Posts by Michael C

HDCP issues, mostly, and licensing

To "support" and be certified to play BlueRay, the hardware, including all components between the Disk and the screen, must fully support HDCP encoding, just in case an inserted disk uses the appropriate copy protection bits. This is a hardware architectural change requiring different chipsets, compatible graphics adapters, and methods for preventing inline copy of video data in flight.

Then there's the power draw issues, heat generated from the drive, physical size of the drive (not quite slimline yet), and other infrastructure issues.

Also, Apple is not really set up for a product lineup to further complicate options. Since very few people want the extra cost of BlueRay on a Mac, that means models in stores likely would not be stocked with Blueray, and this might complicate their build to order timelines as well.

Of course, there's also significant royaly involved, and other licensing costs, and someone's got to write the software to actually support the device (not just for video playback either). There are VERY few DVD writer/BR reader combos available. They either read only all, or read/write all, so getting a cheap BR reader means typically saccrificing DVD writing capabiltiy, or having 2 optical drives, or popping for the extra cost of a BR writer... then there's the software to author BR media as well.

It is a bag of hurt. To include BR support may very well be half or more of the design costs of a new product line, complicate their distribution lists, and BR itself (drive prices) are at this point BARELY profitable. It;s a huge expense for the very small percent of people who care at this point, but unfortunately, that percent if not only vocal, but traditionally Macs are known for media, and this is a glaring contradiction.

With a new line, and new chips, I would not doubt the system is capable of BlueRay at a hardware level. I would be more apt to suggest either Apple is not happy with the full array of softwar ebeing avaialbe, or the drives proviuded did not meet Apple's specs as promised to fit in their new casing design, or had heat/power issues, and had to be dropped until the drive manufacturer came into spec.

latest iPod chip?

How about the existing 3Gs chip? ...or is it gonna be some dock port hack-on chip again?

Also, I'm FAR FAR FAR more interested in the FM "Broadcast" ability of this chip than in receive (except to account for scanning for a clear broadcast chanel).

Apple needs to integrate an API for background "feeds" as well as FM and iPod playback so we can begin to use things like Pandora or other internet streaming radio as a background app as well.

Since t-mobile is taking the hit...

...this likely means that its not actually M$'s fault the failure caused dtata loss.

The firm I'm with has about 3500 x86/64 servers plus a number of other systems including about a dozed mainframes of varying ages. In addition to our owd data processing business lines, being the bulk of the systems, several hundred of those servers and about 100TB of data belong to external customers. You would be SURPRISED how many of them flatly refuse the redundancy services and high availability tier systems we offer. Most agree to basic clustering, many will accept relatively reliable SAN storage (if not mirrored tier 1 RAID10 chassis), but very few will deploy tier 0 or tier 1 availability systems, few pay for redundant networking, and basically none of them have anything more advanced than simply tape backups.

We offer fully redundant systems, at about 2.5 times the cost of standard systems (not bad actually) with standard being defined as at least a tier 3 availability environment (RTO/RPO not more than 24 hours). Customers with multi-million dollar contracts with the government, contingent upon 4 hour recovery times, will often even settle for far less just to save a couple hundred grand. It;s amazing how many people simply do not comprehend how disasterous a disaster can actually be. They have NO CLUE how long it really takes to restore a 40TB database were it actually to fail. The have NO CLUE how difficult a redeployment would be, and how long it would take, if a catastrophic failure (fire, major power issue, mainframe failure)happened. Their MILLIONS of dollars in contract revenue rinde on the decisions to skimp and save a few grand here and a few grand there.

I would not doubt at ALL that T-Mobile did not pay M$ the appropriate fees to have 4 hour full datea recover, and full system replication across multiple sites. They probably valued the user data very low, figuring some clause in a contract about "back up your own data" covered their asses, and did not account for the PR nightmare a data loss for a hosting firm is.

Bean counters simply don;t understand the logistics of server availability and data recovery. The see things like "3-4 times the cost" to move from a tier 2 system to a tier 0 system, and simply figure its so small of a change it's worth saving the million or two on deployment. Then Microsoft says "hey, here it is in writing where we suggested a more resilient design including full data replication and 14 day journaled writes with live rollback support, and here's your signature refusing that and saying tMobile will only pay for tape backups" and follow it up with "and here's the clause absolving us of data loss and SLA requirements because of your refusal to pay, and good luck with your customers..."

