Not sure what you guys meant. I thought my post implied i was going to buy a 1A wall charger. Anyway i did that, and got it powered up. It runs reasonably smoothly. Got up to trying to get samba to work on it, to network my windows drives in. Will probably have a go at playing some hd content as well, to see how well it does the job of a htpc.
Well I meant running it from another computer's USB slot. Hopefully it works off my TV's.
People barely use keyboards? That's news to me. Am I typing this with my mind?
Apple has the tablet as an angry birds machine/e-reader/status symbol market cornered.
This is a tablet that can run Word and Excell, and the full version of windows, and any program that runs on windows (included any windows based game), hence a detatchable keyboard is a usefull addition.
If a detatchable keyboard confuses people, then they are idiots.
Then it's just a touchscreen laptop. Sorry, but I just can't see this having too many points of differentiation from a laptop for a lot of consumers.
Who knows, maybe you're right about it catching on in business, but I'm not sure that the interface looks ideal for spreadsheets and shit.
...illustrating the 80/20 rule. Yes, for a minority of customers the extra features will be a major selling point, but for most they'll just be meh, and add extra weight and cost to the product.
It's the whole 80/20 thing, most people want a tablet as an angry birds machine/e-reader/status symbol. The fluff (like funny folding keyboards) unnecessarily confuses these people. Apple has that market cornered.
You are making assumptions about the political system that would be the alternative (US has no Prime Minister) and how much it would cost. Regardless, at least the person who is the head of state actaully does something. It's OK to love the royals, you can take a big steaming dump on William's chest for all I care. But I don't see them as any more than moochers.
Errr yeah I was making an assumption, that's why I said I was.
Quote from: mattnz;1489915
Generally a country has both a head of state, and a prime minister.
Generally the sky is blue and water is wet. The fuck does that have to do with what I said? Facepalm*
So we need the royals because we have to have a head of state anyway. Even though they don't do anything.
DERP
Ummmm, sorry your argument seemed to be that we would save money not having a governor-general, whereas I was pointing out that we would just have to spend the money on keeping a president or whatevz. I don't think I said anything about royals or nothing.
