152 posts • joined 26 Oct 2010
Re: If this article was by Lewis Page…
Shit! You're right. My bad.
If this article was by Lewis Page…
…he’d have spent the whole article arguing that there are no goats.
Odd that in an announcement awash with 'meh', the super-sim didn't get mentioned. This is the one genuinely interesting release. It could be amazing but, as others have pointed out, it will need policing in order to ensure that smaller carriers get a fair bite of the cherry.
It seems very odd to me that I can go online and order a new computer, or download software, but to change service provider I need to toddle off to a shop to purchase a tiny sliver of plastic that then needs to be inserted into my device. Since the vital bit of the sim is just software, surely it makes more sense that I should be able to just click and change without leaving my chair?
I'm amazed that no one did this sooner.
Oh, I see what you mean. I think that that is probably a separate issue. I have friends who are both female and programmers - but they’re in the minority. My wife, an engineer, would probably say that it’s down to cultural conditioning - and that it will take a long time for the problem to be fixed. I can’t help wondering if it isn’t just that they’ve got more interesting things to be cracking on with…
@Yet Another Anonymous coward
No, no, you miss my point - and, in any case, it doesn't really apply in these slightly more enlightened times when an education is available to all without any particular battle. Anyone these days can get access to a degree in software engineering (whether they can get a job afterward is another kettle of fish entirely, sadly).
My point is that in the past, when an education of any kind was really only the preserve of men (as in some less enlightened countries today), women had to fight for their skills, they may even have had to teach themselves.
Today everyone (in the West, at least) can stand on the shoulders of giants. You. Me. Everyone. Where that kind of education for all is not available then the disenfranchised have to make their own giants from scratch. And, just sometimes, their giants end up being a little bit taller. A little bit better.
I have an idea that women have been visionary in many fields (including computing) partly because of sexism*. Because women were largely ignored and mostly not encouraged by the male dominated establishment, there were no giants on whose shoulders they could stand. On the other hand, there was little dogma and established opinion to hold them back - they thought freely and radically because they had no choice. It was learn it yourself, do it yourself, or don’t do it at all.
I am very thankful for the likes of Ada Lovelace, Beatrice Shilling, Florence Nightingale - women who did their own thing, regardless of whether or not they were ‘allowed’ to, and without whom the world would be an immeasurably poorer place.
*which isn’t to argue that sexism is a good thing, to be encouraged. Sexism is vile and should be consigned to the bin of history - and we’ll find the silver from the lining of this dark cloud elsewhere.
Tikka Masala? Bland, sloppy and disconcertingly sugary? Not spicy enough?
I'd rather have a vindaloo. Or a V70. And I'd imagine that the effects of shitting either would be similar - arse buggeringly painful.
It’s a poor analogy because I own the house and its contents, and its my contents that I’m trying to protect.
A better analogy would be if I owned a park, and I want people to come and visit (for free, because I’m a generous and caring kind of chap). In the park I have various amenities. I have swings, and slides, a duck pond, grass for picnicing on, loos and storage for any bags that visitors don’t want to lug around all day. Does it make more sense for me to
a) provide locks for the loos and the storage (areas where security is required)?
b) in addition put locks on the swings, the slide, the duck pond and so forth as well?
In the case of a) my visitors benefit, and the cost to me is kept reasonable. In the case of b) the cost is astronomical and it’s a perfect bloody nuisance.
Security where security is required (and make it bloody tough). No security everywhere else.
I’m not sure that I do agree with the idea of ‘always on’ security - that creates a two layer network, those who can afford to buy certificates, and those who can’t. Those who can’t may end up being marginalised and the only people who will benefit are Verisign, Thawte, GoDaddy and so forth.
Sure, security is required wherever personal details and banking information is involved - but everywhere else, not so much. If I just want to browse El Reg and have a chuckle at the articles, what benefit does a secure connection offer me?
Wow. There's just too much going on in this one article (unlike, just guessing, the event itself which will likely be "here ya go - new iPads. Oh. And new OSX")
Firstly, boo hoo - is that sour grapes Reg? "Pet hacks", "Invitation lost in post"? Does El Reg really imagine that it can troll with impunity? The thing is, I'd bet (a bet partly based on hope, I admit) that Apple can take a critical review, and honest reporting of issues like bendgate. What it probably feels that it can manage without are the snide headlines and sometimes (not always) biased and deliberately bating articles. If Reg articles were unfailingly accurate and unbiased I'd bet your invitation would be in your grubby ink stained paws right now.
