Re: Big display
Give me a real keyboard with Cherry Blue MX keys over a poxy smartphone keyboard any day of the week.
1840 posts • joined 27 Nov 2009
Give me a real keyboard with Cherry Blue MX keys over a poxy smartphone keyboard any day of the week.
@Mark 85 exactly, I wouldn't walk into such a situation unprepared and rely on my smartphone.
I'll do a mobile search if I need information immediately when I'm out and about, but generally I'll wait until I can get to a decent display and a proper keyboard, before I do a search.
I find search on mobile devices to be too frustrating.
There are probably ways to exploit WP7 and the browser, but with such a small market now, would anyone bother?
My daughter is still using her WP7 Lumia, although she is looking for something newer - she would take an iPhone 6, but isn't willing to splash out nearly a grand on it.
I currently have a WP8 Lumia and am very happy with it - and it has had numerous updates over the last year, both new OS versions and updates.
@RoninRodent one of the reasons why I never by a carrier branded phone.
@returnmyjedi I'm comparing like for like... Both are operating systems that are connected to the Internet. I don't care that one runs on a smartphone and tablets and the other runs on tablets and PCs, they are both connected to the Internet, so both need long term security.
Yes, the Windows Phone 7 is a blight on Microsoft in this regard.
You would have thought, but the last web browser exploit they didn't bother patching older versions, just said that people should move to 4.4.4 or later. Great, when you phone supports that, but if you are stuck on 4.1 or 4.2 you are SOL.
With WSUS and Enterprise, you can plan the updates as you do now - the article specifically says that corporates will get their updates monthly, as now, but private machines will get updates as needed.
The corporate tools also allow for the separate testing and staggered release of patches, nothing here will change.
For private machines, the update cycle will be faster - but generally those machines are also not as well protected as corporate machines. They probably don't have much in the way of AV software - probably a 3 month trial of McAfee that ran out 3 years ago, they are probably, at best, behind a compromisable home router and the average user has no idea about the dangers.
On SUSE, I'd get daily updates, but it was up to me to decide which updates to install and when. This will probably be the same with Windows 10. Either you can go full auto or you can manually install as you want.
@DasBub not really, my 2002 Windows XP machine stopped getting updates last year, my current machines will get updates going into the next decade.
My Android smartphone? 2.5 years old and not even security updates within the last year! Patches for well known security exploits for unpatched Android 4.3? Forget it. Although, I suppose I should consider myself lucky that Samsung at least upgraded it from 4.1 to 4.3.
This isn't purely Google's fault, but it is their ecosystem and they don't seem to be doing anything about keeping their customers patched. The hardware has been delivered, live with the defects or buy a newer device...
To be honest, I prefer the Microsoft attitude.
@streaky yes, they will change them, but they haven't yet, even though they are flagging non-Google properties already as insecure.
Before the days when you were legally required to keep a record of who has driven your motor vehicle in the last 14 days, I take it?
Try that today and you're legally liable for any and all speeding tickets.
No such requirement here, and if you cannot be clearly identified on the photo (assuming it wasn't an actual pullover), then you can generally not be prosecuted. Companies have to have a log book for all company vehicles that aren't driven by one person.
This is just copy-catting, Google are trying to push sites to do this with Chrome as well... And Google are flagging up valid Certs using SHA1 as insecure - unless they come from Google...
"But then I don't live in an inner city and also don't live in a perpetual state of paranoia thinking it is normal!"
Great, wouldn't want you to be paranoid. Hell if it doesn't matter, could you just let us know where you live and what time your house is normally empty?
I have a friend who used to leave his garage unlocked and the keys to his bikes in the ignition, with the comment: "if you are in the area and want to go for a ride, just take a bike, just remember, you bend it, you mend it."
He never used to lock his patio door either.
He never had any problems.
On occasions I've forgotten to lock my car doors - one time, when I was still in the UK, I got home at 11 in the evening from work and my neighbour knocked on the door at 10 the next morning to let me know the windows were still open... My coat, briefcase, CD player and CDs were all still in the car - that was in Southampton - although speaking to my old neighbours a couple of years back, they daren't leave the cars on the street at night any more, let alone leave them unlocked!
