* Posts by Michael C

866 publicly visible posts • joined 7 Mar 2007

Page:

HP talks up slate launch

Michael C
FAIL

Not a product I want

Look, if the think is as thick as a notebook, runs Windows (and has to be maintained like it), and has not much more than netbook performance (maybe low end notebook performance), with some HD flare sprinkled on it, yet you take away my keyboard, a form factor I can use on a lap, and the optical drive and charge me a $500+ premium?

Why would I want this? If I'm lugging around a 3lb PC "slate" that I have to maintain like a PC, for the same price or less I could have a much nicer PC (better yet a Mac with Windows on it too)...

A "Tablet" is one thing, a slate is another. A slate must be sleek, light, and provide simple functions, as an EXTENTION of my PC, not simply a second, lower class PC, that I also have to maintain.

Though we don't have formal specs or pricing on Apple's tablet yet, if rumors are true (they're usually not far off this close to release, we're looking at an $800-900 machine that can do 1080p HD (likely wirelessly), play 3D games in much higher resolution than any current portable system other than a full blown notebook, has a beautiful multi-touch OS (designed for it, not hacked on top of Win 7), it can edit documents on the run and sync with the cloud, you can get apps for it for a couple dollars each (and it runs all the ones you already have for your iPhone, and shares it's licenses with up to 5 devices in a household), it weighs about a pound and is less than Half an inch thick, and it has an OS I don't have to muck around with. It's a natural multimedia extension of my PCs and Macs in the house, usable by the whole family, and great for quick tasks like checking mail or syncing some photos or controlling the home theater. Why would I pay more for something less powerful that weighs more and has less unique functionality?

Michael C
Thumb Down

What?

Huh? The MacBook is $899... a 13" MacBook Pro starts at 1099. and the top of the line 13" starts at under 1500... Even the Macbook Air is $1400 starting....

"under 1500" and coming out in summer or later 2010 is not a compelling price point. You are correct that most use cases for a tablet outside of data input in a business are for media centric purposes. A Tablet is not a full-time machine, it;s at best a secondary PC. I don't want a tablet that takes 45 seconds to boot, has to be maintained like any other PC, and for which I need a couple hundred in software licenses to get anything done. This is where Windows falls flat.

If Apple does release a sub $900 iPhone OS based tablet, out of the box it will be nearly instant-on, be home connected, require little effort at all to maintain, requires no AV, requires no "integration" into the home network (streaming is easy, syncing is easy, configuring home networking between PCs to do the same is not), and it's interface is designed for quick and easy use, typing a quick e-mail, posting an album on-line, editing Facebook, or playing a movie to the TV. If you need something more, you need a notebook and even a Win7 based tablet is going to be a poor substitute. An instant gratification platform, like a big iPhone but with some basic document editing features, a version of iPhoto lite, and a small local addressable file system (in addition to the 16 or 32GB of regular media storage) is a perfect solution for something i can leave in the living room and let the whole family use, or take it to the beach. I'm not going to do that with a 3lb 1" thick PC...

Once impenetrable PS3 cracked wide open

Michael C

had not heart that term in almost 20 years

Wow, thanks for the flashback... I remember building that wonderful little device and using it at pay phones all over new england...

Back in the days before cell phones were affordable, if you traveled more than a few miles from your house and wanted to call someone, it was either carry a pocket full of coins, or have a bluebox...

Bloated Office 2010 kicks dirt in face of old computers

Michael C

They don't

The processor requirement is for the OS mostly, the bulk is RAM requirements. Also, it;s not about making a doc, its about collaborating on a Doc and providing rights management. This is not MS Works or Oper Office, this is an app designed to meet complex business requirements as an integrated suite, and doing that is a GOOD thing. Just launching word does not mean that's all that's running.

Think about it. You';ve got a several hundred thousand word disctionary, checking words in real time, a complete grammar engine doing the same, real time mouse-over response systems, a desktop publishing engine hiding behind it managing layers, a graphic subsystem managing 3D text, shadows, and other "beyond text" objects, and entire code development engine, a macro system, PDF support, Flash support, Java support, XML support, full integration to address boox resources, table generation and chart systems, and that's just the surface aspects of the WORD PROCESSOR (it goes much deeper). Asking 1GB of RAM to run the entire suite, assuming some fairly complex documents and keeping e-mial running at all times, is nominal these days. CPU requirements are not much more than office 2003 (unless you're working in real time data or lots of charts and images). Keep in mind, the sys reqs for the suite are also the reqs to run the heavist app in the suite, which Word or Excel alone may not be...