Secondly, let's just get this out of the way right now. Yes, it will bend. The tablet I'm keying this on right now is thicker than any iPad - and guess what? This will bend too. The thing is, I'm not stupid enough to bend it. So, unless you're 'a bit special' and your medication has run out, let's just take it as read that you can break whatever newness is coming out, and then don't. Evidence will not be necessary.
Re: Microsoft simply cannot afford this to happen
Why is it that Microsoft gets stick for releasing a beta of Windows containing debug and diagnostic code that is necessarily privacy unfriendly (and which they have gone out of their way not to hide - they've clearly documented the fact)?
Would you rather the Microsoft didn't do a public beta, and risk having serious problems with the final version of Windows 10? Public betas don't get rid of all bugs but, done properly, they can help. And it seems to me that Microsoft really does want this to be the best Windows ever.
If you have a problem with beta software, if you don't want to pay the pre-release price, then don't install it - install Windows 7 instead*.
The really weird thing is that I'd be prepared to bet that at least 90% of commentards here have a Facebook account and use it everyday - without once considering the very real security and privacy implications. But (ug) Facebook okay. Me like Facebook. It free. It haz pikchurz ov Fluffeh Kittehz, Me like Google. It free. (grawh) Me hate Microsoft. Me hate Apple. Them makez me pay moneh. Them bad. My brane hurtz.
*or <insert release version of an OS of your choice>.
Re: Calm The F**k Down!
Yeah. What Amorous Cowherder said.
This is development software. Shit, if I was making a pre-release OS available widely I'd want to put stuff like this in too. Let's face it, most users aren't capable of logging a bug report much more accurate than 'Boo Hoo, it's not working'. They certainly aren't up to telling the poor developer what they were doing before it stopped working so that the problem can be replicated. Quite apart from Microsoft's stated reasons of improving autocorrect and so forth, this could be a real boon in reproducing errors.
As long as they remove it from the final shipping version then I'm okay with this. But, as stated, beta users might want to refrain from internet banking or browsing for pictures of naked ladies with this release.
Re: Tries to kill?
Yup. I know. I was being flippant. I thought the clue might be that I was a) poking fun at the misleading headline and b) suggesting that The Register would tone down its language at the request of Apple. As any fule no, <flippancy> The Register only tones down the rhetoric for Microsoft </flippancy>
Re: Will you make up your mind.
Only a fool would claim that <insert name of machine here> can’t get viruses. But you do need to understand the difference between a virus, a worm and a trojan. A virus is something that you get from unprotected sex, a worm is something that a nerd* might try to have sex with (if ever lucky enough to snare a partner), and a trojan is something that our trans-atlantic chums like to put on their worms in order to protect themselves from a virus.
*geeks, of course, are always tremendously well endowed and never go into battle with anything less than a boa-constrictor.
**and yes, I do know what the difference is - but I suddenly caught a nasty malaise, and I realised that I can’t be bothered.
Tries to kill?
Did the attempt fail? I think el Reg owes it to the loyal readers to tell us the truth, and not hide behind whatever gagging order might have been slapped on it by the Cupertinan overlords…
…but there's no need to encrypt your devices. If you've done nothing wrong you have nothing to fear…
Oh, and would you mind leaving your door unlocked? Only criminals need security.
This is the most interesting malware in ages - unless I’ve misunderstood how it works. If it works at the hardware / firmware level then no amount of patching is going to fix it. Would it be possible, I wonder, for an operating system to sandbox all USB activity, such that the device (when connected) has to be approved by the User?
“Are you sure that you want to use this USB Storage device”, “Are you sure that you want to use this Keyboard”. It would get bloody tiresome, very quickly, but it would help to ensure that a hacked USB device of one type couldn’t masquerade as an entirely different USB device.
This is an exploit that has the potential to affect any OS on any computer with USB (and yes, that includes iOS devices, which only appear not to have a USB socket) - I feel nervous about plugging even box-fresh USB kit into my computer already.
