The Hub, the big battery, the keyboard, the real keyboard with spooky built in trackpad.
There's a lot to like there.
1950 posts • joined 23 Apr 2008
The Hub, the big battery, the keyboard, the real keyboard with spooky built in trackpad.
There's a lot to like there.
"No point swearing at code, it can't hear you (fortunately it has no feelings either)."
If we ever get to the point when code can hear you and does have feelings, we're doomed. Doomed I tell yee, doomed.
Unless Lotus Notes is particularly thick skinned, I'd get sued to bits by it.
"Modern languages, in recognition of that fact, attempt to make it as hard as possible for a programmer to screw up - certainly in such obvious ways."
Ironically no one seems to be checking for overflow of:
hlen + sizeof(struct frag_hdr)
"As my machine is a P4 without NX..."
"So the odds of him coming to the UK are pretty low then, I imagine..."
Oh I dunno, apparently we've some quite comfortable embassies across London offering a range of accomodation standards for the blabbermouth-on-the-run types.
...when they evaporate after someone heats them up with some actual measurements.
Sort of a "whoompf" type sound. There may be a cloud of smoke.
Unfortunatley it's usually closely followed by the sound theoriticians make when they learn that all their previous papers are wrong.
Sort of a "sniffle" sound.
There's no sound quite like it for cheering up the experimentalists!
Beers all round I think.
It certainly sounds like putting all one's eggs in somebody else's basket...
Having a contractual agreement on security, availability and reliability does not save your business when it breaks. It is difficult to sue your cloud provider when you have already gone bankrupt.
On the face of it it's not this that makes Windows 10 and Office 365 dodgy. It's the ongoing warrant court case that's threatening that. If Microsoft win that court case then they can continue to serve their European customers out of their data centre in Ireland. No one has yet said that this new legislation short circuits that court case, but I guess there may be something in there. We shall see what happens next.
It certainly is the case that this new legislation will make it more difficult for American companies to have European data in America.
The situation is evolving very quickly. For American companies to continue to operate in Europe and the rest of the world they may have to relocate outside of America. Arranging their businesses so that they are independent of the United States will take quite some time, time they have not got.
However this situation is partly of the companies' own making. They have built up their businesses on the assumption that it is okay to harvest, process and exploit customers' private data. They have done this without a suitable legislative framework being put in place first. Now that the legislative frameworks are being put in place, and that they are turning out to be very incompatible, it is going to be impossible for their businesses to continue in their current form.
Ironically there is growing recognition across European governments that cyber security is a threat to their own national security. Bad guys do use online services for communicating and planning terrorist plots. Various countries in Europe are passing some fairly draconian data access laws in the name of national security. You also have to remember that in some countries in Europe (e.g. France) it is possible to have a secret law that the public are unaware of.
[For example in France the French president has the power to censor media and newspapers. It is illegal to report that the president has that power. And French presidents do use that power to cover up things they do not want reported. That doesn't stop these matters been reported in the British press! This power was used by Jacques Chirac to pardon a political colleague who had been convicted of corruption. This resulted in this colleague serving his "time in prison" whilst actually residing in a very nice villa in the south of France keeping a low profile]
How these national laws end up interacting with European laws remains to be seen. There is a grave risk that national and European and American laws all end up being mutually incompatible. The end result maybe mass fragmentation of online services as it may become impossible to offer an online service across national boundaries. This would clearly be totally fucking ridiculous.
Then the government will counter that in order to do business in America, there MUST be a US office subject to government-mandated scrutiny, basically fording them to either come back or abandon 350 million potential customers.
Remember that the first iPhones were deliberately GSM based so as to work well world wide rather than being CDMA2000 based, which would have been far better in the USA. World market first, USA second has been their phone philosophy...
Remember that there's only 350 million Americans, but there's about six billion people everywhere else. If Uncle Sam ruins that world wide market then Apple will have to pack up their bags and move. Same for Microsoft, Amazon, Google, Facebook, Twitter... At least some of those companies don't need a physical presence in the US.