It's an extension of a PC, not a PC

Admitedly, there are some people, maybe 1-2% of the market, with low enough expectations of PC performance and low enough needs, and who are willing to attempt to function in practically Win98 resolutions on a 9-10" screen, or those who are simply willing to accept that because they can't afford the alternative.

However, in reality, the Netbook is not something people buy as a primary PC (many do, then return it within 14 days having learned better). A Netbook is a light, cheap, simple machine good enough to bring to aclass and take notes, to surf in a coffee shop, or to bring on a road trip and run a corporate presentation (as long as you don;t need to support HD projection). It's something you do some work on, then sync files back to a real PC or notebook later. It;s a slightly more usable e-mail platform than an iPhone or Blackberry if you have to type a lot of lengthy replies though the form factor is certainly less protable.

As a primary machine, most colleges won't even accept it (won't run XP pro due to license limits, so it can't join a domain, thus can't be part of the secure campus network; same goes for companies). A lot of people showing up to USC this year got that as a nast surprise (after they failed to read the colleges new PC requirements page before buying a machine). You can't even get on the campus wifi network unless the machine has a domain account, so in class, you can't iunteract with the professor's presentation, automatically download notes, access their podcasts, or get/turn in assignemnts. A lot of kids bought these things mid summer, and are now stuck with them, and with buying a $1200 minimum priced machine (campus requirements for even basic students are a bit higher than ordinary jJoe, especially since the campus expects you to use that machine for 3-4 years, and still keep up with security requirements, and not also be telling the professor "give it just 2 more minutes, it;s almost booted up!")

Personally, I'm holding out. i have an iPhone (2 in the family). I'm also looking hard at the Eee keyboard, eagerly waiting to hear the price is under $400 ($300 and I'll but it on day 1). I don't mind the extra 2 lbs of a 15" Macbook compared to a netbook, especially since I don't have to figure out how to manage files across multiple PCs without the use of an integrated sync app, which is what netbooks REALLY need (live mesh.com anyone?) I also don't think 3" less in size makes the slightest difference in carying a bag or not. The BAG is what's cumbersome, and 10" sized bags don't hold paper which is still quite necessary fore meetings, and the power brick is the same size, also those netbooks need external CD drives which actually can make taking them on trips worse, making the bag thicker or bulgy.

I think sliding a 9-10" Mac tablet in a bag, if they're $500 and can support some slightly more advanced software than an iPhone and a bit more multitasking, would be something I'd greatly considder. A Netbook? No, can't find a business case for them that I wouldn't easily exchan ge a 13-15 full notebook for. It's simply not that big of a difference. And yea, great, it's $299 with a contract or $500 without one, but then you have to buy a SECOND copy of office, more antivirus, probably a few other apps, and manage patching 2 machines and dealing with file versioning, so where's the savings? $500 for netbook, $300 for office, $100 in other misc software/accessories, $50 for netbook sized bag; for the differnece I'd have gotten a rediculously powerful 15" machine that I'd be able to keep playing cutting edge games on for 3-4 years, or expect to have a 5-6 year lifespan... It's not cheaper to have a netbook unless it IS your only machine, and good luck with that.

@Sean Timarco Baggaley

Backing up a mac is not a BEHAVIOR change, it;s simply wether or not you have an external HDD plugged in or not. It's a compelte "set and forget" backup system that litterally takes a single click on time to turn on. There is no behavior other than buying the frelling HDD, which should have been convincingly conveyed by either the sales rep, the OS online help, or prompts from the Mac upon first boot.

This isn't 1990 where people were frigging clueless about anything PC related. People have heard the words "backup" by now, and understand the idea of having data on a machine that requires protection. All it takes is a simple question of "how?" which Apple answered in the most simple possible way by making it a CORE advertised feature of the OS and major selling point. If you bought a Mac without seeing the feature page highlighting this feature, missed the OS prompts, had a clueless sales guy, and never asked the question "how do i back it up" YET STILL KNEW ENOUGH TO TURN ON THE GUEST ACCOUNT AND CONFIGURE MULTIPLE USERS, I call bullshit.

