1371 posts • joined 28 Feb 2010
Re: Too late to the party...again.
Being late is not an issue. Apple was late in the smartphone market but with the perceived right product it doesn't mean you can't conquer a large slice of any market even entering late. Google and Chrome are another example. Swatch was able to conquer its slice of the watch market - and entered it in 1983 only.
It all depends on creating a product that is good - or at least actually looks like - and people start to want for some reason.
There are some specic wrist devices - like subs dive computers, or cardio training devices - or the like, because you need them at hand and there are not many places where you could wear them - although future practical HUD devices could make them less useful. How much a generic "smartwatch" is useful is yet to see. Especially if they have short battery life, are not waterproof, and require a smartphone to be tethered to. The above devices are self-contained.
Someone remembers Timex/Microsoft watches?
Microsoft did already "smartwatches" when it teamed AFAIK with Timex to transfer PDA-like data to watches. IIRC it used the screen to transmit data to a light sensor on the watch before USB and Bluetooth were available.
After all, nothing really new under the Sun. And still, there's little you can cramp into a wristwatch more useful than two hands showing time...
Re: 2GB GPU to drive a 5k display?
It could be 3D rendering...
Anyway a Nikon D810 frame is 7360 x 4912, while an Hasselblad H5D-50c is 8272 x 6200 - monitor of such resolution can be useful for high-megapixel cameras, and the driving video card will be in the upper range even if their power will not be much used for 2D editing (but that memory could be used for GPU computations as well).
Re: Retina iMac
You. Others can. It's not a monitor for the casual user browsing and watching a movie. Imaging professional can find it very useful.
Re: Retina iMac
Dell monitor also rotates and you can use it portrait, it you wish so. Also, today a professional monitor is more than just the pixel count. What are both monitor color space coverage? Hardware calibration capabilities? Etc. etc.
Anyway, these are just the first wave of 4K/5K monitors, expect more coming. Anyway professional prefer a computer *outside* the monitor, for several reasons (components changing temperature can impact color rendition as well).
Only unlicked devices should ever be allowed....
The mistake was to allow for locked devices since the beginning. No devices should have ever been tied to a service providers. Nobody ever thought about radios ot TVs being able to receive only selected channels (althought it was left happen with satellite decoders), music player able to play music only from one suppliers, washing machine that could use only one brand of detergent, and so on. It was left to happen with phones. It took an high court ruling in the USA to assert you can unlock your phone after the contract expires. The market doesn't need much regulation - just needs to forbid any kind of proprietary regulations coming from the interested companies. Devices should be free and unllocked, and interoperable among networks through standards. And nothing more.
Re: Its that Tuesday time of the month again.
MS could deliver binary patches but they wouldn't be cumulative, and would take much longer to install. It could be far simpler and safer to deploy the fixed files and those using them if any private interface changed. Office is a large chunk of software, it's not a surprise an update may be large as well. WSUS is available exactly to download once and easily distribute across a a LAN (and also to slave WSUS)
Re: Why would you PARSE FONTS in the kernel?
Why would you a shell for DHCP or SSH aithentication?
Anyway the reason is the video drivers are on the kernel too.
Re: Where's the daft name and funky logo?
Did you miss 'Sandworm'? Hate sometimes blinds....
Re: Complexity to the point of no return
And it wouldn't be usable from any language unable to call DLL functions and use pointers. Do you know why COM was designed that way?
Anyway a COM server is just an executable or DLL - just with special support for COM interfaces and instantiation.
Because you know if someone discovered and used heartbleed before? It doesn't leave any trace on your server unlike something that needs to be run locally.
Bash bug has been there for how long? Twenty years? Are you sure it was never exploited? Securoty researchers will tell you, crooks don't.
Re: Complexity to the point of no return
Exactly. The issue are some developers who believes they need a shell - and program more - just to execute some command line utilities from an application, when often there's really no need for it - you can run them without a shell and just redirect I/O.
But using system() or its equivalents is a quick and lazy way to perform that, so why not use it? It's their level of abstraction that is weak - they really don't understand what a shell is and a command line program is.
Not that it is difficult - just prepare the proper document for the target victim and you're pretty sure it will be opened and the user will click exactly where you like.
