Re: "storage blob front ends going into an infinite loop, which had gone undetected during fighting"
Microsoft Flight Simulator?
114 posts • joined 2 Dec 2012
Microsoft Flight Simulator?
Someone has to be the culprit.
Outside of Microsoft, of course.
If Nokia did this somewhere, it was far from universal.
Some people often think it's inappropriate to pay for software. Some well known software companies taught them so in an attempt to be present "everywhere". Then cried "pirates"..
Everything has it's price. It's not always in money.
Yes, you have the right to injure yourself too!
What you can do to yourself, no one else can...
At least not until mobile telecoms become unregulated.
As it is today, they all run on monopoly market and pretty much dictate to customers what devices are appropriate and what are not.
Nope, what went wrong for all the companies you listed was the "Me Too" attitude.
Apple seems so far immune to that. Time will tell.
"It happened with US automakers"
Decades ago, I was an US auto reviews magazine. It had a page dedicated to each model with pros and cons. A page for an Renault model had:
- this is good;
- this is awesome;
- this is truly unbelievable;
- it's a french car and no sane American will buy one.
This pretty much sums it all about US automobile market idiocy at the time.
The funniest thing is, that Apple has been focused on "customer satisfaction and value" all the time, from day one. They are still the number one there and that explains why people generally prefer to buy their stuff, if they can afford it.
Mobile phones is a very competitive market. You can't win it with cheap price. It also needs to provide the customer satisfaction and quality.
Wow, it must be nice to be forced to buy an expensive Mercedes!
Or, to be forced by the mobile company to buy an cheap iPhone with cheap service contract.
A miraculous country, Japan...
Let's do a little experiment:
Go buy yourself one of these. Load iTunes on it and test to see how many hours of music you could play. Or video.
Come back to report. The iPod's capabilities are well known and understood.
Oh, and if you can make this thing run iOS apps, that would put the last nail to Apple's coffin. ;-)
Great idea... but (there is always but, with junk :)
You can't expect this thing to survive even half the lifetime of a decent home automation UI.
These things would run for far more time on batteries than this one. You will need to wire it to mains power and who knows if it's charging system is designed or even safe to run unattended all the time.
But, for prototyping it would be ok. Just like any of your existing hand held devices...
So about the only reason you would buy this is if it's your first handheld device, or.. you hate environment.
Why would having "Intel" and "Microsoft" labels be anything positive?
So, you would buy any piece of crap for under £100? Why? There are certainly better uses for money.
Think about the environment -- you will be buying the next piece of electronic junk and encouraging those idiots to produce more!
I will be interested to see how one can upload 1TB to the cloud from a tablet.
In that sense, it's unlimited, yes.
You spent 60 quid. Ok, it's yours to do whatever you wish.
But you also contributed to the growing pile of electronic waste on Earth.
I believe this all will be sorted when you also need to pay reasonable amount to dispose of this junk properly. Then, people will stop the "but it's only 60 quid junk".
Better spend that 60 quid on food, as your body will properly process that into non-polluting waste :)
"it does sound like this service has significant design flaws, designed to lock people into the service"
When was it you were using an iPhone, and consequently iMessage and know any of this first hand?
By the way, iMessage is indeed a messaging service designed to lock you in. Just as Skype, ICQ and about any other messaging service is designed to lock you in. To be fair to Apple, their SMS interface of the service however does not lock you in, any way. No matter what some American wanna-be-rich lady or an US judge might say.
This is just another iteration of the cat and the microwave oven.
"iMessage was disabled pretty sharpish and has never been turned on since."
And, without iMessage how were you able to send SMS from the iPhone?
Share with us this secret technology, so that we too, could ditch iMessage :)
"surely it should be able to guess fairly reliably within seconds that the recipient is not available via iMessage"
This is exactly what iMessage does.
It is amazing how people will believe anything...
iMessage is the only way to send/receive a SMS on an iPhone.
The system is very well designed and works well 'automagically'.
Of course, it does all you guys want it to do, such as switches to SMS when you no longer use iMessages with that id (phone number). For example, my wife rarely switches on 3G on her iPhone (old habbits) and when I try to send her an iMessage, it almost always goes out via SMS (iMessages indicates what you send, by the color. So this works even with an iPhone at the receiving side.
Nothing usual for the user to do.
I guess, that lady apparently had done some weird configuration, that prevented the SMS "fallback" from functioning. What it was, we could only guess. But could be another iOS deice set up to receive with that number as ID.
All this case demonstrates is the twisted US legal system and the arrogance of the US judge. Don't they at least hire experts on these cases?
Nope, the originals were fitting 5.25" bays on a desktop.
The Internet was all over modem that days.
One reason why Nokia was reluctant to jump to Android was the ongoing lawsuits between Microsoft and Android makers. They were probably thinking Microsoft is a safer bet.
Of course, Nokia should have stayed with Symbian, or any of the Linux based platforms they already had.
But then, it so happened that Microsoft was shopping for mobile device maker...
"The N9 was certainly NOT a "me too" product and had the potential of nailing ..."
Then, the knight on white horse (aka Microsoft) came along and made sure none of this happened.
If the N9 was so superior, why was it not a huge success? I myself, being a long time Nokia fan wanted one -- but the moment they announce Nokia laid in bed with Microsoft, my desire vaporized!
The primary failure of Nokia was software development. Also, hardware quality issues. The design by itself was great and they had absolutely uncontested inside knowledge of the GSM technology.
But beat Apple and the rest of the pack? No way -- while Nokia was offering smart GSM phones, the others were doing pocketable computers that also doubled as a phone. It turns out, consumers were after the computers....
"Unlike in Russia, you can criticize ..."
You speak about this, because you were in Russia, criticized someone and something bad happened to a third party?
Or, you just repeat someone's propaganda?
You would be surprised how much freely Russians express their opinion, about anything. Unlike most people in the .. land of freedom.
I like the idea of inflatable satellite.
Is it humane to insert the goose alive in the oven?
The CPU design did not start with Intel. Their chips have always been mediocre, for one reason or another.
It is only by spending billions to buy the most expensive and cutting edge fabs, that Intel could stay competitive in recent years. But, when you buy so expensive production facilities, it is not possible to sell cheap. And $1000 CPU part price is not something one expects in a mobile device.. Not even $100.
Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.
Speak for yourself. I briefer my rooms properly lit and the one I sit in now originally had 10x40W halogen bulbs. Some ignorable 400W, yeah?
Now the same lighting run on LEDs and consume around 60W for brighter light.
The funny thing about "Chinese manufacturers" is that they produce the components for everyone, including Philips and Samsung. Perhaps you are confusing these with the Chinese sellers, who sell basically the same components, sometimes competently assembled, sometimes not. They usually have contracts with the "better" companies to not sell their products in the same markets (hint: buy your genuine Philips lamp at much lower cost In China).
LEDs, unlike other technologies are much easier to control properly. The quality characteristics are all about the quality of the electronics that drives them. And today, quality electronics means proper design by someone who knows what they do (such people do exist, still). The electronics can be stamped (by a machine usually), anywhere, most often China, as others are lazy/stupid.
"He said the LED's have a high starting current like an electric motor"
The guy might use some learning in what the "LED light" is.
Any sane LED light would include electronic "transformer" circuit, because the LEDs do not operate at 12V or 220V etc. As with any electronic circuit, you can make the load signature anything you wish, someone just has to design it once, and the Chinese will stamp it in components for cents. Nothing to excited about.
Of course, there are junk LED lights, that just run the LEDs in series, if you are lucky with a resistor. Even in such cases, the LEDs do not have such load characteristics.
Cool halogen lights on the other hand, have very high initial currents, because, let's face it, the incandescent lamp is a resistor, when it is dark it has low resistance, when it gets warm, the resistance increases and it eventuLly stabilizes at it's rated power consumption. With time the filament gets thinner and thinner and eventually one day the high initial current gets too much for the already too thin filament wire and the lamp burns out.
It is also because of these characteristics, that AC lamps wear much faster - there is a simple chematics that can be used to start the lamp at the zero voltage moment - making its life much longer.