In 2061: Odyssey 3, the captain of the spaceship Universe takes his vessel through the plume of a geyser on Halley's comet.
Perhaps this should be called a Clarke manoeuvre. Afterall, another name for the geostationary orbit is a Clarke orbit.
Unions, and a good framework within which they exist. Like in Germany. Oh, hang on a mo.....
You could put it that way!
This kind of thing isn't a very good advert for an organisation.
With an outfit like Facebook their investors need to know that the comany has an A team of programmers creating their apps (which need to look good and work well) and, more importantly, their server backend software (which needs to use as little power as possible, power being one of the company's major costs).
Putting out a shite app suggests that the A team is employed elsewhere...
This is what happens when you don't review source code properly...
You're not their market, I'm not and nor is anyone on this forum. Their market is milions of punters who never come near windows update settings, and who know fuckall (and care likewise) about telemetrics, etc.
Have you not been paying attention? The market you are talking about is shrinking, and there's no sign yet that Windows 10 is going to do anything about it. It's still shrinking now.
The market that MS still dominate and may yet preserve is the one that likes this data slurping the least; Enterprise users. There's hardly any of them moving from 7 to 10.
Microsoft have seriously misjudge their market, yet again.
What people wanted was something that worked like Windows 7 and was bought like Windows 7. Windows 8 was bought like Windows 7, but didn't look like it. People didn't want it.
OK so they've kinda restored the look and feel, but then they've gone and changed the ownership model? Funny old thing - people don't want that either.
Whatever is left of the PC market clearly wants to keep things at about the Windows 7 level. Evidence - people are not upgrading, and are increasingly unlikely to do so. And when was the last time you read a good headline about Windows 10? The response to Windows 10 is ranging from meh to wtf.
In an age when the privacy of data is becoming a hotter and hotter topic, Microsoft have bet their future on personal data collection. They're getting desperate - some of these attempts to push Windows 10 could end up landing them in court.
If this doesn't seriously depress the PC market over the next few years then I don't know what will. To stabilise it Windows 10 needed to be anything from meh to brilliant. Meh would have been ok. A meh would have been guaranteed had they not put in all the data collection. In fact, they could have simply kept Windows 7's desktop and put an updated kernel inside. That would be been ok too.
MS need to look at how Apple change things. Basically, they don't. They've taken a few risks with dropping old APIs and frameworks, otherwise they've not really changed a thing. If Apple suddenly changed OS X into something completely different and unpleasant then what do you think their audience would think? Setting aside jokes about sheeople, I think that Mac sales would plummet. Apple must be laughing their heads off!
And in the world of Linux, look at how well Mint is doing. Subtle improvements to the old desktop paradigm are proving very popular there.
Basically on every platform out there there's no evidence that anyone wants anything different to what we've had for decades. The sooner MS drop the crap and go back to boring the sooner things will settle down. It's never going to return to its peak, too much damage has been done. Forcing a Freemium funded OS down the throats of their remaining users without their permission is a recipe for long term decline.
I don't think it will be too long before MS start treating Mac as the primary platform for Office. I mean, they'll have to; people won't be buying PCs...
Don't count on common sense prevailing.
The people who actually need OSX on x86 (artsy types, app devs, some scientists, etc) is a comparatively small part of the market. Some of them already use hackintoshes anyway (app devs).
Most users wouldn't even notice. If apple did launch an ARM laptop which was cheaper then it would dominate. The x86 range could become very expensive...
Thermionic valves. Cathode ray tubes. Valve transmitters.
We don't need any more than that. Silicon free TV - it looks so much more realistic than this compressed processed nonsense.
We always jokingly call Apple the Tesla graveyard. If you don't make it at Tesla, you go work at Apple. I'm not kidding
There's two ways of interpreting that statement. I wonder if he realises that?!
They've certainly done a lot of things very well. Look at their TVs: whilst others were buying expensive FPGAs to do the upscaling (and not very well), Samsung set about doing a proper ASIC doing the maths properly of their own design fabbed in their own plant. Results? Samsung TVs are very good, especially for the money. That's heavy duty commercial ambition flexing some serious industrial muscle and getting good results from it.
