{ Working } { NEW } GT Racing 2 Hack Tool for iOS and Android ( NO Surveys! )
Download GT Racing 2 Hack For Android and iOS Devices No Surveys No Passwords Download Link: http://www7.zippyshare.com/v/97212669/file.html Get free Cash an...
By: GT Racing 2 Free Cash
More:
{ Working } { NEW } GT Racing 2 Hack Tool for iOS and Android ( NO Surveys! ) - Video
Using Grand Perspective Free Software for the Mac to Clean Up Files
John Staedler goes over using grand perspective free software for the mac to clean up files. For more visit http://johnstaedler.com.
By: John Staedler
Read the original here:
Using Grand Perspective Free Software for the Mac to Clean Up Files - Video
Download Video From Youtube Online Free
Download Video From Youtube. Free Software at http://goo.gl/jhlLbo. 3 Million Users. Individuals who want to download video from YouTube should learn how to ...
By: Download Video From Youtube
Read more here:
Download Video From Youtube Online Free - Video
Microsoft is reportedly considering a dramatic shift in its mobile strategy, copying Google and giving away its Windows Phone and Windows RT software to device makers for free. The plan has yet to be confirmed, but if Redmond follows through it could result in a flood of new Windows Phone devices from brands like Samsung, Sony and HTC, helping the platform to emerge as a serious rival to Android.
Okay so thats a pretty bold claim to make Android is streets ahead of Windows Phone at the moment, but key to this is one of costs. If Microsoft goes ahead and makes its software free, it genuinely would be 100% free for OEMs. And that cant really be said with Android while Google also gives its software away for free, Microsoft has dozens of patent licensing deals with just about every Android device maker in existence, and these have to pay fees to the company on a per-handset basis.
To make up for the loss of its licensing revenues, Microsoft will also attempt to take advantage of subscription services and advertising, reports The Verge. Service revenues would likely come from things like Office, SkyDrive and Skype, while ads can be placed in Windows 8 apps.
Microsoft has been edging towards this strategy for some time now, and its all part of the companys shift towards devices and services, such as Office 365, SkyDrive and Xbox. So far, Microsoft has given away Office RT for free since it launched its operating system for ARM-based devices, and more recently its begun giving away freebie versions of Office Home and Student for tablets that run Windows 8.1.
That Microsoft is willing to give Office, one of its major cash cows, away for free is a clear sign that its looking to embrace the no-cost licensing model for all of its products. After all, by giving away Android for free, Google came from nowhere to totally dominate the mobile scene in just a couple of years and theres no reason why Windows couldnt do the same, especially if it is cheaper for OEMs.
At the end of the day, by getting more Windows devices into the hands of consumers, Microsoft can make money from other means, by getting folks to pay for services like SkyDrive, Office 365 and Xbox. It can also ramp up its advertising efforts, and perhaps even push social services like Socl to further help with revenues.
Even so, theres a small hint of hypocrisy on Microsofts part. It wasnt long ago that the Redmond firm teamed up with Oracle, Nokia and others to file an anti-trust complaint over Googles predatory free distribution of Android, complaining that this just wasnt fair.
Presumably that effort hasnt gone anywhere, and now Microsofts adhering to the old philosophy of if you cant beat them, join them.
Go here to read the rest:
Microsoft plots to undercut Android by dropping Windows Phone license fees
At a recent meeting of the MIT Open Source Planning Tools Group, I had the pleasure of hosting Zak Rogoff campaigns manager at the Free Software Foundation for an open-ended discussion on the potential for free and open tools for urban planners, community development organizations, and citizen activists. The conversation ranged over broad terrain in an exploratory mode, perhaps uncovering more questions than answers, but we did succeed in identifying some of the more common software (and other) tools needed by planners, designers, developers, and advocates, and shared some thoughts on the current state of FOSS options and their relative levels of adoption.
Included were the usual suspects LibreOffice for documents, spreadsheets, and presentations; QGIS and OpenStreetMap for mapping; and (my favorite) R for statistical analysis but we began to explore other areas as well, trying to get a sense of what more advanced tools (and data) planners use for, say, regional economic forecasts, climate change modeling, or real-time transportation management. (Since the event took place in the Department of Urban Studies & Planning at MIT, we mostly centered on planning-related tasks, but we also touched on some tangential non-planning needs of public agencies, and the potential for FOSS solutions there: assessors databases, 911 systems, library catalogs, educational software, health care exchanges, and so on.)
Importantly, we agreed from the start that to deliver on the promise of free software, planners must also secure free and open data and free, fair, and open standards: without access to data the raw material of the act of planning our tools become useless, full of empty promise.
Emerging from the discussion, moreover, was a realization of what seemed to be a natural fit between the philosophy of the free and open source software movement and the overall goals of government and nonprofit planning groups, most notably along the following lines:
Added to all this, recent government software challenges hint at the potential benefit of a FOSS development model. For example, given the botched rollout of the online health care insurance exchanges (which some have blamed on proprietary software models, and/or the difficulty of building the new public system on top of existing locked private code), groups like FSF have been presented with a teachable moment about the virtues of free and open solutions. Of course, given the current track record of adoption (spotty at best), the recognition of these lines of natural alignment begs the question, Given all this potential and all these shared values, why havent more public and non-profit groups embraced free and open software to advance their work? Our conversation began to address this question in a frank and honest way, enumerating deficiencies in the existing tools and gaps in the adoption pipeline, but quickly pivoted to a more positive framing, suggesting new and, potentially, quite productive fronts for the campaign for free and open source software, which I will present in part two. Stay tuned.
Read this article:
The public front of the free software campaign: part I