317 posts • joined 18 Mar 2010
Re: It's actually quite a tricky spec.
quote: "But here's the trickiest of all.
Run on 4 AA batteries for 40 hours or 2 AAs for 8 hours."
That is the tricky part; I know of no way to get 400% more work out of only double the stored energy ;)
Did you mean 20 hours on 4* AA cells (still a stretch tbh if you're designing for 8 hours on 2* AA) or 4* C cells for the 40 hour runtime? Going from 5.4Ah to 10.8Ah is not going to yield 5 times more runtime however much I try :(
Surprising note: I didn't realise until I checked just how much charge a "normal" battery holds compared to current device batteries; a single AA at 2700mAh can fully recharge an iPhone 5 (1440mAh battery) with some to spare, and a single C cell at 8000mAh would nearly cover an iPad Air (8800mAh) ^^;
Re: Very good
quote: "...unfortunately companies such as Samsung have never had an original idea and are therefore utterly dependent on Apple/Google to come up with something.
The same thing goes for those so called-smart watches."
So remind me again which companies have actually created and released smart watches, and which companies are only rumoured to have one in the works and have not yet actually released a product?
FYI Apple have always been late to every party they show up at: Apple generally make their splash by being incrementally (in some cases exponentially) "better" than the existing products in whatever market they have aimed at, but what they don't do is get there first. There were PCs before Apple, mobile phones (including smart phones with touch screens, we used to call them PDAs) before Apple, and tablet computers before Apple. There were smart watches before the current crop from Sony and Samsung, and they have managed to predate Apple by several months and counting...
If/when the iWatch appears I expect it to be a polished product, but it will also be indicative of Apple's SOP; let others do the risky leading, then follow once the market has matured enough, and make sure your marketing language implies you were there all along. It works too, as I've lost count of the times I've seen people claim that Apple were the first for "X" when a quick check on the internet will show several predecessors (never mind the fact that I often personally remember someone else releasing an X product prior to Apple's offering). Pretty much every "copying" or "idea stealing" criticism I see levelled at Samsung (normally quite fairly) can as equally be levelled at Apple by judicious use of :%s/Samsung/Apple/
I look forward to seeing what the iWatch is capable of when it gets released, and how well it interfaces with the iPhone and iPad :)
Re: Well that will be worth anticipating
quote: "You're missing the true plot: Minecraft founders, back in the mists of time awakened a great evil by opening the Pandora's box of Java.
By the time we get to Minecraft 4 then the plague will be Windows itself."
Err, the fact it is written in Java lends it to being run as-is on Linux. So you might want to revise that sequence to put Windows first, perhaps, before you kill the only thing letting it run on an alternative OS? :P
Re: money in same old .... out
quote: "no such thing as intellectual property in a court of law.."
quote: "It can not be copyright, because that would be a script by notch."
Say what again? Copyright is wide ranging enough in scope to cover computer programs, including the representations therein; the exact example given is that Mickey Mouse the character is not copyrighted per se, but that the copyright on Steamboat Willie (the film) afford protections to the Mickey Mouse character. Minecraft the game is copyrighted, thus the characters and contents therein are also afforded some protections.
The guys intending to make a Minecraft movie (specifically as a "Minecraft" movie, note, not "Square Block Miner: Adventures in Cubeland") are indeed quite obviously intending to make a derivative product of a copyrighted work without holding the rights to do so. What they did do was show the major studios (i.e. Warner) that there is enough interest in a Minecraft movie to help them decide to seal a deal with Notch for the rights; simultaneously doing themselves out of any profit whilst allowing Warner to make yet more monies for old rope.
Moral of this story: if you have an idea to make monies using other people's IP, make damn sure you have negotiated the rights to do so before going public. If you don't, you'll get shot down and someone else will just take your idea and run with it themselves.
Re: Well that will be worth anticipating
Mortal Kombat, Resident Evil... some films based on games turn out ok (not superlative, mind, but at least ok) ;)
As long as it's not Uwe Boll directing it should at least be watchable, and the fact that it's a sandbox game means that if they hire a capable scriptwriter it could be pretty good.
Just don't let Boll anywhere near it *shudder*
Re: How standards have fallen
As an illegible bachelor, I resemble that remark! >.<
Re: Excellent review; but "flaunting"?
quote: "I know, given this is a S5 article many will find this comment challenging, but it is fair enough to point out the multi-path TCP Samsung have presented as an innovation is something Apple have already been doing since the iPhone 5. "
And channel aggregation has been available since the advent of dial-up modems, in one form or another. I used to bond 2 33k modems together to double my bandwidth, back when "mobile phone" meant something that weighed in excess of a kilogramme :)
quote: "So when you really understand multi-path TCP it's clear Samsung are now advertising a feature Apple have had for two generations, in a more advanced implementation than Samsung are touting, and they didn't bother to tell anyone about it in the first place."
