4340 posts • joined 31 May 2010
For the record, the conversation about this article went something like this:
Trevor: "Hey Adam, you're the Microsoft guy that uses all the Microsoft with added Microsoft, eh?"
Trevor: "I don't think we really talk all that much about enterprise support of smartphones; can you do a comparison of your Win Phone widgety tilewhatsit against the iPhone?"
It seriously was just an idea that was pulled from the ether. No particular reason, other than "this is something Adam knows stuff about and is qualified to write about and there's no way I'm spending my money on buying one of those wretched things, so +++Adam".
I think it's great that religion is being pushed out of xmas. Avarice and naked capitalism aren't all that much better, but I'm down with almost anything that reduces the influence and reach of authoritarian xenophobic moral absolutists. Down with that sort of thing.
Personally, I celebrate the solstice. Because science.
They're actually pretty different. But that, good sir, is another article entirely...
Keep an eye out!
Re: Cloud OS
Disagree entirely. You aren't even remotely understanding Google's business model. Google cares nothing about you putting your data in their datacenter. Google Mail, Google Docs and all such things are nothing more than offerings to get you addicted to the cloud. Google doesn't care if you use Google Docs or LibreOffice's upcoming SaaS offering. They don't care if you use Chrome or Firefox. They only care that you do your work online, not locally.
Would Google prefer that you use Chrome over Firefox? Sure. But it's really no skin off their nose if you don't. Would they like to datamine your documents and e-mail? Sure, but it's really no skin off their nose if they can't.
Ultimately, they make their money through your generalized addiction to the net. No on element - email, document, browsing, etc - is enough for them to form a complete picture of an individual. Get the person hooked on thinking of "the computer" as "the network" and "the browser" as "the gateway to my apps and information", however, and suddenly you own that user.
Google are everywhere. They have trackers and Analytics and what-have-you on virtually every site on the internet. Amazon-hosted SaaS app? Awesome! They're probably using Google Analytics.
The only real competitor Google has is Microsoft. Microsoft want to own your data. More importantly, Microsoft want to keep Google out. Microsoft wants to mine your data and they don't want to let Google do so.
So wherever Microsoft can capture data, a user, a website, what-have-you it disappears from Google's Giant Map Of All Of Humanity. That's A Bad Thing as far as Google is concerned. So Google needs to break Microsoft. More importantly, they need to break people from Microsoft.
That means getting them off Windows and off Office and off IE. Google will use any and ever tool to do so. ChromsOS, Android, Chrome, Firefox, FirefoxOS, Libre Office, Google Docs...it doesn't matter. What matters is killing that Redmondian Black Hole that Google can't extract data from. Nobody else is really a threat, (well, Facebook...but they are already on the "rapid decline" portion of the exercise,) because everyone else plays ball.
Next up: breaking into China...
Re: all well and good in theory
Not really. It always takes Microsoft 3 tries. The first try is ME/Vista/Windows 8. The second try is mostly workable, sort of. The third try is amazing.
Then they "reorganise", decide they need to tear up every single one of their perfectly functional products, piss off their entire user base, burn their partners, create incomprehensible UIs, make their licensing even more draconian and push out another 1.0 turd.
Your alternatives are: Oracle ('nuff said), Apple (fucks given about enterprise = 0), Google (the NSA wishes they were this intrusive), Amazon (run at a loss to capture market share then turn the knobs until long after their screams for mercy have faded into a background din), VMware (dude, where's my strategy?), or Open Source (all right, we have two hands, a GPS and a Sherpa...where's our ASCII?).
HA HA, BUSINESS!
Re: Cloud OS
All right, let me try to clear this up:
Google's Chrome OS is about running endpoint software applications in a browser. This is mostly so that they can be run as cloudy SaaS apps, but far more importantly so that the application is standards-based and can run on any operating system. ChromeOS's sole purpose is to break the requirement for Windows on the endpoint.
ChromeOS can run an application locally or it can run it from anywhere on the internet, but at the end of the day it is just Linux with a browser on it.
CloudOS is about running backend applications and entire operating systems anywhere you want. Locally, at a service provider, on the Azure cloud. The entire purpose is to lock you into Microsoft's ecosystem so you have to pay Microsoft rental fees to access your own data forever. Your applications can be anything - and they don't have a requirement for any form of user interface - and they can run anywhere.