Now, about that software DRM...

I've got a few games, and a couple of other software apps, I'd really LIKE to resell, but since the online codes are locked to a central server, and a new customer could not get their own account to use and update the software, i can't resell it...

I'm not talking about MMOs, which to my view ARE licneses (since they hav recurring and continual fees for access), I'm talking about things like Diablo II, Neverwinter Nights, Quickbooks, applications that require the creation of an e-mail or logon based account for which the username can not be changed once registered, and for which they do not approve the transfer of the account.

Also, all the electronic copies i have downloaded over the years of various programs, which since there's no original media, can not be resold. i need a method for doing that. In fact, that's the primary reason i do not buy electronic software at all anymore unless it is radically cheaper than boxed versions. Steam, I'm talking to you...

This case sets a prescedent, now we need someone to form a class action suit against EA and Steam, Microsoft (x-box live), nintendo and sony, and a few others to ensure our electronically downloaded copies of software are equally resellable to physical media, or are mandated to have a discounted price equivalent to expected resale value after a depreciated age.

facts vs statistics vs rights vs wills

OK, first, the US constitution did not grant the right to bear arms to all men because it was our "right" but because there was a) no established military, b) no established poilice force, c) a MASSIVE expanse of undefended land, d) people owned THOUSANDS of acres each, and needed a way of protecting them from other settlers, invaders, indians, livestock theives, and more. This was also in direct reaction to England's rules for the colonies against certain folk not only owning guns, but at the time it was illegal to make bullets or gun powerder on American soil, it all had to be imported by English law. The right to bear arms was for the militia, which at best in today's world can be described as the National Guard Reserves. It was not for protection from one's government (and although lincoln is often creditid for saying such things, out of context, he was actually against any idea of government where the people WOULD have to revolt to change it)

Next, 4.5% of people with guns shot and killed in an ASSAULT out of 100% of people killed by a gun in an assault. That does NOT say that 4.5% of people with guns SHOT. Per Data from the CDC and Buereau of Justice, in 2001 (the most recent year both have comparitive statistics), 29,500 people were killed by a gun. Only 11,000 were by homicide (less than half), and only 15% of those were by a stranger! 35% were killed by acquaintence, the rest by family or intimiate partner. Only 1650 (approx) were killed in 2001 in muggings, home invasions, robbery, or other gun related anonomuos crime.

If you have a gun in your house, you or a family member are more than 3 times likely to be killed by that gun that by the gun of a criminal in or out of your home. If you have a gun on your person on the street, and happen to be a victim of assault, in this particialy city (which statistics show are relatively flat across all cities medium and large in the USA, with only a couple percent variance) then you;re 4.5 times more likely to be killed by the gun in the criminal's hands than if you are not also armed.

The #1 place to be the victim of a shooting? A cab.

This is a simple argument

A "licence" is something bound by terms of use, and a term of time, or continual cost. A "sale" is something paid for only one time, with no further obligations. The only "sale" restriction commonly accepted is the "not for commercial use" sale, where pricing for commercial versions of a product (which are often not any different at all from retail versions) come at substantially higher prices.

If the license does not include a limited time use clause, a recurring license fee, the limited use of centrailized systems, or other limiting factor contoilling how the purschaser has access to the item, then it is not "licensed" but is sold.

Since you are not required to upgrade to a newer version to continue using the software, and since there are no recurring fees, the ONLY thing AutoDesk has a case with is the "licenced" use of their product authorization servers (aka a form of DRM) and perhaps they might charge some fee to reassociate one person's "license" to a new user (which I'm sure if they said $4,000 that you sir, the courts would call the fee unreasonable and shoot it down, since those fees were not disclosed in the original purchase agreement.

Give up on EV for now

The grid's not ready, and won't be for 30-40 years. Less than 0.5% of us can have one of these plug-in cars currently without browning out parts of whole states.

Besides, with the range limits, un-recoupable higher cost (break even point is too far out of whack), and limited vehicle size/capacity, these are not exactly cathing on as primary family vehicles, they're only being used by commuters and single people with few needs.

Clearly H2 is also a non starter since the infrastructure, even if we could deploy it safely, is rediculous is cost and complexity.

