you mean time machines
Printable View
you mean time machines
I don't understand how you can be so wrong. People do not love to program for Microsoft. They simply target Windows because it dominates 90% of the market. Windows CE does not.
And cellphones are not computer, the gods forbid they shall ever be; they are handheld devices. Computers are netbooks and laptops.
I have one in a plexi-glass and metal box on the floor. Does that count too?
Yet another word for which Elysia has her own personal definition. I was gonna say a computer is anything with a processor in it, but of course the real meaning is derived from the verb.
Computer - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
That's why they program for Microsoft!! whether they love it or not
cellphones is a word that describes a big black and white that is mainly used for calling and messaging
are you serious ? iPhone is not a computer ? Blackberry is not a computer ? New nokias are not computers ?
That's why they program for Windows.
No, it's not limited to that today...Quote:
cellphones is a word that describes a big black and white that is mainly used for calling and messaging
I would absolutely not call them computers because they cannot do what a "typical" computer do (I'm thinking of PCs and Macs, mostly).Quote:
are you serious ? iPhone is not a computer ? Blackberry is not a computer ? New nokias are not computers ?
If there's a better term for it, let's hear it. And iPhone & co are handheld devices.
As is my penknife... so perhaps we should call them handheld computing devices... or dare I say handheld computers? :DQuote:
Originally Posted by Elysia
I'm using my organic computer to read these responses right now.
It would be hard for me to classify the brain as just a computer yet, though I do not completely disagree. While at the lowest level the data can be expressed in binary (depending on which synapses are charged), the brain operates more on heuristics than specific instructions. That's higher order thinking: Even a task as simple as reading something follows a heuristic first, to determine if in fact a human wrote it.
A computer, for example, would have a much bigger screen, allowing you to do what is impossible on the hand-helds: browse the web, watch movies (ANY type of video, which is much different from all sorts of media palyers and stuff out there), video encoding, and so much more. It can basically run every Windows/Linux program out there.
Handheld devices are more appropriate for things that do not require a large screen and/or keyboard and/or mouse. The handheld devices will have its own piece of market, no doubt, because a cell phone is small and light and everyone carries one around. What better to tie certain services to?
I don't find a relatively new, unproven platform (which again relies on C) to be a better platform. Open source isn't a factor of the quality of an OS.
And your link, while a good read, has already been posted.
Well, any thing or person that computes is a computer.
I think it certainly is. Positive or negative is a subject of debate, but it most certainly has an impact on the quality.Quote:
Open source isn't a factor of the quality of an OS.
So what if it relies on C? It seems like a good language for the job. It runs Java also, and they will probably get more languages in the future. Thats more than I can say about iPhone if thats what you were comparing it to.
In my opinion being open source is the most important factor of an OS. I agree that it still doesn't make it good but they always have a better chance of improving than a proprietary one. Sorry about the post. I never saw it on this forum