If you only want to receive mail at aliases it's easy: just setup an email catch-all on your domain ;-) To send is another matter; and unfortunately, I haven't found a way to easily do this with fastmail.
FWIW, I switched my order to the stripped-down "angel" and did eventually receive it but it was non-working junk. Some sensors didn't work; others produced garbage for data. So disappointing.
I'm in the same boat. I backed the original Ubuntu Edge indiegogo campaign, but it never happened. And I would check the site periodically to see if there was a phone that shipped/worked in the States (and there never was) or if it was running on anything newer than a Nexus 5.
FirefoxOS phones were pretty much the same story. Limited hardware that wasn't available in the US market.
With both, it may not have been a lack of global interest; but a lack of interest in the limited markets they chose to release in.
The shotgun approach that both FirefoxOS and Ubuntu Phone took saddens me - I think they could have done very well had they focused on acquiring power/niche users instead of trying to be a mass-market consumer product from the get-go.
When the iPhone first launched, it wasn't adopted by everyone. I remember when, in ~2009, I and a few friends were the only ones I knew who had an iPhone. It wasn't until around 2011 that pretty much everyone I knew had a smartphone.
The basic business lesson is that you have to "cross the chasm" from early adopters to mainstream users - you can't just start selling a new product to everyone and expect to succeed without massive resources, and even then your product can still struggle (see: Apple Watch). Really, the only way to pull it off is to establish a niche market before targeting the general market. This book [1] does a great job of explaining the process - Mozilla and Canonical execs would do well to read it!
Sadly, many startups don't seem to have very good business sense and long-term thinking. "If we're not the iPhone yesterday, then we can't compete and we might as well 'pivot' and 'focus' on our 'core offerings'" - not true! There is a market for a user-respecting, fully (or even mostly!) FLOSS smartphone, but my parents certainly aren't going to buy one - they just got their first iPhone last year after all - so sell to me and people like me, not them. Then, maybe in 6-8 years, once the platform has matured and the FLOSS benefits become obvious, you'll start to break into the general market and start to challenge iOS and Android. But I don't think most companies are down for that; sadly, most are just focused on next quarter's profits instead of building something lasting.
Building something lasting takes resources. Canonical simply had no chance. Even Microsoft, despite their aquisition of Nokia, their marketing budget, their massive dev resources, is failing on mobile. They even have their own convergence feature and it's not enough to attrack customers.
Microsoft made a mobile OS that didn't offer a compelling enough alternative to either iOS or Android.
iOS = Locked in ecosystem
Windows Phone = Locked in ecosystem
Android = Alternative to iOS
Windows = Alternative to iOS
On a technical level, Windows Phone devices performed around the same as iOS devices (fantastic), but lacked mainstream apps (the same problem as Blackberry) but without the backwards compatibility with Android apps.
Basically, Windows Phone was doomed to be the "not android, and not iOS" smartphone despite the great technical aspects of the OS.
Actually by 8.1 people that don't have the bugdet to buy iPhones and disliked Android where buying Windows Phones, up to the point they almost managed 10% world wide.
But then came the Windows Phone 10 reboot, with the promise that all 8.1 devices would get an WP 10 update, promise that they eventually broke by allowing only premium devices to get it.
So no, WP wasn't doomed if Microsoft managed to keep the roadmap steady, instead of rebooting left and right.
On the other hand, they seem to be having some luck with hybrid laptops/tablets. Something that most Android devices still do very poorly.
Not just that but they did it multiple times - 6.5, 7, 8, 10 - all pretty much incompatible from both a handset and even a developer's perspective. Imagine Apple doing that and having their first four iOS iterations all going in different directions every time, they'd also br in Microsoft's position now. They seem to have learned now and I could still see them turn around.
If, "Canonical simply had no chance", then does that mean we're stuck with iOS and Android period? And no other mobile OS has a shot? If you believe that, then you're certainly entitled to your opinion, but I feel like that's not the type of hacker mindset that moves the world forward.
I'm optimistic because I've never seen one of these 3rd option OSes take the approach mentioned in the Crossing the Chasm book linked in my earlier post - they all went straight to mass market vs. targeting a niche, dominating, and then using that beachhead to expand into other markets. If someone makes a legit or mostly-legit FLOSS mobile device, targets it at the appropriate audience, and slowly and patiently nurtures an ecosystem, I think a 3rd option can succeed.
I heard the same thing about desktop Linux for years. 200 distros later, guess what, Windows is still king and Apple is still selling boatloads of pricey machines.
I agree that Linux on the desktop is not a mass market consumer product in 2017, but are you saying that we should just accept that and move on? What about innovative disruption and building the future we want?
I won't tell you what you should or shouldn't do. I will, however, tell you that Apple and Google won the mobile OS game and both of them are working on the next big thing: AI.
Blackberry "won" the mobile OS game in the early 2000's, but look what happened to them: Apple came along with a better product and now Blackberry is pretty much a joke looking for a punchline.
No market is ever truly "won" - they are all susceptible to disruption, no matter what monopolies or duopolies may exist. Not saying said disruption is easy, but it is always possible, and personally I think it is something worth pushing for vs. settling for the status quo, esp. when said status quo is either closed (iOS) or not very user-respecting (stock Android w/Google services).
Again, you're talking like the Linux fanboys I've been hearing for years: "Vista is total crap, it's only a matter of time before Linux takes over", "Windows 8 is a disaster, this is the year of Linux on the desktop!", "Windows 10 is a privacy nightmare! It's only a matter of time before people wake up and switch to Linux", "Steam on Linux? Game Over Microsoft! loll", etc...