This being different to the time that that other mobile operating systems had features that iOS was missing (e.g. copy/paste) but they made no noise about it, and that Apple took 2 years to implement in a counter-intuitive way?
None of them are perfect, some manufacturers miss out on functionality that others think essential or even integral enough to not market it as a feature, etc. etc. This time round Samsung are crowing about something that iOS could already do, next time it'll be someone else.
The real issue here is that the market is reaching saturation here in the West, so device manufacturers are desperately trying to find something they can use as a USP to get people to purchase their device instead of another. You can expect at least another 12 months of this frippery before they pare back and start focusing on the basics again. Like battery life, which has always been important for mobile devices, and will always be important for mobile devices, regardless of what else they actually let you do while they still have a usable charge.
Semi-automatics, even as an Englishman I'm aware the the US banned fully automatic firearms and large magazines a while back, after a well-publicised shooting that involved at least one AR-15 with extended mags. Much like the knee-jerk reaction here after Dunblane which banned all "small firearms" (aka pistols).
You would probably be surprised at just how straightforward it is to become certified to own and operate actual firearms in the UK, despite us not having "first amendment" style rights enshrined in law. You can even get semi-automatic AR-15s, as long as they are chambered for .22 LR (anything larger has to have a mechanical loading action such as bolt or Martini) ;)
Of course if you have ever been convicted of a violent crime, you are shit out of luck at getting a firearms certificate, so I hope you've never punched someone in a pub :)
quote: "Every country probably has laws which makes some acts illegal which many people would say should not be illegal."
And in a democracy, those existing laws which are no longer wanted by a majority of citizens should be repealed. I thought that was the point of government for the people.
Rather than defending the enforcement of stupid laws because they are laws, we should be demanding the repealing of stupid laws because they are stupid.
Or does that leave too much power in the hands of the population?
Re: Help! My radio signal is being stolen!!
Just wait until SETI get the call from the lawyers representing "all content creators in the rest of the known universe"... wouldn't want to have to foot that legal bill ^^;
(note: SETI retransmit the signals they intercept to millions of
pirates volunteer's computers which then perform illegal signal processing on the received data; these volunteers certainly fall under the ambit of "general public" rather than a close circle of friends, so I think SETI might be a bit screwed here for not properly licensing that content...)
Re: Chihuahua TERROR?
Black Chihuawidow (one tiny bite and you're doomed!)
Piranhuahua vs Sharktopus
Re: how does an opt out work with this?
quote: "surely if i wear a mask while walking into a petrol station i will get arrested?"
Probably, but you shouldn't. Wearing a mask is not a crime, so unless and until you actually start trying to rob the place, you have committed no crime.
See also: motorcycle helmets on people who have just filled up the tank on a *gasp* motorcycle. I mean it's not like I'm required by law to wear a helmet in order to ride on the public roads or anything... *grumble grumble*
Re: Yeah right Anonymous Coward
Sapphire displays are not the best solution, easily replaceable plastic displays are. You heard it here first folks ^^;
(in my defense, I've got a scratch on my phone screen I'd rather not have, and people are quoting >£100 to sort it. I'd happily pay £5 a pop for a straightforward plastic one that will need replacing every few months, than >£100 on a Gorilla Glass one that is a total pain in the ass to replace)
Re: @NumptyScrub When Big Brother Is After You
quote: "Straw man - at no point was that stated. I'm sorry but it's basic econ. Even if you argue that every dollar saved on buying movies is spent on skateboards, my moral premise still holds: those who've devoted their lives to giving you joy through their art are not being paid a penny for it."
Rebuttal: that same post points out that The Hobbit took more in the box office than would be made by possibly the entire planet legitimately paying Sky to watch it on their movie channels (1 billion households would be spending from £16m<£66.6m<£160m vs. the actual £600m box office take for The Hobbit as per my rubbish maths).
Your strawman is claiming that thousands of jobs are lost through piracy but not providing one single link backing up that claim, whereas my dubious maths at least uses the actual cost of Sky Movies, and the actual box office takings of that film to arrive at its debatable conclusion of the actual fiscal damage of piracy. You have all the info you need to use an alternative calculation method to rebuff my claimed "costs" and create your own. Almost every argument I have seen (including your post quoted above) claims or implies that there is a direct fiscal loss for every pirate download (aka "not being paid a penny for it").