Because this diminish the graviy of those vulnerabilities? And still shouldn't open source code have been reviewed by thousand of eyes to spot those vuilnerabilities earlier? Shouldn't have open source code "more secure" because of that? Of course this is closed source, thereby no one peer reviewed it, right?
Or after all the only real way to have secure code is to design it well, code it better and test it properly - open source or not?
Re: Complexity to the point of no return
Do you know that OLE is COM, and COM is "Component" Object Model? In this case Excel is exactly a "component" handled through COM interfaces and hosted in the application - in a language and application agnostic way. What is a "component", after all? Something you can embed and drive from another application? What is better, a standard, common API, or a dedicated private one?
Sure, MS could have made office application interop available only to its own applications through private dedicated APIs callable from VC++ only, and all of you would have cried about the "customer lock-in", "hidden private APIs", "unfair competition", "lack of interoperability", etc. etc.
Re: Thank $deity for proprietary software
If it's a flaw in SSL 3.0 design all standard implementations will be affected - proprietary or not.
If it is a bug in a given implementation of SSL (like the Heartbleed bug), then only the buggy libraries will be affected - proprietary or not.
Re: Mmm... Swiss Cheese
One major issue for any browser is they are "open" platforms to be programmed, and needs to support today a lot of very different ways of using them. Versatility doesn't usually go hand in hand with "minimizing the attack surface" - which usualy can be made shutting down features and reducing access to unknown sources.
To make a browser safe, tou need to build sounder code with more robust libraries and compilers. Look at how the October release of Chrome closed 159 security issues, 113 of which were related to bad memory usage...
Maybe you should give a look to:
"This update includes 159 security fixes"
The only difference is that MS Tuesday Updates are much more publicized...
Yes, as the bash soap opera showed very well...
Just because they're not used by the OS itself... the IE HTML rendering engine is used in many OS interfaces. There are in fact patches of IE that don't require a reboot - depends on what file they update.
Moreover Linux fans still are deceived by the fact it doens't ask for a reboot, but the file aren't actually updated until applications using them are closed and restarted. What is better - a false sense of ssecurity, or a message reminding you you need to reboot?
"weasel words - no body knows, they can't even guarantee it."
LOL! It was announced a few week ago and it's a technical preview. What could I write? I have no crystall ball and don't work for MS, but I guess an upgade will be available.
Anyway any Surface Pro is an Intel PC - you can install whatever you like on it. If it wasn't a device I use for my daily work I would like to try the Win 10 TP on it....
The web a platform?? The web is just a transport layer. Whatever you use still runs inside an operating system. And still, any web application is a pain in the ass to use for any moderately complex task.
Windows is much more stable than anything else around. What OS was supported for thirteen years? What OS supports applications written many years ago without any need to recompile them, if you are able and could with all dependencies still working?
What MS thinks is the next technology is usually an issue for developers, not users. You can still run VB6 or Silverlight applications even if they are not what you should use to develop today... but it is true on Linux there are no changes, everything is still as if it was the 1970 still....
Re: admit it... you're either never tried it, or you're just a hater
C'mon how much local store? 16GB? It's less than the CF in my camera.
Updates? A Surface can update automatically, so where's the problem? A Chromebook never gets updates? AV? It's funny how many people think they are safe just because they don't use Windows. Bash bugs and compromised Macs of these days never sound an alarm bell?
Fight with your computer? Unless you're the kind who likes to install all the crap it can find on it, especially from dodgy site, the days you have to fight with a Windows one are gone many years ago. And most Windows software is very well written and easy to use - without any compromise and a full native GUI.
Licenses? Oh well, we're back to people who are afraid to pay for software.... and prefer "free" one paid with all their data. If you're fine with sending everything to Google it's up to you, I prefer software which doesn't, even if I have to pay for it. After all, why paying for the hw is good, while paying for sw is not?
Chromebooks don't tie you to a *single* company called Google that controls everything you can run on your device? Again, people like you just look from a single perspective. MS "lock-in" is bad, Google lock-in is good.... At least on Windows I can run any software I like.
When on the road, carrying around three devices is something I hate. Having a 4" phone and a good 10" tablet which works very well as a laptop too with a keyboard, is all I need.
If a Chromebooks works well for you, good. There are people who need fairly more powerful portable devices able to run the same software they run on their desktop - because they need to perform real work everywhere they are.
