About 4 years ago Samsung doing ARM SoC, RAM and Flash, one 3mm high package, three layered chips. Doesn't work with x86. The RAM and FLASH would fry.
7377 posts • joined 23 Nov 2007
About 4 years ago Samsung doing ARM SoC, RAM and Flash, one 3mm high package, three layered chips. Doesn't work with x86. The RAM and FLASH would fry.
About 300 members and 11,500 rejected spammers.
I make that about 97% fraudulent.
Real Names is a fraction of the 300 valid non-fraudulent members.
You could say we audit so well that none of the 300 are spammers. 100% of the user accounts are not fraudulent.
Even If I typed in the IP of El Reg
I think the ISP must have "pulled the plug".
5" is too big unless it's a 3:1 or maybe 2.5:1 form factor. Too wide.
The iPhone looks like older "tablet" devices. How distinctive can a rectangle that is as much display as possible on front going to be? You don't want a Lemon or Toblerone shaped handset?
Before Nokia SW sank in a morass of Bureaucracy.
I had one. Fax worked well. Email perfect.
I had a company account so they paid for double timeslot GSM so Web browsing was 28k. I only had 19K on the home phone line.
The office used ISDN, DSL was in office end of 2001.
I liked my Nokia Brick. You could do real work on it too.
I have no idea of the virtue of these claims though.
Does not compute. Macs are not for Enterprise. Even Apple agrees. It's a consumer product. Didn't they scrap their server HW product?
Apple hasn't changed the world.
You can watch TV, make phone calls, create and consume information easily on a Computer based device, listen to music etc etc without a single Apple product.
They are successful and have slick GUIs. They are very very good at Marketing.
World changing, Innovative, Creative? No.
Acorns grow into great Arms.
Surely the revenue and profits are irrelevant if they never pay profit related dividends.
Apple shares are entirely thus a speculation vehicle as having them gives you no income.
I thought "desktops" sales now much smaller than Laptop + netbook, and those all outsourced by HP anyway?
No need to sync bookmarks, documents, email contacts.
It's just not useful till the phone has all functionality of a Netbook and just as good/fast and the phone + dock are similar price. Then why buy both.
The phone should "dock" at the "touch pad" location and then be a touch pad / programmable keys
The People that made Autonomy what it is will leave. How long do the founders and visionaries of any of these small companies stay when bought out?
HP may have really been facing challenges. But ditching Itanium rather than WebOS would have made more sense.
This Apple crowd need a bloody nose.
They have done some pretty UI stuff. That's it . Zilch other real innovation.
I designed a small tablet with touch screen back in 1987. Basically any such device has certain obvious features that NO-ONE should be able to copyright or patent as they are too obvious.
1) Rectangular as skinny as possible.
2) Rounded corners.
3) Screen takes as much of front as is possible.
4) Icons on the main screen for all the commonly used functions (Since Xerox in 1970s)
5) Maybe a button or two separate from screen.
My was called the Pen and Pad.
The "pen" had a 2.5mm optically read ball and option for ink (as you can make IR transparent black or coloured ink). Microphone near tip, Earphone at top. Three buttons. WiFi, Bluetooth etc didn't exist then so the Cordless link for voice and data from Pen to Pad was 60kHz Ultrasound. OK the FM receiver had doppler shift issues if you waved it about too much.
If any good lawyer wants to work on a no-win-no-fee maybe the lapsed patent can be revived and we sue EVERY blue tooth headset maker .... :-) I don't think so.
It's time Judges, Juries and patent offices did some real research and stop all this nonsense.
Of course there was the same thing in 1920s over valves and 1930s, 1940s on Radio and TV patents.
Not to mention the despicable behaviour of "Enforcers" of Cine Camera patents at the dawn of Cinema (Nickelodeon isn't a Documentary, but it gives the flavour well).
I think HP make ZERO on printers. Maybe a loss. The profit is all on the Ink.
Are only a Speculation vehicle as they don't pay a dividend.
1990 was the time to buy them, not now when they could be near peak. Apple are actually vulnerable to change in "Fashion" and have very narrow range of product.
But I agree it's terrible:
DEC gets bought by Compaq and all the best stuff thrown away.
HP buys Compaq and seems to chuck the best Compaq and HP stuff away in the Product rationalisation.
HP was once a leading Test gear, semiconductor and optical device company. They became very successful at selling PCs and Laptops that frankly always seemed less than best.
Do they make anything in US still or is it all Foxconn or other Chinese anyway?
Obviously they think the best strategy is to copy IBM.
Then they will be sued by Apple :-)
Really it's nothing like a Cat brain.
As cats don't have owners, they have hosts.
Need multiple separate RAM
Thorn EMI was of course about the worst possible owner.
Maggie Thatcher of course didn't believe in Manufacturing or Industry. It's not all in China.
'Task Switcher' for jumping between and closing down running applications.
Eh? Hasn't Symbian always had that?
It's not a revolution. It's a niche.
Likely to cause a lot of problems too.
But for Different reasons.
