2179 posts • joined 12 Feb 2011
Re: Let's look at it another way.
Me too. Maybe have one brief conversation every few months. I'll just do that on the web, since I damn sure won't install a second app because Facebook is too stupid to wrap the functionality into a single app.
Re: can I has all your data?
Facebook doesn't have access to your location, phone book, call log, etc. on iOS. I have it disabled from getting access to my location and contacts because I refused to give it permission when I installed it, and it can't access the call log or accounts.
While there are ways around this stuff on Android, pretty sure a big company like Facebook is not going to use security issues in older versions of Android to access this data without the user's permission. That would be a pretty big hit of negative publicity, even for Facebook.
Zuck has no idea where I am or who I know outside of Facebook. Well, that latter is not strictly true, people who stupidly allow Facebook to access their contact list and have me in their contact list but not on Facebook will be known by Facebook I guess.
Re: Brikk's version of the iPhone 6 ...
Reminds me of Ocean's 13...
Re: 2 years later..
I've always wondered what happens to stuff like this, those 5 and 6 figure Vertu phones, etc. since the people who are buying them certainly don't want to be using last year's phone when they've spent so much.
Obviously the 1% of the 1% who buys a $10,000 phone can afford to buy a new one each year with the change they find in their couch, but what happens to the old ones? Do they stick them in a drawer where my $500 (subsidized!) Nokia 8860 still sits, or give them to their PA as a hand-me-down Xmas present?
Why would they send the data to a credit card company? If Apple is serious about doing payments they'll set up their own "Apple Credit" (similar to Paypal's Bill Me Later) that people would pay via check or bank debit just like they pay their credit cards. No reason to keep the credit card company around as a middleman.
Since they're working with Paypal already for Beacon, they might even share infrastructure with Bill Me Later, so they don't have to reinvent the wheel.
At least in the US, few merchants have shelled out to support NFC, and few will shell out to support Apple's iBeacon either. It will probably be a great way to buy stuff in an Apple store, and maybe a few other places, but what incentive to retailers have to support this? The same as they had to support NFC - none.
The only way Apple gets widespread support is if they pay the cost for getting the necessary hardware, and take a smaller payment processing cut. Apple can certainly afford that, and getting 50% of the per transaction cost on a lot of transactions is better than getting 100% of the transaction cost on a small number of them.
But I don't think they're really serious about it, they're probably just looking at the tens of billions in sales they have from apple.com and Apple stores every year and thinking "man, if we didn't have to pay 2% on every charge we'd make hundreds of millions more every year"
Probably not because of patents, but because NFC is pointless
It is and always has been a solution looking for a problem. I can already charge up to $50 in a lot of places on my credit card without a signature, of course no PIN, and no "smart" features on my card. Just a simple swipe! What is NFC going to gain me, other than the possibility of someone skimming my card information without even having to pick my pocket?
Whether Apple adopts it is irrelevant, even Apple's support couldn't make it a success at this point. The real story here is about Apple adopting their own payment scheme, but that's not unexpected. There's a lot of money in payments that the card companies / banks / processors are currently raking in, and everyone wants a piece of that juicy pie. The retailers want a piece as a way to lower the cut they pay. The makers of cell phones and cell phone OSes want a piece because they figure everyone is carrying their phone around, so let's figure out a way to make them want to pay that way and earn us money. The carriers are thinking the same thing too, of course. Then you have big internet companies with lots of users like Facebook and Amazon looking to get involved. Yes, Amazon - I just read about it recently, though I can't see how they think ANY retailer is going to accept Amazon payments when Amazon is their biggest competitor!
In a few years there will be a lot more ways to pay for stuff, but most retailers will only support some of them. In one place you can use your Apple payments but not Samsung payments, in the next you can use your Google Android payments but not your Verizon payments, in another you can use your Facebook payments but not your Amazon. One place will accept Bitcoin but not Dwalla. it will be a giant confusing mess and frustratingly for all involved most people will end up sticking with the traditional way of paying using a bank or credit card because they'll know it is accepted everywhere.
FWIW, I did read a rumor that Apple is going to add NFC support to the iPhone 6. Yes, same rumor as about the 5S, 5, 4S and 4. The claim this time is that it is big in Asia and they need to have that support or they'll lose market share. I haven't been to Asia in many years so I don't know how true that is, but there are already solutions for adding a "NFC case" to an iPhone so there seems little need for Apple to add it to the phone itself.