Re: admit it... you're either never tried it, or you're just a hater
Sure, three devices are better than one... I by far prefer a cheaper smaller phone and a powerful tablet (which can also replace a notebook), than having to use three separate device. And I by far prefer an OS which let me work with the applications I need fully locally (and store data locally) and not only what Google feeds me in exchange for all my data.
It's "missing something" but you can't say what. And it won't stop working when Win10 is released (and could be probably upgraded to).
So funny... some people complaining because XP was EOLed after thirteen years, other complaining because Win10 will be released next year. Also it's Windows - it looks to me a stable and proven platform despite Win 8 UI issues which mostly disappear on a tablet.
It looks you're the perfect Apple user - one who feels compelled to upgrade its device every year and pay €950 euro for a phone, just to feel he has the "latest and greatest".
I still prefer the smaller 2 to the 3 for the way I use it. Of course the improvement in the 3 are nice, especially the stand. I'm not sure how much a 7" or 8" with limited RAM/disk Windows tablet may be useful, although one with an x86 chip WiFi and USB like the Toshiba encore port could be a good remote control for my camera - and cheaper than most dedicated ones.
If Microsoft stops the Surface, I'm not surely going to replace it with an iOS or Android device, it would look a large step back in versatility and power. And it would be funny if meanwhile Apple releases an OSX capable tablet...
What Microsoft shoudn't do is change pen technology with each model. I got a Wacom Bamboo Stylus Carbon and I love it (and it doesn't need a battery nor bluetooth), but it wouldn't work with the 3. If it really wants to start OneNote quickly, add a customizable button to the Surface itself.
Re: iOS ME ?
It looks strangely like a Windowsuesque way of getting a device health again...
Re: Too slow
From some perspective, Microsoft understood better what a smartphone is than Apple and Google. For example the "candy icons collection" iOS and Android use as home screens are utterly useless and that design dates back to the Palm devices of many years ago.
At least MS understood the home screen needs to convey useful informations (since WinCE) to the user - and give fust access to them, and just not be a Fisher Price interface with a lot of colorful candies to collect for the joy of the average fanboy luser - which of course is happy to own a phone and show it to others, not to use it really.
Just, MS wasn't able to design a true usable UI for its devices until WP8, trying to backport too much the Windows desktop design (just to go the other way round with W8...)
It's funny how many mindless users don't understand Chrome is the best spyware ever written, one that users actually install themselves. It was also turned into a spyhardware called "Chromebooks".
It's a perfect example of social enginnering. Give people something for "free" and they will blindly forget whatever you steal them in exchange. After all, weren't people accepting to give away their first born for free wifi access?
Add the powerful Google advertising machine and Google drones ready to swear Chrome is the best piece of software ever written, and you get the perfect spyware.
Re: Better config in general
Do Chrome or OSX let you choose what browser, etc. use on install?
This is business - you want people use your products, not someone else. And still Windows let you install much more competitors' software than most other platforms.
Re: I fondly remember...
It was an ill fated choice because it was strongly tied to the US keyboard layout. In other countries it was very uncomfortable. MS had already started with 'world domination' ideas, and was looking for UIs that could work in different languages without becoming clumsy or requiring big changes.
Re: Back in a time where...
That happened only *after* Microsoft decided that an integrated suite with the same UI, and able to easily exchange data between applications, was a great idea.
What Lotus, Wordperfect & C. couldn't do was to adapt the OS to these needs. Microsoft introduced DDE first and then OLE exactly to make Office application integrate easily, first only data (DDE), than the whole application (OLE) - it wasn't made at the file level, but at the application level with a standard API, and it was also open to third party applications...
When Borland teamed with Wordperfect to deliver something alike, it wasn't able to reach the same kind of integration - while Lotus took too long to integrate Ami Pro and the presentation software into its product line - wasting resources in DOS releases.
Re: Many Notes users still spit
Notes/Domino is one of the few apps that makes you really long for a Outlook + Exchange system...
Years ago I worked for a company that was a full IBM shop (yes, we also had a Token Ring network), it was a reseller of IBM products and also had a software development division. We had Notes, but I do not know why, IT one day decided to give a try to Outlook and Exchange. My software development group was chosen as the pilot installation (probably because we were the only ones happy to get new software to play with... and nobody cared if our mail system didn't work for a while).
Well, Outlook was very well received (its UI was years ahead of Notes with its strange Egyptian UI...) - and after a while most of the company wanted "that mail application the software development group uses!". It took more time to get rid of Token Ring and switch to Ethernet, though...