The moment she accepted the role, she accepted responsibility to do the job right.
I have a problem with the use of the word "responsibility" in this discussion. Dictionary definitions are on the lines of "a duty or task one is required or expected to do" (Merriam Webster). Saying that a volunteer is responsible is not quite correct; they cannot be compelled to do the work, they can simply walk out. All you can hope for is that their contribution turns out to be beneficial.
Sarah Sharp works for Intel's open source group, so she is (was) paid for her work on the kernel.
Makes no difference. Intel aren't being paid for her time either. In fact, Intel has a corporate responsibility to protect their employees from abuse, etc. If Intel decides that pouring investment into Linux is not worth the effort (ie they cannot persuade their staff to do the work in an environment Intel does not control) then they might just stop bothering. That would be very bad for Linux.
"With all due respect, "her responsibility" which is USB 3.0 continues to be fickle and quirky in Linux till today. She has allowed crap code to go in multiple times as a maintainer and is complaining that she gets flak. So while Linus is sometimes overdoing it, she is being disingenuous at best."
Right, where to start?
First, it was not "her responsibility", she is a volunteer. No one obliged her or paid her to do that work. Without her efforts you would not now have USB 3 in the kernel at all, you ungrateful prick. If it's too flaky for your tastes, you fix it. Can you do that? Thought not.
Second, are you saying that personal insults amount to valid technical criticism? In that case, here's some valid technical criticism for you: you're a fuckwit.
Third, if Linus was not happy from a technical point of view with her contributions, why would he have admitted it to the kernel? If he was unhappy he could have organised help or helped out himself maybe (afterall, Linus understands that volunteers have limited time available, that they've got lives outside of Linux, that no one actually wants to submit duff code, and that shouting at a volunteer does not magically give them 36 hours in the day. He knows that that extra effort helps fix duff code, it won't magically fix itself if one single volunteer hasn't got the resources to do the job). Or he could have excluded her code entirely from the kernel (i.e. "sacked" her) and made other arrangements for USB 3 support in Linux. He seemingly did none of these things. We can therefore conclude that from a technical point of view Linus was, overall, content with how things were.
Perhaps you should complain about flaky code to Linus, see where that gets you?
She's left, and given the reputation of the Linux community I can't say that I blame her at all. I'll thank her for her contribution, even if you won't.
Thank you for your contribution, Sarah Sharp.
Can you say that yourself? Go on, it doesn't hurt a bit.
The community now needs to find someone willing to pick up the poisoned chalice and run with it. An atmosphere of personal abuse is no way to incentivise someone to do work, especially when a) no one is paying them, b) there is life outside the Linux kernel community, and c) they have limited time to give (all volunteers have limited resources, lives to earn and run, etc. There's not a lot to encourage anyone else to take up USB 3 in Linux. Frankly, with Linus at the top of the pile, picking up "responsibility" for any kernel module seems to promise little in the way of glowing praise, thanks, etc, and guarantees a whole lot of unpleasantness. Who'd want that?
Perhaps another conclusion to be drawn from the presence of Sharp's USB 3 code in Linux is that Linus couldn't find anyone else willing to do it, and may now struggle to secure the unpaid, unloved labour of another volunteer. That might be the sad inevitability of this situation.
It's regularly on Radio 4 Extra, and I've a dab radio in the car, so I listen to it a lot!
Best seaman in the navy too :)
Apple have niche marketshare (~12% and dropping), they aren't attracting new users, if anything losing users.
Irrelevant, commercially speaking. If they're still increasing profits, that is how they will be judged by those who really matter; the shareholders.
The fashion victims that own iPhones are just upgrading to newer more expensive contracts.
Well, how about that?!
Like them (I don't) or loathe them (hmmm, maybe), their commercial success is undeniable. If they can continue to make profits like this despite falling market share that's potentially a gold mine in it's own right; one could conclude that they're narrowing their user base to the ultra-premium market, where price is increasingly not an issue.