So you show me exactly what the direct fiscal loss is, because I've already given you my calculation of it, and it is not a lot at all; somewhere between 1.6 pence and 16 pence, with my personal estimate at around 6.6 pence as a good average for "what it would cost someone to watch this film if they were looking for the cheapest legitimate option". Evey single soul on the planet (7.1 billion people) downloading the The Hobbit would, according to my calculations, have a direct fiscal loss of 1.6p * 7.1E9 = £113.6 million pounds revenue to Sky for them to watch it legitimately (at 6.6p per film it becomes £468.6 million, still short of the recorded £600 million box office earnings). That is, if every single person on the planet (including babies in Africa and the CEOs of the movie studios) all separately downloaded The Hobbit this evening, I am arguing that the direct fiscal loss should be calculated as a bit less than it already took at the box office.
Or to put it another way: I subscribe to Sky Movies (the whole package of crap, people in my house are apparently addicted to television). If I go and download "A Good Day to Die Hard" right now, which is being shown on Sky Movies as I type this and that I have thus already paid for the rights to watch (or Tivo it to timeshift), how much has that act of piracy cost the movie studios? It is an illegal download and copyright infringement, and if you are correct also a callous act of theft which will cause jobs to be lost and rights-holders to be denied payment.
It's on again at 20:00 this evening, and I'll probably watch it now (I haven't yet but this has piqued my interest). Exactly how much mayhem and (fiscal) damage will I cause if I accidentally watch an illegally downloaded copy instead of the one on Sky that I've paid for? Approximately fuck all as I see it (end result: I have watched a film I am entitled to watch), but legally one is a criminal act that is destroying the industry, and one is pefectly legitimate.
How many households do you know that don't have subscription television services? I suspect an awful lot of "piracy" is impatient idiots just pre-emptively timeshifting access to content that they will be able to legally watch in a mere few months, on the channels that they are already paying for. Still blatantly copyright infringement, of course, but they are contributing to the income of movie studios regardless, thanks to subscription TV's relentless push to have new films on, and willingness to sign licensing deals and pay the movie studios to do so.
Re: When Big Brother Is After You
quote: "Kim Dotcom has harmed OTHER people in a big way, by stealing, and helping steal their property and life's work, on a massive scale, and through this destroying thousands of jobs and careers, destroying assets legitimately built up, don't get me started."
Citation needed. I watched a film the other night without paying the £10 cinema fee, or paying £10 for the DVD/BluRay. Was this the loss of £10 to the film-makers?
No, because I watched it on Sky, and I pay a hell of a lot less than £10 per film viewed for that service. If I can legitimately watch a film for a fraction of the cinema admittance or DVD cost, then someone else watching a film should not be held accountable for the maximum cinema or DVD cost, they should be held accountable for the most cost-effective method of seeing that film.
Napkin maths ahoy...
Divide by 30 days: £0.533 per day (you can only watch one channel at once, so I'm ignoring the fact you get 11 channels)
Assume 3 hours as a maximum for film length: £0.066 for 3 hours of viewing one Sky Movies channel, in order to watch a specific film
Using those figures, one billion people (1/7th of the total population of the entire world) pirating The Hobbit could be argued as being less than £66.6 million pounds of lost revenue to the movie studio (less than, because that amount has been paid to Sky, not the studio directly). Alternatively you could pick an arbitrary number of movies (note the site simply states "hundreds of movies to choose from"), divide £16 by that number and claim that that is the subscriber cost of any specific movie: 100 movies makes it 16 pence (£160 million per billion pirates), 1000 movies make it 1.6 pence (£16 million per billion pirates).
Compare that to the box-office takings (all legitimate revenue, and does not include legit purchases of DVD/BluRay or Sky licensing fees) of $1,017,003,568 (£609,747,535 at today's exchange rates) and it shows up just how much money the industry wouldn't have made from those people who refuse to pay cinema fees.
£600 million made from people going to the cinema to watch it legit, at best £160 million / probably more like £66 million / at worst £1.6 million cost for a billion subscribers to watch it themselves (multiple times) on Sky completely legitimately, instead of paying the comical cinema fees to see it a total of once.
Feel free to keep insisting that each pirate download is a missed cinema ticket sale, but I for one don't believe a fucking word of it. When one seventh* of the entire planet can use my patented method to legitimately watch a movie for (less than) 25% of the box office take, it doesn't sound like piracy is hurting the business anywhere near as much as they'd have us believe.
*Also note that from a population perspective, both Sky subscriptions and pirated downloads can be viewed as being relevant per household rather than per person: a pirate is likely to let the whole house watch their ill-gotten gains, just like a Sky subscriber lets the whole house watch their legitimate televisual content. Thus 1 billion households of pirates / Sky subscribers could in theory include 50% of the world population; up to around 4 billion people, if you choose to define an average household as 4 people, with an estimated total population of 7.1 billion to divide it by.