I like Peter Capaldi - and I like some of the concepts in ‘New’ Who. I liked the Blink concept. I liked the Listen concept. I thought the crack in the wall was an awesome concept. But what I really want from Doctor Who is less silliness and more full-on buttock-tightening terror. I want to be scared, and cowering, behind the sofa.
But, as my wife points out, what will scare the willies out of a mid-forties curmudgeon might be overkill for the core child audience.
Re: Look! Justin Bieber has a new zit!
No, I don't work for Apple. But I do make stuff. I'm not an accountant. I'm not a project manager. I create things with my own effort. Software. Paintings. Furniture. I just like making things. Which, in a consumerist, short attention span, society, might be considered a little weird. And, like many people who make things, it really gets my hackles up when some moron just breaks things to get hits on the internet. It's mindless, it's stupid. Damn. I'm ranting.
Where are my dried frog pills?
P.S. the bits about Justin Beiber and Christina Hendricks were flippancy.
There’s a special word in the English language for anyone who deliberately breaks an Android phone, bends back their Windows laptop til the hinge breaks, stamps on their Blackberry, pokes the lens of their Nikon with rods of metal, bends their iPhone, sets fire to their Sony TV and so forth. That word is ‘Twat’. It’s thin, shiny and hollow to make room for the electronics. Of course it will fucking bend. It’s not a test your strength machine.
Anyone who then whinges about its unscientifically tested supposed lack of durability, uploads the video to YouTube or otherwise makes a stupid damn fuss about a non-story isn’t just a twat, they’re a cunt as well.
Sorry to be blunt about this - but there are bigger stories in the world, be they bad (ebola, death of bees, global warming, ISIS, Justin Beiber) or good (that new Renault Twingo III, the new Star Wars film, Christina Hendricks, Windows 10 (maybe), Yosemite). Smashing up shit ‘cos you’re a small minded baby who’d rather destroy than create just isn’t worth the column inches. It’s ‘look at me’ trolling, pure and simple.
I was driving a bright red and yellow Sharna tricycle tractor with trailer. Very racy. And I only had eyes for Linda Carter or Catherine Bach.
I expect that she was driving either a Mini or a Beetle - and probably a hand-cranked vibrator. There was something very elderly spinster about her. That said, I was four - so anyone older than ten was elderly in my view.
I remember having a proper, full-on, hissy fit at infant school after I’d done a particularly excellent piece of work (in itself unusual, since usually I really couldn’t be bothered with that learnin’ malarkey). My teacher, Mrs. Robinson, was so pleased that she gave me a gold star - the source of my ill-mannered tantrum. Gold, I considered, was desperately tacky - and I demanded a Silver star instead (far classier). For some reason, she refused. Unsurprisingly, I wasn’t awarded another star ever again.
Which is a roundabout way of saying ‘gold iPad? - fuck that shit’. I’d very much like one in grey through. Who’s buying?
Given the length of the device and its thinness, only someone with a very poor grasp of basic physics would be surprised that it will bend. I suspect Apple knew it would bend if mistreated, but underestimated the number of absolute tools out there who would abuse it in this way (and then be surprised).
Jeez, with those dimensions, I could bend it* with my hands even if it was a solid block.
*not to the same extent though, obviously.
“TERROR<IST>ERFUNDEN”, nicht war?
Presumably he will be able to take legal action against these idiots - or are the dice so very heavily loaded against law abiding citizens?
The idiots who draft the laws that permit businesses to act ever more stupidly would do well to remember that government is by consent - even in the most draconian dictatorships. Once the people have had enough there is nothing that can be done to stop them getting their way and the revolution will come.
TERROR<IS>MADEUP would look good on a T Shirt though.
Re: I'm trying very hard to give a shit
Laxatives. That's what you need. Laxatives and a copy of Autotrader.
Re: Better Than Z2
How do they make you wait? Sure, waiting is an option if you have a lot of time on your hands and no bloody life - but normal people just order it online and have it delivered. Same as with any other brand.
There are lots of things that you can criticise Apple for without just making shit up. And if you just don’t like Apple, hey that’s cool. But you can just say ‘I don’t like Apple, but for no very well thought out reason’.
Yeah - me too. But it wasn’t like I burned them into a puddle of goo. I burned them so that they looked shot up and then had them trailing black trails of dyed cotton wool across the ceiling of my bedroom, hotly pursued by another Airfix model. I’d make bullet holes with a heated up pin too.