In Birmingham, I left the car in a carpark under the Holiday Inn on Monday morning. As I picked it up on Friday evening, it was unlocked - but nothing was missing.
I tend to lock the car, but there are times I forget. The only time somebody broke in was when I was a kid and despite the door being unlocked, they used my father's golf clubs to smash the window, then made off on my kiddy bike!
The same for a friend, he had a Spitfire and was always worried somebody could cut open the roof, so he left the doors unlocked, so that if somebody wanted to steal the radio, they didn't have to cut open the roof... They cut open the roof anyway [LIFTED] idiots!
It sounds like a modern take on the old practice of moving stale data to tape, keeping the local performance higher by not having to index low access data. If the data can't be found locally, you can then load up the relevant tape - or in this case the SQL Server will "stretch" out to the off-site store to pull down that data.
For those queries, it will be slower, but for the rest, it should keep performance in the acceptable range. If it is working dynamically, then if the data starts to be regularly used again, then I would guess that it moves it back locally.
I used to work for an oil exploration company, the current surveys were held online, the older data, which wasn't needed very often was held in a huge warehouse with hundreds of thousands of tapes and transferred by van back to the data center as needed.
I must admit, I've never received a message with Emojis in it.
Yeah, and it would seem have led so exemplary lives that the TLAs didn't have anything to blackmail them with... :-P
Seriously though, very impressed that they stood up to the TLAs and told them to stop being so stupid.
I have some old Netgear plugs, they haven't caused any lock-ups in the last 4 years. It certainly improved things in the basement, where my home office is. I was getting about 256kbps out of my 802.11g and n routers, with the Netgear plugs I get around 50mbps, I certainly get the full 38mbps that my Internet provider gives me on my 35mbps contract - yes, wow, they actually deliver more than they promised!
Streaming HD video from Amazon for several hours doesn't seem to cause any problems, neither does the continual back-up running around the clock to Carbonite from my PC.
I've been thinking of upgrading to Devolos recently, but other priorities...
In order to make the life of law enforcement officers easier, the solution is to make it even easier for criminals to attack private citizens.
Yeah, makes sense to me!
Shame logical thinkers never make it into positions of power.
Makes me glad I don't drive an Audi...
@Dave126 except there is no data in the basic package... And it will only be available (currently) on the Nexus 6. (According to the official Google blog)
@John, my first thought as well, my private phone is 19€ a month, unlimited calls, unlimited texts, unlimited data (2GB full speed limit, then throttled).
$19 with no data and $10 per GB sounds like a very poor deal.
And unlimited international SMS? What is the difference? An SMS is an SMS, I've never had a contract (since 1993), where sending an international SMS was more expensive.
@Dan, There would also be no searching the site for the relevant information, if it was a single image.
I agree with you, small, low-key, non-intrusive ads are the only option going forward, or we will get rid of all advertising and the sites will switch to micro-payments or monthly subscriptions... And the whole thing will collapse.
We need to find the happy medium, where sites get enough revenue to keep going and visitors don't get so annoyed with the revenue generators, that they stop coming to the site or block the revenue generators and drive the sites off line.
It is your computer, but it isn't your content that you are (generally) reading. How much are you paying those websites for their content? Nothing? So why is it unreasonable for them to display a (static) advert?
I am fine with that. As long as the ads aren't annoying me, I'll let them come through and help sponsor the sites I am visiting, because I generally want to keep coming back. If the site doesn't earn any income, then it might not be there next time I need / want to visit it.
What I don't agree with is corporate websites and product websites that also have advertising, it is your corporate presence, WTF are you doing showing ads on it?!?!?
@Teiwaz beat me to it, I was going to write the same thing.
We use them for sales and support, so they aren't exposed to the knocks that the iPads and Android devices are. We use Hugg cases for transport, but they are generally used in the office, in sales meetings or in customer offices, when doing support.