CloudOS is viewed as the back-end that would power the kinds of SaaSy apps that google wants us all to become addicted to with ChromeOS. Microsoft recognizes that they have lost their endpoint monopoly and are thus seeking a backend monopoly to make up for it.
Google are trying to free us from dependence on any one operating system, or even browser (thus why they fund Mozilla.) If we feel like we have choice as long as we use standards-based web apps then we'll use standards-based web apps! People like to feel they have choice. Anything on the web, Google can track it, monitor it and advertise against it. Google wins.
Microsoft have figured out that there is more money in holding your data hostage than there ever was in holding your endpoint OS and UI hostage. (Thought they'll give that a go, too, for as long as they possibly can.) Hold someone's endpoint or UI hostage and they'll install something like Classic Shell or uBit Menu. Damned people and their damned choice. Had to control.
Hold your data hostage and they'll pay you and pay you and pay you and pay you. If you hold their data you hold their entire business. Once you have them all by the balls you can then start turning the knobs, one at a time. Works for Oracle, Cisco, EMC...
Re: A Chain is only as Strong as it's Weakest Link
RAT doesn't make Metro go away, you arrogant twatdangle. It just forces you to install that utter turd on your local system.
As for your "if you don't use PowerShell for administration you aren't a competent sysadmin" get fucked.
Well said. Completely agree. Though Windows 7 needs Classic Shell to get the up arrow back, and you need to disable Snap, because Snap is just-sub-Microsoft-Licensing-class evil in software form.
Re: Cloud OS
I...I don't even know where to begin. I am going to need a lot of sleep before I can even begin to figure out how you could conflate the two concepts. Also: there's no S in my name.
I spent at least half the article taking the piss out of Microsoft, and you read that as an advert? Check your bias at the door, please...
Re: A Chain is only as Strong as it's Weakest Link
I agree, there is a critical importance to the stability of the underlying OS. Which is why Windows is such a damned fine contender.
Oh, you still think it's a crashy, security nightmare? Sorry, but 10 years ago called, they want their prejudice back. You've a lot to learn. Far more than I'm willing to type out in the comment section here.
Piss on Microsoft for a great many things - gods know I do - but Server 2012 R2 is a damned fine, damned stable operating system. The core install (or the Hyper-V server variant) are both solid offerings. Linux, Unix and so forth have their own issues. When you talk about the "core" of the OS, they are pretty close to equal.
Now, would I prefer a hypervisor based on Wind River or QNX? Sure as hell. Do I believe for a second that Xen or KVM are any better than Hyper-V in the real world? Hell no. I could - at the moment, and not for much longer - be convinced VMware is more stable and secure.
I think you've a lot to learn about Windows Server, how modular it is, how secure it is and - mostly, from your post - how far it's come since your prejudices were formed. It might well be the basis of an interesting article.
Re: End Game
Yes...and no. Microsoft is still addicted to the endpoint. They want their OS everywhere. Microsoft on your lightbulb! (Assuming they can convince someone to cram 8GB of RAM into the damned thing.)
The ticket here is to get people addicted to renting. Microsoft views that ability for individuals and businesses to "sweat their assets" in times of financial downturn as a serious problem. During a financial downturn is when Microsoft needs those steady, ticking revenues the most!
The goal isn't to get the OS off the endpoint, or the server. The goal is to get you on a subscription where you pay every month for the right to use that endpoint/server, with your data as the held hostage to ensure that you'll fire half your staff before you'd ever consider not paying your Microsoft subscription.
In Microsoft's world you can sweat the wetware, but by $deity don't sweat the software.
US centric, much?
The Aussie writer says "the day after thanksgiving", meaning the day after American thanksgiving, despite the fact that the real thanksgiving is celebrated over a month earlier.
Nice to see the USA has so utterly taken over the culture and thoughts of even Australians that they cannot separate one nation's (false and at the wrong time) observance of a holiday from the entire rest of the world.
Re: If you troll your patents..
Indeed. Sympathy felt for Apple is negative. Glee. I feel glee.
Maybe if they become target of enough patent trolls, Apple will stop being one themselves and start pushing for reforms too.
