As the PC market has matured, the entry level hardware spec has essentially stagnated while high end models continue to improve. The same could happen in the smartphone market, so that entry level phones good enough for light use remain about the spec of an SE. Apple need to think carefully how to set the entry level spec so as not to deter buyers from higher end phones. e.g. Make them look less appealing.
538 posts • joined 24 Nov 2008
Re: Something doesn't fly right with this story
but unshielded electric motors as on most consumer drones aren't designed for use in rain, and operating instructions say not to do so. Also the camera lens wont see anything through the rain drops without a lens wiper. This incident sounds like no ordinary drone - assuming there really did positively ID it at night and aren't jumping to conclusions.
We don't need new laws - but better enforcement of existing laws. Airport security ought to be equipped with jammers to intercept drone operator frequencies, or triangulators to identify the location of the operator.
Is Google purposefully breaking Microsoft, Apple browsers on its websites? Some insiders are confident it is
Will MS drop IE too?
In a way, dropping Edge makes sense for MS, as there's little point maintaining two different web browsers. If Edge was born as a cut-down version of IE, but failed to gain traction in it's intended market (mobile devices), it's engine and unique UI features can be rolled back into IE to unite MS's desktop browser market share. If they wait 'til after Google have switched to Shadow DOM v1, the Edge engine ought to still work for Google sites.
Should Google continue making their sites incompatible with other browsers, a future IE could include a Chromium rendering engine for Google's sites, and use the Edge engine for everything else. Relying on the Chromium engine outright would give Google the opportunity to screw up MS web apps. OTOH MS could embrace and extend the Chromium codebase and start causing Google some headaches!
This applies to classic RISCOS up to 3.1, the latest version may work differently, since modern ARM devices have a different memory controller.
"One-to-many mapping is used to 'hide' pages of applications away when several applications are sharing the same address (&8000 upwards) under the Desktop. These pages are, of course, not held at &8000"
Desktop applications run in user mode, and see an address space starting at &8000, the MEMC translates this to the real address in physical memory. When the 'desktop' switches between tasks, it changes which memory pages are mapped into address &8000 and upwards, which isolates / hides those memory pages from other tasks.
Code that runs in a privileged processor mode (like relocatable modules) can access the full memory address space. Relocatable modules are assigned memory in a shared block called the module area which is not dynamically mapped by the MEMC, allowing them to be called from anywhere. Hence the modules must use relative addressing so they can run at whatever memory address they are loaded. If modules were unloaded from memory, this could leave gaps of unrecoverable memory (unless the next module was small enough to load into a vacant gap). The result being that you often had to reboot a computer that had been running for a long time, when the module area was full.
All processes had to be written as position independent code that could sit anywhere in memory
Are you sure about that? I thought this applied only to relocatable modules, not application tasks which ran in user mode? IIRC the MEMC presented the memory pages allocated to a task as a fixed address space, protected from other tasks. Only relocatable modules run in a privileged mode / ring with access to the full physical address space.
This article would have been a lot more informative if it explained why this hardware spec is needed and how spending less / more on each part would affect application performance. Why do you need a 12 core CPU and 64Gb RAM, for something that runs on the GPU? How much would performance be affected using a regular 4 core CPU with 16Gb RAM and the same GPU?
Is the current immigration cap arbitrary / invented out of thin air? Is the cap not set at a calculated level for a good reason?
Shouldn't permitted immigration be dependent on factors like available housing and services in an area for one? If the cost of living is too expensive for local people, no more immigrants should be allowed.
Also, for immigration to benefit the country, shouldn't they impose a MAXIMUM salary? i.e. immigrants should not be paid more than local workers, but should not be imported to undercut them either (so prioritise local workers first).
I once saw an immigrant (German) dentist who told me the extortionate rate the NHS was paying to have him work here under contract. Expensive immigrants offer poor value to the taxpayer - we'd be better subsidising the education of our own workforce and paying them enough so that we have a sufficient number of talented British workers.
Here's my plan...