As to getting the users to use cases, we haven't had any problems so far. They are happy to have something they can carry around (instead of running to a fixed mounted 15" industry terminal), the iPad is also a lot thinner and cheaper than the industry PC tablets they used to have -. about 4 times as thick, rubber cased, Intel Core i3 jobbies for over 2K, running Linux.
If they complain, we suggest dropping the iPad in a vat of pigs blood and see how well it works afterwards... The Griffin case just needs hosing down afterwards. :-D
The problem with the current SP3 is that it is not passively cooled, so there aren't any really tough cases, because they also have to have slits to allow the hot air out, which means that it also lets dust and fluids in,..
With the Surface 3, we might see some cases offering more protection.
I like that they are looking at choice.
We sell iPads with the Griffin case to some of our slaughter house customers for stall management. The cases work very well - although I still wouldn't use an iPad, given a choice.
We also have customers that only use Android.
Internally we use everything - although Surface Pro 3s seem to be very popular at the moment, as they replace the desktop and the tablet in a single device (desktop dock with dual external monitors for the desktop, keyboard case for typing on the move and finger and pen input for meetings and "proper" tablet apps.
Charlie's team showed how lax security was on the "smart" traffic system in Turin in 1969. It looks like nothing has improved since then...
The US armed forces seem to have been reading the dystopian novels about the dangers of using drones lately, and ignoring the dystopian effects of drones (especially autonomous drones and swarms) and just seeing woo, cool tech, how can we implement it?
Since when has search required low latency?
Telephony, video? Yes. Search? WTF?
The biggest problem with Google at the moment is that the results are becoming more and more orientated around shopping and less and less around information.
If I search for a handbook on a device, often the first 2 pages are just lists of shops, sponsored shops and sponsored links to the product name and comparison sites. If I am looking for the handbook, it is more than likely that I've already bought the bloody thing and I don't want to know how much it damned well costs, I want to find out more information about it!
But what the EU is looking into (looking into, not currently prosecuting), is whether advertisers and sponsors get preferential placement, compared to more relevant results, among other things.
One are I do agree is bogus is shopping comparison sites moaning about their ranking. If I am searching for something, the last thing I want in the list of results are links to other search engines!
Idealo seem to get themselves well ranked though, for example and when searching for a handbook, their price comparison links often fill half of the first page for a handbook search, even though they don't even have any relevant information about the product in question, let alone the handbook!
"The ad giant also claimed that there was plenty of competition in the online shopping market in the EU"
Interesting that they show markets where they don't compete showing innovation.
It is like saying Ford is manipulating the market for compact cars and Ford say, "but pushbikes!"
Erm 3 of the biggest complaints in the Windows case had nothing to do with money - in fact it was exactly the opposite.
They were using their dominant position with Windows to push a free browser on users and thus destroy Netscape and they pushed a free media player, pushing "real" media players out of the market.
That is why they had the silly browser ballot and the version of Windows (Windows N) without the media player.
The other big point was the undocumented APIs that gave Microsoft software an unfair advantage, especially on their servers. Again nothing to do with price, they were ordered to provide documentation for these APIs.
In Google's case it is similar, they are accused to using their dominant position (in some markets they have over 95% search market share) to push other products unfairly.
I have Google-Analytics and Co. blocked in my browsers - either no scripts allowed or local hosted.
It isn't necessarily about what they are doing now. Don't forget that Google have been in discussions and gently tweaking their algorithm for several years, whilst they have been in discussions with the EU. The questions are more what the results where, when the case was started and have Google done enough to counter those claims in the meantime.
If you caught speeding, you tend to drive more sedately for a while after that. This is the equivalent of Google being caught and having a cop randomly check them for the next 5 years. The initial offence is what counts, but their actions since that offence will also be taken into account in the final verdict and any subsequent punishment.
