2335 posts • joined 9 Mar 2007
The problem back then was mostly the software
The typical operating system MS-Dos, while still used well into the 1990s for games and business applications, just wasn't suitable for saving battery power or running on off-standard equipment. There was no reliable way to determine if a program was active or not, so some of those palmtops reduced their clock frequency after every keypress.
Dedicated operating systems had their own limitations, with limited software available and often not even real file systems. Syncing them often meant manipulating badly documented RAM objects directly.
Windows CE wasn't much better, and I remember people having swapped the original Windows CE for DOS and Windows 3.11 on early x86 compatible palmtops.
Back then constant network connectivity also was near unimaginable. Otherwise you could have simply used those devices as terminals.
Today we would almost have the hardware, what's missing now is proper monochrome or transflective displays and of course keyboards. As for the software, just having something PC like would be great. Today that platform is somewhat more flexible than it used to be. That way you could install any OS you'd like.
What I'd like to have...
...would be a computer with an empty harddisk. As long as consumer PC manufacturers don't do that, I won't buy from them.
Re: Missing the competative advantage
Actually it doesn't need to be expensive. Treat your IT dev team the right way. Give them decent amounts of money (actually give them what those bad IT guys get), but give them freedom.
Free them from clerical work. Get them an assistant who takes care about company bureaucracy. Give them a small "experimental" budget on which they can try out new technologies.
Then also identify the normal staff members who can program. Include them in technical decisions about your IT. Maybe they can act as a sort of interpreter between the needs of the department and the capabilities of IT.
It's actually what many businesses do when they switch to Linux
Such switches usually aren't "out with the Windows box, in with the Linux one", but also switches from foreign IT products to self made ones.
One of the problems with doing things that way is that you need people who look at a problem and see the core of it. There's plenty of software developers who, when given a simple task will add layer upon layer of complexity.
There seems to be a correlation between such skills and people who prefer something unixoid as their operating system. One of the basics of the Unix philosophy is, in fact, the "Rule of Optimization" which states that you should build a prototype first.
In fact you typical unixoid environment comes with lots of useful tools for prototyping. Everything you can do on a tabulator can be done trivially with standard console tools in the time it takes to install even the simplest SQL server. It probably will be slow and buggy, but it's a prototype.
Re: Well, then!
Well yes, but we already have that problem on the Internet right now. You have 100ms latency for intercontinental links and 100 MBit connections (in cheap data-centres or with end users in developed countries like Turkey). So you easily have a megabyte in transit.
Obviously there is a reason for Gigabit Ethernet for consumers. It allows much faster file transfers. Realistically you can pipe 50 Megabytes per second even with consumer equipment. It's relevant if copying your file takes 1 or 5 hours.
They surely will bring out XP 2.0, won't they?
I mean not bringing out a sensible upgrade option which runs on the same hardware, supporting the same software, that would be like betraying their customers. Microsoft is such a big and trusted partner, they would never do that, would they?
Microsoft doesn't care about "Gold Partners" or anything. Those are just marketing terms. All they want is you to give them money. I know that may sound harsh to you, but Microsoft is a commercial company, they need to make money, that's their priority.
If you don't like that game, stop playing it. Don't switch from XP to Windows 8.1, but look into getting replacements for your legacy applications. For those you cannot find replacements for, get an Application server, Wine or a virtualized XP machine with tightly controlled IO.
Actually using it for graphics is one of the more boring things
Sure you this will enable you to connect LCDs to it since you can finally change the code to support the one you have and all that. That is already a huge stuff forward.
However for me the more exiting is that this unleashes the GPUs for general purpose computing. This will allow you to do fairly complex SDRs on that hardware.
I think it's a good sign that Palantir has to pay that much
It gives me hope that the young and talented still have values and won't just take any job without thinking. It's not easy refusing a $7000/month job when your likely alternative is unemployment.
It think it's great that most of the young people don't want to start at such a company which produces software to justify targeted killings of most likely innocent people. It's a sign that people don't want that. It's a sign that the public is different to those unwashed hordes gathering at NSA sponsored conferences.
Re: Surprise!...People need to give themselves a shake and stop using MS products!
"Unless the SCADA system itself is using Windows as the operating system, or uses Windows to effect day to day control, then you are way off base."
Actually that is the case in most cases today. SCADA uses standards like OPC (OLE for Process Control) which are based on legacy Windows technologies.
