Hacker News new | comments | show | ask | jobs | submit | nextparadigms's comments login

Yes, there's an Asus Zenbook one, with a larger 11.6" screen. It doesn't have a stylus though, but unless you really care about a stylus, and you just want a laptop, then it shouldn't matter.

-----


I don't imagine he tossed in digitizer as a requirement just for the giggles.

-----


Would you say the HN search is a "good one"? And who would search for Go just by typing go in a search bar? Would you really do that on Google? I don't even do that for less common words, let alone one like "go". I usually use 3-4 words for my queries, maybe more. Because I have a pretty good idea of what I'm looking for and I don't want to waste time looking into pages of search results to find the relevant article, because I only searched for one word.

-----


If this is true no one will buy the console, no matter what bells and whistles they add on top to make it "feel right". It's not right.

-----


No one?

Sadly I'm not so sure about that.

I would definitely skip it though, but not that many people really care.

-----


People said that about Diablo 3, and it went on to be one of the best selling PC games ever made.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diablo_3#Sales

-----


Only because of pre sale hype. Not many still playing compared to what could have been.

-----


Does that really matter? The always on DRM issue was known long before the game launched. If it was going to have a serious effect on sales of the game, it would have. You can't really argue against "People won't buy it because of DRM" with "Well people aren't playing it anymore!"

-----


I'm sure the number of people who continue to play the game is at the forefront of their thoughts at Activision-Blizzard, not the piles of money they're busy counting.

-----


Well, one could argue that Diablo 3 did well because people played Diablo 2 for so long. Diablo 4 is going to be in a much weaker position.

Blizzard is one of the few companies who cares about that sort of thing.

-----


This certainly hasn't been the case for Steam's always-on DRM.

-----


What's wrong with the platform owner controlling what's run on the platform? Seems pretty standard these days.

-----


It is pretty standard these days and that's what's sad about it. Anything that removes options, and in some cases rights, from the customer for the benefit of the company is bad for consumers in the long run.

For example, the idea that you don't own the software you paid for, but are in fact licensing it, is fairly standard these days. Once it was crazy to think that you couldn't buy software, use it for a while, and then sell it to someone else when you no longer wanted it. These days it's quite standard to think that kind of thing a quaint notion. How has that made things better for the consumer?

From that simple idea that you don't own software but are licensing its use from the company has led us to the notion that you no longer have first-sale doctrine of the product you paid for. What's the next possible step? Whatever it is, I expect it will not be of benefit to consumers.

-----


I still think this should've arrived with a more modern interface. At least I hope they get to that by the time port it to Android devices.

-----


There's more:

http://readwrite.com/2013/01/03/googles-ftc-settlement-is-an...

-----


Surely I didn't read that right, MS have a $50 million budget just for Google smear campaigns!?

One of the biggest things that makes my blood boil is when corporations invest large sums of money to force consumers to use their crappy products instead of spending that money on making less crappy products that consumers choose to buy.

-----


It should make your blood boil that our government operates in such a way that companies see this as just another vector for competing against each other.

Dan Lyon's piece is pure sensationalism. Reality is likely more like: 1) there is a government affairs group inside MSFT with a $50m+ annual budget (not crazy given the DOJ impact on the company) 2) they hire a connected political machinists and give him marching orders to drum up concern over Google in DC (the same way Oracle, Novell, Netscape did against MSFT--http://www.stern.nyu.edu/networks/homeworks/Microsoft_Case.p...). 3) Guy needs a network of folks to do his deeds—he runs around DC recruiting people telling him he has a massive budget because money seems to be the most effective way to persuade people in Washington (http://www.thisamericanlife.org/radio-archives/episode/461/t...).

Meanwhile, there's a guy with a Google laptop bag doing the same thing.

-----


Microsoft's huge smear budget is harmful to taxpayers too, because they actively have tricked large segments of the U.S. Federal Government (for example, the Dept. of Defense) into only using Microsoft software due to "the inherently insecure nature of open source." Even worse, they smear any browser that isn't IE. That holds back software adoption big time.

-----


Microsoft makes Microsoft look bad, unfortunately for them. But it seems to be in their company's DNA to spread FUD about others. It's like crack to them.

-----


In a recent speech by Gabe, I think he said they'd still check for malware. But he didn't give any details, so I'm not sure if he actually has a plan to open the market, but in the same time has a system for checking malware, or he was just saying that.

-----


I don't really see the value in that either. So until they can figure it out themselves what ChromeOS integrated with Android offers mores than just the Chrome browser for Android, then they should probably keep them separated.

-----


You're not paranoid, but all companies release "leaks" like this these days, without an "official" announcement, months earlier.

-----


It makes sense why they would do it. It let's them get response from the community and use that feedback to address concerns and hype the positives for the official announcement. It is just like the open betas that video games have been doing recently.

-----


Hangouts and WebRTC should be good alternatives for that. But you also can use Skype in the browser last I checked (for video-calls):

https://imo.im

-----


Using imo for skype is far from "ideal" -- you give your skype password to a third party, and I don't think you can call landlines with it. You might say "just use google voice", but you're out of luck if you're not in the US.

I've toyed with giving my parents a chromebook, but the lack of skype is always the sticking point.

-----

More

Applications are open for YC Summer 2016

Guidelines | FAQ | Support | API | Security | Lists | Bookmarklet | DMCA | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: