86 posts • joined 18 May 2011
Re: What about later on
So much faff compared to just copying files into your Dropbox/GDrive folder. For those storing a small amount of data, Dropbox/GDrive is probably a good solution. However, as you get to larger amounts of data, it becomes less financially viable.
Re: Hats off to the Troll who stabbed snoring Gulliver in the eyeball.
Software patents are very different to medical research patents. Medical research patents are there to protect the millions spent on researching drugs and medical techniques. That company has no incentive to do so if it is not able to reap exclusive benefits to that. Software patents do not require millions to be spent in order to patent an idea. And as Apple has proven time and time again, it doesn't stop a company from patenting a common idea that already exists just to make it more difficult for it's competitors. Software patents do nothing but hamper innovation and hurt consumers.
This is great news
A fixed term contract should also be fixed cost (even for inflation). Mobile phone contracts are normally 12 to 24 months so the service providers should be able to factor in the inflation before the contract starts. If this means that they offer shorter contracts then so be it, I always hated the trend of contracts longer than 12 months anyway. Having said that, 30 day rolling contracts is now the best way. It offers consumer more freedom and better for consumers on the whole. It forces service providers to keep their customers by providing good customer service and mobile phone service rather than relying on tying in the customers to a stupidly long period. Most of the time 30 day contracts + SIM free phone will work out cheaper than a phone on a stupidly long contract (when looking at the same duration).
no such thing as a read receipt
There's no such thing as a read receipt. How can you tell that a user has read something. Even if the receipt was generated when the user explicitly clicked on a button saying "I have read this", there's no way to tell the user isn't lying. All an application can provide is a delivery receipt and a "the user has opened this message" receipt.
I did not expect this from Google. Why would they do this as it only hurts them. These third party apps allow users to do things that aren't possible as standard and thus the product because more justifiable. I won't be buying this now as I only ever wanted it because it played local content.
"it's incapable of supporting any form of life that we'd understand" excepted cockroaches!!
I have no sympathy for Blackberry (or Microsoft or Nokia). They all commanded a large share of the market in the respective areas but they rested on their laurels and stopped innovating. By the time the competition overtook, it was already too little, too late. I refuse to spend my heard on money with companies that stop innovating when they become the market leader as it only encourages laziness with regards to innovation.
"iPhone 5s" as in plural of iPhone 5 NOT iPhone 5S
Can't ISPs detect zombified PCs?
Wouldn't it be great if ISPs could detect zombified PCs by means of traffic profiling? Then the appropriate users could be given a number of warnings about their PC being a spam bot. The warnings would give the user ample time to sort out their PC but if it still persisted then the ISP would black list that user. Problem solved!
Microsoft has long been holding on to their archaic views regarding mobile for far too long. Now it seems like they are stubbornly sticking with their views for the sake of pride. Lose the old leadership figures who are trying to sink the ship and Microsoft may have a chance. However, I foresee the ship sinking slowly beneath the waves. Will it be sad? ...nope. I'll be surprised if anyone actually notices!
I'm so glad that this is now going to be implemented. This should have been done a long time ago as some companies do not even offer the opt out choice before you're already opted in by default.
Desperate need to control spam
I think there needs to be a system in place to control spam. The reason why email spam is so common is because it is so affordable to do so. It costs next to nothing to send out mass emails.
One method I read a while back was to charge for every email sent. The charge would be something very small like 0.001p and thus would be almost nothing for home users and would only be a minor charge for larger businesses. However, for spam companies, it would cost huge amounts as they send millions upon millions of emails every day. It would make it simply unaffordable to spam via email. Each ISP and webmail provider would need a way to invoice the email address owner.
You could argue that most spam companies use zombie PCs to send out spam and thus wouldn't incur the cost. Each email address owner can set a maximum cap on email addresses sent per month and thus protect them from getting stung with a massive bill if their PC has been infected with a spam bot. The ability to control the maximum cap should be easy for the user/business so it does not affect their legitimate day to day use.
It's worth noting that not everything you back up to the cloud is something you need instant access to. For that there is Amazon's Glacier services which allows you to archive data. You get significantly cheaper costs compared to S3 but lose your instant access. Access is reduced to a few hours (which might be fine for rarely needed data).
I am extremely please and here's why
Both Nokia with their smartphones and Microsoft with their mobile OS once had a respectably large market share. However, instead of innovating they both got complacent and basically worked on small updates to tick things along. They assumed they had locked in the consumers and money would pour in. Apple and Android have really kicked innovation into overdrive which is why they have been so successful and they continue to innovate which is why they are still successful. The moment a company relaxes back, they become complacent and at risk of being overtaken by a more innovative company.
Even if Nokia and Microsoft now have some very good innovative products, I would not touch them with a barge pole as I know how they act and behave once they become successful. I would much prefer to put my money towards buying products from companies that continue to innovate even when they are market leaders. This is the reason why I am sticking with Android and hope Nokia (Smartphones) and Microsoft (Mobile OS) fail in their respective areas.
Complete waste of frequency bandwidth
1080p TVs are already "retina displays" as explained here: http://www.gizmodo.co.uk/2012/07/why-your-hdtv-is-already-a-retina-display/
For example, unless you sit within 5.2 feet of your 40" TV (which is ridiculously close), you will not be able to see individual pixels so there is no point in upping the signal resolution for consumers.
Obviously, this won't stop the companies from marketing the crap out of this new technology making consumers believe they need it just so they can line the fat cat's pockets.
Why would anyone think £1400 is a great deal for 2 laptops sold by someone on a garage forecourt? If they didn't even see what model laptops they were then it's even more stupid as they could have been some real cheap laptops that you can get brand new in legit stores for under £400 each. It's very hard to sympathise with victims with few brain cells than the fingers on their hands.
There's always so many rumours that it's easy to pick out which ones were true after the event and forget all the rumours that were wrong.
If you shoot enough in the dark, some are bound to hit the target.
I really think battery tech is lagging behind. Most of phones and tablets these days are taken up by battery. There's some cool things on the horizon for powering mobile devices but I'm really longing to see these come out in affordable consumer devices. Using physically bigger batteries in devices only works to a point (and the iPad 3 looks like it has pushed it right to the limit).
...the companies can go back to fighting at a competitive level on product quality and price. Something that is a win win for consumers.
You gotta love the Apple marketing. 264dpi is now a retina display, where as it was 326dpi for the iPhone 4/4S.
Re: And finally....
I'm not talking about the lawyers, the senior staff at Apple right up to the CEO would obviously have some attention diverted away to deal with the lawsuits. They would need to be updated as things progress and the more time spent there, the less time spent giving direction on the company and it's products. I agree it's not about the money, as I mentioned in my first post, it is to do with having their focus diverted.
...Apple realise what everyone else has for a long long time. Fighting in courts does nothing but burn money and take away focus from producing better quality products.
Leave it as it is. It's a 4 digit number, it's not hard to create a completely random number and remember the 4 digit number. It takes less than 5 minutes of elapsed time over a few hours to commit it to long term memory. If some thief managed to get hold of my card, I would really appreciate that they use some of their limited attempts on simple pins like DOB and number patterns. I have no sympathy for people who choose to use simple PINs. If your birth year is 1965 then why not swap two of the digits around e.g. 5961. This creates a much more difficult PIN while still retaining an easy to remember number. There's lot of other things you can do with the DOB pins to make it harder mix the day and month digits so you have DMDM or MDMD or DMMD. Add in the last two digits of your year and you have tons of combinations that all create an easy to remember PIN without making it easy for someone who may have your card and your DOB. If you still want more varied range then add your last two digits of your house number with your DOB, mix two of your digits of your telephone number. You can even vary the PIN for each card you have by varying a single digit. The digit could be random or could be one of the digits on the card itself (e.g. the last digit of the long number or one of the digits on the 3 digit security verification number). I could be here all day coming up with ideas of how to vary the PIN in easy to understand ways.
Viber seems great for calls but the messaging features are a little limited compared to Whatsapp. Whatsapp is about $2 a year (which is so low that it's almost free). So Viber for calls and Whatsapp for messaging, I'm sorted pretty sorted. I like the way both of these integrate with the phone's existing address book so I don't need to create a username and add friend's username to some "buddy list". It just all works :-)
Maybe your contract would be £12 if you didn't have unlimited texts. Either way, telco's have been extremely extortionate with their pricing. I can't wait till VOIP and texts over data is more prevalent (texts of data is almost there). We can then use telcos as dumb data pipes as that's pretty much all their good for now.
Apple is responsible
Apple has a huge influence over the work ethics used by the Chinese companies. They are morally responsible to ensure that the ground engineers are being treated fairly by making sure the Chinese companies they use are fair. I think some of this is caused by Apple's greed in squeezing every penny of profit from their devices. All companies are out to maximise profit, I get that, but there's a limit on how much profit you can squeeze before you hurt the very work force and supply chain.
Any phone can be dual SIM
You can easily buy dual SIM adapters (e.g. http://www.simore.eu/en/Dual_SIM-205-Infinite.php) that allow you to cut down two normal SIMs and fit it onto a holder the size of the normal SIM. This can then be inserted into any phone that takes a normal SIM (i.e. won't work with iPhones that take the MicroSIM cards). They even have really convenient and genius ways to switch between the SIMs (i.e. without turning off the handset). Definitely is the best option as you can use pretty much any phone you like and you can take the dual SIM functionality with you when you upgrade phones too.
Google should provide an application security check
Why doesn't Google offer an application security check as an optional thing for application developers to put their apps through. Clearing the check could give applications a "Google Approved" badge which gives strong reassurance to users that the application is safe. Being optional means that developers don't need to put their applications through that but without having the badge would mean that users would possibly receive a warning that it is an unapproved application (similar to Microsoft signed drivers). Integrating an application filter whether the user wants to see only approved applications or all applications could also be added. This scheme would give the best of both worlds (Apple's application security checking and Android's openness).
I feel sorry for all those early adopters who are suffering from the Prime issues. Although didn't Asus offer a full refund for those who were not happy? This is the main reason why I prefer not to be an early adopter, as they pay more and sometimes suffer the brunt of unexpected issues.
This is great news, finally comments will be visible much more quickly (for most people anyway).
This is both good and bad. It's good because not having the details about a great device makes the wait more bearable. The flip side is that not having the details means you don't know how good the device will be and whether handsets that come along in the meantime I worth skipping or going for. Ahhh what to do???
"So RIM may indeed be the most popular smartphone platform, but only just" how was that worked out when Android has close to 50% of the market share? Even if RIM is doing well in UK, that is no hope if it is declining everywhere else in the world. Developer support and even RIM's own support will wane as there are less world wide users. This in turn will eventually turn the UK market away from RIM as well. I think any growth in RIM is just temporary. (Unless of course RIM makes drastic changes to their strategy).
"Full-year shipments totalled 66.9m tablets, up 260 per cent from the 18.6m units that shipped in 2012."
Shouldn't that say 2010? Also, 66.9m is 360% up from 18.6m.
Jog on Nokia+WP7
WP7 is a complete flop. Microsoft once had a huge % of the smartphone market and it got lazy and complacent. Even though WP7 is a good attempt, it's too little too late. I have no respect for a company that is reactive, I show my loyalty to those companies that innovate. Let's pretend WP7 does dominate the market, what's to stop them from sitting on their asses again once the competition has died out??? Not for me, I'll stick with Android which has shown true innovation even when it is clearly dominating the market. As for Nokia, they've just dug themselves their own grave by pairing with WP7. I suppose it's not too late for Nokia if they do decide to join forces with the likes of Android, otherwise the only business they'll really have are the "dumb" phones that you can pick up for £50 on Pay As You Go.
"the company promises an Android 4.0 Ice Cream Sarnie update soon" promises have been broken time and time again with regards to Android OS updates. Anyone buying this shouldn't hold their breath for ICS update. It'll either never happen or will be extremely delayed.
...the average iPhone and iPad user is not too technical and probably doesn't pay much attention to all the patent wars going on in the tech world. The odd bit of news that does hit the main stream news is probably glossed over.
It's sad that so many consumers do not look past the shiny polish of Apple's products. Apple is a company that is destroying competition, limiting user choice and forcing steep prices on consumers, if only the consumers knew the truth before buying. Buying products from Apple is basically encouraging Apple to continue in this manner.
Why advertise as unlimited?
I fully understand why giffgaff have done what they done, 1% of users using up 1/3 of the capacity is very disproportionate. However, why do they advertise themselves as unlimited if it is clearly not? Why not set an upper limit on data usage where those 1% are exceeding. This would at least show the service as what it is actually doing. If you want to allow users to occasionally have months of very high usage while other months are low then why not set an annual bandwidth cap. Any service that uses unlimited is just asking for abuse and thus I do not think the term should be used.
I hardly send SMS either
Not only to carriers charge for SMS, most also charge for receiving delivery reports too. Most people I chat to are now using Whatsapp so I get to send SMS and receive delivery reports all for free. I get the added benefit of the extra features that come with Whatsapp so it's a complete win win. I think my SMS messaging has gone from usual 100 to 300 a month down to around 20 to 50 a month. I wish there was a common protocol or a de-facto standard for applications like Whatsapp so it was as universally common as SMS. However, Whatsapp is good enough for my needs and the contacts I have.
...the person who sold the violin purchased the violin thinking it to be authentic and actually believed it was for the time she owned it. She sold it on ebay still thinking it was genuine and then this happened. I don't know the full facts but it seems a pretty harsh conclusion to something that could have been more innocent.
Out of stock or pulled from O2??
Who cares, if they're out of stock then they've managed to sell all 5. WP7 based mobiles suck, the metro UI looks like a child's toy and there's hardly any dev support. There is hardly anyone buying it. Those that do are destined for the same fate as those that purchased the Microsoft Zune.
Boo to Channel 5.
Why crackdown on the thieves?
When it's easier to crackdown on the scrap metal buyers who help create the demand. There is a lot the government can do to clamp down on this. Make you voice heard by signing the e-petition here: http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/406. It won't stop all the thieves but it should stop the vast majority as it would kerb the quick buck type folks.
Rip off Britain
Why does Britain have to pay £551 for the 32GB version + keyboard when in the states they pay around £400 ($499 + $149). Britain getting ripped off again, I think I'll get a colleague to bring one back from US when they next go.
...some action against these spamming companies. They need to be hard on them as these companies provide nothing but nuisance for consumers.
That blue is bright
....enough to wake up a person in a coma.
No one wants Windows Phone 7
Microsoft had a huge opportunity when they had a massive market share with their Windows Mobile OS. They sat on their asses with very little innovation. Along comes some strong competition (namely iOS and Android) and suddenly they realise they need to up their game. While WP7 would have been awesome in the days of Windows Mobile OS, it's too little, too late.
Nokia have made a huge mistake by partnering with Microsoft. I can't believe how many mistakes they have made even prior to this with Symbian, Maemo, MeeGo etc. It's a real shame as Nokia do tend to have some great hardware designs (not all their designs are great but most are). However, siding with WP7 will be their downfall.
The only way they can recover in the smartphone marketshare now is to side with Android. God knows if this is even possible following the contracts they've signed with Microsoft.
Nokia's smartphone area is a sinking ship. Microsoft's Windows Phone is a sinking ship. Tie one sinking ship to another and guess what?? They still sink!!!!
Nokia still produce some great dumb phones for the really basic features. However, in the smartphone area, they just can't compete and this is what the article mainly focuses on. I'm pretty sure Nokia will still remain to have a large percentage of the dumb phone mobile market share for quite a while.
This review does not put the Motorola Xoom 2 in good light so I think 75% is quite high. However, the review for the Samsung Galaxy S 2 which was pretty much glowing got a rather low 85% (http://www.reghardware.com/2011/05/18/review_samsung_galaxy_s_2_android_smartphone/). I know it's hard to get consistency between reviews but this seems massively inconsistent.
Orange are money scamming cons
Why does Orange need to increase the price for those already in a contract? People signed up for a contract for 12, 18 or 24 months with the intention that the price they signed up was what they keep paying. If Orange want to increase the price, then they should apply it to those signing up for a new contract only. Orange should take into account inflation costs into the pricing of their contracts so it is not an issue. When people come out of contract and upgrade, they can then offer the new pricing. Those who come out of contract and do not upgrade will be on a monthly rolling basis. However, Orange won't be subsidising the cost of a new handset for those users so that'll more than cover the inflation costs as the customer will be paying full line rental without the benefit of a subsidised handset.
I will not be joining Orange in future if they try to con even more money out of their customers.
Hardly retina display
A 2048 x 1536 resolution on a 9.7" screen only gives a dpi of 264. Hardly retina display like the iPhone 4/4S.
- Analysis Oh no, Joe: WinPhone users already griping over 8.1 mega-update
- Opportunity selfie: Martian winds have given the spunky ol' rover a spring cleaning
- OK, we get the message, Microsoft: Windows Defender splats 1000s of WinXP, Server 2k3 PCs
- Spanish village called 'Kill the Jews' mulls rebranding exercise
- NASA finds first Earth-sized planet in a habitable zone around star