So, if you were caught doing 100 in a 50, you face a big fine and a driving ban. If they defer judgement to see how you drive in the meantime and follow you for the next 5 years and you continue to speed, then you will get an even bigger fine and a longer ban, because you haven't changed your attitude. If the random checks show that you generally now obey the limit, then you face a smaller fine and a shorter ban.
Which is all they can really do. It was the same with Microsoft, they were told to release documentation for the undocumented APIs and they kept getting top-up fines every time they failed to deliver in a timely manner.
Anybody who has the time to appreciate it isn't working hard enough... ;-)
I have a Yubikey Neo NFC to unlock my LastPass safe on my Android devices already. Without master password and Yubikey, no password.
What evidence we do have strongly suggests that Microsoft* has been very receptive and helpful when it comes to government requests for personal data. You've got to comply with the law, of course, but it seems that MS were particularly accommodating.
In recent years they have often fought flaky warrants, but when presented with a valid warrant, there isn't much they can do. It is when something as obviously fishy as the current situation that they react.
You are right, it isn't out of a love of protecting personal privacy, it is not wanting to break the law. If they hand over the data in Ireland to the USA without an Irish or EU warrant, then they are open to prosecution and large fines in Ireland and Europe or breaking the law. In the worst case, it could mean that the directors of Microsoft Ireland end up in prison for breach of Data Protection laws. It will also destroy their international business, especially in Europe (and that of any other USA based cloud tech company doing business internationally).
On the other hand, if they don't hand over the data in the USA, then the directors in the USA could face fines and inprisonment for contempt of court...
I just don't understand why they forced Microsoft's hand like this. Give them the ability to deny and be outraged if it is ever found out and that's all they really need.
Acting outraged won't help in such a case, non-US business are already looking sceptically at cloud services, because they were only quasi-legal in the first place - in many European countries it is illegal to store personal data on computers outside the EU (which is why MS ensure that data of EU citizens is held within EU borders where possible) and tax relevant data must usually be held within the country where the company is based - in Germany, tax relevant data cannot be stored outside of Germany without a special exemption certificate from the German tax office (Finanzamt).
That makes using true clouds difficult in the first place. If the data does end up being stored outside of the country or the EU, then the company is legally responsible for that breach. They are also legally responsible if the data is handed to a third party outside the EU without a valid EU warrant. That means if Microsoft, Google, Amazon or whoever hands the US Feds data from a European company's cloud store, the company faces prosecution and fines (and possible imprisonment for its directors) for breaching Data Protection laws, even though the data was handed over without their consent or knowledge. This makes cloud services pretty much a non-starter when the US Government doesn't start playing silly games!
They wont go away. It will have very serious consequences, but they have options. Azure from the technical side already has everything it needs to do proper data segregation and indeed it does it already. If Microsoft lose (and I seriously hope for them, us and the US IT industry that it doesn't), then they pull some corporate shellgame and appoint licensor corporations in Europe and Asia that under strict controls allow them to be "Azure Partners" or whatever terminology Microsoft come up with.
That is what I meant by MS selling their technology further. Azure itself, a worldwide, single cloud won't be usable outside of the USA, but they will sell the software and know-how to set up 100% regionally owned "mini" Azures.
Amazon is harder, that is their own technology and would require that they set up regional companies that purchase the licenses from Amazon USA, but they cannot be subsidiaries, like they are today.
@Peter2 exactly, if MS lose, it will turn American cloud companies into purely domestic operators, they will be pariahs in other countries.
MS have one trump, that they sell a lot of the infrastructure behind cloud services - they could start selling Outlook.com and Office365 turnkey solutions to local providers, for example, but there is also a lot of open source solutions that can do similar things.
But I don't see Google selling its search engine, YouTube, GMail etc.
@Mage not just Ireland, Germany had a huge media campaign in December and January that the coming changes to Facebook are illegal and people should quit the service.
Both my daughters deleted their accounts in January.
The US government seem to be doing everything in their power to kill the US IT industry, especially internet companies. Very strange behaviour.
If the US authorities win this case, then it will be the end of the international cloud. It will mean a splintering of services, with them being national based (or maybe EU or Switzerland based).