Michael C

Reasonable, completely reasonable

What is unreasonable is ANYONE expecting that kit speced to run 7 year old software would be even capable of running the latest edition, especially if there were already considerations of why NOT to upgrade to a version released 3 years ago.

PCs are designed to be upgraded. Especially RAM, usually disk size/performance, and in some cases. If you bought a PC 4 years ago and you;ve never upgraded it, that's YOUR problem, not the vendor's. Just updates to internet apps, plug-ins, antivirus and moure shoudl typically require a doubling of system ram every 2-3 years, if not faster.

When I buily my gaming rig 1GB of RAM was standard so I installed 2, on a machine that could take 8GB of DDR2, and even ensured i had the option to upgrade to DDR3 (hybrid board).

Businesses typically eaither lease machines, or have a 3-4 year replacement cycle. being forced to support the minor difference between a 7 year old suite and a 3 years old suite should not be an issue, as any PC bought 4 years ago should have all the power it needs, poissibly aside a RAM upgrade.

HP TouchSmart 600

Michael C

sorry.

That nVidia chipset is about 20% slower than the Radeon 4670 in the iMacs. (or the 4850 they can be easily upgraded to for $180, or the 4870 in the 27" monster, all of which are cheaper than this 23" HP...

The 4670 is not much more than half the speed of my 8800GT, which is a dated card I find struggles with most modern games in good resolutions (native res on the HP). It's barely faster than the 9600MGT in the Macbooks... Granted, the 9600MGT is a good enough GPU to play DDO in low resolutions inside a windows 7 virtual machine on a Macbook (how my wife currently plays), but it;s FAR from a "playable" GPU for modern games, and will likely struggle playing Starcraft II or Diablo III when they come out, let alone being capable of playing any games coming our 3 years from now.

If you want a machine for games, pretty much AT ALL, you should not be buying one that can't play lat years games in max res comfortably. This one can't play games from 3 years ago in those resolutions...

Casual gaming like Facebook games? yea. but netbook scan do that too, those don't count.

Michael C

compared

HP comperably equpped (no tv tuner, 2.8GHz, 8GB 1TB, but lacking wireless keyboard, webcam, and microhpone Mac has) came in over $2100.

27" iMac 3.06 Core 2 Duo with same is about $1800. and has a slightly faster Radeo 4670 GPU as well, not to mention a much better IPS display panel with 4 more inches and nearly double the resolution.

21.5" imac is a bit smaller, but still higher resolution (even given the 1" smaller screen), still has a 3GHz cpu (and could be 3.33 for another $180), still has the better GPU, and is closer to $1600.

You can add a TV tuner to a Mac cheper than what HP charges for one, and a copy of parallels can be had free from many vendors and a copy of Win 7 is $49 as well, so for several hundred less, simply saccrifice the touch screen and you do in fact get a MUCH more powerful machine that runs Windows AND OS X. (or, and the iMacs can be upgraded to 32GB of RAM (16GB factory direct across 4 DDR3 slots). The HP maxes out at 8GB using slower RAM. Essentially, this is a $600 premium, saccrifice of webcam options, lack of OS compatability, and a slower machine for a touch interface.

...or, as rumor speculates, for $700-800 you'll be able to get an iPad in a couple of months with NFC, and put it in front of that iMac and use it as a touch interface for it... I'd much rather have a more powerful Mac with more and better options AND an iPad for a $100 premium than have this HP. They priced this out of reality.

More problems for Apple's top desktop

Michael C
WTF?

Seriously?

the 27" machines at Apple's plant are coming off the line and passing all tests fine, any issues have only beed seen after the machines have been shipped (usually to homes), and that follows as the bulk of the issues are in the custom-built models.

Af for being an idiot to buy one? OK genious, find me ANY machine in ANY form factor with the parts build of either of the two 27" iMac models for less money. I'll even let you exclude the webcam, IR port, Keyboard, Mouse, speakers, the OS, the FireWire port, and the displayport-in function, and I bet you STILL can't build a machine for less money let alone order one from a vendor that comes with a waranty.

Here, I'll save you the trouble on the top tier machine:

2.8GHz i7 860: $279 (with stock cooler)

LGA 1156 mainboad with 4 RAM slots $129

Memory: 2X2GB DDR3 10666: $90

Video: Redeon 4870 1GB: $170

DVD/RWDL: $29

HDD: 1TB hitachi 7200RPM: $80

Wireless: Wirelenn N Mimo PCI 5GHz card: $79

Bluetooth: USB 2 Dongle: $29 (internals cost more)

Chassis: (generic) $30

PS: including appropriate PCIx pins required: 550w: $69

Fans: 2 additional: $20

Screen: 30" LG (lowest price screen supporting 2560x1440 or better resolution in ANY size) $1,159 (and it's not even IPS).