That's what every company wants, a customer base addicted to your product with no financial or other motivation whatsoever to buy a competing product. They can charge what they like then, so long as they keep churning out something basically the same as before but "better" (even if it's not really).
Arguably they've been there for quite a while now...
BA did the same with Concorde ticket prices. When they realised that none of their passengers actually knew what the flight was costing them, they put the price up by, what, 500%? Made no difference to their passenger numbers, but made a big difference to their profits.
The Android market is different. That's involved in a race to the bottom. There be dragons down in those depths...
"Or certainly more like their competitors explaining why VW's diesel magic was too good to be true."
VW's magic was to "pass" certification whilst omitting a urea injection system. I don't think that necessarily turned into VWs being cheaper than the competition, they just made more profit from it.
If by "magic" you mean high performance whilst being clean, then seemingly others have managed it. The researchers who spilt the beans on VW specifically cited a BMW X5 (I think it was one of those) as being Okay. One should hope so - BMW put on a urea injection system, and use 2 or 3 turbos to extract the maximum performance from a smallest amount of fuel. With all that lot it jolly well ought to be clean.
However, that's a lot of very expensive kit strapped to the side of the engine block, and doesn't really come in at a price point compatible with low end market pricing. That suits BMW just fine, but it's not affordable for the lower end manufacturers.
I suspect the result of all this will be an increase in the cost of manufacturing a diesel engine for the low end of the market, which will effectively dump them out of the market altogether. Petrol / petrol hybrid will likely end up being cheaper.
Even (or as some might say, especially) BMW get things hopelessly wrong sometimes. On at least one of their twin turbo diesels there is a linkage between an actuator and the turbo's vanes, and the metal (or plastic, I forget which) they used for this part has the consistency and resilience of cheese. It wears very quickly, consequently the turbo vanes are not set right, and there's all sorts of running and emissions problems as a result. There's a good trade for independent BMW specialists in replacing these simple linkages with proper ones made out of proper metal.
"Skoda, the low-end Czech car manufacturer"
Oh boy, are you out of date or what?
This has conflicting requirements.
1) Detect that the right person is carrying the phone, with 100% reliability.
2) Detect when the wrong person carrying the phone, with 100% reliability.
It's no good if it's, say, 99% reliable. That would mean that it would occassioanlly self destruct on a legitimate user, and sometimes fail to destroy itself in the hands of an unauthorised user.
With any kind of feature, gait, biometric sensor there is a degree of uncertainty as to what they've measured. It can never be 100%. Even us humans sometimes get it wrong (ever been convinced you've seen a friend out and about who turned out not to be? Embarassing when you walk up to them and say "Hi!").
The maths involved in optimising weights for combining unreliable sensors like this are clear. You can bias the system one way or the other, but not in both directions at once.
In short, it won't work well enough to actually be useful. Biased one way it will be too unreliable for legitimate users. Biased the other and it will not be secure enough for the intended purpose.
Incidentally the maths problems underpinning the problems with these sorts of systems and requirements is what killed off the biometric identity card scheme here in the UK. They (finally, and very late) realised that it would be useless at the intended purpose, which was letting UK citizens through passport control at the airport and keeping non-UK citizens out (or queuing up at passport control). It was either going to let people impersonate UK citizens too easily, or deny entry to genuine citizens too regularly.
BlackBerry are doing what Nokia didn't.
Nokia vanished. Maybe BlackBerry won't..
However it's clear from the market figures that that is not a selling point.
Loads of people moan about Android permissions all the time, but it's rarely enough to make them buy a BlackBerry...
The crazy thing is that if, hypothetically, someone did a properly good app for Android that gave you the same level of control as you get in BB10 it would be a knock out best seller. Ad blockers are very popular, it would be similar in essence to those. There seems to be a lot of mediocre / crap ones on the Google store... There is clearly a level of demand for it out there.
Personally I loathe Android's Freemium funding model. It's a distasteful race to the bottom that gives zero choice for those who are happy to pay a little bit of cash for stuff that works but doesn't snoop.