Re: Isn't Bitcoin itself ...
quote: "On top of that, the "value" of a BitCoin varies from day to day by over a percent point sometimes by as much as 10%. It is not stable, not reliable and can be completely buggered by malice or a simple mistake."
As opposed to shares of publicly traded companies, which are limited in number, can vary by >30% over the course of a day due to one negative news item, and can be completely buggered by malice or a simple mistake (like a single trader making one wrong keypress)?
You continue avoiding BitCoin, I'll continue avoiding stock exchanges for the same reasons, even though I work for a listed company.
Shit, I've just realised that my day job (that pays the bills) is inextricably linked to an unstable, unreliable item that is vulnerable to malice or a simple mistake. Arses :(
Re: More challenging than it looks
quote: "The only thing that surpasses it for dogs-dinnerness is Windows 8."
Strange, it took me a week at most to adapt to Office 2010 from Office 2003, and to Win8 from Win7. I've also managed to get a good feel for MATE and Cinnamon, although I've yet to touch Unity (or XFCE for that matter). Maybe it helps having gone through most of the GUIs since GEM on the ST, and Windows specifically from 3.11 onwards through to 8.1 today. Maybe it also helps that I rarely touch TIFKAM and just stay on the desktop for everything.
I still fucking struggle with regular expressions though. Could've done with being introduced to those at school, as hopefully the concepts would have sunk in easier ^^;
quote: "Also the Chinese economy, which presumably the Chinese government would be very highly motivated to avoid."
Given that China is very carefully pushing loads of cash back at us by purchasing western (e.g. US) government bonds and the like, they are actually propping up all the fuckwits over here that are making the idiot decisions in the first place. Yes, if they just kept the money and let the local currency rapidly appreciate, they'd find themselves having economic issues as western companies stopped getting stuff manufactured there, but the west would be the one that properly nosedived into the cesspit (economically speaking).
IMO of course, but of the 2 concomitant processes, I believe that the US (and Europe) would come out far, far worse off than China for it. They (China) are the ones covering these comical national debts we all have over here, using the money we give them to make stuff for us... :(
Nope, this sounds more like the sort of film you get when a director hears the term "basement geek" once too often and thinks "it's been 30 years since Electric Dreams came out, I could do a much better take on this whole computer + relationship thing"
I've not actually watched She by the way, that would involve leaving my basement, and outside people scare me :(
Re: it could be because the observations were made in the afternoons, missing morning moisture.
quote: "I don't think MRO was sent up with an arsenal of rocket propelled umbrellas and a precision targeting system"
A startling and quite unacceptable oversight, how on
earth mars are those Rovers supposed to enjoy a quiet G&T (or Pimms, should one prefer) in the late afternoon, if nobody thought to bring an umbrella for some shade?
This needs to be rectified forthwith >:(
The recent Dr. Henri Boffin interview provided a good background on the Register's stance on the usage of the word "boffin". Historically, on this site it is used in a positive context to indicate a scientist who is capable of hard sums and proper science, as opposed to someone with e.g. a PhD in Media Studies.
Immediate assumption of a negative context where none was intended, can sometimes be indicative of personal bias; why do you believe the term "boffin" is in fact negative, or the Register's use of the term intended to be derogatory?
Re: Good to remember whenever you hear that "Apple can do no wrong" blah blah
quote: "Far better to try and fail and sometimes succeed and make a few billion."
The problem with MS is that people can easily disagree on which things are failures. Vista, Win 8 and the Office ribbon are commonly derided, but were they a financial failure or not?
Not to mention that some of us (albeit without a functioning sense of taste, apparently) actually got/get on ok with all of the above, I had no issues with Vista at the time, and am currently using Win8.1 on my gaming rig at home ^^;
quote from the article: "Last year Russia enacted a controversial law prohibiting distribution of "propaganda of non-traditional sexual relations" among minors."
I seem to recall homosexuality being mentioned in various texts from 1000+ years ago... if it has been happening for millennia then I reckon it's pretty "traditional" at this point. Is this law just badly worded?
quote: "Now somebody PLEASE explain to me why anyone is writing anything at all about this silly game."
Apparently it topped the download chart for Jan 2014 on iOS, so it was technically the most popular application last month.
Whether you consider the abrupt removal of (apparently) the most downloaded game on a particular smartphone platform a newsworthy item, is another matter entirely, of course :)
Given the following from the article (my emphasis):
"This includes sophisticated malware, a rootkit, a bootkit, Mac OS X and Linux versions and possibly versions for Android and iOS."
