I'm not sure why you were getting downvoted because the one thing that stuck out to me, after saying to myself "Huh, I'd love to get one of those to play around with." was that in the marketing page [1] it said "Go to microsoftstore.com/whatever" to preorder one yet when I poked around that site there was no reference whatsoever to the Surface Pro 3.
It just seems odd to go to so much trouble for the unveiling and then say, "but you can't check out the specs/look at accessories/drool over it" until 12:01am.
When I read stuff like this I try reeeeal hard to not immediately dismiss it as @hipsterhacker stereotypes, but weird groupthink like this shocks me.
Keeping data that is by it's nature relational in a relational database is, to my mind, obvious. That it isn't for startups that are building their entire business on data foundations (because it's OLD!) is genuinely mind-boggling to me. I guess I'm the one that's old now.
My office also provides VPN phones for remote employees. Plug it into your network, login with your token and you have your full extension, vmail, etc. available anywhere.
I was confused for a moment at the app name as I thought this referred to the excellent CodeBox application[1]; I thought maybe that app had been evolved into a full IDE.
For small things ClickOnce is fine, but it's a pain in the ass to automate. For example, there's no way to synchronize the 'version' of the installer with the version of the EXE it's installing. I had to hack[1] it so I could pull the version metadata off the EXE assembly and then force it into the XML of the project file where the ClickOnce settings are stored.
There's also no ability to publish the built installer outside of the UI- my build scripts had to build the /app.publish directory and then just copy the whole shebang to a network location for deployment. I'm not as upset about this being a separate step, but if they indeed allow you to configure and deploy the installer from within the UI why not expose an API to do it as well?
Overall I think ClickOnce is fine for internal, self-updating tools. It's worth noting, however, that I was inspired to create my workflow based on looking at what Github was doing with their windows client.
For the very overweight this is very likely; running a substantial daily caloric deficit just by eating healthy and drinking water will cause large early losses. This isn't sustainable, however, and really just kickstarts the process. As someone nears a breakpoint (different for everyone) they'll fall into the one pound per week rule.
It's tough to for any author to reduce the concepts of weight management beyond 'calories in' and 'calories out.'
I've been on a weight rollercoaster for the past 10 years, varying between 180 and 230 lbs and I've read many of the same books the author names, and while they all may lead to self-discovery on what makes YOUR body tick, none of them contain the mystical ONE THING that will cause you to lose 20 lbs in one week. In this I agree whole-heartedly with the author.
For those that are very overweight, I do highly recommend the advice to change your diet first, without starting an extensive exercise regimen. Many folks' regular diet is so bad that just eating healthy food and drinking water will cause them to lose 5+ lbs in the first week. You need to buy-in early on to the idea that exercise isn't about burning off the food you ate (as that's impossible) but about raising your metabolism and conditioning your body.
It's also not very hard to lose 5lb if you are morbidly obese.
Harris-Benedict predicts that an individual should have an equilibrium bodyweight depending on their activity level and mean caloric intake. When your actual weight deviates from equilibrium, you will approach it along an exponential curve.
This means that if you alter your diet, your initial loss (or gain) will be rapid, while later losses/gains will be very slow. Graphs here:
I didn't lose 20 lbs in 1 week, but cutting wheat, corn, and dairy from my diet and upping my vegetable intake to 5-7 servings/day has caused me to lose 30 lbs over the past 4 months.
A couple of thoughts (including some commentary on the article itself- sorry I couldn't help it).
The central idea of this article, which is that slowing DVD sales due to the explosion of streaming options are slashing profit margins, is fascinating to me primarily due to the relative absence of blame-shifting onto 'piracy.' There was a mention of it, but it seems Hollywood has finally moved past the 'Piracy is causing all our woes, DMCADMCADMCA' delusions of the late 90s/early 2000s. As a Slashdotter from back in the day that saw such scolding played out on the front page I find it strange (yet optimistic) that they finally saw the real writing on the wall.
However, even though the central conceit of the article is interesting to me I find the language just goddamned terrible. I guess if you're looking for properly-flavored industry news then sentences like "[h]is first picture was the tentpole smash Rise of the Planet of the Apes, and he already had three television shows on the air" and "[m]ore recently, he released the smash Identity Thief, with Melissa McCarthy and Jason Bateman" are right up your alley. I'm suprised the author didn't describe some upcoming SMASH deal as BOFFO.
It's funny that she was an editor for the New York Times. I'm guessing she decided to edit her own book, so she had no one to tell her that her breathless and gossipy over-wrought writing style would be laughable if it weren't so painful to read.
It's an excerpt, so the style might fit better in the book, where hopefully the reader isn't thrown right into it and bombarded with it constantly.
Even as an excerpted article, however, it needed to be edited much more. I skimmed the last half because I found the style unbearable. If you're going to explain why movies suck now, then start talking about facts, ideas, and their connections. Why bother with so much character development when those characters don't matter in such a short piece?
When will they admit that they killed DVDs themselves due to their fear of piracy? The more copy protection they put on them, the less likely any given DVD was likely to work. In the 90's we rented a lot of DVDs. By the time Netflix came along, we finally gave up even trying DVDs from the video store, instead watching whatever drivel was on Netflix only because we had a reasonable expectation that it would work all the way through without a microscratch triggering the anti-piracy circuitry.
Huh? I bought in to DVDs very early and I've either owned or used many DVD players over the last decade, and I've never, not once, had an issue with DRM preventing me from using the disc in a dedicated player.
The only situation I can think of is that you bought or moved your DVDs from a different "region." And the number of people actually dealing with that is so small it's not even worth mentioning.
Perhaps you meant Blu-Ray? While issues are perhaps more common, they're not common enough to drive people away. BR's sales problems are due to high cost and poor timing to market.
>By the time Netflix came along, we finally gave up even trying DVDs from the video store...
I think this is a bigger deal than efforts to curtail piracy. If nothing else it's just more convenient to stream a video than to go to the store and buy/rent it.
In theory they could make up the difference by charging the streaming services enough to make up the difference, but I don't think the market supports a higher price.
man that article was a pain to read for sure. One of those that couldve done with a TL;DR - "so this producer thinks that loss of DVDs killed hollywood" .. but still leaving a lot of questions for such a link-baity article completely unanswered.
It just seems odd to go to so much trouble for the unveiling and then say, "but you can't check out the specs/look at accessories/drool over it" until 12:01am.
[1] http://blog.surface.com/2014/05/announcing-surface-pro-3/