1. Don't sign any international agreement with arbitrary rules that are intended to make withdrawal difficult or impossible. e.g. Imposing an arbitrary period of 2 years to disentangle your economy is not realistic, therefore this expectation should never have been written into EU law. The rule that says you can't negotiate trade relations with other nations until after you have left the block should never have been accepted since it obviously intended to make leaving difficult.
2. Don't invoke the process of withdrawing from an international agreement unless you are ready to withdraw.
If we had a competent pro-British government in power from the begining, neither of these mistakes would have been made. It's evident that those in power are determined force political integration and global government and to make an example of anyone who defies their wishes.
I thought the reason Android phones gained a notch was because Apple's screen supplier had too much unsold stock after the initially underperforming sales of the iPhone X.
In practice, missing the central part of the status bar must be magnitudinally more inconvenient than having a few millimetres of sensors / cameras / speakers along the top of a phone.
OTOH, could it be an industry scheme to trickle-down a retrograde 'feature' to mid-range phones, then re-introduce normal screens back to premium models, to hike up the long term price of a normal, usable phone?
Huawei to hell
and the drones are designed to carry phones
which drones are designed to carry phones? You'd need a large drone (probably >1kg) to carry the weight of a mobile phone. Why shift all the extra weight when an action camera is smaller, lighter and has a bigger lens (more light = good for fast motion) ? Drones frequently crash or fly away, which is most undesirable for an expensive phone with your data on it.
The reason GoPro sales have fallen is because many people don't need to upgrade them, cheaper 4K action cameras are improving, and newer drones tend to have cameras integrated. Small cameras make the drones lighter and more portable.
re. "all the studies I've seen .. the service life of SSDs is comparable to enterprise HDDs"
Well those studies must be based on SSDs that have been in use for 2/3+ years, which probably means they are SLC or MLC (2 level), not TLC / QLC. Even the manufacturers of TLC / QLC admit their endurance is less, which is why they are targetted at consumers rather than production systems. The other worrying trend is that these short lifespan SSDs are increasingly being integrated into devices, so when they fail the whole device is a write off.
Using voltage levels to cram more data on a comms link doesn't justify doing the same for storage devices. A comms link only has to get the right data once, if an error is detected the data is re-sent. A storage device needs to store the right value indefinitely, if an error is detected, an algorithm must guess what the correct data was.
More needless government interfering...
What reason is there that new builds must have FTTP installed? Why not adopt the norms of a free market, let those who want something pay for it? FTTP is hardly a necessity when there are alternative ways of getting internet access.
If I build a new house and intend to live there for many years, I'm forced to pay for an FTTP installation that I already know I wont use? Anyone building a house has many more important priorities on which to spend their limited budget.
If there is a specific issue with rented accommodation not having FTTP connections, then pass legislation that landlords must permit the installation of FTTP if tenants want it.
Post-Brexit border crossings
If the EU insists on a hard border with Northern Ireland, what about (Greek) Cypriots who have to cross Dhekelia? Will pre-EU border arrangements apply, or will they face a double border-crossing each way? Will goods have to be transported by sea to avoid paying double tariffs?
I appreciate the constructive replies. High precision Galileo is accurate to ~10cm while the standard precision is about ~1 metre. So what new applications does this precision offer? What current applications are improved?
1. Cruise missiles / Precision-guided munition
- Guided weapons will destroy everything within 10's of metres, so targetting more accurately than 1 meter makes negligible difference.
- Mobile targets require weapons with localised target tracking
2. Avoiding collateral damage - eg schools being blown up rather than the nearby military target
- 1 metre precision is sufficient to avoid this.
- building surveyors need much greater precision than 10cm, so conventional survey equipment must still be used.
- surveying natural geography could benefit - but isn't worth investing £billions
4. Transport system & autonomous vehicles.
- 1 metre accuracy is sufficient for route planning
- high precision positioning cannot replace the need for lidar / camera sensors to respond to surroundings
5. mapping minefields and paths through them
- 10 cm is better than 1m, but is it sufficient to guarantee avoiding mines without the use of other sensors?
6. "Power of a state / country is measured against their capability (and resolve), and without precision gps, UK's already lost."