British army fighting vehicle of old, such as the Chieftain tank, could be converted with a spanner fairly quickly.
It wasn't wholly successful. They didn't run very well on either fuel, and if run on petrol for an extended period of time the piston rings would wear quite quickly. The result was that they could start dieseling on their own lubrication oil, and run out of control and explode. Apparently running away was the recommended course of action.
If KBA withdraws approval for the affected cars, they can neither be sold nor driven in Germany.
Not even driven? Blimey! That will sting...
Seemingly VW are fairly unique in the diesel world in not using urea in the exhaust system to reduce NOx emissions. From what I hear, urea injection definitely works, so if other manufacturers (which I gather is all of them) have used it then they should be in the clear.
The real problem they have is that these systems need to be properly looked after. They wear out, run out of urea, get fouled up. A diesel car when it's brand new is pretty clean, but after a 100,000 miles who knows? Especially if you run it on cheap diesel.
And of course, things like diesel particulate filters, catalytic converters, exhaust gas recirculation valves, etc. all cost serious money to replace, especially if you take your old car back to BMW, Mercedes, Renault or whoever. I get the distinct impression that the manufacturers push the renewal costs upwards as a ploy to get you to buy a new car. Who would spend £1000 on a car worth £1500?
So I think the real scandal is that the major atmosphere protecting components are not built to last or be econmoically replaced throughout the true lifetime of the car. There must be many a diesel that gets to 100,000 miles only to then start spitting out soot and fumes, yet no owner can reasonably justify the expense to get it fixed. So they don't, and they just drive it around anyway.
"I'm so happy I'm done with using INTEGRITY, ran against more bugs than we wanted to handle, and the standard response was that there was a newer version just out, please try that."
Sorry to hear that. I have to say my experiences with INTEGRITY were all good. This has all been in the past 4 years, version 10. The support I got here in the UK was very good indeed. We didn't try to run on anything out of the ordinary, stuck to carefully chosen standard x86 hardware, and didn't need a magic cable either. Maybe that was a good choice. In that particular system it was very good value for money.
The drivers may be derived from BSD, but they're not really part if the OS proper. The clever bit, the kernel, is all theirs AFAIK.
It's so hard to put an off the peg OS onto bespoke hardware, Linux, VxWorks, etc they're all hard. Someone somewhere has to put the lot of effort into software support. Linux has put a lot of effort into SoC, which is a tremendous help.
"Intel is rarely the first choice for CPUs these days in embedded markets..."
It depends on which particular bit of the market. I can assure you that in the high performance embedded market (radar, etc) it's Intel all the way for newish projects. That's simply because Freescale (now NXP) failed to deliver a decent PowerPC with decent math performance. Not surprisingly I suppose, the market is perhaps too small.
Once upon a time I can remember it being the other way round. I can remember 400 MHz 7410 PowerPCs being way quicker than 4 GHz Pentium 4s (mostly down to Altivec, the PowerPC equivalent of SSE). In my opinion Altivec is still better than SSE, but the first Nehalem Xeons were just monstrous enough to overwhelm anything the PowerPC world was selling, especially as IBM canned the Cell processor.
So in short, if you want a lot of embedded CPU maths the only choice left in the market is Intel.
Which also implies Linux. The Linux kernel works better on Intel's big chips (Xeons, etc) than VxWorks apparently.
Embedding Linux (with the premp-rt patches) on Xeons and making the whole thing real time is really, really difficult. It can be done however, and these days it is about the only option left if you want to crunch a lot of numbers.
Freescale did very well out of the telecommunications market with their PowerQICC range without Altivec.
And if Intel do screw the vxworks side of the business that will seriously hamper a number of really quite important projects for Uncle Sam's DoD.
When Apple took over PaSemi, they canned the PowerPC chip straight away. Unfortunately for Apple Uncle Sam made them keep it going, because it had already been built into some military kit and Uncle Sam wasn't about to redevelop it simply because St. Jobs didn't like it. (And of course Apple really wanted the PaSemi staff, but they all buggered off to form Agnilux, leaving Apple with nothing. Ha!)