I also shared the office for a while with some Notes developers.... well, most of them hoped to ditch it soon and start to develop applications with better tools on real RDBMS...
Re: "Prior to the personal computer, spreadsheets were the purview of mainframe systems"
Actuially, one of the limits of 1-2-3 was its very limited graphics and printing capabilities - you needed add-ons (which costed money) to get decent graphics and prints - in a time when you couldn't easily publish a file or image on a website everybody could easily access - nor easily bring a floppy disk to a meeting... (no laptops, no projectors.... I still remember devices to "print" on real slide film to show them on a screen using a slide projector...)
That was a ground which both Borland with Quattro and Microsoft with Excel attacked easily - both products offered much better integrated graphic and printing capabilities.
Re: @Zippy's Sausage Factory
IBM missed wholly the point that OS/2 needed software to take off. Nobody buys a desktop OS if there is no good user friendly productivity software available (look at Linux, same mistake - ironically, StarOffice . now Open/LibreOffice - was one of the few software available for OS/2). It didn't understand what made the PC take off - and it wasn't the DOS prompt or EDLIN.
Lotus could have filled that gap, but it didn't, even after it was bought by IBM.
Sure, OS/2 could run Win 3.x applications, but 95 and NT4 were coming, and it was clear everybody would have moved to the newer 32 bit applications which couldn't run on OS/2 - and nobody would have developed expensive software for an OS with a small user base. Moreover, the best Win 3.x office applications available were already the Microsoft one - it wasn't smart to make people used to MS software...
it was up to IBM to sustain the investment to bring the most useful software to OS/2, but they decided to avoid it, and rely on third parties who were hesitant and delivered little and late.
They didn't see the Outlook/Exchange combo coming also... anyway Notes alone would have never been a good reason to adopt OS/2 on the desktop as well.
OS/2 also lacked good development tools, Visual Basic and Delphi started then to offer "simple" good tools to deliver GUI apps without the difficult of C/C++ and API programming, but none was available for OS/2 - VisualAge was an ugly monster - but that's another story.
Had OS/2 a good office suite to offer, maybe history could have been somewhat different. But Lotus wasted all its efforts in the SmartSuite for Win 3.1 first, and later for 95, without being able to gain any ground in Microsoft battlefield (also, its software was buggy and with the unfriendly Notes UI), while never delivering an OS/2 SmartSuite in time.
I spent endless hours with Lotus support trying to make WordPro work - it crashed too often. Also Lotus tried to enforce its Notes-like UI on it, and it was really ugly - and often not user firendly, i.e. toolbars could only host buttons and no other controls (i.e. combobox, etc.)
The right click property inspector was introduced by Borland in Quattro Pro for Windows - it was nice, but it just did what in Word you could soften do from the toolbar without requiring a right-click, than a tab selection, and finally the change required - three clicks instead of one. It would be OK for complex tasks, but not for simpler ones. And again, it did use Lotus own UI, and I really hate applications that don't use the OS standard UI - more so if they are also not well designed.
Anyway, since Office 2007 you have local toolbars which appear when you select something...
1) It wasn't aimed at the typical home user Just like NT was more expensive than 95.
2) It came on CD also. But you had to buy a CD ROM - which were not yet common then. The "service packs" came on floppy, though.
Re: You missed a key competitor
It was initially named Borland "Quattro" (the Italian word for "four") , "Quattro Pro" came later - and it was the reason of the "Borland-vs-Lotus" trial, which stated that software menu arrangement couldn't be copyrighted... different times from today, when somebody tries to copyright rectangles with round corners..
It was also the first spreadsheet to use the "tabbed notebook" interface, which led to another copyright infringment cause, this time against Microsoft.
Anyway, it was what put Borland into MS aiming target, and lead to its "destruction" (among many Borland mistakes as well)
Tiles should replace icons fully - everywhere.
Microsoft should replace icons with tiles fully. I would like to have tiles which can be resized and can look like simple icons (but yet display some info) when "minimized", or display more information when set at different sizes.
Why not having a mail or messagin app tile showing you incoming messages? Why not tiles informing you about an application running tasks and status? Why not an "icon" whose info displayed can be customized?