- It's up to every state to decide their own priorities. I disagree that higher precision GPS (below 1m) offers much advantage. Ownership of a satellite positioning system does not guarantee access. Dependence on satellite positioning should be avoided.
> "people who disagree with me are even allowed to express their opinions"
I don't advocate censorship, but respected opinions should be founded on accurate information and reasoning.
Re: In perspective, Galileo isn't important
We voted to leave the EU, not ESA or Galileo or access to high precision Galileo.
Britain is a founder member of the Galileo project, the EU is not.
The EU later joined Galileo and changed the participation requirements so only EU members can have access to high precision positioning. Why did lawyers representing the original participants accept this?
If lawyers failed to guarantee participant's rights, could another international organisation join ESA, claim control over a project like Galileo then bar access to the EU or another member if they left said international organisation?
In perspective, Galileo isn't important
I've concluded that this forum is being used to spread anti-Brexit opinions without basis in reason. The same appears to be the case with the attempt in the wider media to link Brexit with Russia using political actors. This may be to discourage other EU members from leaving or to manufacture a false narrative for reversing Brexit.
Galileo is a minor issue in perspective, but regaining the political independence to control our borders will significantly benefit the lives of the majority of ordinary British people, if implemented effectively.
I remain ignorant - of a practical application for why we need high precision (sub-1 metre) satellite positioning. It's claimed our military or emergency services need it, but why? (Seriously)
Without a reason, high precision Galileo is no loss, nor is there much to gain by creating yet another satellite positioning system. The costs to the taxpayer of the Brexit transition are significant, therefore non-essential costs such as this should be avoided.
The lesson to be learned from this is that in any future international co-operation, lawyers must clearly set out guarantees to continued participation in a project from the outset. Allowing another partner to join a project at a later date, then change the terms to exclude an an existing partner is NOT ACCEPTABLE.
The fact is political union is not required for international co-operation. In reality we and the rest of the world can "have our cake and eat it" but a cabal who want to centralise political power globally are determined to deny us this. They attempt to convince us with false arguments that it's not possible. If we were to hypothetically create another satellite positioning system with non-EU partners, must we surrender to a new political union to achieve this?
PS. Rather than downvote, please reply with facts and reasoning.
If the EU claims to own Galileo (rather than each ESA nation according to contribution) what happens if more countries leave the EU? Does the last member of the EU get to inherit all the assets?
The public Galileo system provides accuracy of 1 metre. Why do we need more accuracy than this?
If the military applications are classified, why would the EU deny us access when they are more dependent on us for defence? We are one of the few nations in Europe to meet our 2% NATO budget commitment despite being in the safest position (having a sea border + the rest of Europe to buffer us from hostile regions). Maybe we should take it easy, cut our defence budget and let the EU take up the slack?
In summary, getting back control of our borders is far more important.
Seawolf's major shortcoming was that it was a line-of-sight system, restricting its practical range to around seven or eight nautical miles
but in the confines of the Gulf where your ships are permanently shadowed by fast boats, Seawolf is all you need.
Sea Ceptor - Developed by EU defence conglomerate MBDA
MBDA's website says they're "European". Let's hope it's not dependent on Galileo or we're screwed.
think about the physics involved in trying to hit something coming at you at over 2 miles per second
Maybe we should have built submaries that can dive very quickly?
If the F-35 remains our only fifth gen fighter, we'll need them all, even if some are kept as spares ( i.e. not in active service).
Carrier fighters only have a short lifespan so the QE-class carriers will need a replacement air wing or two. The only likely replacements will be more F-35's or F-35 derivatives.
I sincerely hope our government doesn't make a knee-jerk commitment to creating an identical sat nav constellation with no ROI, since we have enough expenses resulting from Brexit. How likely are we to ever deploy our military in circumstances where they are denied access to an existing sat nav service?
If the priority is the continued employment of UK based satellite engineers, there are other kinds of satellites that we could benefit from, that don't require the expense of launching an entire constellation. That might also afford them the opportunity to develop new skills, rather than simply repeat what they've done before.
I assume it has a nice way of recognising the border in Ireland and can leash Rees-Mogg missiles of doom (ship's biscuits) on naughty foreigners crossing over.