Re: hit the thing with a semi
I say nothing!
Re: How does it fare
That thing is a tank. Seriously, a tank. You could hit the thing with a semi and it would probably still work.
To put this in context: it is only slightly longer than your average 4-bas NAS and less wide. It has less total volume than an HP microserver and yet the damned thing weighs as much as a 3U 1500VA APC UPS. Those drives are protected. Go ahead and drop a brick building on it. It'll cope.
Re: How does it fare
That is part of what we tried to simulate. The unit basically had white-hot coals underneath it, burning "building" all around it (including on top) and ultimately ended up buried in very hot coals for 15 minutes before we decided to put it out.
Thus I'd say "it handled having a burning building on top of it rather well."
Your details have been noted, citizen.
Re: I was expecting ...
We get paid...but it was an "own initiative" type thing, so a lot of it was on us. It was a blast, so I've no complaints...but it does put a bit of a cap on expenses when a large chunk is from your own pocket. That said, learning new things makes us better at this next time, so suggestions are always welcome.
We'll look into the fire-resistant cables next time, however, I don't think that will help the external power supply. Go watch the video again, you'll see the PSU burning up not long after the thing is put into the fire. Pretty sure that kills any attempt at SNMP gathering, no matter which cable we use.
That is where get into the remote temperature probes. Which is where the real money comes in. Near as i can tell a probe good to 800c would probably have run us more than the entire rest of the event combined...
Re: I was expecting ...
Uh...it was on fire. And the power supply went up in seconds. We burned the unit for 20 minutes and then doused it in cold water for 20 minutes. The unit was up for less than 60 seconds. It seemed somewhat anti-climatic to post that. (For the record, we didn't even see the disks hit 55 before the power went.)
Looked into probes that could be used for this purpose. They were way beyond our budget. (As it is we lost several hundred making this video; there's no way we'll get paid enough to cover our time and materials.) So...yeah. Physics.
I don't know about lightning strike-levels, but the power did light up really pretty-like doing that sparky thing whilst we were busy burning it. Suspect the electronics inside got a good jolt.
Re: by bell and by book next?
Claims the same extreme waterproofing and seems to meet the claims. They cost about as much as your average 4-bay NAS would; not bad, considering. With the new 6TB drives coming out...
So, I'm missing something here, Hooksie. Call it a misinterpretation.
Let's pick your comment apart some, shall we?
This says Trevor. I'm going to assume it's directed at me. I don't see any other Trevors around.
"I think that very fair comment was directed at The Register."
No, it's really not. There's no evidence presented. Just mud flinging from someone with some bent feelers.
"you didn't write the article did you?"
Um, actually, I'd have to check on that...nope, this is one of Jasper Hamill's. He's a nice chap, by the way. Head glued on straight, sharp as a tack. I think you'd like him. Unless, you know, you're crazy. I think you'd have to be crazy not to like the guy.
"You have s fair mind"
I'm going to presume that the stray "s" is supposed to be an "a". They're close together on the keyboard, that could be a typo. I am unsure what "a fair mind" is, but I am going to choose to believe you mean that I am fair and objective. I'll take that as a compliment, I put a crazy amount of effort into this.
"so you would be barred from writing for this site."
Wait...what? You've completely lost me here. (And we were getting along so well!) You see, I think you're trying to say two things here. First, that The Register would not let me write for them. Secondly, that The Register would not hire someone fair, objective and intelligent to write for them.
Okay, let's address that in two parts.
1) I have been writing for The Register for almost 4 years. While I'm sure there are some there who are not exactly fond of me, I'm going to go with "they'll let chumps like me scratch aimlessly at the walls and push publish."
2) The Register loves fair, objective and intelligent people. While I personally do - and have, loudly - dispute the objectivity (or fairness) of some writers as relates to certain topics, there is absolutely no form of downward editorial control from on high saying "believe this, write this, act in this fashion."
The mere fact that I can mix it up with other writers - even editors - about things should prove the diversity of opinion encouraged. I get into it with other writers about everything. From the lobotomy-friendly climate denying that some choose to engage in to the ultra-capitalist diminution of human beings into "capital resources" to who should be the next CEO for Microsoft. (Nadella or bust!)