They are not just better, they are apparently godlike enough to be able to infect the uninfectable. I'm eagerly awaiting the clarification that the OSX and Linux variants still require the user to accept the install and provide the root password ^^;
Re: what about over discharge ?
If a mechanical short can be caused inside a battery purely by vibration, I'd suggest it is not a good design for a battery. Most use cases for batteries are in devices that are either portable (and can be subject to external vibration) or for devices intended to port themselves, like electric cars, which vibrate as part of their normal usage. Don't Design Them Like That.
A external mechanical short across the terminals is a recipe for fire regardless of how hot the battery gets itself; the shorting conductor will heat up as it carries current, and is thus a fire risk itself, independant of the method of providing current. Don't Short Them At All.
12V lead-acid car batteries live in heavy vibration environments, and have a high current capability. They don't internal short despite being inches from internal combustion engines, and are perfectly capable of starting fires with external shorts. These existing cars also contain a lot of rubber and plastic (not to mention diesel or petrol) that once lit continues to burn, and produces noxious fumes, so overall I don't think a rack of (well designed) Li-ion batteries in an electric car is, specifically, more of a fire hazard or health hazard than any other car on the road.
YMMV of course, but I happily drive a car with explosive liquids contained in the fuel tank; changing that for potentially explosive batteries is simply a change of risk, not specifically an increase in risk :)
Re: Did I just read a thinly veiled mysogynistic rant or what?
quote: "Waking up The Crazy in certain men can be very easy. Anything that suggests they aren't super strong physically. Anything that suggests they don't know everything there is to know about cars/trains/boats (insert vehicle of choice or all). Anything that suggests that you know more than them on any technical subject. Anything that suggests they aren't exceedingly attractive to the opposite sex even if they have a beer belly, flobbly backside, thinning hair & look about 50 when they are 30. Basically anything that touches on this type of man's enormous but fragile ego."
Plus you don't have to be female to instigate this; men who have those triggers can get set off by other men just as easily (although the misogynist ones will obviously take the implied criticism less well from females). I've had discussions over choice of turbocharger, or choice of switching gear turn heated due to particular participants disagreeing, even though their basis of disagreement was (it turned out) provably incorrect... :/
Re: Nothing to see here...
quote: "What he's saying is the title should be "Put down that jailbroken iPad! Snoopware RECORDS your EVERY gesture, TAP on jailbroken iOS, normal Android"
*happily continues using normal iPad*"
Well, at least until some security researcher comes up with a proof of concept for a privilege escalation on iOS, possibly like the ones used for rooting the device in the first place.
As long as there are no privilege escalation exploits that malware authours can use to run their touchlogger as root, then your normal iPad will be fine :)
Re: I wish ...
quote: "The thread addresses specifically and unequivocally physical retail outlets. So, that would make your response misdirection and wrong.
There is a word for what you just attempted to do, and I will let you go figure out what it is."
So tell me, since you appear to have forgotten to add all your refutations of my position in your reply. If you explain why it is misdirection, and explain why it is wrong, then I'll be compelled to have a cry at being out-debated on the internet and you will win :)
Here's a starter: I am contending that retail as a term includes distance selling, thus "retail outlet" includes "e-commerce website" (as in your statement "i do not think there are many other mobile phone manufacturer that have their own retail outlets selling their phones."). Note that this is actually a comments section on a patent litigation story and thus any assumptions made should probably be stated specifically in order to avoid confusion.
Alternatively we can agree to disagree, which is also fine by me, or we can agree that Samsung are copying <whoever was first> the way Apple copied <whoever was first>. All are equitable solutions :)
Re: I wish ...
quote: "While your example is correct, i do not think there are many other mobile phone manufacturer that have their own retail outlets selling their phones. This might be true for every tech company other than Sony and Apple, and Sony probably were first because the Ginza store has been there forever."
Well, apart from the ecommerce websites, which afaik count as "online retail outlets" selling their own devices, of course:
and so on. I bought my last Nokia (the N93) direct from their website, prior to the iPhone being released, so that definitely predates Apple's direct retail offering of mobile phones (although only by a few months tbh).
quote: "64bit processor - workable fingerprint sensor - soon to be seen on a Samsung near here."
Both of which were seen last decade on laptops (aka "portable computing devices") from all sorts of manufacturers, including Samsung in 2002. Don't try and pretend that fingerprint sensors or 64-bit processors are innovative for 2013, please, you just look a little too desperate to prove a point that never was important in the first place.
Seriously, at some point I swear someone is going to claim that the Apple iWatch was the "first smartwatch" just because they honestly don't know any better. And that will make me sad :'(
Re: Just wish
quote: "Just wish you had tried Linux on the dock part. Even only booting from an USB stick, to be able to give us an expectation on how well supported (or not) it could be if one opts to install Linux instead of the supplied W8."