I stopped here, $2163, plus shipping... No waranties (other than by individual manufacturer)

Missing Mic, Speakers, WebCam, Card Reader, OS, Keyboard, mouse, IR Receiver, Dual link DVI/Displayport Cable, Software of any kind, assembly, warranty, assembly services, shgipping charges, aesthetic form factor, and it's already $100 more than the top of the line 27" iMac including a free printer and a copy of Parallels MacMall will throw in.

I would have run down the same on the little brother, but I passed the iMac's price after Monitor, Processor, GPU without adding anything else... Difference there is likely $300 or more.

The 22" iMac base model I can beat by about $150 if I really go for low end parts and a real low end GPU, but still that doesn't include OS, Kbd/mouse, webcam and more.

Oh, and the full size iMac will only draw about 365w (at full max power, average is under 280w) compared to the specced out i7 above which will exceed 300w all the time, and 450 regularly, so you;ve got to factor 3 years of a 100w power draw into your numbers too.

Michael C

well, take a look at this then...

Apple's screens are actually the same or lower price than their "competition".

You see, Apple's displays are NOT retail grade displays, but commercial panels. Look at comperable professional displays and they're all starting over $600 for 24" and over $1000 for 30". Yea, you can find cheaper displays, but comparing a Vega to an RCA knock off is not exactly a comparrison....

I just checked NewEgg. There are 4 24" displays in Apple's class that cost more, one from HP is over $1900 for a 24" display. NEC and LaCie displays cost more than Apple's. Even given it;s age, the 30" is still one of the cheapest displays in it's class, hundreds less than NEC, LaCie, and any comperable HP screen.

Data protection and virtualised machines

Michael C
Go

Check out this firm

Unitrends.

Full tapeless backups of 40 platforms, unified infrastructure, scalable, no per-server licenses or agents to buy (sold by capacity only), runs a hardened Linux system, and it;s FAST. Fully support VMWare backups and restores, including P2V and V2P recovery across dissimmilar hardware (not all OS platforms).

I worked for them for a few years. Since I've left, I still have not found a better product. I wouldn't call it "Enterprise Class" as in, backing up more than a few hundred servers with their infrastructure would be a hell of a lot of work and therte are better mass-scale systems for that, but for 1-500 servers, nothing is better that I've found.

btw: i got laid off by them, so I have no real love for the company, and I certainly have no benefit from supporting their product, but they have great people and an absolutely incredible product. (and it's about half the price of anything EMC or Symantc are offering, especially when you get into lots of small servers vs a few big ones).

www.unitrends.com

Apple's iPad - the tablet with the data center soul

Michael C

No Imagination...

Look, this thing is NOT going to be a netbook with a phone OS. It's not a simple communication device for simply accessing information and running tiny apps like an iPhone is. It's SO much more....

1) not a media player, a media control system. Wirelessly connected to your TVs and integrated into your home network. Play video from the device to the TV while surfing the web and checking alerts. It;s both a portable media player and a replacement for a boxee/appleTV, possibly even a set top box entirely.

2) Apple hired a whole team of people to develop their iLife and iWork suite into web enables and iPhon/iPad integrated application suites. This thing IS going to do couemtn creation, collaboration, sharing, and publishing, and most certainly will be fully integrated into iWeb and Mobile.me (if they don't have a whole new solution for it).

3) NFC, one of the lesser rumors. If you have a Mac (and possibly a PC) and bring the pad near it, it could easily become an extension of that machine, becoming an additional input device and extension of the screen display.

4) it's more powerful than most netbooks and can play lots of games in addition to all it's 1080p glory. It will also run all the apps you already own for your iPhone (without additional licensing) since you can have up to 5 devices per iTunes Store account that can all (automatically btw) share apps and media files. It's also a fully multitasking iPhone.

5) its so much better of a form factor than a netbook, with the same or better usabiltiy, for only a few hundred more (unsubsidized anyway), and with native cloud integration local storage of just 32-64GB should be completely sufficient. Full usability should easily exceed 8 hours with the screen on in wireless productivity mode (4-5 hours on 3G with screen on), and should be able to run screen off for more than a day easy as a media player.