That's part and parcel of being a good news organization. Differing opinions are allowed. No "party line" exists. And nobody is a shill for any company.
I have written about companies I am involved with. When I do so, I post a disclaimer about that. Examples are here and here. Am I a shill now? How about if I told you that the about page on my personal website contains a disclaimer section that is up front about any possible sources of bias that might affect my writing? Am I still a shill?
I think you should read up some on the concept of brand tribalism. It is entirely possible that your concept of who is (and is not) a shill is being influenced by your own personal preferences regarding brands/companies/products and so forth.
No writer is perfectly objective. Not me, not other El Reg writers, no one. But we try, damn it. If we are biased by anything it is all of the preconceived notions and prejudices that are encompassed within "a lifetime's worth of personal experiences". We are not shills because The Register gets paid to advertise on the web pages or other such silly nonsense. As writers, we're insulated from that crap by the excellent sales team that works at The Register.
If you want an example of this you need look no further than myself. Microsoft advertises with The Register on a regular basis. I'm sure you've seen the ads by now. I talk smack about them all the time and they deserve to have smack talked about them because they make stupid mistakes and piss off their customers, partners, employees and investors alike.
I also - just by the by - talk smack and take the piss out of anyone and everyone else too. Because, you see, I write for The Register.
...and we bite the hand that feeds IT.
Re: reason d'etre ...
Did...did you just say I write what big corporate want me to write? For example, Microsoft?
You're a tool. Demonstrably.
I disagree. I've seen some advertising that's done head-to-head comparisons and highlighted independent reviews. I've seen companies do this well...and companies fail.
Microsoft did not do it well in these ads. They are less "vicious attack ads" than the Scroogle set, but they still are not doing the "here's our competitors, here's us, you decide" trick quite right.
That's the thing. I've seen advertisements where A is openly shown against B and pointing done to independent reviews that can back up what was just shown. That is the sort of advertisement that truly gets my respect. They are rare as hen's teeth, but they happen.
Microsoft looks like they're trying to get there. Sort of. For that, they get a little bit of respect. But...they can't quite seem to make it. Like everything Microsoft's advertising group does they miss the mark and just come off as awkward.
For me, when I see a vendor putting their product up against a competitor and saying "here's where we're better" I know what they honestly think are the winning features. Even in the terrible Microsoft ads. It gives me a clearer view on where that company sees themselves differentiating than anything else they could run in that ad slot.
I don't sanction "attack ads." But I deeply respect honest comparisons.
Edited to add: also, do you know how hard the concept of "unbiased" reviews is? I make a living to them and you lot tear me a new arsehole regularly when I dare say something nice about a product/company you hate or dare criticise a product/company you love. No matter how unbiased the review (or the reviewer) the biases of the viewer will always colour perception.
Surface, for business, is worthless too.
For business use I need something with a real keyboard that will give me at least 12 hours of RDP over WiFi and/or word processor usage. I see little-to-no business benefit from fondleslabs, certainly I see none over the Galaxy Note 2 I carry around with me everywhere.
If I were hot and bothered about being able to paw at some glass like a primitive for work purposes, I would use an iPad. It has rather more applications and a decent office package, at least as far as "use by glass-pawing primitives" goes.
Fondleslabs are inherently content consumption devices. At which point one is pretty much as good as the next, with the app ecosystem making the real world difference. Surface is a fondleslab with a terrible ecosystem and it's a damned shitty attempt to replace a netbook/ultrabook.
I think, for business use, I'll stick with my Lenovo x230 and the 18 hours of RDP I get out of it with both batteries in. For everything else, there's my Note 2.
Re: @Trevor Pott
All social mores evolve. This is one I happen to believe serves no purpose in the modern world.
The internet arrived and the world changed. Now people research their purchases before making them. You are either ready to deal with that reality or you aren't. Dealing with it means being able to stand up to both direct and indirect comparison.
You'll win on some aspects and lose on others. It's in acknowledging that and saying "no one size fits all, but we think we have the best balance of price/features/support/etc for our target market" that you earn my respect.
I recognize that my views may not be mainstream on this, but they are carefully reasoned and unlikely to change if the only rationale presented is repeated assertion of extant convention.