The solution? Check out http://www.dotyenergy.com. WindFuels: ordinary gasoline, deisel, jet fuels, and lubricants, made using a process we've had available since WWII, highly refined using modern heat exchangers, more efficint catalysts, improved hydrolisys chambers, and a dozen other improvements. The input is waste CO2 from other saources, like coal plants, and the output is pure fules, with no contaminants or dangerous byproducts (like lots of sulfer), for between $60 and 80 per barrel, completely competitive at $3/gallon at the pump.

This is not vaporware, it's available. Doty is working to have full scale facilities in producting inside 5 years, all they lack is physical investment. The data is available for full review (and has been reviewed by hundreds). The math is real, the science is proven for 50 years. We don't need new cars if we can drive them on carbon nuetral fuel created using off-peak free unlimited energy. The numebrs work, there is enough wind, there is enough coal waste, and we can use our current cars and current fuel infrastructure (while we build out the grid, supported by the expansion of the wind energy market, and in 30-40 years make a switch to a much more technologically sound EV).

@Psymon

1) So should HP be slapped for not allowing Cannon printers to use their drivers and software? Should Kodak be allowed to spoof Sony's ID so that their cameras can operate as camcorder inputs into Sony's proprietary software? No. And here's the big one: Should PALM then not be forced to allow APPLE'S iPhone to sync with Palm Desktop!?!?! I'm sure Palm would have serious issue with that (as they DID prevent numerouscompetitors from doing just that!)

2) iTunes is not a market, its an application. A FREE application in a field of other FREE software that directly competes on features. Music is the market, and there's no lock-in with the music sold by Apple, it's not proprietary to their devices (even when it was, all one needed to do was rip to CD and back again, LEGALLY, and fully supported by Apple's EULA), iTunes plays any MP3 files, and any software that wants to can freely (again, supprtoed undedr the EULA) connect to the XML file and sync anything, including playlists, ratings, and more. iTunes actually isn't even so much an application, but a DRIVER, not at all different from the proprietary software that comes with your ATI video card, or an HP printer, that only works with their devce even though it does things very similar to other devices. This software was developed by Apple at their won cost. They HAVE a legitimate plug-in interface which can be cheaply licensed and used, and have provided free (no license) access to the XML file for anyone to access and use.

3) Music sales in iTunes, though massive, are not higer profit than the iPod segment of their business. iTunes REVENUE, yes, much higher, but the PROFIT is less, even more so when you strip out TV, Movie, and App purchases. Even the smallest iPod, the shuffle, costs only $26 to make out of it's $79 street price (about $62 wholesale), so a roughly $40 profit per unit sold... The Touch has closer to a $80 profit per unit and the iPhone more than $200. I'd not call a 30-60% profit margin "reduculously slim", in fact its quite HIGH considering the norm in the industry is only 15%... Apple, profits only pennies per track from music sales, and has often stated that the iTunes MUSIC store itself doesn't do much more than cover it's own costs, it exists to prop iPod sales. In the 5 year history, the store has only cleared 8.5 billion songs (as of Sept 2009), and at a profit of about $0.09 per song, that's less than $1B in total profit over 5 years. Apple profits nearly $2B anually, and it's no secret iPods out-profit Mac Sales. This CLEARLY demonstrates facts that prove the iTunes store can not possibly outprofit the iPod.

4) Even if Apple did have a Monopoly on the MUSIC market (not the music management application market, since there is no such thing) it is NOT illegal to BE a monopoly (they're actually not even #1 in the music market, btw). The government does not differentiate between physical and digital music sales as seperate markets, since no matter HOW a comsumer gets music, it can all go onto their computers and portable devices. Still, Apple has less than 70% of the total DEVICE sales for DIGITAL music. Even at 95%, the generally accepted monopoly mark, they'd not only have to acheive that goal, but they would actually have to USE that staus to ACTIVELY PREVENT other competitors from entering the market, or use their status to acheive monopoly rank in a different market segment.

