The lack of any direct storage expansion in Apple's iOS products has been one of the more enduring causes of complaint for those using or pondering on owning one of these devices. Kingston Technology demonstrated its idea of a workaround when it previewed the MobiSX at CES at the beginning of the year. Now in production, with a …
"it is rather odd that it imposes its own limitations. After all, Kingston has traditionally provided the means to upgrade equipment, but with the Wi-Drive, the company has made a device with its own storage limits. Undoubtedly, Kingston wants to sell its chips, but given the Wi-Drive's price, it is the lack of an SD-card slot to further extend its capacity that rather takes the shine off this compact and capable iOS storage expander." No. Just taking a leaf out of Apple'sbook.
£95 for *16Gb*!!!
Which is even funnier . . .
. . .. when I can buy a 16Gb MicroSD for my android for less than fifteen quid. :~)
"being wireless, there’s no way you can use it on a plane"
Other than... just turning it on and using it like you would anywhere else. They aren't going to know, and it really isn't going to cause the plane to fall out of the sky.
Show me the proof that this is really the case. Otherwise you're playing with my and other people's lives.
This is the same crap as 'well, this stop sign is in a place where there's hardly any traffic at all, so I don't need to stop here'. And guess what will happen?
Because they have wireless on planes?
You do know that they have wireless internet access on planes, right?
Does the fact Lufthansa offers inflight wifi and has done for quite some time count as proof?
Personally I would have considered the fact that no plane crash has ever been attributed to someone leaving their wifi on as proof enough but suit yourself.
So no, it's not like having a stop sign at an intersection at all.
The real question is why would I buy a 16gb non upgradable storage device when I can get a wifi enabled SDcard reader and 16gb card for tenbux more. And I have lots of SDcards already.
I know exactly what will happen- the minute you run the stop sign, there'll be a police officer hiding to catch you and write you up. :)
Mines the one with the speeding warnings in the pockets
@Christopher P Martin
Typically one or two devices trying to handshake with an access point at 31,000 feet won't cause a problem.
Of course the further the distance, the greater the transmit power and greater the chance you might interfere with avionics, but the real problem is when 150-odd dicks like you all try to turn on their wi-fi because 'it won't bring the plane down, you know', you have enough transmit energy to seriously affect sensitive aircraft systems.
Documented examples of systems affected by wi-fi frequencies are PDUs (glass cockpit display systems), navigation/positional aids and Ku-band transmission systems for communicating with ground stations. Which if it's all the same to you I'd rather stayed operational whilst I'm on board.
So speaking as somebody who flies 200k+ miles per year....
If you start dicking around with wifi next to me on a flight that isn't equipped for it, you'll need a proctologist to retrieve your device from whence it has been shoved.
And I just upvoted you for that one
Maybe a bit too graphic, but yes.
To all the haters out there -- the WiFi installed on the planes have been tested against the electronics / avionics on the plane itself. And have been certified as such by the manufacturers of those planes.
So, I guess Apple / HTC / whomever also did this, so you can say 'sure, there's absolutely no interference?'
If it's not tested, and approved, do not use it where I can see it. If something happens, and it was caused because of the use of non-approved electronics while flying, I will hunt you down in the afterlife :-)
Would these be the same 'documented examples'...
...that are actually just the crew guessing that's what might have caused a malfunction? Actually I can answer that one- yes, because there are zero confirmed cases of interference. And the in-plane wifi may be certified, but it's still people's own phones that connect to them. There's nothing magic about the on plane wifi that makes peoples phones somehow safer.
@Christopher P. Martin (again)
IATA lists 75 cases where PEDs (Personal Electronic Devices) were listed as the probable cause for aircraft systems malfunctions between 2003 and 2009 (http://newsfeed.time.com/2011/06/10/report-evidence-mounts-that-electronic-interference-may-affect-airplane-safety/#ixzz1P9u1UJ00).