This, at least, is destruction with a point. Generally though, I feel rather annoyed by idiots who smash up gadgets / cars / whatever, regardless of manufacturer. Fuckit, I feel annoyed when I see twats kicking over snowmen or stamping on sandcastles. It's clever to create and mindless to destroy - and, as I say to my son, if you can't make it then don't break it. And, if you can make it, you probably won't want to break it.
It seems to me that users who are worried about the security implications of an ever more connected world have two choices.
1.) Roll your own cloud solution and hope that the open source code that you use hasn't been altered in any way by the NSA or <insert nefarious agency of your choice here>. Code reviewing all that isn't practical for most people, and hosting on your own server isn't guaranteed because you're relying on the trustworthiness of code that the server runs. I love Linux, and I love my Synology - but I don't have massive confidence that Synology's cloud software is secure, regardless of where the actual bits are stored.
2.) Trust in Apple - and hope that Microsoft follows suit. Google and Facebook, and so forth never will - their business models are predicated on the information that they can gather about you, so it wouldn't be in their best interests. Personally, I do trust in Apple. They've never given me any reason to doubt them, and I'm confident that they won't start now. And look at it his way, if Tim Cook was lying it would be the biggest scandal in the history of the industry, and Apple would be wiped out overnight. There's too much at stake for this not to be true.
I'm sure that Microsoft will up the ante on this - and, for the record, I'd trust them too.
Re: No POSIX
Why should Linux be Windows compliant? POSIX is an open set of industry standards, designed to improve interoperability. Windows is a closed Microsoft 'standard'. It would be easier for Microsoft to fully implement POSIX compliance than Linux implement Windows compliance. In any case, taken as a whole and including the tablet / phone ecosystem, servers and so forth, Windows is haemorrhaging market share - so, in many ways, it's more important for Windows to comply with the industry standard (POSIX) than for Linux to comply with the ersatz industry standard (Windows)
There are other shells available for Windows True. They aren't commonly used though - and it's even less common for Windows to have a halfway acceptable terminal app installed. Doubtless you're wondering why this matters - after all, you could just download and install your own alternative. In a secure server environment though, systems are locked down - and it isn't possible to just install the shell / terminal app / text editor of choice. *nix systems typically come with a vast selection of options preinstalled, thereby overcoming this problem. Furthermore, it doesn't matter what shell or terminal you install, Windows still can't be 100% configured / controlled from the command line and it's inherited CP/M's idiotic confusion over / and \. As to choice of shells, the same applies to *nix. On *nix masochists can even opt to have a Windows cmd shell, complete with confused slashes.
your friends would accuse Windows of "bloat" In my view, bloat isn't about providing a plethora of functions (which is a good thing, provided that said options can be hidden from the noobs). Bloat is about software which is far larger than it needs to be to fulfil its functions. For example, if a fizz buzz program takes more than a few hundred bytes to implement then it is (in my view) bloated - and there'll be many people here who would consider my code bloated, overblown and baroque. As stated previously, it isn't possible to 'just download' in a secure environment (although I have, of course, done so on my Windows box at home).
Until Windows is POSIX compliant, has a terminal and command line that doesn’t utterly suck (I had high hopes for Powershell, and I was disappointed), and plays nicely with other operating systems out of the box (UFS support, SSH, SCP and so forth) rather than expecting other OSes to play nicely with it (Samba, etc), I’d say that Windows has a very long trek ahead of it to catch up with Linux.
*Rolls eyes, chuckles* Lawyers, eh? Politicians! What a dick.
Wow, shilling much?
But who are you shilling for?
I don’t dispute that it would be very nice if Apple’s prices were lower*, especially since iCloud backup doesn’t even work with the lowest (free) subscription. It would be nice, for example, if the ‘free’ subscription capacity was tied to the capacity of your iOS device. Bought a 16GB iPhone? Get 16GB free, in perpetuity. Bought yourself a 32GB iPad to go with your 16GB phone? Add 32GB to your subscription. Very soon, a regular upgrader would have more storage than they could possibly use (bragging rights only) - and it wouldn’t be as prohibitively costly to Apple as it might first appear because very few people would use anything like their allotted allocation.