5) Apple has provided more OSS than any of the other major firms, and has steered the industry to advance in numerous market segments. They've been part of more than a dozen standards groups and promoted USB, FireWire, 802.11, DisplayPort, ExpressCard, GCD, Darwin, various C++ extensions, WebKit, and many, many, many more. iTunes is a good program, which is why it's popular, and Apple PARTNERS with multiple companies for iTunes integration and offers support for syncing in multiple ways. They have done NOTHING to prevent Palm from writing their own integration, they have simply prevented Palm from doing so using an unsupported USB method that causes expenses on Apple's behalf to deal with code errors and device validation they've never before had to account for, and for Apple to take the rist that if they did NOT prevent this integration, that future updates would allienate potentially millions of iTunes users when their experienced support later broke with an update. If Apple makes it clear from the beginning that they do not support direct integration, then customers can't later be dissapointed.

iTunes is not a protocol, it's not a standard. It is an APPLICATION, used to manage, update, control firmware for, and report errors in Apple devices. It;s a driver suite. It happens to ALSO include a music management system, but that's just a fancy GUI backended by a FLAT FILE SYSTEM, and OPEN SOURCE XML DATABASES!!! IT IS FREE TO USE, IT IS NOT PROPRITARY, it just takes EFFORT on PALM'S side to use it.

Exchange ActiveSync issues

It's not just Apple, in fact, they seem to be effected less than others...

We have Excvhange 2007 with about 15,000 users. About 20% have their phones connected to it, nearly HALF iPhones (and not a single RIM device, since BIS will never be deployed here for numerous security audit reasons) .

Just spoke with the admin team. So far, only 2 people with an iPhone have called in to complain, and it appears re-installing iTunes 9 and then reimaging the device with 3.1 solved their issues. However, dozens of WinMobile and a few Palm folks have called in, some of them with completely bricked devices that had to be serviced to get working again (several of them replaced). Apparently not 3.1, but some Exchange side security patch caused the issue. It was identified and removed, and there's no further complaints since 2 days ago.

Old Hat

This is not exactly new science here...

1) users are NOT local admins of their machines

2) Group Policy locks down nearly every aspect of their machine

3) centralized security and monitoring, AV can not be disabled, all patches/DATS auto pushed from central serevrs.

4) strict internet controls (monitored access, and only for those who need access). Internet access further protected by a white list.

5) imaged machines based on roles. Machines are never fixed for a user. If there's an issue, drop another pre-configured machine on their desk and then fix the other one (by starting with re-imaging to eliminate software issues).

6) users can not save files locally, period. MyDocuments folder is relocated to a network share through policy or logon scripts.

7) Strict corporate policies on software used in the company, electronically audited through something like SpiceWoerks or CA e-audit.

8) USB ports can not be booted from, BIOS locked out with a password. No CDRWs. Additional drives connected will only show up to admins (remove all drives other than C: and D:). Selected users who are approved to move files from the company systems to home systems only do so electronically through a web portal or through citrix etc. No thumb drives or portable media.

9) All portable computers use encryption of the whole drive. Hibernate automatically on lid close, and can only be logged onto when a domain connection is available or as local user.

10) e-mail secured by not less tha 2 different filtering technologies (from different vendors). Ability to send/receive e-mail from external sources approved on a per user/department/job role basis only. (most users should not require full e-mail access, only internal e-mail).

11) No Wifi except in conference rooms, public areas, etc. Even that is either a DMZ zone for guests, or requires MAC address pre-approval and 802.11x authentication.

It sounds harsh, but we don;t go to that extreme. MOST users (except call center folks who are monitored by the minute and simply don;t have TIME to surf when on the clock) do have limited internet access, at least to some approved news sites, local banks, and a few other places, so in a spare minute you can get some personal time without having to lug in your own personal computer and a tether-enabled cell phone... We're not cruel, but having a locked in system where users simply can't make changes to computers solves a lot of issues. If they can't store data locally, and their machines are roll based inaged, then if theyre's an issue, and they call helpdesk, the response it "someone will be by in less than 30 minutes with a replacement machine, let us know if you have trouble after that" Or "Yes, we know, that service is currently unavailable, did you not check the self help site and read the service advisory?" Help desk no longer requires technicians, only ordinary call center folks, and desktop support becomes a bunch of untrained computer movers. If there's ever a software issue, all effected machines can be identified by groups and re-imaged across the network (this is rare as the images are thourally tested, and software is a few revisions back from the bleeding edge and generally bug free, and patches can 99% of the time be uninstalled successfully if they break something).