It's an i5 with very few extras so I suspect it'll probably install ok, however you would lose all the integration features between the "dock" OS and the tablet. Since you can get a cheap laptop and cheap tablet seperately for less than this item, that would remove the main USP for this device, which is the integration between the 2.
quote: "Incorrect analogy.
It's more along the lines of let's replace the engine management software and watch us get 20% more BHP and use 10% less fuel from the same engine.
One day you will learn the difference between software and hardware."
You may get +20% power and +10% economy out of the engine, but if the supplied ECU remap also disables ABS and ESP, or can't communicate with the instrument binnacle, then it's still moot whether it was worth it at all. You are losing functionality (the supplied ASUS software/drivers suite that lets the 2 devices integrate) for the sake of replacing the OS, and as mentioned above that would be destroying one of, if not the only, USP for this device. IMO you'd be better off getting a cheap laptop and tablet seperately and pocketing the savings, than buying this to install Linux on, even if the Linux install is painlessly smooth.
Re: lies greed and back stabbing = eve online
quote: "eve is so much like the real world greed back stabbing .. even the mods have alts ..you could say control from above .."
If you have a massive problem with behaviour like that in a game which you can easily avoid, I can only imagine how annoyed you must be at Real Life, which costs a lot more per month and is mandatory to participate in :(
Re: @theodore 17:10
quote: "You are a nasty little child, aren't you?"
Without knowing the exact circumstances or people involved, it would impossible to say whether making light of this death is unforgivable or to be celebrated.
I am going to hold off from either offering sympathy or making jokes until I find out if he was one of the demographics we're allowed to be nasty about (paedo, rapist, wife-beater, lawyer etc.). Until I have that information I can't be sure what the correct reponse is :/
Re: I love the smell of Flame Bait on a friday
quote: "Probably has something to do with the bad taste left in a certain Redmond company's mouth by selling $150m AAPL Preference stock in 2001, which would now be worth over $11Bn."
In the comments of an article extolling the sin of pretending (or assuming) information only available in hindsight should have been obvious at the time, no less. Is that deliberate irony, I wonder? ;)
I feel somewhat vindicated that Alastair also appears to have noticed how Apple continually end up late at the parties (MP3 players, smartphones, tablets, smartwatches) with their "saving grace" being that they've let others make the initial mistakes while rushing to market, and have a more mature market to sound out regarding the killer features that consumers actually want (like more storage aka hard disks, although they weren't even first for that).
Maybe I should just lighten up and let the revisionists rewrite history to let Apple invent all handheld consumer electronics, but it always feels off when I have owned or used some of the preceeding kit (like some properly dire Win95 tablets, that I'd actually rather forget). Apple do it well, but they rarely do it first...
Or Oracle, whose insistence of never certifying their enterprise products on anything resembling current software versions is legendary.
The recommendations for our E-Business Suite product are JRE6 (not 7) and IE 9 (6 months ago it was IE 8).
You try telling the finance department that they are required to use airgapped machines to access their pet system, because it is a massive security risk to allow their normal laptops to do so and thus have exploitable code installed on machines that can browse the internet.
It doesn't end well, usually :'(
Re: Come and get them
quote: "It will be interesting to see if a bit/alt coin ever starts to function as a stable currency. Stability is important. You would not put your savings into a currency that might be worth 20% less when you need it, or worthless by the time you retire."
Currencies aren't necessarily stable, and "savings" (investments) are often in objects whose "value can go down as well as up", aka stocks and shares. Transience and devaluation already exist inside the savings mechanisms available; for instance the face value of French Francs is currently irrelevant, they are a collectors item rather than a currency now, even though 40 years ago they'd have been considered as stable as any other.
Ultimately the "value" of any altcoin is going to be reliant on the confidence in the transaction network, and the perceived utility of it as a payment method. If the transaction network remains stable and secure, and enough vendors accept altcoins, then they are going to retain value, regardless of the actual magnitude of the value (whether 1 DogeCoin is $1 or $1000 is irrelevant, if you have enough to make the transaction).
Re: And ...
quote: "Better a few gold coins in an Oxo tin under the bed, than placing one's wealth in the latest web driven bullshit boom."
Right up until the price of gold tanks, of course, and those few coins in the tin become worth less than the
paper cloth already in your wallet.
The gold standard has come and gone, allowing the price of gold to fluctuate as wildly as any other commodity. Thus gold (and by extension platinum, diamonds, and other "precious" items) are no longer guaranteed to be worth the same in the future as they are now. The UK famously sold off half its gold reserve when gold was at a low, in order to finance the purchase of... foreign currencies.
