Greg Knieriemen, in TheRegister, has an open letter to Jeff Bezos, complaining that he could not install Gmail, or any other Google Apps on his new Kindle Fire. To be fair (sort of) he mentions that “The Yahoo Mail app is on the Amazon App Store (and for the ten users still on Yahoo this is a nice app)”
This all came as a bit as shock, since the Kindle Fire runs “a flavor” of Google’s Android operating system and Knieriemen incorrectly assumed that it would run all the Google Apps.
Knieriemen thought he was home free when he learned that you could sideload apps that were not in the Amazon App Store, but he was still denied entrance to the “Promised Land”, and could not get Gmail to run on his Kindle Fire.
This is something of a mystery, as Knieriemen points out, that he was able to sideload and run the Nook app, and “Other competitive services like Netflix and Hulu are directly available on the Amazon App Store.”.
Knieriemen offers no further enlightenment as to why Google Apps won’t run on the Kindle Fire, but he does document how he remedied the incompatibility issue. He returned his to the store.
As an honorary Missourian, I felt compelled to do further “research”. ( Yeah, I looked on Google. What do you think, I went to the library?) Knieriemen’s open letter incidentally, comes up 3rd out of 1,380,000 hits when you type in “How to run Gmail on Kindle Fire”. (At least today it does.)
Then a couple listings below the letter to Bezos, there’s this link telling you How To Root Your Kindle Fire.
Once you’ve rooted it, you will be able to install the real Android Market, from which you can get all your favorite Google Apps, including Gmail. Be aware that rooting devices is not for the technologically squeamish, and it could damage your device, and might also to void your warranty. Okay, you’ve been warned, knock yourself out!
Greg Trashes the Kindle Fire even more on his website nekkidtech.com http://nekkidtech.com/
Read More About The Kindle Fire at Kindlefirewire.com
Billionaire Tom Steyer is accused of reaping financial benefits from his support of Green Tech legislation. Wayne Lusvardi, writing in Calwatchdog.com, makes the case that in
the kleptocratic state of California where so much plundering of people’s wealth is going on under the guise of a green, redevelopment or public health agenda that it has become taken for granted that one can do so. The line that demarcates what’s mine and what’s yours has become so blurred that there is no longer any shame of using laws or tax initiatives for public greed.
Steyer runs Farallon Investments, which Lusvardi claims ”holds a number of green stocks in its investment portfolio”. Steyer, according to Lusvardi, would benefit from the continuation of California’s green power law AB 32. As reported by the Sacramento Bee,
Steyer heads Californians for Clean Energy and Jobs, Steyer heads Californians for Clean Energy and Jobs, a coalition of technology firms and environmental groups that formed in 2010 to defeat an oil-backed suspension of the state’s greenhouse-gas reduction law
The Bee also reported that Steyer is backing a proposal where the state
would require businesses to pay taxes based solely on the proportion of sales they have in California compared to other states. The $1.1 billion tax hike would largely fall on the backs of out-of-state companies who currently pay taxes based on a different formula that does not penalize them as much for maintaining workers and offices outside of California.
Steyer’s proposed tax would first take half of the tax proceeds for green projects and jobs that would no doubt prop up his and CalPERs’ investment portfolio.
CalPERS is the California Public Employees Retirement System and Farallon is one of the external managers of their retirement fund.
Lusvardi makes no mention of any of the proponents of Prop. 23. Presumably none of them would have enjoyed financial benefits if it had passed, and we must therefore conclude that their motives were entirely altruistic.
On November 21, The Financial Times published another call by George Soros, for the ECB to “Save the Eurozone”. Soros wrote
It is imperative that the ECB should not fail that test. The central bank must stop the bond run at all costs because it is endangering the stability of the single currency. The best way to do it in the near term is to impose a ceiling onthe yield of sovereign bonds issued by governments that follow responsible fiscal policies and are not subject to adjustment programmes. The ceiling could be initially fixed, at say 5 per cent, and lowered gradually as conditions permit. By standing ready to buy unlimited amounts the ECB would effectively turn the interest rate ceiling into a floor from which bond prices would gradually rise without the ECB actually having to buy unlimited amounts. That is what the Swiss government did successfully when it tied the franc to the euro at 120.
Raoul Ruparel, a researcher for the think tank “Open Europe”, wrote a comment in which he expressed his opposition to the Soros plan.
Ruparel’s view is that “Greater intervention by the ECB raises more problems than it solves.” Ruparel said:
Without a clear mechanism for winding down the ECB bond purchases, it becomes impossible to imagine a situation where the ECB could end its bond buying programme without causing huge market distortions.
Ruparel argues that
German fears over hyperinflation cannot be seen as an anomaly – it is a political reality that goes to the heart of the German post-world war settlement. The day the ECB is turned into a politicised lender of last resort, may also be the day when the Germans start to seriously question whether they wish to be a part of the single currency.
Previously, Soros said, European leaders “held a bazooka in their
hands” which they could use to shoot down the debt crisis.
Remember Novell? Back in the early 90’s if your office had a network, it probably ran on their software. Now Novell is suing Microsoft for $1 Billion, claiming the software giant violated anti trust laws when it allegedly duped Novell into thinking Wordperfect would be included in Microsoft’s Windows 95. (By then, Novell had bought the word processing program.)
Bill Gates claimed that Microsoft was innocent, when took the stand yesterday. Cross examination is expected to continue today.
Groklaw managed to dig up Novells’s actual filing which describes “how Microsoft stabbed it in the back”.
If you don’t have the patience to sift through it (we didn’t) you might be interested in some of “the bullet points”
The Sherman Act Precludes Monopolists From Excluding Potential
Competitors That Threaten To Commoditize The Relevant Market
Microsoft Engaged In Conduct Other Than Competition On The Merits
That Had The Effect Of Preventing Or Excluding Competition Or
Frustrating The Efforts Of Other Companies To Compete For Customers
Within The Relevant Market.
Microsoft Evangelizes The Namespace Extensions To
Microsoft Withdraws Support For The Namespace Extension
Microsoft’s Deceptive Scheme To Eliminate WordPerfect Was
Deliberate and Premeditated
Microsoft’s Conduct Against Novell Was Part Of
Microsoft Feared the Threat Posed by Novell’s Office
WordPerfect’s Shared Code Technologies (“PerfectFit”) And
AppWare Constituted Middleware With The Potential To
Weaken The Applications Barrier To Entry Or “Moat”
Protecting Microsoft’s Monopoly Power In The PC Operating
Novell’s Office Productivity Applications Were “Key Franchises”
That Microsoft Sought to Own to Widen the Moat Protecting its
PC Operating Systems Monopoly
Novell’s Distribution Of Netscape Navigator Constituted A
Threat With The Potential to Weaken the Applications Barrier
To Entry Or “Moat” Protecting Microsoft’s Monopoly Power In
The PC Operating Systems Market
There Is Abundant Evidence In The Record To Show That Microsoft
Sacrificed Windows 95 Quality And Profits In The Short Run To Exclude
Potential Competition And Maintain Its PC Operating System Monopoly
Microsoft’s Conduct Did Not Make Business Sense Apart From Any Effect
It Has On Excluding Competition Or Harming Competitors
We can all breathe a sigh of relief, now that we know that there’s still a possibility that Donald Trump might run for president. At least that’s what Mrs. Trump (That’s Melania, in case you’ve lost track) told Joy Behar.
Switch to our mobile site