So, if desired and incandescent lamp can be made to last much more, easily (that schematics exist for decades, today they are dirty cheap) - but this will jeopardize the profits..
... Nokia was ....
Their reign ended the day they went to bed with Microsoft. Sadly... Nokia had some good know-how of GSM technology.
... the Z3 isn't a "2nd rate Sony handset", it totally destroys pretty much every phone on the market,...
I had not noticed the existence of the Z3 had any impact on my iPhone, or any of the numerous other phones from various manufacturers I own.
So it basically destroys nothing, but Sony's cash reserves.
... when you buy an iPhone ...
When you buy an iPhone, you actually pay up-front for future services by Apple or their subcontractors.
Nothing more, nothing less.
Of course it's Microsoft's implementation. They never understood Kerberos.
NTLM junk should have been sacked at least a decade ago.
"Something YOU have and something YOU know"
... AND something you ARE.
We are not yet quite there with mobile devices, but soon...
"The problem is that current fines are puny. Google will not change its way unless a fine really hurts, but simply write it off as the cost of doing business.."
Indeed, 10% of their money each year is not much. They make more profit than that...
"If they are right, the law wouldn't apply to any French online company or indeed any company on the planet until the French updated the laws."
Updating the law is not difficult. What would Google do then?
First, about the "news": Apple mobile devices already charge over USB only. Apple actually provides an (whatever) to USB cable with each and every device. In Europe, Apple bundles their (whatever) to micorUSB adapter with the iPhone (might be, not in every country, or via every unofficial sales channel - but that's the channel's fault in not complying with EU regulations). Their "wall charger" outputs only USB and can be used with any other device that is charging off USB. Therefore, Apple has fulfilled whatever requirement the EU has invented for phone chargers.
Now, the funniest thing of all is that each and every new phone comes with: an USB cable for charging and an USB wall charger. Therefore, nothing was done for the electronic waste. We still do have plenty of USB chargers and USB cables lying around!
The ever funniest thing is that for these devices to pass (whatever) mandatory electromagnetic compatibility certification, they must provide a sample of the charger they will be used with and (in theory) must be charged with only that charger during use.
Has the EU bureaucrats considered forcing the compatible certification change on their (many) regulators?
Some other day...
That costs a whooping 1 UKP on Amazon.co.uk?
Apple must be selling billions of those to collect enough cash to survive...
Did you ever know, that all Apple mobile devices, except some very early iPods charge via USB only?
They also implement all the current regulating techniques you described.
So go ahead, charge your iPhone with the solar cell and a zener diode (that must be pretty powerful and big diode, by the way -- or it will blow out at dawn).
> Including a microchip in the lightning charging cable to prevent cheap cables being made
Of course, there are no chips in the lightning to USB charging cable. Lightning to USB cables are sold at prices about 1 UKP on Amazon and elsewhere.
There are chips in the (say) Lightning to audio or video cables, because the interface is an all digital bus, and you need some digital to analog conversion to get out these formats. Such chips would exist on USB interfaces in devices that support it.
Funny enough, all of Apple's devices do charge over USB only so why are they picked up in stories like this? Perhaps because mentioning Apple generates more clicks...
Now, substitute 'China' with a country name of your choice and you begin to see the bigger picture.
People will be well to remember the Ten Commandments.
Especially from an iOS or Android device...
10TB data... that you need to get to the device and then from the device to the cloud. Smart people, those Chinese!
It is technical.
The Samsung's chip (Exynos 5410) has severe design bug in that it contains a non-working CCI. That means, that it
- cannot run all the 8 cores at the same time;
- cannot run the big.LITTLE cores, as intended by the architecture (each big core has a LITTLE pair);
- when switching from "low power" to "high power" (A7 to A15 cores) it has to flush/reload cache which makes for abysmal performance.
All this means that it's "performance" is severely impacted and way under the promised values. About the only way to "fix" this is to lock all CPU cores running at the maximum frequency, no power management, no gating, no big.LITTLE switching. In short: a big lie.
