* Posts by Mark .

1859 posts • joined 18 Jun 2009

Borked Bitcoin bunker MtGox in administration: Lawyer seizes control

Mark .

Re: Mighty quiet ....

Another way of looking at it is that almost always true with Bitcoin that the price at any given time is significantly less than its all time high - because Bitcoin tends to grow in sudden spurts where the value rockets up, then drops back down to a lower value, that's still much higher than the previous level. So being at $500 when the all time high is around $1000 isn't any sign of a decline.

Whether the price will drop down to a lower level like $100-200 or not, is anyone's guess.

Google shuts Glass store and nixes Video Call feature

Mark .

Re: I wonder how much it costs to make one of these

They're not paying for the privilege to develop, they're paying for the hardware. And when early developer kits for new hardware like consoles or whatever else appear, I thought it's pretty standard that you have to pay.

I don't know about a failed Newton, but it's like selling console developer kits to games companies and asking them to write games. You know, like how it happens all the time.

Samsung's thumb-achingly ENORMO Galaxy Note Pro 12.2

Mark .

Re: Phones getting bigger?

Your post is "This one person does things this way, therefore everyone will". Personally I see no point in 10" tablets, as I'd rather have a more functional laptop/netbook (although the 2-in-1s are fine too). If you're going to do it that way, why both with a phone at all? (Some large tablets are actually smartphones, just use a bluetooth headset.)

A 5" phone isn't a nasty compromise - it's a decent sized screen, whilst still being small enough to fit in my pocket and come with me everywhere. I'm not sure someone really gains much by swapping the 5" phone for a 3" one, especially when they then also carry a 10" device everywhere.

The 5" phone doesn't replace a tablet or laptop, I have a 7" tablet and 10" laptop too, but don't have them on me all the time.

Mark .

Re: re. use in portrait orientation

You're not comparing like with like though. I don't see how people know what to expect with Android anymore than with Windows 8 - there are plenty of devices to choose from (not that I think choice is a bad thing anyway, it's one of the things I like about those platforms).

People know what to expect with say the Galaxy Note, but you could say the same thing about specific Windows devices, e.g., Surface Pro, or Transformer Book.

Amazon sets FIRE to your living room in bid to shake up TV streaming

Mark .

"I note Nokia are now trying to use Android as a base in the same way."

Not true, Nokia X supports 3rd party app stores, and so works with anyone. True, it doesn't ship with Google Play, but that's because Google Play is closed, and they charge for it - it's not part of AOSP. So yes, it's because of a closed ecosystem, but Google's, not Nokia's. Consider that there's nothing stopping Google putting Google Play on Nokia X (just like Amazon have put theirs on Google Play).

"I think Amazon are big enough to make a dent in Google Play and iTunes, but do consumers really want to embrace yet another ecosystem"

Of course not, it would be so terrible to have a whole three shops to buy things from. The Internet would be so much better if it was just like the old days, when there was only one shop in town that sold things.

Seriously - when someone says "ecosystem", read "vendor lock-in". Companies want "ecosystems", I just want to buy from where I want. I might buy music from Amazon, put it on Google Music, then stream it via either Windows, or perhaps via my Android tablet that pretends to be a Chromecast device, and sends it via DLNA to my LG TV (I'd rather stream direct from Google Music to my TV, but again, that's the downside of an ecosystem lock-in).

I don't want a rainforest, I want my devices to work together.

I take the point that, if closed ecosystems are bad, adding another one isn't a good idea either. But I think the more systems there are, the more chance that companies are forced to work together. People might say "I don't like this new device, that doesn't work with anything else", but I hope people won't say "I don't like this new device, because I enjoy being locked into this other ecosystem".

Mark .

Re: OK? How would this be crusing Apple then?

I presumed it meant, as in people might actually buy it...

Does AppleTV also work as a console? If it does, I've yet to hear of anyone making games for it. You might as well say AppleTV offers nothing that loads of generic set-top streaming boxes offer (in which case, true, there's no reason to specifically mention Apple over anyone else in the article).

Or possibly all these ~$99 boxes will lose out to cheaper devices like Chromecast and NowTV.

Mark .

Re: UK version?

Does being a smart TV really add that much? I mean, that suggests you can get two TVs that are otherwise identical quality/features/etc, apart from one being cheaper without the "smart" functionality. When I looked though, smart functionality is now coming as standard for many manufacturers, except perhaps for the very cheapest (which are often older generations still on sale).