We have 14,000 workstations. We have about 25 people in the workstation helpdesk supporting them all in a central call center, and about 3-4 people at each campus maintaining the hardware. We used to have over 100 people in the helpdesk. ...now if we could only get our SERVERS onto the same process (it;s in the works, but quite a bit more complicated as we support over 1000 applications across 3500 servers on 12 differnet Os platforms...)

no comparrison to an Apple 15"?

Often you guys thrown the MacBook Pro 15" in these specs lists as a benchmark comparrision. How can you produce an article about a graphics machine and not include an Equiv Mac at the same time?

Yea, it's a few hundred more, and doesn't yet have a BR player, but I'd still like to see how it stacks up in performance and battery life.

OS X and Viruses

OK, lets end some FUD.

1) There are Mac Viruses, you SHOULD run an AV app, but more importantly, a mailware protection system.

2) The viruses that CAN infect a mac are rather hard to implement, require directing a user to a malformed website (usually by e-mail, which note above mailware scanning protection is important), and often requires root user account to be enabled (though some do not). What can the virus do? Well, it can take control of the machine, but what does that mean? Can you make it a zombie? pretty much: no. You can manually root around in the machine via comand line, access files and steal data, but that's about it... Installing a traditional virus that runs in the background (like a keylogger) really isn't in the cards due to the UNIX permissions system, lack of complete root access, and insistence that programs announce themselves very clearly when running under OS X. It's hard to keep a virus secret if it's dancing in the system tray announcing it's presence, or clearly shows up in Sysmon and Top....

3) 1 infected mac can't easily infect another on the same network (let alone another). It has to use a known exploit, which up to now are all done by distributed files (hacked pre-release iWork 09 disks are common, but don;t exactly self distribute and self execute do they), or by directing to a website. There's no direct exploitable entry points (that have been found, that are by default open and accessible). You actually have to FALL VICTIM to a scam first, or be redirected to a hacked site, or download something illegal... its very difficult to get a virus to you.

4) MANY MANY of the virus xers out there USE macs, so few are willing to write viruses that exploit their own platform. This is not a universal protection as #3, it's near impossible to have macs cross infgect each other, but it's one more limiting factor.

5) Since all (to my knowledge) of the proof of concept viruses for macs use a permission escalation gained from a buffer underrun in a weak application (which are usually quick to fix once discovered), even if we don't have good virus definition files, huristic scans are very powerful, and easy to implement, and protecting a mac from unknown viruses is very easy, and even basic free AV scanners that use huristic models are near 100% effective (accepting that if you actually LUANCH a virus installer yourself from a downoaded hacked installer, then type in a keychain password, only The Jobs can save you). The system may have vulnerabilities, but the simplest levels of protection make it highly secure.

6) Easy to fix. It's a flat file operating system. Deleting a virus is easy, rootkits can't readily be installed unless you were dumb enough to get the virus while running as root... Even rolling back the whole machine to a pre-infected state is easy, and a complete re-install is cake with time machine.

It's not perfect, it can be exploited, but the scope of what can be done with a hacked machine is very small and the methods for hacking it require a user intervention (tricking them, or making them download and execute something). This is a fairly secure out of the box UNIX operating platform. Yes, any program added to it, especially those with open IP listeners of external server conenctions open vulnerability, but even those vulnerabilities can be detected by cheap (or free) basic software. This is NOT the case for Windows, and typically not for Linux as well (as most Linux systems do not have best-practice user security models out of the box, and most people using linux su- to root often anyway).

knowing the Kw/RPM at HP marks means nothing...

...unless we know how much FUEL it uses to generate that much energy.

...and only 47Kw? most of the EVs are running 100Kw+ motors. The Volt, a small EV, uses a 120Kw motor (peak), and apparently averages (on 8Kwh of battery over 40 miles kills that) about 200Kw total vehicle draw. Even it;s small 1.0L engive delivers 53Kw of juice.

Now, if you told me the Volt's motor only got 22MPG for that 53Kw, and the Lotus engine got 65MPG equiv on it;s 1.2 when generating 47Kw, then that means something, especially with it being a flex fuel running on an ethanol blend.