I'm not saying your experience will be the opposite (buying high and finding the price tanks from $1200/oz. back to $300/oz.) but I also cannot guarantee that it won't fall back to those levels, since nobody uses the gold standard any more there are no real limits on the price variance. Gold is now only worth what someone will pay for it, rather than defining the value of other items :'(
Re: And ...
quote: "The thing is, who other than criminals or speculators really want Bitcoins? If somebody could come up with a legitimate use that can't be fulfilled with existing currencies, surely the answer is to find a way of generating a financial product to fulfil that need. Bitcoins are basically a replacement for diamonds, and there are reasons why diamonds have never become widespread currencies.
Rather than downvote, explain why I'm wrong."
Currency is currency; barter tokens to enable the exchange of goods or services, and a "valid" currency is one accepted by both vendor and purchaser. We already have multiple currencies with variable exchange rates, so why would one more (or less) be an issue? If I am already at liberty to purchase goods for GBP, EUR, USD or CHF, why is BTC somewhow different? Since I live in the UK I'd struggle to find a "legitimate" use for EUR or CHF with local vendors. Doesn't stop them being "legitimate" currencies though, widely accepted (in certain geographic regions) and with published exchange rates for those geographic regions they are not accepted in.
The reason diamonds are not a widespread currency is also fairly obvious; we no longer use gold or silver directly as currency, so the inherent value of the tokens are irrelevant. All that is important is the stated value of the token, so there is little point trying to fit an appropriately sized diamond into something to give it value. If we move back to coins being made of something worth exactly the stated value, then I could see a point for diamonds, but that concept hasn't been used for some time.
Re: Less than generous respawn points ... rehashing whole swathes of levels again and again
quote: "run it in a VM and snapshot it."
Assuming your VM platform of choice allows OpenGL / DirectX passthroughs to the host, of course; since these are games they are likely to want to use hardware acceleration APIs.
I know VMWare Workstation supports DX9 and OpenGL 2.1 for the VMs, however I'm less familiar with other virtualisation products. YMMV getting them to run in a VM without issue ^^;
quote: "Before purchasing any printer I always check the availability of alternative firmware so chip-less cartridges may be used."
Just be careful you are not inadvertently breaking the law; the deliberate circumvention of technical protection mechanisms has been deemed an offense in certain jurisdictions, and it could be argued that firmware that checks for "legitimate" cartridges is a technical protection mechanism, and thus replacing said firmware is a deliberate circumvention.
Not that I don't agree with you, but vaguely worded legislation that is zealously applied by big corporations can be exceedingly painful if it is decided that someone has infringed :(
Re: new products
quote: "With the exception of Dick Tracy, who is still looking forward to strapping a shit phone to their wrist?"
They aren't shit phones though; the intended function of a "smart watch" is a discreet remote Bluetooth display device to go with a Bluetooth audio device (aka headset). For the mooted iWatch (tbc) it would effectively be a way of checking who was calling, or what the notification was, without needing to take the phone out of your pocket / handbag / marsupial pouch to do so.
To that end if (when?) they announce an iWatch, I would expect it to have an accompanying headset for hands-free calling, or to expect the user to be wearing the Apple headphones (with mic) to use as a headset. Without hands-free talking the watch becomes far less useful as a remote display or control of the phone.
A friend has the Pebble, and while I wouldn't spend that much to buy one myself, I can see the use case. It's not something that 100% of existing iPhone owners would genuinely want though, so I suspect Apple are spending their time trying to work out what the killer features are to try and maximise the potential buyers.
quote: "as opposed to continue to honour contracts"
What, unexpected mid-contract price rises? I'm not sure how the mobile phone companies are going to deal with such an unfamiliar concept...
Re: I'm waiting...
quote: "I've always said if you don't have the guts to say what you want to say to someones actual face then you don't have the right to say it whether enshrined in law or otherwise."
Now try and reconcile that with the right to security of person. i.e. if I have the guts to say exactly what I want to say to someone, and they then attack me because of it, who is in the wrong?
Either I have the (protected) right to say it, or they have the right to respond to my provocation with physical violence, which would suggest that I should not have said it in the first place. I'm assuming that the phrase "have the guts to say" is indicative of there being an expectation of violent response to what is being said.
So we have 2 situations; either Party B is committing an offense by violently responding to the speech of Party A, in which case "having the guts" is irrelevant as you would know you are protected by law, or Party B is legally allowed to respond with violence, and thus Party A does not in fact have the right to say it, guts or no guts.
Personally I would go with the first, and thus anyone "having the guts" to say something unsavoury directly to your face, rather than through a keyboard, should also be able to do so with impunity (unless you are some sort of violent criminal scofflaw). The second option is more akin to "I have the right to beat up anyone who says something I do not like", which does not sit well with me, or indeed any of the basic human rights works to date.