6) the interface is going to be amazing. Managing photos, working with web sites, editing documents in the port of Pages, navigating will all be simply wonderful to do with guestures. Since it;s big enough to cross your knees, of stay in place on a table, the virtual keyboard should not be an issue either (though i suspect a portable keyboard WILL be an option with this device for added functionality when you need to work heavy.

Will it replace a full featured notebook, especially in a business environment? no. Could it be used on the go in place of a notebook? Easily. Will it consolodate your home theatre and other media experiences more completely? Absolutely.

Oh, and it's more than an ebook reader, it's an ePeriodical full color reader, RSS integrated, system capable of experiencing interactive works web sites in their full easy to read glory, and it's still got all the power of an iPod Touch app platform and the pricing that goes with those apps. If you have an iPhone or other 3G capable device nearby it should tether as well, and I'm sure they'll be options for integrated 3G as also.

Michael C

Wrong

Apple spent more than a year with a whole new team porting iWork into web apps. If you think you won't be doing document editing, even web site design in iWeb, photo management, and more on this pad, then you missed the clues...

This device is MUCH more than the device, it;s a platform to cross integrate your desktops/laptops and your multimedia life, and put it all into the web. The iPhone didn't include editing features because to add the toolbars and guestures needed would have complicated an already cramped display into near uselessness. Double the screen size and you can have bttons to push and do real content editing. Cloud integrate that experience with their new billion dollar datacenter in NC, and you have something truly powerful, and well worth a $400 premium over a netbook. (even less once you include all the software the netbook needs, including AV and backups, to compete).

Apple (finally) boot camps Windows 7

Michael C
Unhappy

works for me too, with caveats

Win 7 works in Bootcamp fine. Had it under 10.5, as a parallels bootcamp partition, updated to 10.6 all works fine; except the trackpad sucks, volume is muted, and nVidia card is not detected. Have to play video games inside Parallels virtual machine instead of native on Win7. THAT is an issue, and I'm glad Bootcamp is now supporting 7. I just hope a re-install of 7 is not required... Don't want to waste the key.

2010 will be the year of the net tablet, claims analyst

Michael C

what?

netbooks didn't start at $300 and go up to 500, they started at $700 (subsidized down to $300), and now they're $400 flat (and have much better specs to boot), and the low end systems subsidized by telcos are sub $100.

Tablet PCs bombed because the tablet interface sucked, stylus input was a drag, and they were 5lbs or more not thin and light and under 1lb like the iSlate is likely to be. Also, 5 years ago there were no good tablet use cases, apps were all home grown and expensive, they were targeted at businesses especially healthcare without vendor full support, and portable video like we have today was stil not much more than a dream.

The new iSlate is not a basic PC with a touch screen in a small form, it;s a media powerhouse designed to interconnect your audio/video world. Wireless HDMI to TVs, cross syncing with other systems in your home, cloud apps, photo management on the go, e-reader, portable video player, and with an 8-12 hour battery? under $800? Sign me UP!

(assuming it runs a slimmed down OS X, not a beefed up iPhone OS that is, otherwise they can keep it unless the price is withing $100 of an iPod with the same storage capacity)

Michael C
Thumb Down

netbooks

...are dead. They sold like hotcakes to all the people who could not afford a PC, or who thought that getting their kid one would be nice for class. That ius untill all those people actually realized it was SO underpowered, not to mention lack of Microsoft Pro OS support preventing it from joining domains and campus systems, that it was all but useless escept as a secondary PC.

intel initially blocked lots of "netBook" stats, greatly limiting the device class, but has renigged on almost all those details when sales began sinking, and as vendors demanded better deals due to the unexpected hig returned product volumes. Dell indicated netbook swere being returned at near 4 times the normal rate for anyone expecting to use it as a primary PC (and since lots of people return cheap dell systems already, that says more than you think).

A tablet, with full multimedia integration, being significantly more powerful than a netbook, backed by cloud technology, immenently more portable, sharp screen, responsive slim OS, paired with a pico projector or wireless HDMI is amazing. Then, add NFC and pair it with a nearby PC to make it an extention of the input system for it (put an iSlate near a NFC equipped iMac and it could automatically become an extention of that iMac for input AND display). That's a device I'd like to have.

3D TV gets cold shower from Avatar man

Michael C

No Active Glasses

I'm OK with 3D glasses, but not active ones. Polarized like the ones in theatres today (preferably the EXACT ones) will be required before I'm ready to invest. Yea, I'll probably end up owning a "3D capable" TV before then (technically, all it requires is an HDMI 1.4 input and 120Hz screen or faster), but I won't pay $50+ for glasses for it, let alone dealing with charging and all, and especially not with small children who will break them!