Now, you are absolutely right that no market is won forever. Like you said, Blackberry was once king of the hill and was toppled by Apple. But again, like you said, Apple had a better product (and the resources to bring it to market).
So now, the question is: what's the next thing? The next "winner"? Where's the better product than iOS and Android today? Sailfish? Tizen? Mer? Fuchsia is in development at Google and looks intriguing, plus it's open source. What else could "win" mobile?
Not really sure how to respond to your first paragraph, but I'll take a stab at it. All I'm saying is I think there _was_ a viable way for Canonical to bring Ubuntu Touch to market, they didn't follow that path, Ubuntu Touch failed as a result, and I wish that things had turned out differently. Had they followed the approach outlined in Crossing the Chasm, I think they had a decent shot at upsetting the status quo.
^^ I don't see how the above makes me a Linux fanboy?
As far as the next "thing" or "winner" goes, I'm not sure what that will be. My only hope is that it's not locked down and non-free by default like mobile operating systems have been. However, seeing the way AI and such are shaping up, I'm skeptical that we're not headed for a very closed, proprietary future with few if any viable alternatives to the mainstream offerings of Apple, Google, Amazon, etc.
I don't believe that a "better product than iOS and Android" exists today. Sadly, Ubuntu Touch will never be that better product, nor did Canonical ever really give it the opportunity to be.
So, what could "win" mobile? Given that the smartphone market has basically matured, the only two viable approaches are:
1. Develop a niche product that could eventually grow into a mainstream offering, or
2. Build the next "big thing"
Unfortunately, Canonical tried to make Ubuntu Touch a direct iOS/Android competitor from the get-go and they barely made it to market before everything folded, so I'd argue they tried to take a 3rd approach and failed. Right now, I don't see anyone who's really taking either of the above approaches with much success, but I guess the good news is disruption _is_ coming. When and how, we'll just have to see, but one thing is for sure: Ubuntu Touch is out of the running.
Just to be clear, Google Fiber in Austin is more marketing than reality. A small area of town has it--most do not. And while the other players have now introduced fiber, their coverage is also limited to select neighborhoods.
So, I don't agree that it's nice for Austin. This removes the incentive for the other providers to continue expanding coverage, and the core of the city will likely be stuck on the old cable lines for much, much longer.
I loved the size, weight, and screen of the MacBook instantly, but put off getting one after reading all the flak about it not being usable for "real work". Heck, I've even heard sales people at the Apple Store say it. But eventually, my love of ultra-portability and retina-displays won, and I got one anyway (to replace my rooted, Arch-running, ex-Chromebook.) And I love it. Sure, I don't expect as much out of it as my 13" Pro (work machine), and I spend most of my time in the shell and vim rather than post-processing video or 3D rendering, but this thing is a joy to use.
It's not for everyone (or every computing task), but if you have a preference for the smaller screens and portability, and are aware that you're willing to trade raw machine grunt for this portability, then I wouldn't write off the MacBook just because "someone on the internet" said it wasn't usable.
I've got an XPS 13 which has a similar form factor to the 12" MB (304mm x 200mm vs 281mm x 197mm) and love it as well for all my tasks. The key is the screen - pack in a reasonable number of pixels and it's perfectly usable.
Completely agree. It's unfortunate how many Americans don't realize how poorly they're treated as employees. I don't think it even becomes obvious until you've traveled globally and had children.
You're right, but think about what the implication is. In exchange for a lower quality of life, we have more billion dollar startups. Not the only billion dollar startups-- just more relative to the more civilized countries. Most of these startups don't actually improve the public's daily life significantly, and offer incremental efficiency, convenience improvements, or services that people will be not using 99% of their waking time. Sure, on the long view software is "eating the world", but it's nibbling around the edges first, occupied with the condiments and garnishings rather than the meat.
Successful startups in exchange for shitty labor protections are a shitty trade for the vast, vast majority of people.
That's true of tech startups. But think of startups that aim bigger. The South African who founded SpaceX would have struggled to amass his army of engineers in Europe. In the long run, these moon-shot innovations that are only possible with huge amounts of cheap talent might save humanity. The low-hanging fruit (first airplane, first rocket motor, first PC) that could be started in a garage by a few folks working in their off time is gone.
I like that we have both types of labor climates in the first world. High-risk, no safety-net and unshackled by regulation like in the US, but also a more cushy albeit less dynamic one in Europe.
I seriously looked into relocating to Germany as a mechanical engineer after salivating over their extended paid vacation time and ease of taking transit all over Europe. But if I were ever to start a company, fuck paying for that. I'd do it in the US where labor is cheap and business taxes are low.
True, but this is an edge case that is unlikely given the toll that pregnancy takes on a woman's body and the challenges for the family. If you have kids, can you honestly say that you think this would be a good thing to try?
Another issue is where the parental-leave financial support comes from. Should it be the company's responsibility, or is this a government initiative to invest in the health of its citizens? Would you support the idea if the company had zero financial responsibility for the paid-leave (and only had to bring the parents back on once leave is over?)
It's definitely not common. Partly because $120k doesn't go as far as you'd think if you live in a nice city, and partly because not everyone wants a Porsche. If you're into cars, and really wanted one, you could be driving a used 911 on that salary (if your other bills/expenses are reasonable, and you go with a tame model.) The thing to remember about expensive cars though, is the high cost of ownership. Insurance will cost more; Parts will cost more; Repairs will cost more; Tires and gas will cost more...
I'm curious about this "bad, bad idea" theory too. For our site, I have a handful of hard-coded scoring functions that the site can select from based on search context, and it's far more supportable and debuggable than some of the dynamic query assembly approaches I've tried in the past.
ElasticSearch is a wonderful product that is a real pain to tune, so I'm curious if there's a better approach I'm missing.