Icons are a relic of the past, when computers struggled to display simple bitmaps fast enough. Now even the less powerful graphic cards has no issue with simple 2D graphics - it's time to make app access "icons" something more that static bitmaps...
Re: Here we go again..
If you properly modularize it, you can install on each system only the required modules, to keep the OS footprint and resource consuptpion low enough. That's why, for example, Linux can be adapted to run on different devices. And meawhile even embedded systems became much more powerful and with far more resources.
If you ever gave a look to XP Embedded or 7 Embedded, you would have found something alike already. You believe that "Microsoft's approach to coding" never changes - but they are not so dumb as you like to believe. After all, Windows Phone is already far less resource hungry than Android...
Re: No printer and scanners support, does it support graphic tablets?
Adobe CC was not well received by many users - who prefer to have software installed without any need to be connected to be able to use it. This experiment - besides looking silly given what Photoshop users usually needs in their workflow - looks weird for how much control about data it takes away.
And believe me, the last PC I'll ever use is a Google-controlled one. Which will never be as powerful as needed exactly because Google controlling needs.
Re: Chromebooks, but not Linux?
"The other question is why a significant number of folks..."
If you remove those using a pirated copy of Photoshop to post their family photos of Facebook or the like, the paying users choose Adobe product because they are an industry standard that deliver exactly what you need how you need it - and have a large support in any step of the workflow from inception to image delivery.
Professionals needs tool to get a job done as fast as possible - and be paid for it. They have no reason to waste their time (and money) trying to assert a "free software" philosophy they couldn't care less - especially it means less hardware support, less workflow support less 3rd party and industry support etc. etc. - and thereby a lot of wasted and unpaid time to try to make it all work together to obtain the result you need.
Think most of them also use expensive, proprietary, lock-in "traps" like Apple PCs... why? Because the cost of software and hardware becomes almost irrelevant if it helps you to deliver the right product in the right time at the right price.
The idea that the professional needs come first, not a "philosphy" of software used, is something most Linux fans still fail to understand, and explain the Linux irrelevance on the desktop. But nerds, most people don't give a damn about the software they use, as long as it's the right choice to get their job done the way they need. And they don't care if they have to pay for it as long as the prices is perfectly acceptable and will be repaid soon by a smoother workflow and proper result reached without issues.
Only when Linux developers will accept people choose software for what it does and how well, and not how it is developed or costs, they will get a chance for desktop software.
Re: No printer and scanners support, does it support graphic tablets?
Extreme use case? LOL! That's the *usual* use case for Photoshop users (but those who get a pirated copy and have no clue how to use it really). Do you believe people buy Photoshop (at that price) to use it with crappy monitors, cheap printers and a mouse only?
To upload your photo to the Internet Lightroom is even too much powerful - Photoshop is even more. And most of the power of Photoshop can't be really unleashed without proper hardware support - calibrated monitors and printers, pressure/inclination/etc sensitive input devices. That's what Photoshop is designed for - and its steep learning curve don't make it a product for the masses at all. Was it Elements of maybe Lightroom I could understand - but a Chromebook is really the last device you would like to run Photoshop on unless you're a cash-constrained beginner.
It's chromebooks-google fans arrogance that makes you all miss the point - you don't have a clue about how a lot of software is really used, and believe everything could be run on subpar hardware just because Google tells you so.
No printer and scanners support, does it support graphic tablets?
Your expensive A3+ photo printer becomes useless... your scanner as well, no GPU support for faster operations, does it support a graphic tablet at least? Can you color-calibrate a Chromebook monitor and get that streamed Photoshop use your profile? What color space the average Chromebook monitor covers?
Hey, but it runs from the "cloud" if - as already pointed out, remote operations were something new... even Remote Desktop has (or had) a browser plugin... (and it can remotely map your printer and USB devices)
Sure, some school needing to teach the Photoshop basics could find it useful if cheap enough, especially if they just need a Chome browser and don't need to buy Chromebooks.
Re: Time to rethink
Under the hood Windows 8 has improvements over Windows 7. For example, its hypervisor is far better, and can take advantage of newer CPU virtualization support. Sure, you can use another one, but if your OS comes with a good embedded hypervisor, why not? Especially since they are a pretty intrusive kind of software.
There's also better support for high DPI displays, and they'll become more common soon.
As SSD disks becomes mainstream, the OS needs to change how the disk is used to maximize its life, or performance.
