Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 30th Jul 2012 19:38 UTC, submitted by tupp
It might be a cliche, but sometimes, a picture says more than a thousand words. Over the years, I've often talked about how the technology world is iterative, about how products are virtually always built upon that which came before, about how almost always, multiple people independently arrive at the same products since they work within the same constraints of the current state of technology. This elementary aspect of the technology world, which some would rather forget, has been illustrated very, very well in one of Samsung's legal filings against Apple.
Thread beginning with comment 529535
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[12]: Just another thing it CAN do.
by Sabon on Fri 3rd Aug 2012 19:27
in reply to "RE[11]: Just another thing it CAN do."
Member since:2005-07-06
They do their programming and testing all on a tablet? Or, are they remoting to another machine to do their work remotely? What platforms are their applications targeting?
They are remoting into their work desktop computers through a program that encrypts their data going back and forth using 256 bit encryption.
Which brings up another thing. If you are taking your code off site there could be a case for being fired since the laptop could be lost or stolen.
That is part of the appeal of the iPads. None of the data is stored on the iPad. They remote in with encryption and all their data is back at work.
What they look at is the IDE on their desktop computer (which is locked so no passerby can see what they are doing) and the program is compiled/recompiled on their desktop computer.
If their iPad is lost or stolen, all they have to do is report it and the iPad is wiped remotely.
RE[13]: Just another thing it CAN do.
by Alfman on Fri 3rd Aug 2012 20:00
in reply to "RE[12]: Just another thing it CAN do."
Member since:2011-01-28
RE[13]: Just another thing it CAN do.
by Soulbender on Fri 3rd Aug 2012 20:25
in reply to "RE[12]: Just another thing it CAN do."
Member since:2005-08-18
RE[13]: Just another thing it CAN do.
by OMRebel on Fri 3rd Aug 2012 20:56
in reply to "RE[12]: Just another thing it CAN do."
Member since:2005-11-14
They are remoting into their work desktop computers through a program that encrypts their data going back and forth using 256 bit encryption.
So, the tablet computer is serving nothing to them but as a means to remote in to another computer? And that is it? So, instead of carrying around a bulky 11 ounces more, they choose to remote in (hoping they have a decent internet connection) and use the desktop/laptop they are remoted into? That is because they can't actually do their programming on the tablet - my point exactly.
PS - telling me about encryption doesn't impress me. That is a given these days. It's not the 1980's, and it's not new.
Which brings up another thing. If you are taking your code off site there could be a case for being fired since the laptop could be lost or stolen.
Our code is always taken offsite on our backups. Leaving your code in just one location is rather reckless and careless.
None of my employees (nor myself) have lost any of the company laptops. I guess that's why I hire people who are responsible.
{p}That is part of the appeal of the iPads. None of the data is stored on the iPad. They remote in with encryption and all their data is back at work. [/q]
No, that is the appeal of remote access - it's not the appeal of the "iPad". You could substitute a variety of devices in place of the word "iPad" you are fixated on that would do exactly what you are talking about. Let's try that:
"That is part of the appeal of the Galaxy Tab, Nexus 7, Ultrabook, Netbook, etc..."
You see how that works?
What they look at is the IDE on their desktop computer (which is locked so no passerby can see what they are doing) and the program is compiled/recompiled on their desktop computer.
Exactly. They CANNOT actually do any work on their tablet. Wanna know why? It's a toy.
And, about it being "locked", no kidding there chief. Whenever you are remoted into a computer, it displays as being locked. This isn't the days of PC Anywhere dial-up man....
If their iPad is lost or stolen, all they have to do is report it and the iPad is wiped remotely.
Responsibility is a bitch........
Seriously man....your "fanbois" is really being taken to the extreme. Your points are all foolish and antiproductive. I am also figuring out that you really don't know much about modern day IT by your posts.
Edited 2012-08-03 20:57 UTC
Member since:
2005-11-14
You sound like the people I used to be around in the early 80s. They said similar things about PCs, those little toys that are a waste of the company's money and of little to no productivity.
My friends program in C++ and Java. They make a very good living and our respected by their boss.
They are not respected to the price or size of their "toys". They are respected to the quality and quantity of their code and their ideas for the major programs they help maintain and create new code for. Mainly they take sections of code, thousands of lines, and replace it will better, faster, more secure code.
Sorry but they prove every day that no only is this plausible for possible. Their boss sees no losss in quality or quantity of their code. He isn't an ignorant smuck but like you is a senior programmer who knows his stuff and isn't fooled by idiots. If he didn't like their work he wouldn't "put up with it".
Fact is, it works for them and he is more than happy with their work. Sorry that your ideas of what is possible is so intrenched in the past. "
They do their programming and testing all on a tablet? Or, are they remoting to another machine to do their work remotely? What platforms are their applications targeting?
If they do NOT remote to another machine, are you telling me the IDE that they are using is as functional and productive as something like Eclipse?
I look forward to your response....
Edited 2012-08-03 19:20 UTC