"All Smart TVs need a smart phone or tablet to access all features easily."

Depends - the "magic remote" (Wii-style pointer) works fine with my LG, and the smartphone app simply gives me control of the same mouse pointer, so isn't any easier for many things. On the other hand, getting it to stream local content via DLNA is easier using Windows laptop or Android apps. I'd say other devices complement a smart TV, rather than being a requirement.

It doesn't matter that the Chromecast requires a hosting device, because the whole point of it is to connect hosting device to TV. As you note yourself, selecting content (whether a TV stream or local media) is easier via laptop/tablet/phone, so why not make use of that.

Another cheap option though would be NowTV - although the paid content is I believe restricted to one option, it's cheaper than Chromecast, doesn't need any additional devices, and comes with free content too.

As WinXP death looms, Microsoft releases its operating system SOURCE CODE for free

Mark .

Re: Are you insane?

And we can look forward to releases every six months, with major annoying changes far more frequent than the long periods of Windows, and a much shorter period of support forcing us to upgrade. If we're lucky, the new version won't black screen on boot, and we won't have to spend ages editing graphics card config files to get it working again.

(I use and like Ubuntu, but I find it odd that the criticisms to Windows here apply far more to distributions like Ubuntu.)

Mark .

Re: Are you insane?

I agree - I not only love the history revisionism that portrays Windows XP (hated by geeks at the time) as now some golden age of Microsoft operating systems, but you have people actively wanting to run an OS targetted on machines less powerful than three year old smartphones. Apparently all those years when MS was criticised for the security model was just a joke.

Yes, it's a shame that people do have to upgrade once every 10 years even if they don't care for the new "up-front" features, and yes software companies do therefore get to earn money in return for continuing to upgrade the OS for new hardware, and fixing security issues. But personally I love living in a future where even my phone runs rings around my Windows 2000 desktop PC, let alone the hardware I have in my laptop. I wouldn't trade that just to save an upgrade fee that's required to take advantage of it, and if I was that against it, there are free operating systems that people could use and stop complaining. I'd be curious to know how many people here really are running Windows XP on their home machines, or are just Windows-critics in disguise...

Mark .

Like most software companies then.

Meanwhile, how well does http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ReactOS work, if that's what you want?

Mark .

Re: Are you insane?

But I thought XP was just 2000 with useless crap and a fisher price interface. And had huge security holes like everything being run as admin, and programs being able to write to each others' folders. Funny how its now praised as being great.

I never was much a fan of XP; it didn't offer much over 2000, and was only an improvement to those who were previously on 9x/Me. Windows 7 onwards meanwhile does have improvements under the hood, whether better support for newer hardware like SSDs, improved security model, and I like being able to launch programs by typing the name or clicking on the taskbar, rather than scrolling through a big list of every app. Anything was better than DOS or Windows 9x though.

If you don't want the extra crap, go get NT 3.5.

MtGox finds 200,000 Bitcoin in old wallets

Mark .

Re: ::shakes head:: @Jake

Except Bitcoin is alive and well, so if the "too good to be true" refers to that, those people are still doing fine, with Bitcoin values still 900% up from a year ago - a time when people like you were already claiming that that was the top of a bubble.

The problem at Mt Gox was "storing large amounts of Bitcoin in an online wallet, especially on an exchange where for months they've had troubles like not allowing withdrawals of USD", and as d3rrial points out, most people - including Bitcoin users - were aware of the problems for ages.

MPs urge UK.gov to use 1950s obscenity law to stifle online stiffies

Mark .

Re: The politicos said that grumble flick websites should require a credit card

It's also odd that typical anti-pr0n arguments usually refer to commercial material, and apply less to say, sites with user-generated material. But here we have MPs telling us that if you want to show other people, it must be done commercially!

FANBOIS' EYES ONLY: United Airlines offers FREE MOVIES on iOS kit

Mark .

Re: Android #fail

You do realise that the browser is an "app", right? An odd criticism to make, given how ios devices seem to need an app to view every single web page out there.

I'm not sure why you criticise removing Flash, since when could IOS do that?

Mark .