The Celebrigate fiasco is so irrelevant to the discussion that I don’t know why you even brought it up (except, perhaps, to give the lie to the rest of your piece). The breach was caused by piss-poor passwords, an error that could trip up any platform - yes, even Windows or Android. Apple’s ‘fault’ was insufficient alerting to web logons, and I imagine that it’s a ‘fault’ that other platforms are vulnerable to too. Apple has fixed that hole - and I imagine that the others have too, whilst thanking the FSM that it wasn’t one of their users that got tripped up first.
I use clamXav - and it's successfully identified viruses on flash sticks that were missed by colleagues computers which rely on the work standard install of McAfee. Okay, so this probably isn't news - but at least clamXav ain't on the bottom of the pile.
Too much life?
These people clearly have too much life if they can afford to waste days of it. It would be most equitable if some of them could be relieved of this excess life in order to boost the years of those of us who have too much to do and not enough time to do it in.
And am I the only person who’d laugh himself stupid if, after all this queuing, Apple didn’t release anything new on September 9th. Just a big empty stage with the words ‘Fooled You’ on it.
Re: I'm more impressed
You have a devious mind sir. Or is the voice of experience speaking?
Re: slippery slope or lawsuit magnet?
At no point did I suggest that Google was breaking the terms of its contract. And yes, ultimately, if you don't want Google to read your shit then don't sign up to it*. I was suggesting that this kind of data mining is not in the long term interests of society (although I am very persuaded by the postcard argument).
As to the slippery slope, what is fallacious about it? If you had a time machine, would you argue with those who opposed (picking a suitably blown out of proportion example) Naziism, Soviet-style-communism, Fascism, McCarthyism and so forth that they were just subscribing to the slippery slope fallacy? Surely it's just a matter of how much slip you're prepared to accept before shouting 'foul'.
*up to a point. I don't want Google to read my shit, but I send email to people who don't mind - so, ultimately, that's me fucked - and I didn't even sign their blasted contract.
Of course, because MD5 is always unique for a given file, and no two files can have the same MD5 - that would be unthinkable. In fact, it's the most efficient compression algorithm even - reducing petabytes of data down to a few handfuls of bytes.
Sorry. I'm bored of the MD5 argument now. MD5 doesn't come close to telling you what a file contains - its only purpose it to guarantee that something has gone wrong in a copy, in no way can it tell you if something has gone right. And it certainly can't be used to probe the content of a file.
Re: Because you gave Google permission.
Not me. I pay for my email. But that doesn't matter does it? Because a great many of my friends, family and customers don't - and so a lot of my words are going to end up on Google anyway whether I like it or not.
Re: slippery slope or lawsuit magnet?
@AndyS "the information from Google allowed law enforcement to gain a warrant"
I see what you've done there. You've put the cart in front of the horse - which won't work nearly so well.
It is the job of the law enforcement agencies to approach Google with a warrant, not for Google to approach law enforcement agencies and suggest that they might want to take a warrant out on one of their clients.
The Post Office isn't allowed to open mail and parcels without a warrant - why should email be treated any differently?
I concede that, in this case, the right outcome was achieved - but I worry that this will make it harder for the right outcome to be achieved in the future, and that it could result (in an unpleasant future that is merely a repetition of unpleasant events from the past) in innocent people being persecuted for lifestyles that are none of anyone else's damn business. Like being Jewish, or Muslim, or Homosexual, or Christian, or Transgender, or Atheist or any one of a number of things that have resulted in abhorrent behaviour from wider society in the past.
In the same way that the post office doesn't open letters and parcels unless a warrant has been received concerning the recipient or sender, I can't for the life of me see why online services should be treated any differently.
It is right and proper that these offenders are caught of course, but it strikes me as something of a short term victory since scanning for crime in this manner will just drive the criminals deeper underground as a matter of course, making it harder for legitimate law enforcement agencies to gather evidence. In the future, the criminals will hide themselves out of reach of Google (and other service providers), and law abiding citizens will be further inured to the idea of giving Google, Facebook and so forth (mostly freetard services, to be honest) an all they can eat buffet of no-questions-asked data.
And yes, they'll claim that its for our own good, and that they're not interested in our law-abiding private email. I'm pretty certain that other organisations in the last hundred years might have claimed something similar - organisations whose ends were definitely nefarious. And whilst our governments and corporations may be relatively benign* today who is to say that we won't slide towards Macarthyism, Facism, Communism or <insert evil government of your choice here> in the future, regimes which may be able to coerce Google et al into spilling the beans on each and every one of us.
