I thought it was Trendy Tarquins? (cf. Summer School)
4885 posts • joined 16 Apr 2007
I thought it was Trendy Tarquins? (cf. Summer School)
Only had brief experience with Slack's conferencing stuff but the experience was dreadful: resource hog with lots of dropped connections. Still very much a "work in progress".
Google really knows their network and codec shit: give Hangouts a go.
I stopped using Skype once MS starting enforcing MS logins for using it and I could no longer use the minimalist and usable client for MacOS. For chat there are hundreds of alternatives and for conferencing Hangouts has been more stable for years. Video chat has only ever really had novelty value but, again, Google has this nailed.
I have one customer where I have to use Skype for Business on their hardware and network. While it generally seems to work for me, many users complain that it is unreliable for voice so they dial-in on their VoIP lines which are sharing the ethernet with their computers.
Arm + FPGA?
Already happening in HPC and even Intel is offering it to large enough customers. It's nice if you need to change things over time but things like encryption and codec's can just go straight into silicon and reduce unit costs.
Well, IBM looked at the order volume and just wasn't interested in putting more resources into it.
Judging the performance of a CPU by its clock speed is so 1990.
He isn't: you can run workload tests. The only area I see Intel consistently on top is in heavily single-threaded stuff. Given how easy it is to add specific hardware acceleration to ARM there's no reason why Apple couldn't do this with its own chips.
But, while this might make sense for the phone chips because of the volumes Apple sales, it's probably quite happy at the moment for Intel to take all the risks on hardware development, negotiate a nice price and keep a fat margin. But a shift to a full ARM stack at any point is probably possible for Apple. My guess is that they'll wait until we start seeing a lot of Android-on-ARM notebooks.
Buying a cellular provider would be doubly stupid because they'd become a competitor to all the rest who operated in the same market(s) it did.
Possibly, but the current wave of vertical integration is heading this way anyway with AT&T buying Time Warner and Verizon's plan for Charter. So maybe go the whole hog with Disney and buy Sprint or T-Mobile (both have owners who'd like the cash). While I'm sure they'd be able to convince a lot of I-Phone owners to switch to their network, the bigger problem is that the change in the business culture: they don't want to become HP after Compaq!
Look at Microsoft's history with their many large acquisitions, or Google buying Motorola, or the king of bad acquisitions in tech, Hewlett Packard.
While I agree with you generally it's probably worth looking a bit deeper: Google bought Motorola for the IP and flipped the carcass to Lenovo in a textbook "private equity" move. Google now has a nice patent portfolio for "patent trumps". Microsoft buys were probably more a mixed bunch: AQuantive stands out as a real turd hence the write-downs but some of the other deals (Skype and Nokia) were bad "business" but probably good for investors. These purchases were done with some of the cash stockpiled outside the US so they were very tax efficient for some investors.
HP, well poor HP lost its way when it bought Compaq and it's been downhill all the way since then. Maybe, just maybe, the split will a technology company to step out of the "consultants and services" shadow that is the real money pit.
The remarks about Qualcomm are very ironic.
So Apple and co are going to repatriate trillions of dollars into the US.
Only if this can be done in a tax-efficient way, which usually means share-buybacks coupled with debt issuance.
Numbers were better than predicted but only 7% more Macs doesn't look good considering this was the first full quarter with new, more expensive models.
I was helping a friend look for a new computer this week and shocked by what was available in the shops. But just as much by the lack of customers actually eyeing the kit.
Manufacturers are still making the same mistakes they have for years and pushing sub-standard machines for Windows: 2GB on a modern machine isn't acceptable. This is real landfill, to use one of Andrew's favourite terms, and isn't helping the Windows cause. There is one potential brightspot: the I-Mac clones such as those from HP but these really need to be in the shops and on display.
The irony is that while I'm moaning about the spec of notebooks around the € 500 mark – okay but I'm not sure I'd like to work with one – (below this there are too many compromises) I'm fuming about Apple's prices. But, guess what, Apple's MacBook Pros (without the idiot bar) compare well to similarly specc'd and weighted (max 1.5 kg) notebooks but Lenovo seems desperate to give me a touchscreen (no, I really don't want one). Yes, there is a price differential but it is not sufficient for me to want to switch to Windows for development and nearly all the Linux GUIs make me cringe (I quite like some of the KDE stuff but there isn't everything I need in my stack). So, for me at least, it's going to be a Mac again (though no fecking I-Cloud or Siri) but maybe I'll pick up something like a Pi-Top as well.
Going forward: if anyone makes a serious go of Android-based keyboard devices then they could do quite well because what both IOS and Android apps do really well (among all the crap) is focus on the user.