Re: Excellent news

No, people would be annoyed at paying loads for a seat, then finding that they offer this service only to the minority of iphone users. I remember when there were uproars when companies "only" catered for 90% of Windows users - and it was right that people complained, because 10% or not, it's still unfair and anti-competitive to lock people out based on what they use. But the situation with iphone-only support is ridiculous, when it's barely managed above 20%.

Why can't it all be through a browser, instead of needing an exe? We had the days of "Best viewed in Internet Explorer", then the days of needing Flash, but today where we need a propetary executable that only works on a minority of devices is far worse.

And the industry wonders why they're losing money and people download. The flyer who bittorrented their media gets it to Just Work with any make of device he or she has.

Sorry, like most people I don't have an iphone - that doesn't mean we're "anti-Apple".

MtGox gets its sorry assets frozen amid US class-action lawsuit

Mark .

Re: This almost sounds like...

But the value of Bitcoin isn't decided by what's printed on the paper like Monopoly money (perhaps you were confusing it with fiat currencies...), but based on the market value.

If something has market value, I don't see why that means it's not "real", or is "imaginery", nor why this makes them like 8 year olds. Whilst the concept of Bitcoin has yet to be tested in court, the idea of things having a market value most certainly has - even if something isn't a currency, for laws like theft, fraud etc, courts can still look at the market value.

Indeed, if someone stole your Monopoly money, they'd still be guilty of theft - try doing it from your local shop, and see if they won't call the police because you cry that it's not "real money". It's still real theft.

(You also ignore that exchanges store "real money" too, which I believe people are suing over.)

Mark .

Re: anymore money is just 1's and 0's on some bank's computer also

Similar with Paypal. Keeping significant amounts of money on an exchange is as dumb as doing so with Paypal - though I fear there are a lot more people doing the latter.

"Plus there's the fact that the bits managed by your bank have a source that is way more based in reality than the ones "mined" by a graphics card."

This doesn't make sense, bits are as real as any other, and I'm not sure how one defines a "source". In Bitcoin, the bits represent a private key. The original source of bitcoins in the network are being "mined", but I don't see how printing paper is more "based in reality"... (Well, one is purely virtual, but if you dismiss that, obviously you're not going to be interested in any purely virtual currency.)

Mark .

They can still freeze the rest of the assets - remember that exchanges don't just hold Bitcoin, but also currency like USD. Indeed, the class action that I read about stated they would only be suing for lost USD, due to the increased likelihood of success in court.

MtGox, that bastion of unregulated e-currency Bitcoin, turns to Texas judge for protection

Mark .

Re: Perhaps someone can explain to me...

The time isn't for the transaction, rather it's to receive "confirmations".

Pubs I've seen accepting Bitcoin don't care about waiting for confirmations. Yes, theoretically this means someone could fraudulent buy beer with Bitcoins, but then they'd just come over to you a few minutes later.

It's true that Bitcoin is less suitable for a physical shop where you can walk away with the goods straightaway, but that's not really where people are expecting it to be useful. The potential uses are lower transaction fees for online ordering, international money transfers, and transferring money between individuals in countries that don't have as good a banking system as the UK (and not having to rely on Paypal for any of these).

As I say in my other comment, there are other reasons why people might end up having money on exchanges. Whilst eliminating the time for confirmations is an interest use of an exchange/online wallet, this requires the recipient to have an account of the same site, and I'd say is only of minimal use in practice.

"Now there are lots of them and there seems no reason why Mike down the road can't start Mike'sCoin in his mom's basement. This must surely undermine any "scarcity" value and erode confidence in bitcoin as a medium of transferring value."

But there is also value in how many places accept the currency. Even now, there are far more places accepting Bitcoin than your Mike'sCoin, so why would I buy any of Mike'sCoin? No doubt we may see several virtual currencies come into mainstream use, but creating new currencies doesn't automatically reduce the scarcity of existing currencies.

Mark .

Re: Perhaps someone can explain to me...

This doesn't really answer his question, and is rather inaccurate. You can use Bitcoin stored on your own computer just fine - you don't need an exchange to spend them in a pub, online shop, or whatever that accepts Bitcoin. The fact that the value is mainly determined by the trading on exchanges doesn't require you to store any on an exchange.

In fact, having money on an exchange in most cases would be useless for spending - you'd usually first have to transfer to a wallet (e.g., on a phone or your computer) to spend it.