TRUE 3D TV's will have an active polarizing layer on top of the LCD matrix, and will do left/right eye switching on the TV and use passive glasses. I'd pay $500 more for a large TV (42" or larger) to have this feature now (and at most $200 more 3 years from now).

Fortunately, I have yet to buy a BR player, and I'm told the PS3 can be updated to support the BR3D spec (I'm waiting to buy one on exactly that formal confirmation). My current TV is also only a few months old, and is as large as my enertainment center can hold, so the next upgrade is not only the cost of a TV away, but also a large furniture purchase... Maybe in 2-3 years.

I'm actually much more interested in the networking featuresx of new TVs than I really care about 3D. 3D is only impressive when the screen is larger than your base field of view (when you;re close enough your eyes need to move around to see different parts of the image clearly) Smaller than that, most of the effect is lost. In my house, I'd be looking at a 70"+ TV to gain that effect at a minimum, and my room is not THAT big...

Microsoft Office 2007 migration aches foreshadow 2010

Michael C
FAIL

What is the upgrade for?

@David 155:

Seriously? We're still asking whether of not 2007 is worth the upgrade over 2003??? We don't yet know what 2K7 improved on? Have you even really LOOKED at Excel 2007? Have you seen any of the new PPT graphics? Have you seen the inline editing power? Have you examined document collaboration, sharepoint integration, document signing, native PDF conversion, the new power added to Outlook?

First off, Excel is no longer a simple spreadsheet with some VBS macros, it' now a seriou data management application. The power added to the data filter option ALONE is worth the whole suite, let alone the conditional format system and more. It's now possible to practically write applications inside of excel without ever using a single macro.

Clearly you have not even checked out the features listing, which is over 150 major new items. Improved mail merge, online integration, increased spreadsheet max size, more powerful formulas, overhauled fumula editor, practically a whole new PPT experience, new graphics across the board, better image handling in documents, smarter document tagging/TOC/index functions, new Outlook interface, better preview, better print functions, better 3rd party format support, FREE PDFs, file support inside databases, better search, inline editing, this goes on and on and on. 2007 is the most significant improvement (other than the GUI alone) since it moved from Windows 3.1 to 95.

c'mon, get with the game... It's been out almost 4 years!

Michael C
Stop

simple resolution

If you're sending Docx file formats, in the message body send this link:

http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyId=941B3470-3AE9-4AEE-8F43-C6BB74CD1466&displaylang=en

If they can't open the file in 2003, it's because they don't have the patch, which BTW is included in office 2003 SP2 so if they can't open the files still today they're GROSSLY out of compliance with patching their office suite! btw, this also works with Office 2000 and 2002...

Docx has not caught on because a lot of IT departments simply set the default format to doc to avoid having complications rolling out patches, and then never went back and changed it once SP2 for 2K3 came out. People simply don't see the file type very often.

However, the real benefits of Docx are mostly in a smaller file size. There are some format changes that get hard coded back when saving to Doc as well, so editing graphic elements or Escher graphics is not possible once it's been saved, but it still looks the same and other text can be edited.

Of course, if you're collaborating on a working document, you should be on the same version anyway, so tell them if they want to work with you they just need to upgrade and suck it up. If you're just sending files for review or to provide data, SAVE THEM IN PDF FOR CHRIST'S SAKE (it's free in 2K7!). Also, when sending doc or docx files, don't forget to CLEAN them first of previous edits by using the publish options...

Rogue phishing app smuggled onto Android Marketplace

Michael C

...and it does now.

Apple is constantly developing and using automated tools for code inspection of each new app. As new tricks are played by devs (most caught in the manual review process, though not all), Apple is adjusting it's apps for better automated analysis.

Phishing is not easy to do on the iPhone. More over, being alble to submit at all creates a clear and easily followable legal trail, and anyone trying something like submitting a virus or actual phishing app would be handed over to authorities fast. The Goolge Marketplace is not so clean of a system, has little or no reveiw process to speak of, and almost anyone can post an app. The fact this got into a central marketplace (not sum 3rd party run app store) is even more appauling. The fact Android can run backgroud apps at all is also troubling since it;s possible for an app to appear to be legit, but sniff your web traffic and keystrokes in the background. That's not possible on the iPhone OS.

Apple has removed whole ranges of apps before, it's not one occasion. Apple can only push to an extent on that as well, since harvesting phone numbers and e-mails is not actually illegal at all (only against TOS), and it did not harvest entire contacts lists, only your number (which could have just as easily been done through an online registration request and not have been in the app and thus would not have gotten them pulled).