Microsoft and Intel investors should be worried.
They'll probably focus on the recent strength of the dollar deflating non-US revenues.
I think you may be surprised when the actual results are announced. While they might not be what some people expected or predicted, Apple will still be pocketing very large profits. Your price comparisons are not quite accurate (equivalent specs including weight are similarly priced) but Apple probably does need to be careful on the high-end of overdoing it.
Making political pronouncements via Twitter is simply cretinous: it privileges one media organisation over the rest.
It's older than that: the Marx brothers but probably also Mark Twain, et al including Cicero. It's painfully obvious that those wishing to wield power are the least suited to doing. But, unfortunately, they're also usually very charismatic.
There's a huge distinction between speculation and propaganda…
Speaking of executive orders, how come they were bad when Obama was making them but suddenly OK now?
Who's complaining about them? All presidents make them with the knowledge that the next one might undo them. But if you want details then Obama's orders were usually made after he couldn't get something through Congress, Trump is currently signing ones largely for show: nearly everything still has to go through Congress.
Trump reminds me of Mussolini: he likes to be in front of the camera doing something. We can expect a lot of this for a while but at some point he's going to have to deliver and the constitution deliberately makes that difficult.
WE know which is the lesser of the two evils, and it ain't Clinton.
I actually like Larry Correia's comparison of them as two different forms of cancer. Lots of reasons not to vote for either of them but one of them had to win. On balance, as an outsider I think Trump's business interests are going to be the biggest problem and this is where the attention should be focused. We should get used to him hiring and subsequently firing venal incompetents.
It's really quite simple: employed office holders are banned from conducting party business.
Mind that's all assuming the reports true.
They may all be true but also incomplete. Samsung's initial response indicated that they thought there was a construction / design problem in batteries from one supplier. This turned out to be an optimistic and, ultimately, very expensive assumption as we're now learning. For whatever reasons the design flaws in the batteries only became apparent once they were in the devices. Alongside pressure and the usual bashing we give our phones, you've also got lots and lots of dodgy power supplies.
The key thing will be the lessons learned both in terms of design, specification, testing and approval processes: is someone really going to stop the launch of something that has been in development for 18 months?
As all Li-Ion batteries are potentially explosive it's important to get regulators onboard here. I can see arguments both for and against mandating removable batteries: makes recalls a whole lot easier; knock-off replacement batteries are known to be safety risk. Getting the regulators onboard also makes it easier to fight off competition from no-name Chinese makers who give even less of a shit about safety and one of the reasons why Samsung went ahead with this particular specification was in response to a highly competitive market. Had it worked out as intended, it should have insulated Samsung a bit more from the cut-throat competition.
Obviously not enough.
But I suspect the problem was related as to what kind of testing was done: you would be amazed at what people actually do with their phones and anticipating this can be very hard.
I'm not a consumer electronics engineer so I'm not going to speculate but I do wonder from the report as to whether pressure sensitivity (such as being in an airplane) might have pushed things beyond design tolerance on some devices. No excuse, of course, but remember the number of reported incidents versus the number of devices actually sold.
at least based on the last budget there isn't. So any announcements are either the usual repackaging of previous ones, or outright lies, or both like the £ 350 million a week allegedly to be found down the Treasury's sofa.
They would do better spending their time thinking up a strategy for preserving UK-owned exploitable intellectual property,
Easy to do using some kind of golden share but this begs the question as to whether ARM would have been as successful with such an arrangement. On paper the ARM sale was a great deal for the shareholders… A bigger problem is current trend for debt-financed M&A but I don't expect any government to take any steps to reduce this any time soon.
Governments almost always get it wrong when they get closely involved in industrial policy whether it's by trying to pick winners, protectionist policies or subsidies in the form of lower taxes.
Your correspondent suspects the idea Samsung wants us all to take away is that it pushed so hard…
… that safety considerations were ignored with disastrous, though fortunately not life-threatening, effects.
While you're busy beating on Samsung you might also mention Takata whose problems with airbags were slightly more alarming. Or any of the many similar cases. For various reasons (cost-cutting is not the only one) products are released onto the market with defects. Some of these can and should be avoided. But before we get on our high horses, we might take a moment to consider how complicated some of this stuff is.
That said, while Samsung is handling the Note 7 extremely well, it's got a potentially bigger issue related to the influence peddling scandal in South Korea.
To be fair to the "journnos" stories like this and the Apple "antennagate" are easy to write and attract lots of readers. But, basically, there's not much meat left of this: Samsung fucked up, fumbled and then accepted full responsibility and did a complete product recall and investigation. You can't really expect more than that.