It is as if you were offered an car engine, with "exceptionally high elasticity and dynamics, low fuel consumption, high power etc"... only to find out that under normal usage, it becomes unresponsive for a while when switching from low power to high power more, the low power and high power modes are very distinguishable and boringly not smooth and you can never, ever reach the promised performance. But, when the engine detects it is being performance tested, it would run full throttle, maximum power and no consideration whatsoever on fuel consumption -- with the risk of burning in flames. Would anyone buy such a car? I doubt very much.
"And, if I was a Sammy guy, I'd be inclined to tell the techs to write a better resource scheduling thingy that responds to system load instead of specific known signatures.... and to stop hiding incriminating-looking crap in the binary blob. ;-)"
Those poor tech employed by Samsung were obviously asked "Guys, what can we do to have our stuff perform better", and the folk likely answered:
- we could do proper research, better design, implementation and testing: this will take X years;
- we could attempt to write better scheduling software to make our product perform better (*): this will take X months;
- we could write a small utility, that detects when a benchmark is being run and push up the limits of our stuff. That could fry the thing, but we know people typically run benchmarks for a short time and observe their things during that times: this will take X weeks.
Guess which option the Samsung management chose?
(*) By now we know, that the original 5410 "Octacore" has defective CCI and that better scheduling was in fact impossible. Samsung engineers might or might not have known this at the time. Most likely they did.
In any case, I believe the stupidest thing Samsung can do is to attempt suing Anandtech. Going to court might force Samsung to reveal things they better keep secret.
The difference is, if Samsung chose to let their CPU run at these speeds all the time, battery life would be severely impacted (up to unusable), the handset temperature would increase (up to frying or catching fire), the chips inside would melt etc. Most chips have limited lifetime if exposed to high temperatures, so do most of the other components.
Also, you erroneously assume that the benchmark has any control over what cores it runs on. This is all done "transparently" by the OS. Samsung obviously decided to do this trick, because otherwise if left to the default core scheduling they would reveal just how bad the real-world performance is.
They were however not smart enough to account for newer versions of the same benchmarks.....
The morale: never agree to buy an reviewer's (Samsung) phone second hand, it's CPU might have not much life left.
There is a reason why the 24 hours of Le Mans race is so important for car manufacturers.
Yet, Samsung stays mum... that has to tell us something.
But you are correct. If Apple were caught to do something like this, that would enrage a lot of people -- for no other reason, than the fact that Apple does not have to make such tricks to sell their stuff. Nor do Samsung, but for some reason they don't seem to understand it.
This is an interesting idea. However, Samsung are not *that* stupid...
What Samsung did was to trick the reviewers and it was the reviewers who outright "lied" to the public, in part by not actually checking the "facts" of their findings. Will these reviewers be punished? I doubt that very much.
If Samsung were stupid enough to actually refer to those benchmarks in their advertising materials and thus directly deluded consumers, that would merit punishment. Otherwise, they are safe.
Let's hope this story will actually make the reviewers more wary and less prone to praise whoever vendor gives them new gadgets to play with.
"If people could use their existing Office app "
None of the existing desktop software is fun to operate with touch. What is the point to be able to run an piece of legacy software on a tablet, when that will only inflict pain on you?
Microsoft have attempted to run full blown classic Windows on tablets for more than a decade already. Didn't attract anyone.
"Windows RT is the same full multitasking OS"
It is exactly the opposite.
iOS and OS X use the same base OS (Darwin/XNU) with different UI and API layers. Apple further keeps both products and remove the inclination for developers/users to bridge the gap by keeping OS X on Intel only and iOS on ARM only.
Windows RT however contain only a (small) subset of the other Windows APIs and UIs, namely only WinRT and Metro -- and most interesting, the WinRT in Windows RT and the WinRT in Windows 8 are different. The "desktop" in Windows RT contains an crippled and incomplete win32 implementation as well.
"Secure Boot on RT still hasn't been hacked."
How you know that?
I believe, nobody was paying attention to the real purpose of the Surface.
It's probably the highest-tech skateboard around! :)