On March 10th this year, Boeing suspended Wi-Fi deployment on it's newest 737-NG variant after multiple systems failures on Honeywell avionics and cockpit display systems during installation of Wi-Fi access points in the aircraft itself (http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/2011/03/10/354179/wi-fi-interference-with-honeywell-avionics-prompts-boeing.html)
The US Subcommittee on Aviation hearings concluded that Personal Electronic Devices (PEDs) can pose a serious hazard to aviation when in radiating mode" - http://commdocs.house.gov/committees/Trans/hpw106-102.000/hpw106-102_1.HTM
The 'Straits Times', Kuala Lumpur, ran an investigative journalism article in July 2007 titled: "Electronic gadgets caused navigation fright on KL planes":
'A MALAYSIA Airlines plane lost its bearings momentarily and three others had their navigation computer systems knocked out for a while during the past four months all because of interference by portable electronic devices used illegally by passengers. Only quick action by cabin crew prevented one or more of these incidents becoming a disaster.'
And that's after 5 minutes research. You'd have to be pretty arrogant to assume in the face of this that there is no risk in turning on your Wi-Fi during flight. Not that that'll stop you, of course.
I just hope I'm never sitting on the same airplane as you.
All of which...
...helpfully demonstrates my point for me. Your first citation has the direct quote: "...no direct correlation is being made between electronic interference from personal electronic devices and plane malfunctions". I strongly agree with "some experts" referred to in this one who say that "these anecdotes are not enough to draw conclusions".
Your second citation doesn't refer to personal electronic devices, but the installation of access point gear in planes which only vaguely correlated with some problems during "ground testing 'at elevated power levels'".
Your third citation, another direct quote: "despite all of the studies that have been done, there is really no hard scientific evidence that cell phones, or other devices, actually interfere with the navigation and communication equipment on aircraft" and it goes on to say that all the evidence is anecdotal.
I'll barely even dignify the fourth "citation" with a debunking. It's actually from August 1994, if you look here: http://newspapers.nl.sg/Digitised/Issue/straitstimes19940807.aspx and it is pure hearsay and anecdote fuelled by paranoia.
In my eyes, there is as much basis for not using wifi on planes as there is for these poor people thinking their collection of (possibly psychosomatic, or possibly physical and unrelated) symptoms are caused by radio waves: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-14887428
This leaves you with the argument: "well, it might cause a problem, and I'm not willing to take that chance". If that were a valid argument in its own right, none of us would be using wifi or mobile phones at all "just in case" they cause cancer (which, incidentally, also has no evidence whatsoever to support it). The evidence for electronic devices interfering with planes is so slim it's practically non-existent.
Seems like an expensive way around the fact some prick didn't fit an SD slot on their tablet.
Sounds like it takes a lot of tinkering to get it to work.
Wouldn't that appeal more to an Android user, not an iOS user?
I have a better idea
I just bought the ASUS WL-HDD 2.5 and they let you choose what hard drive to put inside.
...now it's even EASIER for someone to steal your data. No wires needed!
Buy the Apple Camera Connection Kit (USB + SD card reader, $29.99), and a 16GB USB disk ($15).
Make sure any media you wish to view is in a folder labeled DCIM, in the root of the USB disk.
Insert disk into adaptor, adaptor into iPad, et voila, you can view your content without jailbreaking.
Spend the extra on a 64 gig tablet, probably the price difference would buy you one of these things.
Who are they trying to kid?
16 Gb for nearly a hundred quid? In a package that size? I have a terabyte portable drive that cost less than this, and it's about the same size. Sure, it doesn't have wifi, but so what? If I need more storage on my phone, I have a micro-SD slot.
This is an expensive, shiny gimmick for people with more money than sense. Who do they expect to buy this? Oh yeah, that's right...
- Geek's Guide to Britain Kingston's aviation empire: From industry firsts to Airfix heroes
- Analysis Happy 2nd birthday, Windows 8 and Surface: Anatomy of a disaster
- Adobe spies on readers: EVERY DRM page turn leaked to base over SSL
- Google chief Larry Page gives Sundar Pichai keys to the kingdom
- Lollipop unwrapped: Chromium WebView will update via Google Play