Some people take that view. I prefer to see head-to-head comparisons. Hear claims that can be challenged. If you believe in your product, then stand by it! If you believe you're better than the next guy, say why and defend that position!
I simply don't believe in the totally arbitrary social rules of "don't mention the competition". If you have a comparison to make, make it, make it well and stand by it. Not that Microsoft did a particularly good job, but in my opinion they raised valid points worth considering.
Commerce isn't a gentleman's game. It's a fight to the death. If you think I should give you my favour over the next guy, show me why.
This isn't to say your view is invalid. It is just representative, I think, of a different time. I am going to do research on all products available. Marketing by saying "here are the things to care about in our product" isn't really helping me. Telling me "here's why we're better than the other guys" cuts to the threat of the matter and speeds my decision making quite a bit.
Better yet, get your product in front of multiple independent types to do comparisons and tell me the results - good and bad - so that I can decide for myself, and do it as quickly and efficiently as possible.
I'm just too busy for the game of parsing mealy-mouthed platitudes from multiple vendors, sorting through the noise and comparing apples to footballs. I think successful marketing to today's busy people would provide comparisons as a service.
Truth be told, however, I'd give anything to go back to an era where things were slower and everything was less cut-throat...
Re: Fish tanks on the internet...
Cheers. I'll reach out to them and see if perhaps my ideas and their technology can be combined!
A lot of IoT devices will be designed badly and be a terrible idea that will lead to all sorts of problems. No question. I've written about that before.
Some will be so simply they can't be "hacked" in the sense you're thinking about.
Others will indeed be fully fledged, properly designed, well defended computers in their own right that are low power enough to live off ambient energy. Today you need to be little more than a sensor, a radio and some minimalistic logic to be a backscatter device. Two years form now expect full-bore ARM devices to live in that category.
Hell, even the "dumb sensors" are often "smart" enough to have IPv6 tunneling that they then don't report to a computer on your LAN, they report directly to the cloud. Certainly other "internet of things" devices such as the internet-connected smoke detectors don't report in any way to a local server or PC. They just find network access and report themselves to a SaaS app hosted on Amazon.
You are still thinking like and edge-defending IPv4 sysadmin, sir. You are dating yourself and demonstrating that you don't really understand what IPv6 is going to "enable"* or how it will completely change our networks - and our lives - irreparably.
*you'll note that I'm not exactly in the camp of "IPv6 is a good thing" specifically because of what IPv6 "enables". It's great if you're an ivory tower douchepopsicle with an unlimited budget, but the ramifications for end users and SMBs were not only not thought through, they were actively dismissed with extreme prejudice when brought up.
As is typical for ivory tower douchepopsicles, the response of IPv6 designers and evangelists is that end users simply need to get better at network security, understand IT more and spend more and more money on security product, router, etc. There is a reality disconnect there that is going to be a goddamned nightmare to deal with as the Internet of Things explodes and there is a reason I'm getting out of IT before that proverbial encounters the circulation device.
We will all be paying dearly for the arrogance and shortsightedness of IPv6 designers for the two generations, at least. But shhhhhh. Don't talk about it. Otherwise people will call you names on Twitter.
Re: What is with all the luddites
Re: What is with all the luddites
"Are you seriously suggesting it hasn't changed the world?"
The internet changed the world. It didn't change people. So, like any tool, it has been used for good and for evil. More evil than good, of late...and likely that will be the way of things in the future. That's human nature.
"As for 'goodness and freedom', I was a big promoter of the upside potential and I think time has proven me correct in that."
No, it hasn't. It's proven the opposite.
"Rather than pretending you can escape the inescapable you may better advance your own cause by staying to make sure that sanity prevails and we don't end up with Big Brother prosecuting thought-crime before the fact."
Bullshit. Authoritarians cannot be stopped. Almost all living people in the first world simply haven't known true dictatorship and thus must experience it again before they realize that sacrifice and vigilance are necessary to defend against it. Humanity will have another very dark time ahead of it before we realize - for a generation or two - that freedom is more important than security. Anyone who stands up to those seeking to put the hoi polloi under their thumb will be crushed. There's not a goddamned thing I can do to stop it. Not one.
"In the next fifty years we could be living in heaven or living in hell. Our leaders are currently voting for hell. Unless we counter with a very strong vote for heaven, we will be leaving a disastrous legacy to our grandchildren. You can't vote if you leave the system."