What happens is every vehicle crossing the border drives over a weigh scale, so the vehicle weight is recorded with the licence plate. The integrated surveillance network of satellites / UAVs / cellphone trackers / traffic cameras monitor every vehicle journey. The start and end is recorded for every journey that crosses the border. The information is stored in a big database which identifies mass transfer over time, highlighting sites with a high net mass loss / gain. These are then cross referenced with declared goods importers / exporters to identify persons potentially trafficking goods illegally.
PS. No good for weapons / drugs but the data could be useful to identify suspicious journeys.
This is political posturing to try to keep us in Galileo, and offer a future to UK based companies.
Launching another commercial Satnav system would be a waste of money, but a defence only guidance system may be necessary if the UK is denied access to Galileo's high precision data.
The alternative might be the US giving the UK access to high precision GPS, but what if they demand our laws must be made in Washington?
Not My NME
I'd rather our armed forces defend our country from those who are actually invading, occupying and/or taking over, rather than exacerbating relations with foreign nations who aren't doing the above.
Conflicts are usually provoked by those who stand to gain. If only our puppet politicians and national media weren't controlled by a few psychos who are ultimately undermining our country (or what's left of it). They probably have their own private nuclear bunkers.
Glad to see elReg is on the ball and didn't call this the "Spring Creators Update" like many other tech publications. The spring "Creators Update" was last year (1703). That said, they should think of a better name for this one. How about the "May 2018 Creators Update"?
Yet Another Satellite Navigation System
With so many SatNav systems to choose from (GPS, GLONASS, Galileo, BeiDou, NAVIC) why waste money creating another? A cheaper option is to merge the publicly available positioning data from them all to get increased precision.
As the Russians or Iranians (presumably) have demo-ed in Syria, current SatNav systems are vulnerable to electronic interference meaning they can't be relied upon for military applications. Better to invest in alternative navigation systems combining inertial + ground radar data etc. If you must have a private SatNav for military purposes, launch 3+ disposable micro-satellites near the target area (keeping the protocol secret). All major powers can destroy satellites from the ground, so you can't expect SatNav satellites to remain active for long in a real conflict.
EU big, EU right
excepting the kippers who need 'special' consideration
We voted to leave the EU, not ESA. That means the electorate is opposed to closer political & economic union, but not against research collaboration. The EU is still on track to become a superstate, it's way more than just the free trade area we voted to join originally.
Our membership of ESA predates the EU's, but it appears the EU now decides who qualifies to participate, but Brexit must be seen to take the rap for the change in participation requirements (it's better PR for globalisation that way).
It's probably a good thing to define the future relationship now, since in the long term the EU superstate is likely to foment control of more European institutions. Every institution will have to decide it's raison d'etre. Should they serve the people or the powerful, and what's the contention?
Small problem: world faces big shortages of air freight capacity
The solution to this is to increase the number of dedicated air freight aircraft. There's a use for old A380s if operators want to upgrade to the A380neo.
Most freight aircraft are converted ex-passenger planes. If the challenge is to keep them flying longer (beyond their normal airworthy lifespan) without endangering lives, why not remove the pilots and have them operate as freighter drones? To reduce the risk to people on the ground, re-route the flightpaths / choose runways to avoid populated areas.They say planes practically fly themselves, so why not let them?
0th world problem
"The notch" is such an irrelevance it signifies mobile phone design has reached it's zenith. Anyone seeking interesting work in product design should look elsewhere.
Here's a suggestion: if phone companies are so concerned about size, why not invest some R&D money in creating thin but effective phone protectors, or does that not align with your profit motive? They're in common use, but they are chunky and run counter to the tactile experience of using an expensive phone. But the more expensive the phone, the more worthwhile the phone protector.
If a phone can detect it's falling, it could trigger the protector to flare up like an airbag to provide better impact protection.
Another problem: if manufacturers produce edge to edge displays, the phone protector can't grip around them without obscuring the display.
generators capable of running whole factory cost lot of money
Yes, but the production process could have been designed with a UPS powered safe shutdown procedure that would avoid destroying 11% of the monthly production run (if it doesn't take longer to restart production from this state).