Re: Apple will be fine...
Apple's market share is only "contracting" because idiots keep measuring smartphone market share not realizing that all phones will be smartphones soon enough. So all the bottom feeder feature phones that are replaced with bottom feeder smartphones help the smartphone market share of non-Apple vendors, dragging Apple's down. Apple has continued to slightly grow its share of the overall mobile market.
It doesn't matter to Apple if it only has 10% of the mobile market when it is making 2/3 of the profit for the whole industry (Samsung takes all the rest, no one else makes any money to speak of)
Scratchproof or shatterproof?
I agree the utility of further resistance to scratches is minimal, since current Gorilla Glass does a pretty good job. However, Gorilla Glass ain't all that great at shatter resistance, and that is where I think the sapphire will make an impact (no pun intended)
Based on the videos that have been shown, it looks like Apple is using some sort of sapphire composite. I base that on the fact that it can be scratched by regular sandpaper (Mohs 8.5) and garnet sandpaper (Mohs 7.5) when pure sapphire is Mohs 9.0. Also the fact that the screen was able to be bent at a 90* angle, which I can't rule out for pure sapphire but it seems highly unlikely to me.
The "worst case" situation for clumsy people with smartphones is a drop on concrete. If it lands wrong the screen will shatter, and even if it doesn't land wrong if it isn't a straight drop but they're bumped and the phone goes flying out of their hands and lands face down the concrete can scratch the face as it slides along the sidewalk (because the quartz in the sand in the cement is Mohs 7.0, harder than Gorilla Glass)
I haven't seen a test of rubbing the new screen against quartz/sand/concrete, but if it survives that, even the clumsiest person should not need a case (well, assuming the rest of the phone is as durable as the face, which won't be the case if they continue to use aluminum!) The immense flexibility of the screen means it will be shatterproof for all practical purposes. Any impact large enough to shatter the fact would almost certainly destroy the phone anyway - so no running over it with a car or dropping out of a fourth story hotel room, but it would emerge unscathed after the "normal" from your head/hands to your feet drop.
Re: Call me cynical
Yes, because Apple is always coming out with another iPhone 6 months after the first.
Re: Was it really necessary for MS to change
No, it still wouldn't be very secure. The Windows kernel might have been more secure, but only a fraction of Windows security issues have had to do with the Windows kernel anyway.
Reason for "unlimited"
Blame human nature, or blame Apple, take your pick. Consumers have shown a strong preference for "unlimited" (data, calls, texts, etc.) over limited plans that offer far more than what they actually use. AT&T found that most people would pay $20 for unlimited texts rather than $15 for 1000 texts a month, even those who averaged well under 100 texts. They like certainty in their billing, even if they must pay more for that certainty.
Some blame could be pinned on Apple here for starting this for data, because they insisted AT&T allow unlimited data for the iPhone when it came out. The iPhone made much heavier use of data than previous smartphones (i.e. made it more useful, with a full browser instead of WAP, better apps, etc.) Since it is difficult to know "this website is 4MB every time I visit it" and take that into account when budgeting use, Steve Jobs didn't want iPhone users to feel restricted in that way as it would lower customer satisfaction.
You're right of course that unlimited is impractical for cellular data once everyone is using it - it can't be used in dense areas for regular internet connectivity, for instance. It only works well if not too many people are doing it - and AT&T demonstrated what happened when too many were, since for years they had all the iPhone users in the US and their network had a lot of problems as a result (that wasn't the only problem, the small size of GSM cells makes providing full coverage more difficult)
Obviously so, you can't know where a lost phone is if it doesn't have a way of telling someone who can tell you!
Re: under-water release
Depends on whether the dinosaur stopped or kept walking while pooing.
Name on big government IT project that ever came close to budget and time
There seems to be no penalty for running over budget, so of course all the vendors do, they make more money that way. Write the contracts so they eat the cost overruns and get no pay if a system working to spec isn't delivered on time and the bids will be higher but the taxpayers won't get socked paying more or paying for something that doesn't work.
Let them take a share of the savings if they come in under budget in addition to preference in future contracts and they'll have incentive to reduce costs.