Heaven and hell don't exist. My contribution was to not have children. I know what's coming and I won't bring another generation into that future. No amount of "voting" will alter the course of our society.
"I am not sure that privacy as we know it is a viable notion going forward."
Hence my middle finger in the air at society in general and a planned retreat from the rest of the world.
"The only viable response to privacy concerns long term has to be political and social as well as technological. To respond as a part of the body politic you have to remain a part of the body politic. Dropping out just to protect yourself is pointless."
You're a doe-eyed fool wearing rose-tinted glasses. Listen to me very carefully here: the only way that meaningful change will occur is if a lot of people die. By this I mean hundreds of millions. Humanity will not rethink it's NIMBYist, authoritarian tendencies unless we go through the looking glass one more time.
Even that will only waken one, maybe two generations to the delicate balance before we careen once more into the abyss.
All of human history is our ancestors learning the same lessons over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over...
Our descendants will not be any different; and in fact, we ourselves are the same.
Over 95% of Americans support gun laws banning fully automatic weapons, requiring background checks to get weapons and so on. Do you see a trampling hoard of movement in that direction? Goddamn it man these people almost put Sarah Palin a heartbeat away from personal responsibility for thousands of nuclear weapons.
No amount of hope, cheer, goodwill or happy thoughts will change the wealth gap, the power gap, the overwhelming influence of the military industrial complex or the burning need of those who have power to do everything humanly - or inhumanly - possible to ensure that under no circumstances they stand even the remotest risk of losing that power. Uncontrolled, unmonitored people are a risk to the power of those who currently have it. The gap between "them" and "us" is so vast that it cannot be bridged. We've already lost, fellow peasant, you're just stupid enough to believe you're still free.
When they push too far - and I think that's twenty years out, yet - the revolt will be swift, it will be brutal, and it will be unbelievably, overwhelmingly bloody. A social upheaval and civilian massacre the likes of which this world has never seen. Entire nations will lay in ruins, their citizenry shredded and their economies ruined for lack of warm bodies to push the buttons and make the system go.
Entire fields of knowledge and learning will be lost. Our society will be set back a generation, maybe more. Nothing we can do will prevent this. Nothing we do can even mitigate the carnage that is to come.
If you want to contribute usefully to society then dedicate yourself to the preservation of knowledge. All knowledge. Recognize the future for what it is and help plan for the aftermath. I will never have the resources to build a true archive of knowledge - though I fund what I can.
Instead, I seek to recuse myself from this increasingly intrusive and depressingly hateful society so that I might write. I will leave a legacy only through my books. Those books will hopefully be ready by future generations and carry with them a message of hope. Of ideas and ideals that were forgotten, suppressed, pushed to one side in a mad dash for personal security and uneclipsable power.
The knowledge I will preserve is that of decency towards your fellow beings, of doing the right thing, even when it does not benefit you. Of working for the future even when the present cannot be saved. These are concepts that I think will be hard for the survivors of the coming wars to pass to their children.
A bitter, broken people have little use for concepts such as inclusiveness, acceptance and tolerance. People look inward after those events. They ostracize an they cast about for someone - anyone to blame. If it is an identifiable group/nation/race/whatever...so much the better.
I can't stop the future. But maybe I can pass down through the generations what little good ours had discovered. That is all I can do, and I'll let nothing stop me from doing so.
Re: What is with all the luddites
You sound like one of those la-la fairies who said the internet would change the world and be nothing be goodness and freedom.
I'd tell you how wrong you are, but the salt shaker is bugged.
Frankly, the Internet of Things *is* avoidable. It's called moving into the middle of nowhere and going off grid. I plan to. Every article I write, every conference I attend, every dollar I make is a step towards that goal. My life is my own. If the succeeding generations - or others members of mine own - want to give up their privacy in exchange for...what, exactly?...they can go right ahead.
Re: Where can I buy such cheap Bluetooth sensors, in my case a mains energy monitor ?
Follow some of the links in the article! One of them leads you here: http://www.digikey.com/us/en/techzone/wireless/resources/articles/comparing-low-power-wireless.html, which is DigiKey. This has a list of information about the different types of wireless gear available...and DigiKey sells it all.