Those old legacy systems are probably much less of a problem since they were simple. Unless you are a total idiot and connect your internal bus to the Internet you are not likely to have any problems.
The newer stuff is much more of a problem, since it's not just Windows based, but done by that breed of 1990s Windows programmers we thought had died out with the .com crash. The people who think their C++ compiler does bounds checking, who believe in security through obscurity, who think SQL databases are a great way to store settings for desktop software and who believe in software licensing files which need to be regularly updated. (even though you already bought the hardware which is essential for the software and cost millions)
Re: So let me ask this then....
Well you can use directional couplers, plus you can actually build one "into your antenna", by making an antenna with the right geometry. Both technologies can bring you about 40dB of separation tops. Maybe you can get into the range where local reflections get relevant.
But it's not going to be much of a revolution.
Re: What would you do with a Boeing Black on your lab bench?
The key exchange for ports sounds like a good idea at first, but then we are talking about USB. Long before you can exchange any keys you'll have the USB stack talking to it. If you are lucky, you are using Linux or some BSD, then the amount of security critical bugs is probably low. If you are unlucky they are using some commercial RTOS which nobody ever checked for security issues.
Yes, but the optics for multimode fibre can be a lot cheaper. Since the core is larger it's easier to splice it and get light in or out. The extreme case are plastic fibres like the ones used for SPDIF. Those are dirt cheap, that's why they are going to be used in the car industry.
It does make sense from multiple aspects
First of all Facebook sees a competitor in WhatsApp. And a simple way to deal with it is to buy it, particularly if you have lots of (virtual) money.
Second it makes sense for the bank selling it, since it means they can turn some of the valuation into actual money without the market collapsing. Think about it, if you have 10% of bubble2-0.com and you want to sell your share on the stock market, the market will collapse and you'll end up with a small fraction of what it's worth. If you can sell it to another .com company, you will get part of your shares in actual money. So you can turn "worthless paper" into other "worthless paper", plus actual money.
"I think they need to bring in severe penalties for misuse of powers, any by tougher penalties I mean real punishments like lashes, the stocks.."
The point is, as long as the laws are so deliberately vague, not limiting themselves to certain crimes and not defining "Terrorism". You first have to define "propper" use of a law before you can punish "misuse". And that is one of the problems here.
It would be best to get rid of those vague "anti-terrorism" laws. There is virtually no terrorism in western countries, only abuse of those laws.
Well the problem is Deutsche Telekom here
Most ISPs in Germany peer with each other, so e-mail hardly ever leaves the country....
However Deutsche Telekom rarely peers, which means that packets from one German ISP to Deutsche Telekom can well go through other countries or at least foreign providers.
Obviously this is just some ploy to shift more money to that company. It'll do absolutely nothing against foreign or domestic secret services.
How much enthropy is there?
I mean you somehow need to get information from the user to the system. It's easy to calculate how much information you can type, it's harder to estimate how many bits you can extract out of that kind of scheme.
Re: What's the point?
Well what's relevant today is the uplink speed. And that's the current bottleneck. And there the difference between 1 and 20 MBit is still huge. With 1 MBit you can barely stream SD, with 20 MBit you can stream decent HDTV. Particularly with fast mobile networks getting affordable, having access to your local media is a big deal.
There is a second point. We now still have companies like Google who have the money to invest in the research needed for the next decades. Who knows how long we can still do that kind of research.
We also need to invest in the infrastructure. Our current last mile is still based on copper, a technology which became outdated in the mid 1970s. We desperately need to start a programe replacing it with a dedicated pair of fibres into every home.
Re: At least this is honest.
I don't think you understand the idea of copyright. Copyright, in it's current form, wasn't made for "people" it was made for corporations. If personal data gets covered by it, it'll be exclusively for corporations.
Around 14 years ago....
...lots of companies popped up with similar business models. They took over your computer and displayed adds when you were online. You got extra money for clicking on those ads.
Obviously people just installed it on some old box they had lying around and installed software to surf the web and click for them. So what will happen here is that most of the users will be bots.
Actually there is a port to the Raspberry PI
Considering Google Play is among the worst things of Android
I don' see how this is a limitation. My Android phone doesn't have Google Play and I've yet to miss it.