Using exchanges with online wallets is the easiest way to obtain Bitcoin (though not the only way), but one can immediately withdraw.

The main reasons for having lots on an exchange are (a) laziness/stupidity, (b) someone who's filthy rich from Bitcoin anyway, so even a small proportion represents a large amount, (c) people who are day trading large amounts.

"Compounding factor is that there's also an insane amount of speculation on the value of BC, which requires you to have serious amounts of "BC value" in accounts in exchanges"

I don't understand this - the amount you want to invest in Bitcoin (whether on an exchange, or not) isn't affected by the price of Bitcoin.

As for "completely useless and valueless, they have no backing of "the equivalent of...."", they have uses; nothing has "inherent" value, other than what people give to it, and Bitcoin isn't backed in the same way that gold isn't backed by anything (and nor are modern currencies backed by anything else, either). Your last paragraph is just an ad hominem rant.

Bitcoin ban row latest: 'Unstable, loved by criminals' Yup, that's the US dollar – Colorado rep

Mark .

Re: It's actually quite hilarious

I don't think the OP is calling for Bitcoin to become legal tender though (in the sense of, the national currency, i.e., something you get paid on, and must be accepted by businesses and the Government as payment). So no, Bitcoin is not fiat.

Brit Bitcoin dev: I lost 'over £200k' when MtGox popped its socks

Mark .

I wasn't aware that there is a "community", that one person is now magically a figurehead for. But I guess arguing against straw men is easy to do. Your analogies aren't even vaguely relevant.

Mark .

Re: Disappointed with how naïve the dev is

"I was always suspicious of the Bitcoin stuff. It sounds like: Hey, I have all this money, let me exchange it for a virtual currency, and for that I get a string of 0 & 1's. That's the proof that I own virtual coins. Now, let me give that string to someone else for safe keeping."

It's the last bit that's the problem, but that isn't part of Bitcoin, rather a problem with using online wallets (including keeping large amounts on an exchange).

"Virtual currency may be the future. But just as the the original IBM PC was no where near the best PC, and DOS was not a secure operating system, the first incarnation of a virtual currency was never going to be the best virtual currency."

Possibly, but don't underestimate the network effect. And to go with your analogy, whilst today's computers are far removed from an original IBM DOS PC, we can still trace a heritage where hardware technology in today's x86 machines that still dominate computing evolved from that IBM PC, and where competing platforms died out (68K, PPC, even Macs switched to being a brandname based on the x86 hardware that everything else uses); and the OS running on 90% of those machines evolved from a family of operating systems descended from DOS.

Also there is the issue, as I say above, the problem here is not with the currency itself, but what happens when you give that currency to someone else to "look after" it. Other competing virtual currencies still have that same problem, AFAIK. I'm not sure how this could be solved by the implementation of the currency itself? Note, Bitcoin already offers the ability to store the currency yourself, and trade for other currency yourself, it's just that online exchanges are much more convient for doing trading. I did once use an exchange where you can trade direct with people, but it's less convenient to use.

Mark .

Re: Disappointed with how naïve the dev is

It would be interesting to know how much he's lost as a proportion of what he had - if it's most of it, he is indeed foolish, and surprising for a Bitcoin developer. On the other hand, maybe he is filthy rich (not implausible, for someone in to Bitcoin from an early stage). Why go to the police if it's only a small amount? Well, I'd still report theft of my wallet to the police, even if the cash on there was a tiny fraction of my wealth, most of which is stored in banks.

Your arguments about "pretend bits" "backed by... nothing" make no sense; modern currency is not backed (by definition of being "fiat"), and I don't think being virtual stops this being theft (or some kind of crime at least - if a hacker causes damage to information which results in a loss, good luck claiming it's just "pretend bits").

Plenty of Bitcoin supporters and users would like regulation and certainly more security, I'm not sure how many want "wild west". Different people have different views. Bitcoin doesn't need to be "backed", as Bitcoin *is* the thing being bought (gold isn't backed by anything else).

Blimey! ANOTHER Bitcoin bleed brouhaha

Mark .

Re: Whereas if it was a bank doing these transactions @Ben

Question for you, do you not own anything that isn't backed by the Government's deposit guarantee?

Bitcoin certainly isn't as secure as that, but that doesn't mean people don't have any other investments - I find it odd that Bitcoin draws such anger from some people, who presumably don't spend their time mocking people who say, took out a shares ISA this year.