The lowest of the low-powered Bluetooth and WiFi stuff is currently made by Broadcom.
Re: Tech-fetishism meets control freakery meets Big Brother
Uhhhh, no. You're absolutely wrong. The insurance company will provide you with a pre-canned device that simply uses DHCP internally (and/or IPv6) and then sends it's information out to the cloud. There would *be* no user configurable anything. Just like OnStar.
Any information you, the user, get about the sensors would be through the insurance company's cloud portal. In fact, the insurance company would probably just be reselling/rebadging software/hardware made by a Silicon Valley IoT startup.
Did you miss the past twenty years of consumer electronics development, design and dispersal? TiVo. Spycam TVs. Wifi Routers. ADSL modems. Security systems and cameras. OnStar. And on and on and on and on...
Re: Fish tanks on the internet...
I know others do it. I'd love to create something simple, reproducible and maybe even commercialisable. If you know who did your tanks, I'd love a chance to chat with 'em..
Re: Tumble Drying
I have, actually. Several times, as a matter of fact. I also know that it has descendents and responses in which numerous people have looked at how to mitigate and even take advantage of the stresses placed upon a grid by wind power.
It is Watts-like deniers and NIMBYs who generally wield that paper (and several others) and say "we should not install Wind power!" They also snub their noses and decry any attempts to enter into evidence other papers that show we actually can cope with wind power just fine, with only minor alterations to our existing grid...not even needing a smart grid to do it.
I hold those people in unbelievable contempt. Right up there with the "fission is bad because radiation" slanted-forhead crowd. Science isn't waving around one paper and screaming for a halt to progress. It is a process of learning, understanding and a continual search for knowledge and the truth.
So if, based on your comment, I lumped you in with the drooling idiot deniers of the world, terribly sorry. If I was correct in my snap assessment, well...sorry retracted.
Re: insurers do this
Zen comes from watching the fish swim about happily. Not from fighting with hoses and buckets and watchign the fish flail about in a traumatised fashion because WTF BUCKET OF WATER ON MY HEAD.
Re: Benefits of IoT
Before it was "a solved problem" was it "just for nerds"?
I'm curious, at what point does fear of the unholy moral turpitude brought about by the Internet of Things give way to the realisation that this is not the future come to change us but a reality we are in the midst of living today?
Re: Tumble Drying
Let me guess, you sup tea with Anthony Watt?
Re: "coast" for a decade, growing profits year over year by 15%
From your keyboard manipulating digits to the Redmondian ether, sir. Amen.
Re: People are not nearly as locked in to iOS and Android as the author believes
Um, where the fuck have you been for the past ten years?!?!
People who buy a new laptop/PC/etc for reasons other than "it died" are in the extreme minority and have been for at least ten years.
You sound like you are morally offended by the concepts under discussion - "Use it a tool, more than a toy/passive entertainment device like most people. If you find a better tool that makes you more productive, you're going to buy, even if there are some added costs to replace a few hundred dollars worth of apps." - rather than actually looking at proven purchasing behaviors of consumers and businesses alike over the past few decades.
You, personally may lack loyalty or change resistance. The market as a whole does not...and it is price sensitive enough that - with the exception of large enterprises and governments - "a few hundred bucks worth of apps" per node is more than enough to prevent change, even in a business.
Re: Isn't Bill Gates Microsoft's Steve Jobs?
Aye...and he would run that company right into the fucking ground if he took over today.
I figured some of the bigger ones had to be doing it, but I couldn't find links to any of it. Thought that article about Facebook's cold storage came out after I wrote this...
Re: Fucking snipers!
Well, we'll talk like that in a private Skype channel, or over teamspeak/xfire/what-have-you. I don't really do public voice channels much.
But I would sure get my panties in a bunch if an invite-only opt-in channel established for use only by my clan were monitored for foul language by the thought police.
- Just TWO climate committee MPs contradict IPCC: The two with SCIENCE degrees
- 14 antivirus apps found to have security problems
- Apple winks at parents: C'mon, get your kid a tweaked Macbook Pro
- Feature Scotland's BIG question: Will independence cost me my broadband?
- Driverless car SQUADRONS to hit Britain in 2015