It would be wise to design factories so that critical parts can be swiftly evacuated in the event that the factory is about to face flood / fire / invasion etc.
It would also be wise not to cluster the manufacturing of one component type in one area of the world.
If AR / VR is going to be the next UI for computers, it needs to subsume the existing screen based interfaces, allowing current applications to appears as 2D surfaces within the virtual environment. No-one wants to keep taking their headset on an off to see to a screen, or or worse, look at a screen using a camera. The desktop / phone UI needs to be pulled apart and put into a virtual environment.
As for Mixed reality, unless the headset is completely untethered, home users will have a very limited real environment to "mix" with.
Stock Android = "OK Google" always listening?
If the market is heading towards stock Android on all phones for security updates, does this mean they will always be listening for "OK Google" (and everything else)? This has been reported for recent Android 7 & 8 phones with Google Now / Assistant, even after turning the setting off. Perhaps this is a "feature" for phones sold only in certain countries (for now), along with disabling the VPN?
Big Brother will be pleased.
Data globalisation -> Russia wins
The proles may have voted for Brexit but that wont stop the powers that be needlessly globalising everything. That we the people aren't consulted about how our own data is stored demonstrates how our "democracy" works. If we are consulted, it will be after they've implemented it so that reversing the decision will be costly and disruptive.
Even if cloud hosting costs are cheaper elsewhere, the data transmissions costs must be taken into account. It's probably worth paying more if the extra money is fed back into the local economy.
If the Russians are capable of tapping transatlantic cables, data security is at risk. In the event that they cut our communication links (or if they are cut by mistake or natural causes), the NHS wont have reliable access to patient data.
A shame but not suprising
It's a shame when management make such an abrupt decision to exit the market, throwing away all that development experience, rather than attempt to become more competitive. More so if they make the decision just as a new model is near release. Great news for their competitors though.
With over 1000 employees for just a couple of product lines (the manufacturing is probably outsourced), it's not hard to see why they're so expensive. I expect their cheaper competitors have a much smaller team allowing them to significantly undercut them on price. The business model of making a cheaper, inferior product for a wider market and iterating the design every year to copy the innovators seems to be more successful. Perhaps more western companies should adopt this approach and do away with the expensive overheads of research and advertising?
Rather than sully an established brand, introduce a new no-name brand for the cheaper product. If your no-name brand attracts a bad reputation for one product iteration, just invent another throwaway no-name brand the next year. Cheapness always sells.
How is this lawful?
The Mark II Dronegun will possibly disrupt drone operations by jamming command, control and communication frequencies
This must violate legislation in most juristictions. What about laws restricting radio frequency interference? Is the owner of the drone still responsible if someone else is interfering with the control signal? What if the battery expires while they don't have control, or they violate minimum separation rules because they can't take avoiding action? If the drone is damaged or causes damage to other property, is the operator of the Dronegun liable?
If a Dronegun is lawful, why not an anti-Dronegun device? If it's permissible for anyone to hack the operation of someone's private property, what else is permitted? Can I shoot your pet dog / carrier pigeon with tranquiliser darts? What if it's carrying a camera?
Have any SSD advocates seen recent market stats to back up (sic) their projections?
A couple of years ago it was reported that SSD fabs were ramping production to meet demand, with SSD prices remaining stable for the last 3 years. Are sales still rising or is the consumer SSD channel now overstocked?
Re: Why go totally F-35?
It may be able to do that when it has no stores, but put a few bombs on it and its range beyond the bow will be measured in metres
The Ruskies solved this by air-to-air refuelling. They have expensive "buddy" fighters converted to this role, which also have to be carrier launched and have limited range. Besides this is a moot point, since the QE class has a straight flight deck with a ski-jump, so it can only operate V/STOL aircraft at present.
However it's generally impossible to operate the catapults and have the landing area clear at the same time as they overlap, I think the latest US carrier might be the first to allow that by some careful re-positioning of parts.
Nimitz carriers have catapults on both the foredeck and the landing deck. See http://www.gettyimages.co.uk/detail/news-photo/x/556638285