Please stop for a moment and look around
The UK is one of the few places on earth where television actually works. Even ITV has some fairly decent programming since there is the BBC trying to make good television without any fear of loosing their income. In Germany for example, public TV stopped caring about quality and commercial stations noticed they neither needed to care.
The UK system works. Sure it has flaws and isn't perfect, but it's better then what the rest of the world has. Please, I beg you, don't throw away what you've got.
Re: I see problems for operators
People are already messing around with the air interface, you can buy 15 Euro feature phones you can reflash and use as GSM probing devices. The operators don't seem to mind yet.
There are, currently, no holes which would allow you to make free phone calls. What you can do is denial of service, but that's no big deal on a wireless network.
Re: The paper notebook computer sounds intriguing.
The genius of the SD-Card form factor is that you can both use a plug or solder it directly onto the board.
Well they got a patent and licenses to sell
The technology itself isn't particularly new or innovative. People have been building "signal powered" transmitters for decades now.
We'd need to solve the problem at the root:
1. Ditch App-Stores and get proper distributions which have strict code control like Debian for example. Yes, this would kill commercial closed source apps, but point 3 will take care of those.
2. Mandate some common hardware platform or a BIOS so the operating system doesn't need to be ported to every device.
3. Design and implement a very simple protocol for "remote GUIs". Essentially this should replace web-apps with something simpler, more secure and faster to use over wireless connections. It would be something like "GUI-toolkit" commands via TLS over Websocket or something. There may be code to implement something like custom GUI elements, where the code can only access the properties of that element and draw in the area of the element as well as get touch information from that area. All the logic would run on the server, everything time critical would run on the client. This is of course trivial to charge for.
Re: Overly aggressive throttling?
Well... ISPs aren't soup kitchens. I pay the ISP so they will continuously upgrade their network.
An ISP throttling is like a restaurant telling me, "We're sorry, but we are out of food, you'll only get half portions... however you still must pay the full price.".
In the UK?!
I'm sorry, I wouldn't buy such a device designed in the UK. I wouldn't buy a device coming from someone who grew up in a country where people think it's healthy to have more surveillance cameras than people. This doesn't seem like a place where even the most basic privacy protection could come from.
However I applaud Dyson for trying to promote the idea of inspiring technology as this can cause good people to turn to engineering instead of money laundering. Though I believe this is rather futile in most western countries, I dearly hope I'm wrong.
It's about breaking a narrative
Currently governments spread the narrative that nobody cares about surveillance. This is about breaking this narrative. People do care.
But a big trusted partner like Microsoft....
...wouldn't let their partners stand in the rain. They surely will bring out Windows XP 2.0. Otherwise they'd just act like any old commercial company putting profits in front of partnerships.
If you are a "gold partner" of Microsoft or any of those marketing things, pause and think about for a moment. You may currently develop your business critical applications in C#/.net, Silverlight or even VBA. You justify this by thinking that Microsoft would never pull the rug from under you and support your technology till infinity.
Now we are here, Microsoft pulls the rug from under Windows XP despite of it still being used on a third of Windows installations. Microsoft does not offer any kind of sensible upgrade plan, for example an XP 2.0. Vista and Windows 7 are no alternative for most companies.
If you are just using plain Win32 you actually have a small change you code might run on newer versions of Windows, but then Microsoft brought out Windows RT, a version of Windows incompatible with Win32.
Or of course the tunnel :)
Rule of thumb
Whenever someone tries to sell you a new technology which is "complex", it either means that it doesn't work or that it will not work reliably.
Good technical solutions rarely are complex. The Internet is simpler than the X.25 networks it replaced. UNIX was simpler than MULTICS.
They should choose a German
The concept of cat videos was first widely known in Germany.
Or you could...
just buy any of those many programmable keyboard with inserts for the keys.
Even if the code would be free of any obvious backdoors...
There's still the "bugdoor", a plausible bug which leads, for example, to remote code execution, but simply isn't fixed. One prominent example is ActiveX. If you can fake a certificate, which the NSA surely can do, you can get code running with user permissions.
Re: Enough already
Actually looking at it, that may be a feasible thing to do. It seems to be a "normal" microchip which you can "easily" reverse-engineer.
Re: My quality of life has improved
"Smartphones can be used to involve yourself MORE with the outside world - if you don't spend all your time playing with Twitter, Facebook, Angry Birds, and your multiple Fart apps."