Bitcoin is not completely anonymous as all transactions are public, allowing some means to trace. Police should be interest in a theft of Bitcoin as much as anything else, though yes there is the practical issue that they either may not care, or find it harder to investigate.

People have been claiming the bubble will burst since the price was $10. I'm still waiting for it to drop back down to that price, let alone go below.

Mark .

Re: Whereas if it was a bank doing these transactions

Straw men are usually quiet.

Paypal deals with "fiat" and has the same problem of being unregulated and good luck if they shut your account with money in it (even if it's their choosing, rather than due to an actual theft); OTOH, I and plenty of other people want anyone handling Bitcoin to improve their security, and it'd be a good thing for more mainstream use to have more regulated and secure places to manage/buy/store Bitcoin. Bitcoin as it is today obviously isn't on par with national currency or banks, and I don't think anyone claims it is; OTOH there are a lot of things that people use (Paypal, various forms of investments) that aren't either.

Hundreds of folks ready to sue Bitcoin exchange MtGox

Mark .

Re: Surely if Bitcoins are

To the RIAA perhaps, but for the rest of us, IP "theft" isn't theft, but copyright infringement.

This on the other hand is an actual instance where something virtual really has been stolen - the original owners are deprived of it.

Bitcoin bank Flexcoin pulls plug after cyber-robbers nick $610,000

Mark .

Re: Leading indicator...

This is why no one uses Paypal - not regulated by a bank, no deposit insurance, not backed by an army.

Mark .

Re: I believe that a well-implemented cybercurrency would be a good thing...

A better analogy would be buying gold, where it's held by a company, rather than physically owning it.

There's no central bank reserves or deposit insurance to back that up, either. But many people still invest in gold, without it being branded "19th century".

Mark .

Re: I believe that a well-implemented cybercurrency would be a good thing...

What improvements for being "well implemented" do you suggest?

I mean, a lot of the problems here are with the "cyber" aspect. Physical security is in some ways easier, you can lock it up, put armed guards on, and so on. With computer security, there are pitfalls such as people using weak passwords, keyloggers and so on.

The other issue is one of regulation and laws - it still being easier for online exchanges/wallets to say "not our problem", and difficulty of getting police to look into the theft.

What improvements to the currency itself would fix these? (Genuine question - not saying it isn't possible, but it's easy to say it could be done better, without actually explaining how.)

Mark .

Re: And yet...

First bubble? If price going down means it was a bubble, Bitcoin has experienced multiple bubbles in its history.

Yet given that each low is far higher than the height of the previous bubble, this doesn't really prove the people saying "It's a bubble" right, when they've been claiming that since the price was at $10 or earlier.

The fact that people who sold at $1000 doesn't mean that people who bought at a recent low are wrong. I don't see how they are gullible - those that sell now, after buying when it was lower, have made a profit.Buying low is just as important as selling high.

Child sex abuse image peddlers dodge UK smut filters and demand Bitcoin payments

Mark .

Re: What exactly is a "pseudo-photograph"?

But what do you mean he very much looks like a trader? If by that, you mean evidence, then that would be enough to convict.

A jury are not required to be convinced completely, but beyond reasonable doubt - no different to any other crime.

Individual politicians do not have the powers to pass new laws. They can make some media-friendly soundbites, without actually doing anything of real consequence.

Mark .

Re: What exactly is a "pseudo-photograph"?

Looks like a photo, but isn't - so includes computer generated imagery.

(This change occurred in 1994. 2003 raised the age to 18. As of around 2009, any non-realistic depictions are also included. It's been a slippery slope...)


Mark .

Re: You think that I was saying that this was just good for Apple?

You misspelled Symbian (or later, Android). The early iphone sales were nothing compare to other smartphone platforms, and later it was Android that dominated. Even Windows Mobile outsold the iphone in the early years, it was so pathetic.

The best selling smartphone of all time is the 2009 Nokia 5230. And that was just one of many Nokia smartphones. That made the smartphone mass-market - but unfortunately, you've probably never even heard of the device, because the UK media just harped on about the poorly selling Apple phones all the time.

The first few iphones were the geek toys, whilst everyone else was using Blackberry, Symbian, Android. Not to mention that anything before iphone 4 could hardly be called a smartphone - the first one couldn't even do apps!

Mark .