No private business would accept a contract written the way the government contracts are, no wonder so many are lined up at the trough ready to take advantage of Uncle Sam. With liberal application of campaign
bribes donations the companies can insure that while Congress whines about it, they never do anything that might stop the practice, especially for defense contracting.
Re: SmartHome stuff
Security of all these things is made much easier, if they can only connect but can't be connected to. They all connect to the device used to manage them, and you only need to worry about securing that one device. That doesn't fix the problem because that one device probably won't be secure (especially if it is a PC) but at least the problem goes from intractable to tractable. If your home router is secure, then even if the device everything connects to isn't secure there will be no way for anyone to access it remotely ("remote" meaning outside the range of your wifi)
I don't really care about any of this because I continue to believe there is absolutely no reason why anyone will ever want their oven, fridge, washing machine, etc. networked. A web cam or baby monitor, sure. A thermostat? I'm skeptical but I could see where the annoying types who are always messing with the temperature will want to be able to mess with the temperature remotely.
The idea of networking individual light bulbs is just insane, and hopefully it dies a quick death. Talk about a stupid idea!
The Chinese government is striking against US companies it can't beat
It beats some - Baidu (and the firewall) has made Google rather irrelevant from a search perspective in China, piracy has neutered Microsoft. It keeps Apple at bay through the press accusing them of various things, but they're a pretty small percentage of the Chinese mobile market anyway.
They haven't found a way to beat Qualcomm yet, designing your own mobile chipset is not at all easy, and even using home grown standards like TD-LTE for in-country if they want to sell their products to the rest of the world they need to use others' patents on LTE, GSM, etc.
So let's accuse them of being a monopoly (which they are) and abusing it (questionable) and threaten them with huge fines. The thing is, if they're accusing them of charging too little for their patents, what is the remedy - let's fine them but then make them charge more for their patents to make up the difference? I don't understand the logic here...
I'm rather surprised they haven't ever tried to strike Intel in this way - maybe Intel quietly came to some sort of arrangement, or maybe they're next on the hit list.
Isn't that a pretty good deal for an auction commission? If he'd auctioned it at Sotheby's, it would be twice as much assuming a $2 million sales price.
I assume it would be possible to negotiate with either Ebay or Sotheby's to get them to lower or possibly even drop the commission for items auctioned for charity. As I've never auctioned off a $2 million item, or given $2 million to charity, I really have idea about how likely this is with either one :)
Since Facebook knows a lot about the average user, who between the profile stuff like "interests", what they "like" and who their friends are and what their interests and likes are, Facebook can target the ads pretty well. I don't have any interests listed and only a handful of likes.
There's nothing to tell them I play golf or bike a lot. But somehow I manage to get a lot of targeted ads related to golf and biking. It is creepy, but the average person probably doesn't think twice about it, and I suppose that's better than seeing ads for diapers and tampons.
But even though I'll never buy something I see advertised that way, because I don't want to encourage it, I'm sure enough do that they can justify paying for it. I think $6+ per user is way too high, but right now is gold rush time. Eventually a lot of advertisers will run the numbers and figure out ads on Facebook aren't worth what they're paying and those revenues will drop because the ones who find out it is worth it and double down on the advertising won't make up the difference.
Re: Ipad only a content consumption device
No one is suggesting the PC will be put out to pasture, only that it has seen its sales peak because for a lot of average people who only consume content a tablet or smartphone serves their purpose perfectly well and they no longer have any need for a PC.
No one is suggesting pulling the PCs out of your or my cold dead hands.
Re: Not much to go wrong with a tablet
How do you need a computer "to keep your tablet working"? You can back up to the cloud, load stuff from the app store / iTunes, and update wirelessly. You used to need a computer for backups and updates, but not for a couple years now.
Re: Ipad only a content consumption device
Your wife wrote a book on an iPad? I sure hope she used a keyboard cover, if not was it titled "how to use the wrong tool for any job?" :D
Tablets in general are not intended for content creation, that includes Surface. Yes you can use a keyboard on Surface and have it act mostly like a laptop, but in that case, why not get a laptop? Keyboard covers have been available for iPad and Android tablets since well before the Surface came out, but only a fraction of people buy them (similar to how only a fraction of all tablet sales are Surface) That's because few people buy a tablet intending to create content, John Robson's wife is the exception rather than the rule.