Google now has REAL phone IP instead of the toy phone patents of Apple.
But it puts HTC etc in a Quandary...
Apple + iOS
Microsoft + Winpho + Nokia (but who wants to come on board with an OS in a nose dive )
Google + Android + Motorola.
Also Android isn't "really" open source. Honeycomb is only the start. If it's more advantageous to Google to put all the eggs in Motorola and Closed source they will.
Google has no real commitment to Penguins. Only committed to Google.
don't need a mouse and keyboard.
People that actually create information DO need a keyboard and mouse.
No-one is taking away my laptop.
I'll have one of every size Tablet to go from 4" to 12" though to go with it. That's the bit that Trek git wrong.
He may have some point, but hardly coherent.
Physical damage from "cyberwarfare" is overstated. Stuxnet isn't typical and there are simple methods to protect against such threats.
Computer configuration and user training is more important than any AV package.
Neither of these default on settings existed originally:
* Manage Social Advertising
* Turn on/off enhanced advertising
Are they serious?
Has the reviewer made a mistake? Is there not even DVI out for DVI to HDMI (which is just a connector and does support HDCP)
Component out only is use really just for obsolete or US HDTVs.
For the new strategy, the worst that could happen is that a mass market buys the N9.
I'd guess they are only selling it at all because the plan was in place before the scrapage and contracts signed to make some initial quantity.
Because they never pay dividends and really only have 3 products, Mac, iPhone and iPad.
World wide the Mac is < 10% of PCs and iPhone including ALL phones is tiny. 18% of Smart phones?
They are the leader in the Tablet Niche. Though didn't invent it and won't stay leader.
Of course market share isn't everything.
Remember the hype about "The Last One"?
Mine's the one with Z80 Instruction set in the pocket
Linux is a bloated copy/clone of 1976 UNIX. Kernel release (only) about the same time as entire NT 3.1 OS release in 1993.
Phones work best with a RTOS, unless you have a 2nd CPU to run the Phone stack. QNX is a RTOS, Standard Linux is not a RTOS, though it's been kludged.
Linux is a Macro Kernel OS. QNX is not UNIX like, no matter what Wikipedia claims, unless you think NT3.1 or Minix are "UNIX" like.
NT had "POSIX" subsytem for years like QNX has, that doesn't make it UNIX like.
QNX is *REALLY* old, dating from 1988, but unlike Linux is a complete design for embedded systems and was really only used for Industrial Controllers, SCSI subsystems and automotive systems till RIM bought it.
Is it a good idea for a phone? I don't know.
Does it need the latest and greatest CPU? No. It likely needs as little or less than Symbian, much less CPU than Linux + Java, (Or Android Davik which is really Linux + Java).
Though X windows was ported to QNX somewhile ago, QNX is more known for NOT having a GUI. RIM has their work cutout. They might have been better going for Meego, Windows phone 7 or Android.
2400mhz is 1000,000,000 times slower than 2400MHz memory, so is fairly poor.
Why are things like this allowed to be Patents at all?
Data is a Big problem.
For the same customer revenue (i.e. £20) the traffic on data compared to voice is about 100 to 200 times as much.
Virtually ALL data traffic is i/o from the Network, many voice calls terminate on same network.
While operator pays termination charge for O/G voice call, the Operator receives revenue from I/C voice call. For Data the operator pays for the traffic in both directions.
LTE charges need to be much higher, maybe x10 to be profitable. Really data at the minute is subsidised by voice and SMS. SMS of course is a great revenue earner that costs nearly nothing to run. Internet IP IM in contrast makes the operator no money and costs them 1000s of times more than an SMS.
I'd not agree with Torvalds on much..
But Unity, Gnome3 and KDE4 are stupid.
I'm not that fond of OS X or Win7's candy mode. At least Win7 can be "reset" to be somewhat like NT4.0 / XP, except the configuration tools and Control panel are designed like some evil web site done by a secondary school work experience student.
1992 to 2000 the GUIs were improving. Now eye candy is replacing functionality and usability on all OSes. Not just a Penguin problem.
Are Desktop GUIs getting designed by Webinista Arts Students these days?
For Linux there is also Ice Window Manager? Very basic, but at least it does what it says on the tin.
Tell people what they want to hear.
What's a phone box?
A box that a new mobile phone comes in or the Public Urinals that used to have phones in them?
My coat is the one with a phone in the pocket.
IE 6.0 20.44
Firefox 3.6 13.95
IE 8.0 11.49
IE 7.0 5.29
Mozilla/5.0 (compatible; SiteBot/0.1; +http://www.sitebot.org/robot/) 3.86
IE 5.5 2.32
Firefox 4.0 2.27
Opera 9.0 2.12
Opera 8.0 2.05
IE 9.0 1.41
Firefox 3.5 1.14
Firefox 3.0 0.97
Safari 5.0 0.94
Chrome 8.0 0.84
Chrome 11.0 0.77
Chrome 10.0 0.75
Firefox 5.0 0.71
IE Generic 0.7
Chrome 12.0 0.64
Chrome 7.0 0.62
Opera 7.0 0.6
Opera 7.1 0.59
The search bots are the highest :(
Google Search AKA Googling
Google Code (alternative to Source Forge etc)
Google Android and Davik
All paid for by "advertising". If it doesn't work it will be re-engineered and re-named and released till it does.