Re: You think that I was saying that this was just good for Apple?

Except the 2007 iphone couldn't even run apps - yet even bog standard feature phones from 2005 or earlier could. As noted in other comments, the iphone lacked features, and took years to catch up.

The only customisation I'm aware of is them sticking their own application stores or website links on there, but that still happens, everything from Kindle Fire to Tesco Hudl. (And you can hardly argue that it was good that 3rd party customisation was provided by applications "thanks to Apple", whilst whinging that networks provided 3rd party applications!)

Mark .

Re: Apple sucked their business out from under them?

What Apple did was stop users from having features. Copy and paste? MMS? Video calling? Had to wait years for that.

Mark .

"Best smartphone didn't go to an offering by either of the two market leaders – Apple and Samsung"

Samsung are the market leader, period. And even Nokia still outsell Apple. Why this fascination with pretending that 3rd-place-Apple are on par with number one? As Bender says, it's a fancy name for losing.

Quite why I'd want an ipad heavy either - the functionality of a feature phone, with the portability of a laptop. A Nexus 7 is much more portable and lighter.

MtGox has VANISHED. So where have all the Bitcoins gone?

Mark .

Re: And yet we're still to believe...

"Would you trust a bank with your cash, without a government deposit guarantee?"

So you don't have any money/investments beyond what is in a Government-guaranteed bank account?

Of course ones life savings should be kept safe, but that doesn't mean people don't have money in less safe places, whether it's convenience (your cash in your wallet isn't Government-backed either) or potential of better returns.

Mark .

Re: electricity wasting global ponzi scheme

I love all these people complaining about wasting electricity, whilst using electricity-guzzling computers to do so. It's like the people who get on a high horse thinking they're saving the planet by turning off lights for one hour.

One might as well criticise paper money, because of having to cut down trees.

Mark .

Re: Face meet Palm

Yes, the price has now crashed to pennies like everyone predicted. Oh wait, no it hasn't.

(I can tear up paper money. The non-robust part of Bitcoin is trusting some 3rd party with all your Bitcoin when it's not regulated like banks are. Mt Gox can do what it likes, that doesn't cause my Bitcoin to disappear.)

MtGox MELTDOWN: Quits Bitcoin Foundation board, deletes Twitter

Mark .

Well yes, sooner or later everything will come to an end (to clarify, Mt Gox in this news story, not Bitcoin). I'm not sure that's useful though, without knowing whether that will happen tomorrow or the heat death of the Universe. And The Register will one day end too, but you're still here using it in the meantime.

Nokia launches Android range: X marks the growing low-cost spot

Mark .

Re: Forking from the inside.

I agree, though also, some of those 25% may be because of dependency on things that aren't yet available on Nokia Store. E.g., some of my apps use Qt, which requires the necessitas library, which it automatically downloads from the device's default site. So it will work as soon as necessitas is available on Nokia Store (they've been good about making it available on many sites, not just Google Play), but when it came to their initial automated testing, it meant those apps failed the compatibility test. So hopefully this figure will drop in future.

Mark .

Re: Forking from the inside.

In-app freemium apps, DRM, advertising, "achievements" are useful things? :)

I agree that a hurdle is that many won't bother distribute to Nokia Store at all, but for those that do, I don't see why they'd jack up the price - it's extra customers, for relatively very little extra work compared to developing an application or porting to a new platform.

Are the requirements for being certified for Google apps known?

It could be argued the other way - there's nothing stopping Google making their apps available for all Android devices, on other stores (or at least, making it possible to download from the website for sideloading without owning needing to use an Android device that already has Google Play). They just choose not to. Note that (unlike I think the Kindle Fire?), these devices won't be "locked down" devices that only work with Nokia Store, there is already mention of them working with other 3rd party sites. Nothing stopping Google working with that.

I currently enjoy using One Note on my Android Nexus devices. That's not because Google has "certified" itself to MS to use their services, it's because MS did the work to put it on Google's site.

Mark .

Re: Utterly desperate move

Although since it's not using any of Google's services or closed source apps, they (presumably) won't have to abide to any of Google's licences or conditions. They're using Open Source Android, with Nokia services on top.

It's a shame to see Symbian and Meego go, as well as that nothing came of the rumoured Meltemi, but I think it's good to see something new Android based at the low end, but distinct from Google.

Mark .