Most people are content consumers, not creators, and for that a tablet is a better solution than a PC for many.
Re: Not much to go wrong with a tablet
Dream on. Apple's biggest competitor for iPad sales now and in 2018 will be iPads they sold in previous years that still work fine. Their next biggest competitor will be disposable sub $100 Android tablets that people will feel they don't need to take as much care of or worry as much if lost/stolen as a $500 iPad. Surface tablets are and will remain a distant third.
Re: the App Store paid out $20bn in revenues to app developers
What are you on about? You can reload apps and music you bought from Apple if you lose your device, buy a new one, temporarily deleted it to make room or whatever. I suppose you can come up with a few examples where something changed and Apple is no longer allowed to distribute it but that's the exception, not the rule (and would equally affect Google Play)
I know devs like to come up with cute names for things, but they have to realize these days that people look over binaries with a fine toothed comb and a name like that is going to make people wonder what the heck it is for!
Re: SourceFire report
That thing is so full of bad statistical practices that it would be a lot shorter to list what they did right than what they did wrong.
The good news, if there is any, is that it doesn't look like they're playing favorites and trying to make one thing look better or worse than it really is, they just aren't that clueful about how to properly present this type of information.
The other problem is their sources of data may be suspect. Who determines whether a given vulnerability is critical or severe or whatever, and have consistent criteria been applied throughout the past 25 years? I very much doubt that. Not to mention that back in the 90s, there was a lot less attention paid to the issue.
For example, Windows NT looks a lot more secure than any other version of Windows based on the number of vulnerabilities, but people just weren't looking very hard at it compared to how much attention is paid (literally paid, as there's a lot of money in it now) to finding Windows vulnerabilities today.
If someone offered a bounty of $10,000 per critical security issue in Windows NT today, I'm sure that total would grow by leaps and bounds - a lot of it by finding "yes, this bug that was recently found in Server 2008 is present in Windows NT as well, but no one had bothered to look because no one uses Windows NT anymore"
Qualcomm not Samsung
The article says that Samsung is selling cut rate 64 bit ARMs, but it is Qualcomm. It even links to an article with Qualcomm in the title!
Of course when that article was written the chip was just announced, not sure if it is actually shipping yet or not.
Adding shipping charges
A couple times I bought buy it now items off Ebay that listed a range for shipping costs, and the total amount ended up being in the range so I didn't think much about it. There should be some way that Paypal can have the buyer authorize a maximum amount and no way for the merchant to go over it. If you're buying something with the understanding that price/shipping is fixed that there's no range, that's the only amount that should be authorized.
If this isn't a bug, it is really shady, but being shady is nothing new to Paypal. There's a reason why only morons would link their bank account (either directly or via their debit card) to Paypal. If you're a seller and someone disputes, they can pull money out of your account and you have no recourse. With a credit card, that's not possible. If you're a buyer only I would have guessed using a debit card is OK (but I still would never do it, credit cards are better protected by US law) but I guess this shows that is not true.
Re: Paypal's business model is crookery
Putting it on your Visa/Mastercard is fine, if you're using a credit card and not debit card. If you get screwed, you dispute the charge and don't have to pay it because it is settled well before you have to make the payment. While the same is technically true for a debit card, in the US at least, the money is already out of your account until the dispute is found in your favor, which could be a real problem depending on what your balance normally is and how much money was taken.
What pisses me off is step 2 is pretty much gone in the US. You would think credit card companies would like virtual account numbers since using them fraudulently is impossible, but maybe they like fraudulent charges overall because probably a lot of people don't watch their statements closely and don't notice small fraudulent charges.
Where I live in the US, we got LTE about a year ago, before that it was HSPA+. I thought that was plenty fast enough, and don't really care if I've got that or LTE. HSPA+ is more than fast enough as far as I'm concerned.
Hopefully 5G is more concerned with increasing the total bandwidth available per tower/cell than it is increasing the bandwidth for an individual user. Talking about getting hundreds of Mbps is all well and good, but what's the use case? I suppose getting 500 Mbps to my phone is good because it takes a slightly smaller fraction of a second to download a 1 MB image on a web page so someone else can have their turn, but increasing per device bandwidth shouldn't be the focus.