Note that as a seasoned internet hard-ass, I'm going to pretend I always have the guts to tell people exactly what I think of them to their face, because it is easy to be a hard-ass on the internet (also I can bench like a billion pounds and am totally a black belt in a thousand different martial arts) ;)
Re: Ok, you've lost me
quote: "How does a cross-licensing deal between Samsung and Google strengthen either's position against Apple? They are only licensed to use each other's patents, not to use said patents against Apple. The licensing deal doesn't change wether or not Apple devices infringe any of the patents. It doesn't change the argument over SEP patents and FRAND. What changes?"
It gives Samsung the opportunity to claim that any disputed functionality is in fact licensed from Google patent X rather than infringing Apple patent Y.
Recent advances in patent litigation have shown that there could be more checks done by the USPTO prior to granting a patent, so it should come as no surprise that there may be several functionality patents that cover very similar areas, held by more than one company. Should any of the disputed functionality be (mostly) covered by an existing (badly checked) Google patent, it may be possible to argue this successfully in court to attempt to get claims made by Apple thrown out.
e.g. if Google have a "swipe to unlock" patent to go with Apple's "slide to unlock" patent, it would be trivial to claim that the functionality present in Samsung devices is based upon the Google process rather than Apple's, and thus completely legitimate.
Note that the actual validity of either patent becomes relevant in this case; it would force the courts to assess the patents on their own merits rather than simply assess whether the functionality matches the patent (and ignore whther the patent should have been granted in the first place). I'd call that a win, personally ;)
quote: "This article is the answer to the commonly heard statement "why would I get an iOS device, you can't do as much with it"."
At least, it is up until some sod develops malware that does the same thing to iOS (aka poses as iTunes to the mobile device and then uploads whatever codebase it likes). If you can puch apps to an iOS device from iTunes, you can pretend to be iTunes and push apps to the device...
Luckily, only corporate customers and affluent people tend to use a lot of iOS devices coupled with Windows PCs, so hopefully malware writers won't be targeting that particular vector now they've managed a proof-of-concept with Windows->Android :)
Re: Oh Titus, please look at the actual casualty figures...
quote: "You do have the luxury of commenting from a country where, to date, the level of Islamic terrorist activity is very low.
I had friends on tubes when Islamic extremists blew up London. Lucky for them they got away with it that time.
This doesn’t seem to have happened for a while."
I have the luxury of living through most of the London Bombings of the last 40 years, mostly perpetrated by that terrorist organisation the IRA (or pIRA, or Real IRA, or whichever copycat it was at the time). And I think the reasoning for "we must collect all the chaff in order to sift out the wheat" is a crock of shit; 100% blanket surveillance of every inch of the UK will still fail to catch some "terrorist" plots.
Also note that over the last half century, we've mostly been terrorised on native soil by Christians (the aformentioned IRA) rather than Muslims.
I'd also invite you to look at the numbers of lives (potentially) saved; feel free to peruse this list of UK terrorist attacks, add up all of the numbers of killed and injured over the last 40-50 years (I couldn't be bothered, sorry), and then compare them to, say workplace deaths and injuries for one year or possibly road (un)safety figures.
Then feel free to use those to justify the money and manpower currently spent on anti-terrorist surveillance, vs using that same spend and manpower to make our roads safer.
I may well be wrong and terrorism might be a credible and likely method of me being killed in the UK. Personally I still think I'm far more likely to die by being rammed off the road by an unobservant driver, but that may be a personal bias based upon perceived threat, rather than actual statistics. I'll be happy to be proven wrong, if UK terrorism attacks are actually far bigger killers than roads or workplace accidents :)
Re: Virtual PC ?
quote: "If you run the "secured email" client in a virtual pc then what ever is displayed may be copied at the host OS level irrespective of ANY security that the client may have."
Deliberately circumventing technical measures implemented to protect content... you may want to double-check just how legal that is in your country ^^;
quote: "Indeed, and I'm wondering why there is such concern about the client copying or passing on the plain text of the e-mail."
It's an attempt to make Snapchat for email. I think Snapchat shows you just how secure that is in practise ^^;
- Bugger the jetpack, where's my 21st-century Psion?
- Something for the Weekend, Sir? Why can’t I walk past Maplin without buying stuff I don’t need?
- Review 'Mommy got me an UltraVibe Pleasure 2000 for Xmas!' South Park: Stick of Truth
- The land of Milk and Sammy: Free music app touted by Samsung
- Privacy warriors lob sueball at Facebook buyout of WhatsApp