Have to agree with you on this. Google is already beta testing the assistant on world & dog in Allo and will no doubt release it as a standalone app in due course.
I fear a return to a full border and subsequently terrorism, which will have learned all the lessons of the last 15 years. :-( Northern Ireland was a huge money pit with bombs before the Good Friday agreement and has since benefitted (financially and in terms of jobs) significantly from EU funds. Disaffected sectarians without jobs is not a recipe for peace and prosperity.
We'll get a better idea after the next elections to the Northern Ireland Assembly but I really am pessimistic about things.
flood of cheap labour from Eastern Europe – a boon to bosses, as it suppresses wages
Statements like this demonstrate a clear lack of understating of the labour market in what is known as the "lump of labour fallacy".
Britain had a "booming" low wage sector before EU enlargement but this is almost entirely due to a preference for low regulation and low skilled workers. Immigrants from elsewhere in the EU were attracted by job opportunities, ie. jobs that could not be taken up by UK nationals for various reasons, including the wages offered (there is certainly correlation). If they had not arrived then it's most likely that the positions would have remained unfilled or wages and prices would have to rise significantly. Immigration leads to economic growth through increased aggregate demand (new jobs are created as a result) and indeed many immigrants have gone on to create their own businesses as have so many of the generations before them.
However, while the EU immigrants have been net economic contributors, there is no doubt that they have caused resentment because they compete for scarce and inflexible resources: housing; schooling; healthcare. This was particularly notable in areas with no recent tradition in immigration where, say, even a 5% increased in "foreigners" at the doctor's surgery can have a dramatic effect in waiting times. But they're not responsible for the current problems in the NHS: this is down to the UK's shameful tradition of trying to squeeze a quart out of a pint bottle. Indeed the NHS has for years depended upon skilled immigrants and would probably collapse without them.
Otherwise the analysis is fair (the UK government is still looking for the clue hammer), but largely misses the point. Until the UK formally requests to leave the EU then all of these speeches and remarks are purely for domestic consumption, which is why it contains nonsense like "no deal is better than a bad deal". Game theory alone tells us that a bargaining position of maximum demands is not optimal in the forthcoming negotiations, so we can expect this change. In fact, the speech was reminiscent of May's many speeches about reducing the number of immigrants to the UK. And just how successful was she in this respect? Even immigration from outside the EU, where the UK can do pretty much what it likes, rose.
It's possible this is a long game and the idea is to start making things so unpleasant for the UK in order to sideline the hardliners and make the inevitable compromise more likely to succeed politically: an vote in parliament is likely to depend as much upon the opposition as it is upon the government's own supporters.
What? People voted to leave the EU because they were being informed about cookies? Good riddance!
Banners we never sufficient for explicit consent but some EU member states mandated them and web monkeys copied them. Technical solutions such as proper browser settings, think of websites asking for your location, would always have been possible.
Anyway, until the law is changed the existing laws stay in place. It's just that the fines will start to go up from next year.
This is simply a discussion document…
The EU never requested popups and explicit consent is still required for non-essential cookies because it's a good thing.
Banks don't want to makes things secure either becasue it costs money
They want just as much security as will give them plausible deniability and mean that they are not liable for any losses. Making customers responsible also means that they can sell insurance. Win, win you might say.
Good security that is easy to use is possible with HBCI. Never heard of it? Makes you wonder why, doesn't it.
You pay in one way or another.
Don't Allo and Duo rely on using your mobile number for identification
like SMS/MMS, etc.? Probably to set up but I think this is a side-effect of the encryption system used. The phone + SIM model was chosen for GSM because it's good for security and also one of the reasons why, in Europe at least, the phone number belongs to the user and not the service provider.
If you want something multi-platform that isn't necessarily tied to a number then you can give BBM or Wire a look.
1) can you tell the difference between an API and a service? Hangouts is alive and kicking, the rest are better RIP.
2) which services do you provide for free?
Google announced last year that Allo and Duo would be the new messaging platforms with Hangouts being reserved for enterprise, where it works really well and for which the relevant extensions will be kept around.
Note to self: one-sentence-per-paragraph articles are usually accompanied by whiny comments.
When apple release an iOS update everyone gets it.
Which unfortunately still doesn't mean that the updates are ever timely.
Unlike Huawei, ZTE has struggled to break out of the white label market for handsets outside of China. This is probably as much down to its corporate structure as anything else. Then again, given how close it is to the Chinese military, it doesn't really need to worry as its forays into the data centre business illustrate.
Shall we go through the original Python code-base and re-implement it in Go, testing as we go?