The real limiter in a lot of places will be the network connectivity to the tower. If your cell can serve 500 Mbps to dozens of devices simultaneously it isn't much good unless you have a multi gigabit link to the tower to feed it. Otherwise it is all a rather pointless exercise.
User friendliness of 450v DC
What would you prefer, that solar panels output at 24v or 48v and lose a lot more power or use much heavier gauge wire at greater expense to avoid wasting energy?
If the device can be made this small it could be located on the roof itself so 240 VAC power would enter the house, if that makes you feel any better...
Re: 240v 60Hz...
Pretty sure that most of the world can handle 240v, even if they're nominally 220-230 (some places are 250, I think Japan?) As for the 60 Hz, if someone can design this for 60 Hz and win the million bucks, it would be a simple change to make it capable of 50 Hz for the rest of the world.
People hate it but they have no choice
Sort of like using Windows.
There's really no competition in social networking. Twitter, Linkedin, Tumblr, Pinterest and so on are all different enough from Facebook they aren't really replacements. The only direct competition is Google+, but that's a bad joke that apparently Linus Torvalds is the only regular user of.
Its because of Qualcomm
They're just totally dominating this business. They're not quite the Intel of the baseband chipset world, but they aren't far off.
The more interesting question is what will become of their engineers. Rumor had it Apple was hiring some of these guys. It would seem odd for Apple to design its own baseband, but I guess considering they hired a bunch of GPU guys a couple years ago and will probably include their own GPU design in this fall's or next fall's iPhone, maybe they want to eventually control the design of everything inside the iPhone.
Re: Offshore cash, fines, and taxes?
They could pay fines/costs from non-US governments with those funds, but if they used them for US fines the money must be repatriated first and full US taxes paid (less whatever taxes have already been paid on it in other countries)
So if Apple or Google get some bigass fine from the EU they'll be able to use money that has not been fully taxed in the US to pay for it, but if it is in the US they must repatriate first.
Oh I know, the point of the article was yet another smartwatch related patent from Apple, which like all the others sheds no light on what the capabilities of the device they may eventually release will be.
How is this patent any more interesting than the other half dozen or so that have been written about by everyone all over the internet for the past several years?
Really, an article that suggests a name based on something scribbled in a patent application?
I think we can pretty sure it won't be called that, since telling time would be about 100th on the list of things people would buy one for.
Easier said than done
Developing the interface for an app that will work properly on a 4.5" touch screen and a laptop screen using a mouse doesn't sound too simple. You pretty much need to code two GUIs for it, or use the smartphone GUI on the laptop and waste most of the extra real estate.
Look at Facebook, for instance. There's a reason they don't try to cram the web page into the app, or use the GUI from the app on the web page. If you have two separate interfaces, it is akin to having two different programs that use the same API library.
What's the incentive for developers to go through the extra work to target Modern and produce a full sized GUI and a touchscreen GUI, versus simply producing a Win32 application that they already know how to build? All that extra work to build the Modern app with two GUIs only adds 1% to their potential install base - probably that extra work would be better spent either creating a iOS app for that IBM/Apple alliance, or an Android app to access the bulk of the mobile market!
Re: Makes sense to me
What the hell? Why should everyone be required to learn how a router works? You don't know every subject in the world to an equivalent level to that, why are computers special? Because you already know them and think everyone else should too?
There are probably people who feel the same way about cooking, for instance, but maybe you're one of those who can't do anything beyond boiling a pot of water. Or maybe you don't know much about your country's political structure, or home maintenance, or growing food, how to load/use a weapon to hunt, how to create art, and so on. I'll bet you scoff at at least some of those as being important, but there are people who would argue that each of them are more important than knowing how a router works.
Re: One rule for the US of A and one for everyone else
All this ruling says is that you if you don't have a US presence, you can't make a complaint through the US ITC (the body that would allow banning imports or infringing) This doesn't stop them from suing in US federal court, or the courts of any other countries that Seagate and LSI operate in.
Microsoft isn't Apple, and never will be. Microsoft has never been at the forefront of a technology trend. They rode IBM and later Compaq and the other PC cloners coattails to make Windows dominant, acquired the software that would become Office, and ever since they've been trying to copy/take over markets others have created.