Packard Bell oneTwo M

Michael C

PB, really?

Wow, i thought they passed on years ago (wish they had).

Microsoft undercuts planned Office 2010 retail price

Michael C
Stop

Not good enough

"industry is still stuck with office 2k3. some places have upped to 2k7. and open office is free.

"

Well, all well and good if you need basic Word and Excel support. As soon as you include a corportate Exchange infrastrucutre, you at least need copies of Outlook. Again, basic e-mail and calendaring can be done with freeware, even with an Exchange server, but try working with rules, distro lists, SharePoint integration, collaboration on documents, or more, and Outlook starts becoming your only option. Trust me, we're a VERY anti-microsoft shop, and held on to alternate e-mail systems as long as we could. Someone finally figured out that by doing so we were loosing over $5M per year in efficincy losses due to poor document collaboration and meeting management, plaus a lack of realtime remote communication efficincy for key salespeople and executives. Out entire Exchange deployment, including 3 years support, for 15,000 people, cost barely over $1M.

Oh, and then there's what DOESN'T come in open office. Visio. InfoPath. OneNote. These are indespensible in our IT areas where we have over 2,200 IT employees. (we're a data processing shop with over 3,000 servers and several hundred programmers, not your typical IT distribution for a company out size).

Open Office is great for home users and Mom n Pop small shops, and in some business areas, but in large firms, Office is really the only considdered option beyond simple document creation. No, out 15,000 users don;t all need a registered copy of office, many could get by with Open Office, but then again, those employees could also get by with just PDFs as they don;t really create anything ever that could not go in notepad.

Michael C

Not

It's suitible for 99% of home and small business users, maybe.

I have 2200 people here for whom Excel and Word alone are NOT good enough. They need Visio, Project, InfoPath, OneNote, and native SharePoint integration for collaboration. Also, just try to get on in a business world without Exchange and Outlook for a while (we did for 10 years). it costs MORE (Groupswise, TAO, they're all more expensive and have less integration, and there are no other DOD STIG approved large coprporation email systems.)

We looked into Open Office. We tried HARD to stay off Exchange. We realized not switching to MS Office and Exchange was COSTING nearly $4 million a year.

Once you have to buy Outlook and Visio, the rest of office under open licensing is free... We also tried alternatives (including homegrown stuff) for project management, and honestly, nothing does it as well as Microsoft Project, and noone we could hire into project management knew anything other than that package, which was a training barrier.

Then there's the training. Most people walk in the door with some Word and Excel experience. Few if any have Open Office experience, which means training them. I'm not talking about "open document, start typing" I'm talking about document collaboration and team development functions that are very difficult to implement in other apps, or simply are not options. Then there's digitally signing docs to think about as well...

Sorry, I'm a certainly NOT a fan of M$, and as an analyst our credo is "if it runs on linux it goes on linux" (same for virutalizing), but when it comes to workstations, especiually managaing 15,000 of them, M$ is really the CHEAPEST and EASIEST option. yes, there's a cost up front, but have you ever tried to manage a network of over 1,000 Linux machines? I have. It sucks. Honestly, if they'd just release Visio and Access for OS X we'd probably dump XP for OS X instead of moving to Win 7, but alas, it;s never been available even though the rest of office it.

Y2.01K bug trips up Symantec

Michael C
Flame

Dumb.

They were not testing actively dates into the next callendar year at all? ANY proper dev team does this every year, if nothing more than to validate leap year, daylight savings changes, and more.

It's no wonder we shifted off Symantec productcs entirely many years ago, and have yet not gone back.

Nokia sues Apple (again)

Michael C
FAIL

BS

6,073,036: 2000, Newton came out in 1998. Sorry. Numerous touchscreens also came out long before that. Apple has pleanty of prior art on this one, as do others, to invalidate this patent entirely.

6,262,735: 2001, again, Newton as prior art, let alone every touch display released prior for POS systems and more.

6,518,957, 2003, touch screen phone (does not specify mobile in patent!), i give to you Apple's 1983 tehcnology: http://www.techeblog.com/index.php/tech-gadget/apple-touchscreen-phone-circa-1983

6,714,091: 2004: Honestly, beyond me a bit, but it sounds fairly specific, and easy to work around, but if it is in fact general enough, would not every device on the market using CPU stepping violate this patent? Also, kinda obvious once you penetrate the tech speak, and I don't see how its much different than some patents filed as early as 1973 i found describing basically the same system, which by this point have all expired.

