Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 9th Aug 2012 13:12 UTC
PDAs, Cellphones, Wireless "It'll be a full x86 device - Lenovo calls a 'joint effort' with Intel and Microsoft - that clocks in at 1.3 pounds with a 10.1-inch 1366 x 768 display. It's billed to have 10-hour battery life, which would be impressive for a device only 9.8mm thick. The standard model is Wi-Fi-only, but there will also be carrier versions including one with AT&T's LTE connectivity." If you see a 1366x768 resolution on a 10.1" display, they blew it.
Thread beginning with comment 530489
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[5]: Comment by shmerl
by Morgan on Thu 9th Aug 2012 20:08 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Comment by shmerl"
Morgan
Member since:
2005-06-29

So just because you legally can do something, doesn't mean it is reasonable or right to demand one. I believe the same argument is made for software patents, they're perfectly legal in the US too, but according to many, the exercise of that legal right is reprehensible.


You're opening a can of worms with that one. The laws exist to serve the people, not the other way around. The moment the laws become oppressive is the moment they should be changed. That is what most of us here hope for with regard to software patents; right now they serve only to oppress the individual and take away their rights.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[6]: Comment by shmerl
by Nelson on Thu 9th Aug 2012 20:27 in reply to "RE[5]: Comment by shmerl"
Nelson Member since:
2005-11-29


You're opening a can of worms with that one. The laws exist to serve the people, not the other way around. The moment the laws become oppressive is the moment they should be changed. That is what most of us here hope for with regard to software patents; right now they serve only to oppress the individual and take away their rights.


That's a rather..primitive view of how the law should function. It is also largely besides my point that a measuring stick for morality is not legality.

Just because you can, maybe, after extensive legal procedure, get a $100 check, doesn't mean it makes sense to do so, nor does it make my statement that tablets are appliances any less true.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[7]: Comment by shmerl
by Morgan on Thu 9th Aug 2012 20:32 in reply to "RE[6]: Comment by shmerl"
Morgan Member since:
2005-06-29

You're confusing "core" with "primitive". So are you suggesting that the law should oppress the people? I weep for your future generations...

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[7]: Comment by shmerl
by shmerl on Thu 9th Aug 2012 20:32 in reply to "RE[6]: Comment by shmerl"
shmerl Member since:
2010-06-08

Just because you can, maybe, after extensive legal procedure, get a $100 check, doesn't mean it makes sense to do so

What makes sense, is to be able to buy the computer with OS of your choice or with no OS (so you could install something else there).

The fact that one has to go through complex refund process is caused by monopolistic practices (of MS in this case), precisely as you pointed out for the purpose of making it too hard that it shouldn't make sense to bother doing it. It only proves the point of crookedness of MS and OEMs who do this bundling.

Edited 2012-08-09 20:33 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2