maintain the Windows part no matter what.

An example of actually being unable to alter itself to meet changing market conditions? Apple renamed the operating systems to indicate huge underlying changes in the OS architecture, while maintaining substantial compatibility, while MS tries to coverup that there has been any change at all by coming up with all new names at the drop of the hat. Perhaps because there really has been little longterm planning? Or at least no coherent plan – Windows 3, Windows 95, Windows Me, Windows NT, Windows CE, Windows XP, Windows Vista, Windows Mobile 6, and Windows Phone 7 – seem like attempts to just add Windows to whatever operating system is around at the time, not an example of a path to the future.

Developing new OS with little coherent path but calling them all Windows does not seem as likely to attract developers as one OS whose path to every type of device is relatively seamless. especially an OS that could well be found on more mobile machines from Apple than those from any other company.

Ballmer counts the iPad as a PC

What Happens to Market Share Numbers If You Count the iPad as a Portable Computer?
[Via Daring Fireball]

Answer: Apple shoots from number seven to number three in worldwide portable computer sales. And the growth curve is even more striking.

And what’s the argument against counting the iPad as a portable computer? The average selling price is higher than most Windows laptops. “Netbooks” count. Is it because the iPad’s OS didn’t have a 1.0 in the 1980s?

[More]

The head of Microsoft has said that the iPad is just a PC, so why not go by his nomenclature? Here is the relevant graph:

But take a big look at the trends. All the other companies are on a downward trend. But not apple. in fact, here is what the growth trends look like, both with and without the iPad:

It will be very interesting to see how long Apple can continue this growth. If it is able to for a couple of more quarters, it will be the largest maker of mobile computing devices.

Just think, the largest manufacturer would not have Windows on it! For the first time in forever the OS for a major computing category will not be made by Microsoft.

Perhaps Ballmer will want to change his definition.

I love Texas threads, particularly ones about Dang Good Candy

Random Texas sign: “Dang good candy”
[Via Boing Boing]

I spent the last few days in Texas. I didn’t take this photograph, but I wish I had. Thanks for snapping it and sharing it, Chris aka @blueneurosis (whose Flickr stream is here).

[More]

As someone noticed, the ubiquitous Dairy Queen is nearby. Having lived and driven in Texas for most of my life, it is a given – the locality is officially a town if there is a Dairy Queen present.

But even cooler, someone in the comments knows the store, located in Chillicothe, Texas and provided the website link. Just so cool that even little stores in towns between Dallas and Amarillo can have nice websites where I can shop online for Dang Fine Candy, like Bourbon Pecan Pralines or Cajun Spices Pecans! They have Pecan Coffee, which my brother might like.

Pecans are like zucchini – half the fun is figuring out what to do with them because there is just so much and you can only give away so much to your friends.

And the thread continues with all sorts of discussion about the proper way to write y’all, how to pronounce Kuykendahl Street (‘Kirk en doll’ County) and other topics – such as Texas is not part of the South. It is Texas!

Use MIT to get a science education online

by Dimitry B

A free MIT science education? Yup, and Science loves it
[Via Ars Technica]

MIT’s OpenCourseWare, possibly the best place to go if you want to study physics in your pajamas, has been awarded the Science Prize for Online Resources in Education (SPORE) by Science magazine. OpenCourseWare receives close to 1.5 million pageviews a month, with traffic from educators, students, and especially independent learners.

The SPORE prize was created to honor innovations like OpenCourseWare, a site that makes much of MIT’s curriculum available to anyone with Internet access. It’s best known for the depth of many of its course resources, particularly in the sciences. Many classes, like introductory physics with professor Walter Lewin, include videos of all the lectures, as well as items like course syllabi and assigned readings.

The award gave OpenCourseWare’s contributors an essay spot in the magazine, which they used to note that 50 percent of the site’s visitors identify themselves as independent learners, unaffiliated with a university. This fall, OpenCourseWare will roll out a new section of the site geared toward independent learners, containing more problem-solving and self-assessment opportunities.

[More]

MIT OpenCourseWare is leading the way for high level science education online. They are available online or through iTunes, with both audio, video and transcripts.

The University of Washington is also one of the participants at iTunes U. In fact, there are a ton of Universities with free content.

Now we just need to get certification done right and the ability of people to re-train themselves becomes a possibility.

Fixing Social Security could be easy

by SergioTudela

The CBO has released a report detailing the effects of a wide range of different options that will extend Social Security benefits passed 2039 – the date that current projections yield as the time when it no longer can fulfill its full obligations.

The report looks at altering Social Security taxation, changing benefits, raising the retirement age, reducing cost of living adjustments and other approaches. Most of these will fail to accomplish the task at hand. Raising the retirement age to 70 will not be enough, for example.

There is one option that will not only make the Social Security fund solvent but can also be done without changing any of the current benefits or eligibility requirements – get rid of the taxable maximum.

Of the 30 options the CBO looked at, the only ones that did better than this option either increased taxes for all of us or lowered benefits. This option simply means that all Americans are taxed the same no matter how much they earn. It is one of the simplest to implement and the fairest to everyone, even those who would see higher taxes.

That is because this not only keeps Social Security solvent but actually results in increased benefits for those who would pay more.

Currently, both employee and employer each pay a 6.2% payroll tax. But this is only imposed on wages up to a taxable maximum, which today is a little over $106,000. Any wages above this are not taxed at all. So the highest wage earners pay a smaller percentage of their wages for Social Security than the rest of us.

In 1983, 91% of all earnings from jobs fell below the maximum. But the highest earner’s salaries have increased so rapidly since then that in 2009, only 83% of the earnings were below the maximum. Simply removing this maximum would make Social Security solvent for almost 75 years.

Removing the taxable maximum means that everyone pays the same percentage of their earnings to Social Security, no matter how much they make; all Americans pay equally.

These higher taxes for those making the most amount of money does not mean that they will not get increased benefits. The CBO’s calculations include higher benefits for the higher earners than they would receive now. They get most of their money back, just like the rest of us. The benefit calculation remains the same as it is currently.

So, they may have to pay more now – although they would simply be paying the same percentage as the rest of us – but they would also get more back when they retire.

Doing this will make keep Social Security solvent for almost 75 years. It is the fairest of the options with the least effect on the vast majority of people. And even those whom it does affect will see increased benefits.

SImply taxing all Americans the same could save Social Security.