Re: Utterly desperate move

Nokia have already "ported" my apps without me doing a thing.

No porting is required unless there's a dependence on some specific Google thingies. Note this isn't like Blackberry (which was a different OS running some kind of Android VM/emulator), it *is* Android. Different UI, but that's no different to apps I develop on my Nexus running on Samsung Touchwiz or HTC Sense. It's true there is a risk that simply getting developers to release apps on a different site is a hurdle, though I think Nokia have advantages over Amazon - it's much cheaper (1 euro one off fee, versus $99/year), they're starting with an existing base of developers already on Nokia (whether through Symbian or S40 - smaller than Google Play, but better than what Amazon had to start with). It's more appealing from a matter of principle (IIRC Amazon wanted a locked-down device that only worked with Amazon, where as these devices will work with 3rd party sites and sideloading - just not Google Play, because Google don't allow than unless you comply to all their terms - if they released a "normal" Android phone, would they be able to have Nokia and MS services installed all over it?). Of course it isn't going to get anywhere near the numbers of Google Play, but it's marketed at the people currently buying S40/Asha devices.

I also don't get the burning platform thing. Symbian was discontinued, WP isn't. I suppose technically the Asha platform is, but I don't get why people are suddenly loving S40/Asha over Android...

Although I do agree, if they've shown they are capable and willing to use Android to make their own platform, it's a shame they didn't do this 2-3 years ago as the Symbian replacement.

Mark .

Re: Heh

Your Desire HD was a high end (high priced) phone, not a budget one like these. How do the specs compare to similarly priced Android devices? (And before anyone brings it up, the Moto G is more expensive. On that note, should I rubbish the Moto G? After all, it's no better than my 2 year old Galaxy Nexus. But, my Nexus was a high end phone at the time.) Alternatively, this is a huge jump from the similarly priced Asha devices they replace.

Also a nice baseline from a development point of view - there are loads of 480x320 or even 320x240 256MB RAM phones still out there that develops have to support (unfortunately Google Play doesn't make it easier to block based on RAM or resolution).

And there is a 5" device too (not to mention ppl often seem to whinge about wanting smaller phones), and I thought we all hated the lack of microSD on some phones...

Pics: 'Bitcoin ATMs' spring up in the US

Mark .

Re: Lost 90% in one month

The quoted figures aren't the prices of Bitcoin, they're the Mt Gox price (which stopped Bitcoin withdrawals and looks like is going under - if you can't withdraw Bitcoin, it's not really a Bitcoin you've bought).

Vendors who accept Bitcoin still usually price in their local currency, they just use Bitcoin at the transaction, so fluctuation isn't an issue.

And no one ever used pounds or dollars for illegal purposes did they...

Mark .

Re: Sigh

As an investment, it's a high risk (but also potential very high return), but I don't see why it's different to other high risk investments.

It would be silly to put all your savings/pension into Bitcoin, OTOH, a good strategy is to distribute your savings over a range of risks.

I don't think anyone is saying put all your money in Bitcoin (the only people who have most their savings in Bitcoin are the people who ended up that way after getting rich from it).

Facebook pays $19bn for WhatsApp. Yep. $45 for YOUR phone book

Mark .

Re: Communication, Communication, Communication

I'm not sure Wifi at work is commonplace, even in offices, plus people may prefer to use their own mobile for privacy reasons (the same way that some people will now check Facebook on their phone at work, even though they could just use the work Internet-connected PC).

Malls/bars/restaurants - a large number of these are those annoying ones you have to sign up and log in. It's easier to use my mobile data. Plus the faff of finding it out - if I'm in a shopping centre and want to send a text or look something up on the Internet, I don't want to have to faff finding out whether there is free "Mall Wifi", and if I can find its password. That's assuming I'm in a "mall", most shops in the UK aren't. Then it's not uncommon that Wifi connection is poor quality, and I'm better off staying with mobile.

I have BT hotspots included in my contract, though the rare times I remember to look for it, there are none nearby. Plus you're contradicting yourself here - you're arguing that Telcos have nothing to sell anymore, because people can instead use a service sold by the Telco?

I'm still going to want mobile data in order to cover all the places where Wifi isn't available, which for me is most places outside of home, and since I've got mobile data, it's usually easier to keep using that rather than faff with seeing if I can find Wifi at any random point.

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019