While it looks like a slightly promising competitor to iOS and Android, if they don't lock down good pricing, it will fail. $1000 is just not a good price point when it comes to a tablet. I understand that this thing will support a full Windows environment, but honestly, I use my tablets to surf and play. If I want to run Photoshop or an IDE, it's going to be on my workhorse laptop.
The $1,000 price-point is for pc tablet, which sounds more useful for the enterprise market. The ARM tablet, which is more in-line to what you describe, is supposedly going to be $500-600.
Surface RT won't cost $1000. As for the $1000 model, I suppose it depends on whether someone considers the Surface Pro a desktop-capable tablet or a MacBook Air with touch screen.
I don't think the target market is looking to play starcraft on these things, but rather just be able to run the full version of applications.
I know having a nice thin device that can run OneNote is what I look for more than anything.
There's nothing better than being able to take endless amounts of handwritten notes, and have them all indexed and searchable without any extra effort.
Absolutely amazing how many of those reflect the design used in later models of the iPhone. Before the first was even made they had the 3G/3GS prototype, some that closely resemble the iPhone 4/4S and even the iPad. Absolutely awesome!
No one here to blame other than political agenda. I fully feel we could have been in preparation for a humanized mission to Mars at this point. However, we've wasted too much time funding war and whether or not abortion and gay marriage should be legal instead. It's actually quite sad.
From personal experience, don't apply to any positions that don't reveal the company name in the post. You'll rarely get anywhere, and when you do it will likely not even pan out to being who you want to work for or the job that was described.
What I normally do is this:
Find a job that you find unique or intriguing. If it has a company name attached I immediately jump to LinkedIn to find who I may be working for and if it's the small company, I just look up the CEO.
At this point, I start following the CEO on Twitter (if they have one) and I find out what they are interested in and post about. I will now usually start engaging that person every now and then to make them put a name to a face. This also allows you to get an idea of the personality of the person you may be working for.
After a while, I'll put the question out there, "Hey I saw that you posted Foo job at your company. Has this position been filled? I'm extremely interested."
If they don't have Twitter, I'll engage them straight through LinkedIn. At this point I'll be straight upfront and honest. Just tell them that you are interested in finding out more information about the company before you formally apply for the job. When the time comes, try and get your resume straight to their personal email via this conversation.
Open up a line of dialog with someone who is posted the job. If it's an HR department, it may be tough, but not impossible. It's worth it in the long run to build up connections (even if their virtual) with people. Blindly applying to positions is just going to leave you in the dark.
This method has worked for me 3 times now. I turned down one of the opportunities. Not necessarily the best sample size, but the method shows very clearly that you intend to work for that company or at least that you are extremely interested in going the extra mile.
In Orlando I'm paying $240 a month to get 40Mbps down / 5 up with a full channel lineup, plus Showtime and NHL Center Ice. So THIS would be a huge deal to people in my area where only one cable option exists in a lot of Central Florida.
A (TM) is for an unregistered trademark, you own the IP of it though your use of it in the marketplace. This is what they have, and in fact anyone could have. In reality the (TM) is there to indicate you intention to protect it.
An (R) is for the registered trademark, as the name suggests you register it with your local trademark authority. It provides grater protection and is easer to take people to court over the misuse of.
Not necessarily: "In the United States, neither federal nor state registration is required to obtain rights in a trademark. An unregistered mark may still receive common law trademark rights. Those rights, for example, may extend to its area of influence—usually delineated by geography. As such, multiple parties may simultaneously use a mark throughout the country or even state. An unregistered mark may also be protected under the federal "Lanham Act" (15 USC § 1125) prohibition against commercial misrepresentation of source or origins of goods. Unregistered marks are also protectable in the United States under Lanham Act §43(a)."
Honestly, what would an Amazon branded Android experience bring to a smartphone? I suppose I could see why they released a tablet to support their Kindle line, but this doesn't make much sense to me.
They aren't even remotely winning in the tablet game either (<1% market penetration). The Nook is besting them for 4th place.
Obviously they make their money from their controlled store / experience, but does that make up for the difference in R&D and production costs yet?
Amazon already has agreements with many mobile providers around the world to supply data access for the Kindles. If their smartphone offered worldwide data roaming that did not cost an arm and a leg...
This is not a trivial problem to solve and I'm not sure Amazon is especially well positioned to solve it. The cost is being driven in a large part by the networks you're roaming onto, not the company you've signed a contract with.
Your analysis of the source is misleading. The statistic reported is that the Kindle Fire captured .71% of web traffic as recorded by Chikita, an ad network.
I'm not saying your conclusion is incorrect, but I'd like to see a more definitive statistic regarding market penetration. Overall, I agree; if Amazon's main goal is to drive content sales, I don't see why entering the smartphone market at this point is the best move.
Honestly, if applied broad spectrum (pedestrians, passenger vehicles, etc) what is the legality of what I conceal on my person or in the privacy of my car? What if I'm in a public space and I have a concealed weapon but a permit to do so? How do the differentiate in that situation?
I really don't like this at all. I love how the company making this product is called 'American Science & Engineering' and if this is applied on a street level it's one of the most un-American things I've seen.
Stuff like this makes me sad about where this country is heading.