Our dystopian future isn't Skynet, The Matrix or even the Intel of "A is for Andromeda". It's being looked after by our "do no evil" benign, un-creepy Google overlords.
I put a fake name on my Google+ profile, but it doesn't matter. Google knows my real name, where I live, what my deceased pet was called, the IP addresses of my children...
If the signals are separate signals (beam forming etc) then each signal is subject to Shannon Boundary.
If the signals share the same beam, then Shannon STILL applies. The total information bandwidth is limited. The bandwidth can be shared by time, frequency or code. (or any combination). Those are multiplexing techniques. As CDMA has shown, code division multiplexing is poorer than Time or frequency. Absolutely perfect signal recovery (i.e. better than Rake) only makes it as good as other schemes. TDMA wastes space on guard times between channel. FDMA wastes lots of space on frequency guardbands. Datamultiplexing (as in DVB) is 100% efficient, but only works for downlink, up link has to be CDMA, TDMA, FDMA or OFDMA. The latest technique is OFDMA as the guard timing is very low if the stations are stationary or if there is no multipath. You might use 3,500 carriers at slower symbol rates and for uplink vary the number of carriers assigned to each station. Downlink uses all carriers and Data-multiplexing.
You can't get something for nothing. The DIDO sounds like the wireless equivalent of "over unity" machines. No doubt it can work, but no more than 1% or 2% better than the best OFDMA systems with beam forming. If it's 5% better overall than LTE, Wimax or Flash-OFDMA I'd be amazed. If it seems 10% better then its a scam and there are hidden wires.
Wireless can't replace Fibre except in either Broadcast or very sparse Rural applications (5 users).
Actually the Shannon Boundary and Shannon Limit derived from Shannon-Hartley Theorem probably are "laws". The Shannon-Hartley Theorem was a theory, but it's probably a law.
AirPoints don't replace ISP fibre, DSL or Cable connections.
My understanding was that the data doesn't all go back to the data centre( That would be a massive and stupid bottle neck) but the analysis of the link is done at the data centre (why?) and then the parameters to use are sent to the AP. Which also sounds pretty stupid. Why not an SoC?
It's fake snake oil. I've been working with wireless systems a long time and even all the "real" systems are heavily lubricated by snake oil. E.g. 42Mbps 3G/HSPA+ when the capacity *IS* shared among all users and at typical distance and signal you'll get about 4Mbps in a 5MHz channel if there is no-one to shared it with.
The major issue with Mobile outdoor bases or indoor AP to laptop/gadgets turns out not to be nuances of modulation and coding. But aerials. If your house has a directional aerial on the chimney for a fixed wireless system, if everything else is equal, that will have x8 capacity in same spectrum (Shannon applied carefully) compare with ground level indoor mostly omni-directional; aerials in a laptop or gadget. No one wants a giant motor driven aerial on their mobile phone or laptop, so such systems with mobility are always inferior to fixed outdoor directional aerial systems.
Some more articles here : http://www.techtir.ie/comms
For under £19
The ISS is only about 360km above sea level. GEO is about 36,000 km. 100x higher. That's a lot of energy. Without fuel the ISS drops over 20km per year.
The ISS is not big enough or robust enough or high enough orbit to be a "staging post". It's barely more than a toy. The money would be better spent on Space exploration Robotics.
Of course the ISS is doomed to be plunged into the sea. Actually most of it will burn up in the atmosphere. The only argument is when. It's expensive to keep refuelling (even with Ion Drive propellent) and maintain.
Most of the advances have been in robotic and automated space exploration. Apollo, Mir and now ISS are really dead ends technologically.
As was the Shuttle.
I think these early satellites used film cameras.
The film was processed on board and then "slow scanned" and transmitted. Hence the noticeable film / emulsion artefacts.
There where also deliberate grid markings added.
OK you bought your surplus 4.8m dish off eBay.
How hard could it be to hijack the Broadcast TV satellites?
The cost of access to on-line copies of material is maddening for a lot of Academic stuff if you are not in a University.
use a PC with XP
no big deal
"There's a case for *a* patent - the invention of the IR remote itself. Maybe stretch a point for a learning remote"
Actually they are a copies of the Ultrasonic remotes. Hence the the choice of 35kHz to 43kHz for "carrier" frequency.
There is some cleverness about "learning" a code. Having a pre-built library is simple.
There was a radio in 1930s with motor drive for "memories" and a "wireless" remote. But there was no "learning version".
I don't think one-4-all was 1st learning or universal remote.
Personally I think the Harmony Remotes and higher end "one-4-alls" are grossly overpriced. But that's another story.
There really should be NO patents on something as simple and obvious.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2018