Simple solution

There's a massive swath of radio today for HAM, mostly for hobyists, and a then a loud arguemnt claiming HAM is an emergency radio service needed by emergency crews.

1) when you're using HAM for emergency commincation, odds are there are not going to be any nearby operating BoPL systems. There's been a disaster... Hard to have power after one.

2) For a fraction of the cost, and with no training, emergency centers cal switch to ComSat. They're now cheap to operate, cost about as much as a handheld GPS, and are far more useful at a disaster site than a radio needing a 50' arial and a generator to operate...

Cut back the HAM frequenct range to about 10-20% of what it is today. Give BoPL the other 90% (plus it's other ranges available). Isolate the two systems, and end the argument. The hobyists should still have enough frequencies to keep their radios operating without much issue for a while yet with only the remainder.

Considdering simply the training costs alone in labor, every munuicipality, emergency service system ,police, fire and more coule easily be wquipped with emergency comsats. At less than 1 dollar a minute to use, and for the few hundred bukcs per phone, this is practically a free replacement technology compared to HAM, is far more useful, far more portable, and usable by anyone. We need to abandon all emergency plans that involve HAm now and move to a technology that has long since been available to replace it, regardless of who's feelings get hurt.

Oops

All those who bought a Gen 1 HTC Touch, and a bunch of apps, now got to start ALL OVER... So sorry. Shoulda bought an iPhone; a device that actually has some reasonable expectation of backward compatibility and product line longevity.... and wasn't a cheap immitation.

Summer ends 9/22 21:18

Summer (in the USA) is not determined form some arbitrary date associated with a holiday season, or a vacation period, it is clearly defined as the time of the equinox, which in 2009 happes on September 22nd at 8:18PM. In some places, it is also defines as the period of highest average temperature, which actually lags the solstice by about 6 weeks or more, and in parts of California, October is considdered the second hottest month. So first, we have to ask by which "end of summer" did AT&T mean, since they never actually clarified. They could have even meant their Summer Quarter (q3) which for AT&T ends on October 28th...

If AT&T has failed to deliver MMS by then, then MAYBE they'll have an excuse. Irregardless, if ANY company was to be able to be successfully sued for a product announced that showed up on the street late, Microsoft would have been bankrupt loooong ago, as would nearly every major software company. The same could also then legally be applied to any firmware patch required to fix a broken feature taken away by a software update...

Further, failure to send and receive MMS native messages does NOT prevent the iPhone from sending and receiving IMAGES, audio, and video electronically, which is the INTENT of the product, and supporting a specifgic protocol will likely not be determined a "selling point" for a non-specific future announcement.

The only one getting anything out of this are some lawyers, who might make a bunch of money, but if they're unlucky, this could be seen as a frivilous case in the most gross sense, and they could get significant disfavor with judges, their firms, or possibly be disbarred if someone takes it far enough... Even is we clarified summer legally as 9/22, filing a case in court before they actually BROKE that data would not be looked on well by most judges. For Chirsts sake, it;s not even Labor Day, by even the earlist account, the end of summer. most kids are not even back in school yet!!!

no back support

Yup, agree with 1st poster. Might be comfortable to ride, but for people relegated to a wheelchair, sitting up all day is a struggle, and leaning back for a rest is a requirement. Leaning forward provides no neck support, and is also not exactly the most confortable for the female riders. Further, that SEAT is not going to be good news to be on for a long day sitting in it, and it also completely ignores anyone who might be in a wheelchair due to a leg injury (aka, leg in a cast, hip in a cast, etc, typically cast as a straign, not bent, leg).

Here's #4

The fact that this is essentially a "rewrite" of Vista, with a small number of improvements, and as per Apple, it should be $29 for existing Vista users, and free for existing Ultimate users. The only people who should pay the full upgrade price (which from any version of XP to 7 ultimate should be $169 or less) are people who never took the leap to Vista.

There should also only be 3 real versions: Basic (for netbooks and low power devices), Ultimate, and a corporate edition. That's it.

FUD

@Stef 4: Problem, you're listening to the news...

There have been fewer than 25 reported cases of iPhones and iPods combined cathing fire or exploding. The bulk have been written off as "dropped on concrete," "left in hot sun," "sat on and cracked," and "left in hot car," all of which can easily cause any LiIon based battery to combust, and all of which are listed as things not to do with a device so equipped, and all of which can NOT be blamed on Apple, let alone any other device manufacturer.