They succeeded copying Novell, failed copying AOL (remember Microsoft's walled garden version of MSN?) failed copying Google, failed (well maybe succeeded somewhat) copying the Playstation, failed copying the iPhone/iPad.
When they've been first, as with their multiple attempts to make Windows tablets dating back almost 20 years, they've utterly failed to make something anyone wants to buy. They have to wait for someone else to show them what the market wants, so they know what to build.
I think at this point that despite Apple stubbornly refusing to show any proof that it has "peaked" the Reg figures they'll keep playing because eventually they'll have to be right. Well, providing the Reg is still around to witness Apple's decline, that is :)
Re: @Crazy Operations Guy
You don't need a big batch of it to test a detector, and could easily keep it below the "blowing your limbs off" threshold.
Though it would seem easier to ask those who work with it if they could part with a quantity equal to a couple grains of sand. However, I suppose there's probably no sanity in the laws governing its control and even that small of a quantity is treated as being just as dangerous as a 55 gallon drum of the stuff.
If the phone is kept face up you don't need a notification light, because the screen turns on with the notification already. I guess this is intended for those who keep their phone face down, though I imagine the camera flash at 1/10th normal brightness could serve equally well as a notification in this case.
This is probably something someone saw in an Apple patent a couple years ago and decided they've had sufficient time to design it into a product. Thing is, companies file patents all the time that never see the light of day in actual products...
Sorry, you have a total misunderstanding of how chips are designed and made, apparently.
Think of it like this: let's say Samsung had a Star Trek food replicator, that let you make any food that had the recipe programmed into it. Apple created the recipe, Samsung provides the replicator. Apple could (and will it sounds like this fall) take that recipe to someone else who has a food replicator. There aren't a ton of options that can handle Apple's needs and scale, but there are at least: TSMC, Samsung, Intel, Global Foundries, IBM. Maybe UMC.
It is Apple's 100% internally produced design. There are some tweaks you need to make to it for a specific process, but that's akin to knowing that a certain oven has the temperature reading a bit high and the eggs you're given are a bit smaller than normal and making adjustments to your cake recipe to compensate.
Re: You really want Apple Gov.
Do you really think Apple is going out of their way to code Safari so Here Maps don't work? More likely it just doesn't work. You can find sites that don't work properly on every browser, there are none that are perfect.
If Nokia wants Here Maps on iOS they can make an app. Google has a Google Maps app, and Apple hasn't stood in the way of it, so I'm sure they would approve a Here Maps app for people who want it. If I lived elsewhere, that's probably what I'd want, from what I understand it is the best mapping solution outside the US.
Re: Do I detect...
Samsung is only friends with Google at the moment because they need Android. If they are able to get Tizen out the door and get some traction behind it, they'll be happy to leave Android behind for as much of their product portfolio as they can and take all the revenue Google is making off them for themselves.
SATA as a limiter
Depends on what the drive is being used. For sequential access, it is a big bottleneck. For random access, not necessarily (or at the very least, much less so)
Even with sequential access, it depends on what the sequential access is for. For big file copies, sure, if that's a bottleneck for you. But if you're doing something with that data that's another story. For instance, if you're I/O limited now but will be CPU limited at 200 MB/sec, upgrading beyond SATA is pointless unless you can do some major CPU upgrades (more cores, since you won't get 3x more IPC or 3x more clock)
Re: [Obama] promptly passed the buck and said it was up to Congress to get it done.
Every president "rides the line" of what is actually granted to him. The problem is that each president takes what the last president did as a starting point, and pushes that line a bit further. Obama is going a bit further than Bush II, who went a bit further than Clinton, and so on.
It isn't just executive orders, but also rulemaking from the executive branch as a whole. A president could issue zero executive orders and still be pushing the line out if the agencies under him push the line - obviously with his consent as he has the power prevent it.
- Just TWO climate committee MPs contradict IPCC: The two with SCIENCE degrees
- Apple winks at parents: C'mon, get your kid a tweaked Macbook Pro
- SOULLESS machine-intelligence ROBOT cars to hit Blighty in 2015
- China in MONOPOLY PROBE into Microsoft: Do not pass GO, do not collect 200 yuan
- BuzzGasm! Thirteen Astonishing True Facts You Never Knew About SCREWS