Unfortunately modern "Smartphones" (since about the Apple iPhone) are just designed to be Facebook/Angry Birds machines. That's the market all manufacturers are currently chasing.
I have tried different "smartphones". I've started with Android, but that didn't have an escape key. (WTF!). I'm currently using an old Nokia Communicator. It kinda works, but is software-wise a long way to go.
If I were to build a smartphone I'd make it like this: Use a clamshell design. Put a feature phone into the lid behind the display, then have an independent PC which can run arbitrary operating systems accessing the keyboard and large display. If you hold it, make the PC suspend to RAM. In a way just what Nokia did with their Communicators, but updated.
Same strategy as in Germany
Just claim that nobody cares and many people will believe it's not a big deal. This is also tried in Germany.
In reality many people care. More and more "everyday" people wonder how they can use encryption. That's why crypto-parties are s popular.
It was some marketing accident
Multiple vendors sold the same hand held analogue mobile phone.
So there was the SEM340:
The Post, which also ran the network, called it the "Pocky".
So for Bosch there was only one name left, "Handy C9":
The name later was used for all hand-held mobile phones.
The big question is how it's done
If you have well made networks with lots of spare capacity, as it should be, there should be no problem. However ISPs are now looking at saving every penny which includes capacity.
If you want to do VoIP over a network with congestion you will need to have to do QoS and that can only save you to a certain degree.
Now get that on mobile phones, too... and make one in a Nokia Communicator form factor, and I'll finally be able to get a decent mobile device.
They'd first need to sort out the common platform problem
They need to find ways to make all hardware look similar enough for the operating system to be able to boot across multiple vendors without having to port it.
Well there are plenty of examples where maximizing revenue has lead to lower quality.
The market doesn't care about quality, it only cares about marketing. It doesn't matter if your product is better for the same price all that matters is how it's sold. Look at Apple, their products are mediocre at best at top prices. Selling things costs a lot of money and virtually every consumer electronics company spends way more on marketing than actual technical product development.
I'd pay, however...
I don't want to pay for the conditional access system which, in case of the BBC, would probably cost a decent part of those 11 pounds. Such systems are expensive.
Furthermore I see television as a public medium. I pay so everyone can see it. Even and particularly those who cannot or will not afford it. The BBC somehow managed to stay this wonderful micro-cosmos of good programming by far superior to German public TV for example. (Unless you like Sports of which German TV is full off)
Not the only metric
I mean sure extrapolating a trend isn't always going to work, but ask Wolfram Alpha for the number of Facebook members per world population.
If Facebook continues like this and we don't have a plague that kills mostly non-Facebook users, their growth will be consider to be considerably smaller than the growth of the population. Cutting down on fake accounts doesn't seem to help eithere.
"I don't get why people are surprised by this. It's a sensible move by a sensible company."
We are not used to companies making sensible decisions!
Well yes, but what should it change?
Imagine you are an ISP in the US. You are likely a local monopoly, so people have to get their Internet from you. If you get more complaints, you just staff up your support department and raise the prices. Or you cancel the contracts of the people who complain the most.
Well first you have to know that Alan Turing is not as widely known in places outside of the UK as he is inside. If you'd ask a random person in Germany for example, they'd have no idea.
It's very likely he has never heard of Alan Turing, so he probably has no opinion on that case as of yet.
A different worldview
I think he's referring to the motivation they had. The Internet as we know it today was not invented for the money. It's foundation was invented to provide communications even during war, most of its services were invented in universities to promote the sharing of information and knowledge.
The Internet, unlike other networks, was made in a spirit of openness and sharing. In Roman Catholics this is called the "holy spirit". They consider the feeling you get when you write some software and you suddenly realize that it's used around the world by thousands or millions of people a religious experience.
The fundamental question why people act that way is because god set it up so they would be like that, at least according to Catholics.
Re: I hope
Hmm, it was a bit different, Elop was obviously planted as a mole by Microsoft.
He might have done the same at Macromedia.
- Vid Hubble 'scope scans 200,000-ton chunky crumble conundrum
- Bugger the jetpack, where's my 21st-century Psion?
- Google offers up its own Googlers in cloud channel chumship trawl
- Interview Global Warming IS REAL, argues sceptic mathematician - it just isn't THERMAGEDDON
- Apple to grieving sons: NO, you cannot have access to your dead mum's iPad