Microsoft, along with the likes of Red Hat might survive, as they sell the software behind a lot of cloud infrastructure, but you can wave goodbye to Facebook, WhatsApp, Azure, AWS, iCloud, Outlook.com, Office365, Salesforce etc. especially any business orientated cloud services. They will be untenable, no business is going to risk prison for its executives, because their hosting services hand out their data "illegally" at the drop of a hat - "illegally" for the jurisdiction in which the company operates, not where their cloud provider is based.
Microsoft did release an MS-DOS app for Windows Phone on April 1...
Even comes with Win 3.1 and Paper Rock Scissors DOS based game... :-D
And Lion? I can't even get Mountain Lion on my Macs.
Brain the size of a planet and I'm stuck here talking to you. God, I'm depressed.
It depends on industry and regulation. If it is no longer supported and you are in an industry where financial or personal data is being held on those old servers, you could start facing fines for putting them at risk, unless they are properly isolated.
Uber is employing / contracting these drivers to carry out services on their behalf. They are putting their paying customers into vehicles that Uber is paying for to transport those passengers from A to B.
Therefore it is their responsibility to ensure that all the drivers they sub-contract to are properly licensed and insured and that their vehicles meet local road worthiness rules - which are generally much higher for private hire vehicles than normal private vehicles.
The problem is, Uber are saying that it has nothing to do with them, whether the drivers are properly licensed and insured and that the vehicles are safe. Wrong. It is their responsibility to ensure that their drivers are properly licensed and insured.
It is the same in any other industry. If I hire people for a building site and I pay them cash in hand, then I am liable if the Customs & Excise catch onto it. Likewise, if I hire cheap foreign labour without checking that they have valid work permits, I am going to face fines. Uber is no different, they are hiring drivers without ensuring they are legal, therefore they are facing sanctions.
It would be very easy for Uber to ensure that their drivers are legal, but they refuse to do so, because that would cost time, money and hassle. Why do things legally, when you can cut corners and do things on the cheap and put your customers at risk?
The authorities take a dim view on such sharp practices and are sanctioning Uber appropriately. If Uber want to avoid sanctions they just need to stop being arrogant idiots and comply with the law.
And as part of that whole globalization thing, there aren't supposed to be barriers to trade in services anymore at least not between the United States and the European Communities.
There are no barriers to trade, as long as companies operate within the law of the lands where they do business.
If a Dutch company decides that, because they can openly sell marijuana in coffee shops in Holland, they would have a rude awakening if they tried to do that in most parts of America. Where is the globalisation there?
I work for a software company and we do business all over the world, but we have to follow local legislation when implementing financial and ERP software in other countries. There is nothing stopping us doing business in those countries, as long as we follow the rules and regulations that are set in place. That often means jumping through a lot more hoops (Russia), but in some other countries (Poland, Hungary), it means that the rules are less tight than at home, so there are fewer problems to deal with than in our own highly regulated home market.
You can set standards without unduly constraining market participants who follow the rules. What's happening here in the US is that a lot of places have established taxi operators who bid on a limited number of medallions, badges, licenses, etc, with the entire "fee" going into the city's coffers.
And that seems to be the fallacy of many comments coming from the left side of the Pond. "That is how the taxi business works in America, so it must be the same (and corrupt) in the rest of the world."
So many commenters automatically assume that the reason Uber is getting into trouble in other parts of the world has nothing to do with the fact that the drivers don't have the relevant driving licences, insurance etc. but that it is protectionism by the taxi drivers and the government in collusion.
As somebody who lived and worked in London for a while, I would assume that New York, Boston, LA etc. taxi drivers go through rigorous training, have to know the streets of their city like the back of their hand and don't need modern technology like a SatNav to get from A to B.
(As an aside, I took my step-daughter to the airport yesterday and she was astounded that I just got in the car and set off to the airport. She asked me where the SatNav was. She seemed to think it is nearly impossible to drive so far without a SatNav to guide you.)