What about DIrectX 12? Will be it retrofitted to 7 or will it be an 8+ exclusive? You may not need it, or you may...
There's a difference between supporting new hw somehow - i.e. using SATA disks pretending they were plain older ATA ones - or exploiting its capabilities fully. New hw may present itself to older OS in a compatible way, but you're going to renounce to use it fully. Does it make sense to spend $$$$ in new hw, and use it only in a legacy compatible mode?
Also, new release may start to drop old legacy features for many reasons, including security - and support new standards as well.
Meanwhile, some applications start to remove support for older operating systems, XP and Vista. For example the latest Canon camera utilities don't support them. If you buy one of the new cameras announced at Photokina (i.e. the EOS 7D MK II or the Powershot G7 X), they are supported only by the latest utility releases (and some are 64-bit only) - if you have one of the older OS, or you upgrade, or you have to renounce to use their software. Lightroom already no longer supports older OSes.
It's not always the OS to drive the adoption of new applications, sometimes it's the other way round. You may need a newer application because it does support something you really need, just to find it won'r run on older OSes. Supporting XP and Vista along 7 and 8 is becoming more and more time consuming, and since XP is EOLed, and Vista has a tiny share of the market, expect more and more new releases dropping support for them. If you're ok with older software it won't hurt you much, but if you need newer ones - and you could, if you need to support something newer, you will need a newer OS.
Re: Time to rethink
Those who believe an OS is just a GUI, usually fail to understand that hardware evolution needs OS evolution as well. There has been big improvements in the past few years - a large increase in the number of processing units, large memory spaces, sold state disks, now also directed attached to the PCIe bus which will need to become even faster, and GPU no longer limited to UI processing. Older OSes were never designed, nor could be retrofitted, to take really advantage of such hardware. Sure, non real need for browsing or the like, but there are a lot of users who perform complex and heavy tasks on PCs. They may not care much about UI widgets bells&whistles - but the do care their hardware is used for what they paid for it, and not by an OS designed mostly for a single CPU, 128MB of RAM, and 'slow' spinning disks of a few GBs only.
The OS internals needs to be designed in different ways, using different techniques to handle larger and newer resources.
But if all you care are shiny buttons, well, you don't need them.
Re: Open goal for USA bashers
Sorry, byt the very day US agencies started to spy like those in Russia or China, US was no longer the land of "the free". Fear is always a bad counsellor.
Even if you are very afraid of terrorists or the like, you have to understand that freedom and democracy exposes you more to their initial attacks - and you can't do anything unless you destroy the very freedom and democracy you took so long to build. It's far better to be hit by a terrorist attack than losing freedom for ever and live in fear. That doesn't mean that those taking advantage of freedom to kill, private preople of freedom, and create destruction should not be destroyed.
But fear is always what non-democratic government use to get power and maintain it - beware of those telling you you should fear, and give them too much power and ask to renounce to your freedom to protect you...
US is right, unluckily it can't sustain its position after the NSA debacle.
In many countries the Internet is seen as a dangerous vector do disseminate dangerous ideas like "freedom", "democracy", "human rights" and so on. And there will be strong attempts to be able to block them.
The US position is right, but it acted more or less the countries it complains about - not to the extend of blocking contents - but illegaly spying on people yes. There's less risk to end in a "re-education" camp somewhere, but NSA activities were against the very idea of freedom in a democracy.
Thereby the US position became weak, very weak, and allies it spied on won't be very willingly to help.
The government and congress should really undersand and assess the damage NSA did, it is a bigger damage that any terrorist attack could deliver - US lost its reputation as the "country of freedom and democracy", and the effects of this self-inflicted damage will last long, very long, much more than any terrorist group fear.
For all those "but router switches use BusyBox!"
There's not only your bedroom/basement one...
Re: "mobile first, cloud first"
"Robbing you of your privacy first..."
That's Google motto, MS would infringe Google copyright on data stealing....
- YARR! Pirates walk the plank: DMCA magnets sink in Google results
- Pics Whisper tracks its users. So we tracked down its LA office. This is what happened next
- Review Xperia Z3: Crikey, Sony – ANOTHER flagship phondleslab?
- Ex-US Navy fighter pilot MIT prof: Drones beat humans - I should know
- OnePlus One cut-price Android phone on sale to all... for 1 HOUR