Keep in mind, there are over 100 million iPods in circulation, and another 30+ million iPhones... Out of the 25 reported cases, maybe 6 or 7 can not be explained away as user abuses outside of clear warnings for environmental conditional use that would have caused any LiIon based device to also explode or burn up. That's a 1 in 20million chance your iPhone or iPod will burn up! Most state lotteries have better odds...

Further, the 3GS and upcoming iPods, and all currently shipping MacBooks use LiPolymer, which is not prone to combustion or explosion... That means if you don;t have one, and buy one, you are not even part of the 1 in 20 million odds...

Beat you to it

We started app consolodation about 3 years ago when during an IT departmental restructuring revolving around deployment methodology efficincy changes we assigned specific managers to preside over each application we've deployed. We tracked just shy of 3,000 applications in use. today we're down to just about 2,000 active or in development applications, and it's shrinking still. We think something around 1200 is an acheivable goal, with more than 2/3 of that number being actual in-house applications we could not remove due to particular line of business needs or custom processing done for a particular client.

"application" in our definition is any unique installed or distrubuted software package that either requires manual installation on its own (aka, not an automatically installed subcomponent of another application), any program an end user refers to by name, or any application that requires patching directly. Basically, either it comes in a box, has a development team dedicated to that app, or has security or operations impact that must be accounted for. under these rules, something like OWA is treated as a subcomponent of Exchange server, and itself is not a unique app, but in the reverse, there might be several java applications that interact to build a single realtime web console interface and they might be tracked seperately....

@doug

Thank you for putting the FUD straight :)

AT&T loophole

AT&T claimed it did not have a say in "individual apps" and that Apple had the "last say" in any inclusion or exclusion from the store. However, what they did NOT say is that clauses in their contract with Apple prevent Apple from accepting certain TYPES of apps, or apps that have specific features that either bypass AT&T revenue streams, allow free calls through the data side of the network, allow havy data use like viewing live TV over 3G, and likely more restrictions.

In these cases, in order to avoid running afowl of AT&T contract terms, AT&T would not even need to be consulted, and Apple would simply have to refuse an app that violated these conditions. It would thus have been Apple's decision (by omition of contract terms which they're not permitted to disclose) to not accept that app.

Google Voice does not use VoIP, but it could presewnt some challenges for AT&T (more so for other carriers), as all calling activity could be redirected via the user's google number, and if that number was lited at the person's "home" phone, was passed through an AT&T landline, or was listed in some "my 5" group or equivalent, such that calls to and from that central numnber were allways free, that could cause AT&T (not to mention OTHER partners and potential partners) had any say in that. in Particular, I think it would be wise for the government to ask VERIZON if THEY had any say in this, based on their rumored soon to be approved contract to sell and support iPhones...

I had already thought of this, i am only waiting on my google Voice phone lines to be approved. i have 2 AT&T landlines, both the most basic possible service, no callerID or anything, no long distance package, they're $12 a month. I use one exclusively for incoming fax and the alarm system, and the other is for local calls. All I'd need to do is turn on call forwarding (permanantly) for each number to a Google Voice number. All calls from my AT&T mobiles to the home phones are free (thanks to AT&T unity, I call any AT&T line, land or mobile, for free). Google would take my call and forward it to anyone I wanted through their system. All calls incoming would be routed through google the same way, and thanks to callerID forwarding, appear to be calls originating from an AT&T line. I'd never pay for a phone minute again ever, and would drop more than $60 a month of my current iPhone family pan cost. On Verizon it would be easier as I could simply list the Goolge line as one of "my 5" for free, and I could then also drop the AT&T landlines...

Clearly AT&T and Verizon are already aware of this loophole in my contract. Lot of people have done this before (I did with an Asterisk telephony board years ago to Sprint). Allowing Google voice clearly could bypass their ability to bill for airtime calls, and would be a serious hit to their revenue models, and due to existing contract terms for ober 10million iPhone users, they could stand to loose BILLIONS. Essentially, with a Google Voice account, the $59 iPhone plan becomes an unlimited calling plan...