Because computes make fewer mistakes than humans? "Transpiling", particularly with Python, is well understood, reliable and fast as the PyPy project documents.
A cross compiler allows Google to get rid of CPython and, eventually, create a private version Python that is not foreign matter in Google's parallel universe.
This is some of the biggest horse shit I've come across in a while. Google does loads of stuff in Python and actively contributes to lots of products. They wanted to use it for systems stuff but hit problems with the GIL and Go was a reasonable solution for some stuff. A good developer keeps an open mind and Google is keen on good developers.
I've not used Go myself but I know plenty of developers who are comfortable switching between Go and Python depending on the task in hand. Go's builtin support for concurrency and parallelism is fantastic for some situations, though not for all, as Ben Bangert's talk on Python to Go and back makes clear. In many situations being able to use PyPy will solve most performance problems and this sounds like an extension of the idea where better parallelism is required.
Meantime async.io is getting traction and Python is also looking at ways of alleviating problems associated with the GIL.
The real issue here is DonorsChoose taking such a so much of a cut and Schools needing to beg for essentials like paper, colored pencils, etc.
This is the sad truth. I know of one school in Germany where the kids have to take in their own toilet paper!
All aid programmes reveal contradictions. Indeed foreign aid programmes are one of the biggest gravy trains for industrial contracts out there.
I'm not a fan of Chromebooks but the US non-profit set up invites this kind of self-serving "foundation" because of the favourable tax treatment. However, just because schools are asking for computers and basic materials, does not make the programme evil. It just highlights the general underinvestment in education. The programmes themselves are supposed to be complementary and provide additional resources.
As others have noted, the comparison is the cold fusion nonsense: the time isn't spent debunking but in trying to replicate the experiment and possibly along the way discover flaws in equipment (fast neutrinos) or calculations.
Theoretically there is no reason to give this "drive" any credence. But sometimes, just sometimes, it's worth trying the daftest of ideas just one more time. And a good scientist is one who's able to put aside his prejudices to do so. That said, this really is an expensive joke.
Sadly, using Tunnelbear from outside the UK condemns one to be geolocated in Slough
Great, let the spooks all think we're in Slough and then, pace Betjeman:
Come, lovely bombs, and fall on Slough
You can only download/use Signal through a Google Play account; which entirely nullifies the point of it for me.
Lots of places you can sideload it from but it is fine to install it from the Google Store: key creation and exchange have nothing to do with that.
Facebook cannot fix what happened two years ago, no matter how much the EU or the UK would press them to..
You can't change the past but the EU Commission could easily enforce not just financial sanctions as the case against Microsoft demonstrated. Anything that looks like unravelling that deal would put a lot of pressure on Facebook because of the size of the deal and the potential negative affect on Facebook's sell the idiots' data business model.
Expect the Trumpeter to get noisy about this.
Yes, "strictly necessary" cookies have never been a problem: the people who drafted these documents are not entirely clueless. Banners, such as those used on El Reg, do not constitute informed consent but are easy to copy. As this is how much of the internet works, this is why we see so many of them.
There is, of course, a problem with what constitutes "strictly necessary". I've argued successfully in the past that this can include statistics as long as the data collected is processed in accordance with the data privacy regulations of the website owner: this excludes Google Analytics, which Google provides as a "free" service in order to track people across websites.
Of course, in a "post-truth" world privacy can be considered as at best optional and, at worst, dangerous.
But now they all need each other. Trump won the election so he doesn't need votes from the saps any more but he will need Congress to get anything done and the palms in Congress will need greasing.
I don't think Boeing's going around boasting about how it's revolutionising the industry. Plus, and I don't know any details, doesn't Boeing have to produce something to satisfy the politicians? That usually means a whole heap of impossible requirements.
Anyway, having multiple suppliers is important. Having Space X in there undoubtedly encourages the others to up their game. Who knows, it might even lead them to tell the politicians when their pipe dreams are impossible or at least financially ruinous.
Whoever said rocket science isn't hard?
While admire a lot of what Musk does, there is often an undertone that the existing way of doing things is all wrong. Yes, NASA (but even more so DARPA) is a nice source of big, fat cost-plus contracts for the industry, but they still have an enviable record for getting stuff done. Especially the stuff no one has done before.
As for launch records: Space X still has a long way to go to match Ariane but it's good that they're trying and we're all learning new things.
Yes, because the Linux lot never get it wrong. Except that Debian and Ubuntu are famous for botching the integration of upstream patches (openSSL, cough). And RedHat will happily offer you software that is not only no longer maintained but actively warned against.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2017