6,834,181: I don't know of any apple devices offhand that specifically do this, but can one patent the placement of parts inside of an object as a "machine or device" I though you could only patent functional systems, this seems like a combination of aesthetics and a miniaturization technique, which is itself not patentable. Throw it out.

6,895,256: 2003, All refers to the single-chip camera assembly, which apple purchases from what they could assume is a licensed distributor of such technology. But, just in case not, It correlates to analog image monitoring system of on-camera analog sensors for image capture timeing and exposure balance using an onboard integrated image processing system and control bus signal prior to the image being captured and sent to a digital processor. The iPhone cameras do not incorporate such a system, and rely on off-camera image processing not a single-chip solution. Maybe the iSight infringes? who makes the single-chip camera inside those? Not Apple... Still, 2003? Fairly certain i was seeing system-on-a-chip digital cameras in BestBuy prior to that date... Again, refers to mobile terminal, not mobile communications device, so all digital cameras fall into that category.

6,924,789: 2005, Sorry, a) this refers to a capacitive touch screen with specific sensor points correlating to "switches" for keys as well as accepting touch guestures. Apple does not correlate keys to explicit "switches" in the capacitive matrix, it;s all done in software, and B) Apple has a stack of patents on the iPhone's touchscreen dating prior to this patent. Also specifically the patent states the keys are made from silicone rubber, coated in a transparent matrix and hard top coat, and the matrix is comprised of indium-tin-oxide. This is simply too specific of a patent and does not apply to any apple technology I know of, excpet posibly the original iPod ring interface, which was available long prior to 2005...

This is a WEAKER set of patents than Nokia's original volley. Apple's counter suit was actually chock full of REAL patents that clearly indicated Nokia's (and others) violations. Apple does not often attack others when patent disputes are for fairly mundane techologies like this that they really don't care if their competitors use (the interface is right out though!), but they drag them out like this when someone throws a frivilous suit against Apple itself. They exist for defensive purposes. Nokia has weak claims, which might get a small judgement (a few tens of millions), but Apple's counter claims could easily have half or more of nokia's own devices yanked from the market, and have a multi-hundred million return claim. These new claims i think can be easily shot down by Apple's crack legal team.

If Nokia gets out of this paying APPLE less than $100M I'll be surprised. They best simply back down and open the license (and that alone means everyone else gets to stop paying as soon as their current contract terms run out if not sooner). Apple admitted they were approached about some of the GSM licensing for this stuff, and when they did not agree to the rediculous terms, worked around the patents completely, and Apple's folks are REALLY good about doing that properly when they're aware of possible infringement. Nokia however is in direct violation of several key Apple patents I can't find prior art for, nor can I simply dismiss otherwise.

Also, Nokia's admission they're not only behind Apple and RIM, but they "plan to catch up in 2011" including saying "we will also win the war because, in addition to email, we will be adding content, chat, music, entertainment and several other features, which will soon become very critical for success of any company in this space." Well, what, do they think Apple is going to sit on it's ass until 2011??? Chat, already on the iPhone. Music? c'mon. They've got 4.0 in the works, and new tech on the horizon, and there's NO WAY anyone's keeping pace with apple in this space. Yea, they each come up with a gimmick or two in some new devices Apple might not get to first, and in some areas Apple itself is playing catch up (background plug-ins, launch page), but they're not going to pass apple in OS function, device performance, app availabiltiy, and build quality all at a similar or lower price, and by 2011 it will be too late and Apple will have too much market share and they won't have the clout in the industry they have to force other devices on carriers.

FCC rescues American football fans

Michael C

Simple solutions

1) any change in channel line-up that involves the removal of a channel that was available on the date a commitment contract was signed (or was added and maintained for more than 12 months, including nonconsecutively, during the uninterupted subscription term or for those without a contract commitment) becomes an opportunity for subscribers to terminate their contract early without any financial penalties what-so-ever (even ecluding return of prorated equipment costs or installation chanrges). In fairness, we'll limit this to "core" channels considered in the top 70 channels carying traditional programming, sports, news, or other event based programming, etc, basically the america's top 120 minus PPV, shopping, cable music (XM/serious/muzak/etc), and other non-traditional channels. Also, any channel that goes off the air completely and is no longer offered on any service or competitor at all can't be held against the provider (though a discount may satill apply below if it follows certain rules, but rebranded channels don't count).