Same thing could happen here. If VxWorks support starts becoming ineffective then Uncle Sam might start getting very cross, and Intel might have to be forced to go cap in hand to the people they've just sacked. You take on a product with very long term support promised to some customers with big sticks, don't be surprised if they wave those sticks at you.
You owe me a keyboard.
Maybe idiotic, but companies that have done it the other way round have ended up in trouble too when all their remaining staff retire...
If they're trying to save money then that's probably a symptom of the management trying and failing to grow a business. Things aren't easy out there for proprietary expensive real time operating systems.
This is probably some MBA trying to be a clever arsehole when really they should accept that the business has filled the market, especially now that Linux has pinched so much of it, including their own Linux distro. Also selling Linux ain't natural, especially if some of the "magic add ons" are actually someone else's unacknowledged open source efforts... If they want to stay in the market properly then that means taking special care to retain expertise, especially the amount they charge. If they lose too much expertise through these redundancies and the inevitable follow on "fuck this for a lark" departures, they may end up with no business at all.
These days I use Greenhill’s INTEGRITY if I need something like that. It's even more expensive, but is very cool and the company is privately owned by a single individual. If he's happy with his niche then there's no one else to tell him he's wrong, and that's a good thing in my opinion from a long term support point of view. If I were in the market for a properly good rtos then I would look at these redundancies today and wonder about Intel's long term commitment to my project's support if I chose their products...
Linux has certainly had a big impact on their business. I heard that VxWorks never adapted well to multi core processors. Sure they bolted multi core support on top, but didn't do it as thoroughly as they might. Linux has left VxWorks behind performance-wise on multi core processors.
When I first started doing big embedded systems it was all VxWorks, VxWorks, VxWorks. Now it's Linux all the way, with the premp-rt patch set being good enough for all but the most demanding of applications.
Now that Linux has grown tools like kernelshark the there's not a whole lot of technical advantage in the proprietary IDE WindRiver had. In fact, Tornado was at its zenith on Sparc/Solaris, primarily for debugging. You could have a separate debugger running for each thread (well, task), and that was amazingly useful. You cannot do that even today on visual studio or gdb as far as I'm aware. The Windows version was rubbish in comparison.
What does he mean by ahead anyway? Google get to read all our data anyway, it's no surprise that they're ahead of the NSA!
Also, it's not exactly a great advert for Android for work if Google's own security bod doesn't rely on it for his company email on his mobile. If it's not good enough for him, how is it meant to be good enough for us?
"He noted the irony, however, in the fact that the "five countries most opposed to a national ID – the UK, US, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand"
Not quite right. In at least two of those countries the driving license is a de facto ID card. However there isn't a means for it to be widely used by the holders as an electronic ID card. I'm not sure what sort of political point he's making; most of the objections in the UK centred on the right of not having to carry it, not the existence or utility of the card itself.
Sure, for a lot of people "security" seems not to matter too much.
However, now that there's tons of adverts for NFC-pay-by-phone, there's money at stake. If there's one thing that everyone really, really cares about it is money. If people start realising that poor security = money stolen from their bank account, they will care a lot about security. Android's update anarchy is a seriously liability in this regard. Apple, Microsoft and BlackBerry can say, "we've got updates properly sorted". Google cannot.
Britain was buying ball bearings from Sweden too. Used Mosquitoes to fly them out. In fact for a short while Britain was buying Swiss Oerlikon anti-aircraft guns built from German steel...
Careful, your case might get replaced by a cardboard box with "Luggage" written on it...
In some ways seeking to impose one's own laws on another country is tantamount to a declaration of war. Imposition of law is control of that country.
If MS lose this case it will be a pretty bad advert for the USA. Want to run an internationally significant company? Don't base yourself in the USA, lest your international business evaporates.
"Your comment is just more uninformed anti-American bullshit. The 14th amendment applies to the USA, not foreign countries."
Well, kindly go and tell the US judicial system that. Apparently they think otherwise.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2017