*or, then again, might just be pretending
Comparisons with Raspberry Pi are irrelevant since the Raspberry Pi is cheap enough for it not to be the end of the world if it breaks, and this overweight shark doesn't even have Ethernet. So it comes with a Windows license? Big deal. The only advantage that Windows had in the embedded space, that there were plenty of developers who were familiar with it, has now been lost to lighter and more efficient OSs, thanks largely to the rise of Android.
For a desktop system, I can build cheaper. For an embedded development system I'd be looking at nix - in one of it's many forms. Linking this to Raspberry Pi is just link baiting.
Maker of inexplicably popular, but rather poor quality, audio gear sues manufacturer of inexplicably popular, but rather poor quality, audio gear. What a sad state of affairs it is that this should be news.
Define Power User
Please define 'Power User’. If running Office and Windows XP on a Celeron with 2GB of RAM qualifies as ‘Power User’ then I am a top gun fighter pilot*
*I fly rather elderly gliders.
Re: It's the beginning of the next Maunder Minimum.
Give Jake a break. He’s learned a new term and now he’s all excited so he wants to use it. He doesn’t know what it means of course, or how to interpret the data, but hey - learning is a process? Right?
Old Skool FTW
I think I'll stick with playing with my NADs, thank you.
Re: A bit dodgy use of pronouns
The problem, as I see it, is that we all have unrealistic expectations of how much our gadgets cost. If you think back to the 1980's, when our computers* were largely built in America or Great Britain, they cost a good deal more than we're prepared to pay nowadays.
Take the BBC B, without a monitor or disk drives, adjusted for inflation you'd be forking out £1,176. The Apple II (again, without disks or monitor) would set you back a cool £1,538. Go for an IBM PC (yup, even back in the eighties you could have an IBM PC if you wanted) and you'd need to find £5,242, with disk drives and monitor. A Mac would see you shelling out £4,211 of your hard earned pennies - and that would only get you a measly 128k of RAM and no hard drive.
Not fair to list 'high' end machines? Even a Spectrum (£515 adjusted for inflation), or a Commodore 64 (£922 adjusted for inflation) busts wide open what most people are prepared to pay these days. And you still didn't get disks or monitor at that price.
So next time you look at the cost of a top price personal computer, and wonder why anyone would spend £2,500, consider that even that price is historically excellent value for money - and if we want to do something about the abuse of workers everywhere, we need to be thinking in terms of at least £1k for a base spec machine.
No, I can't easily afford it either. But, on the other hand, I'd rather have to scrimp and save for my next computer than be complicit in the abuse of the people who built it.
*our computers being those used in the UK. I have no data for other countries.
Re: RE: "So now it's Samsung............... " Fe, fi, fo fum... I smell a iPhanboi.
"That is in fact a reasonably objective description of the situation that firms like Sammy and the Fruity Company find themselves in. If you object to this description of the situation then I am forced to conclude that you are yet another example (AC, naturally) of the low forehead knuckle-dragging tribalists (regardless of the sect to which you belong) that we have all too many of here at El Reg."
Hear Hear! I'd buy you a beer in real life for this example of eminent common sense - please accept a virtual one in the virtual world.
Re: Intractible problems
Hear hear! But drivers are increasingly reliant on technology and rather dopey about solving these kinds of problems themselves. I know someone who insists that she's a good driver because she can apply her make up, talk on the phone and do a million other things whilst driving - and her car remains straight and true and stable the whole time. Of course, it all went to a can of worms when I turned off the dynamic stability system (and, with it, traction control, lane departure and so forth). A salutary lesson (and yes, the road was empty in both directions when I pulled that stunt).
The more electronics get thrown at cars, the more incompetent the average driver will get.
- Breaking news: Google exec in terrifying SKY PLUNGE DRAMA
- Geek's Guide to Britain Kingston's aviation empire: From industry firsts to Airfix heroes
- Analysis Happy 2nd birthday, Windows 8 and Surface: Anatomy of a disaster
- Google chief Larry Page gives Sundar Pichai keys to the kingdom
- Adobe spies on readers: EVERY DRM page turn leaked to base over SSL