2) Any impending channel change involving removal (or downgrade, for instance dropping of HD while maintaining SD) of channels must be "confirmed" (not a "this possibly might happen") not less than 45 days prior to the effective date, providing subscribers ample time to change services, should they wish to. This would include channels added post contract commencement. (this also applies if adding channels increases the monthly price). once notice is given, even if the chanel does remain after further negotiation or agreements, any request to terminate service must still be honored within that 45 days after anouncement was made in writing to the customer (via received bill or notice, not contingent on some generic press release date they might not receive)

3) removal of channels that are part of an existing package must result in a lowering of the monthly bill by not less than the per-subscriber cost for that channel. Each channel in the package must be itemized seperately and the total price of the chanels must equal the package price. (this need not equal what the provider pays for the channel, only a predetermined cost to the consumer itemized down to the channel level as part of a package). Channels may not be "swapped" in and out of a package in the idea that one replaces another either, each must be taken individually.

4) addition of any channels to an existing package must be done either by a) leaving the package price the same, and modifying the individual channel costs that sum up to the current package price, b) making the channel optional to consumers as an ala-carte option, or c) providing it at no cost to existing contract customers, but adding the channels cost to new subscribers or those out of contract who have not had a price adjustment in more than 12 months.

5) any channel added that is not part of basic cable, a single extended cable tier, the top premium tier (everything included except pay-packages) a pay channel tier (HBO, Shotime, etc), or a sports package (not a tier, but something like League Pass or MLB package), must be considdered optional. Channels added to base packages/tiers may not incur increased billing to customers during their price renewal period (not to exceed once per year), to a point greater than the difference between their current price and new subscriber price (excluding promotional discounts that last 6 months or less). ie. if i pay $49 a month, they add 4 new channels that I get for free in the interum, 12 months later they want to raise my rates to cover the cost of the new channels, but new subscribers also still pay $49 for the same package (if you excluded a $10 discount they get for 6 months), then they can in fact not raise my rates at all. If new subscribers paid $52, they could bump my by $3 to cover the new channels.

In exchange for accepting these rules, we'll let them have selective output control under the following additional caveats: should a homeowner have incompatible equipment, the cable or sattelite firm must provide either an adapter to make their existing TV compatible (including replacing any rented equipment, or any equipment purchased from the provider like sattelite boxes or DVRs required to receive existing subscribed to services), provide any cables and installation necessary, or if the TV/stereo would not be compatible without replacement, they must enable the SOC-only content to be distributed on a non-encoded chanel to that subscriber. The only exception is pre-release DVD which need not be made available unencrypted, but all else above applies (if they enable it on any other non-pre-release-DVD chanels).

Apple misses self-imposed Windows 7 boot camp deadline

Michael C
WTF?

problems with 7?

I've got 10.6 and Win7 running NOW under boot camp. Even have Parallels 5 running it in coherence mode right from the partition (though I'm dissapointed I still can't suspend the machine or do snapshots if running from a bootcamp partition).

I simply loaded bootcamp, and installed 7 right into it. Is there something I'm missing???

Dell crowned Bad Santa computer maker by angry customers

Michael C
FAIL

a card? are they f'ing kidding?

Look, a week or two for a custom PC is not a big deal. After that, the price shifts, and I'd expect to AUTOMATICALLY receive either cash back equal to the difference between the price I paid and the lowest price offered during that backurder timeframe, or upgrades to the best system components that equal the performance of the price point. Additionally, if the delay exceeded 4 weeks, or especially if it missed a major holiday delivery without indivation is would, I'd expect additional compensation.

Last time I custom ordered, it was a GateWay notebook, over 4 years ago. GateWay delayed delivery about 4 weeks due to problems acquiring the particular high performance HDD I had requested. By the 2nd week I had confirmation of the delay, and they discounted the order $75 as that was the new price point. On week 3 they offered a RAM upgrade in addition to the discount. Finally, they made an offer of a step up in model, keeping all the other offers intact, which included a better CPU and GPU, and i had the machine 2 days later. Had i bought that configuration 4 weeks earlier it would have been nearly $250 more.

I'd still be a Gateway customer today if they still made and sold decent high end laptops, but they folded and make crap now. Instead i got a MacBook Pro for the wife in November... which was the best machine I could get at my predetermined price point. (Dell has nothing to compare to a top end 15" MacBook Pro, nor does HP or Acer or Lenovo, best I found with the same specs was either a 9+lb 17" with a 2 hour battery that cost $400 more, or a weaker system with poor graphics for $200 more). She's got 10.6 and Win 7 on it and it plays DDO in a VM with a better framerate than my desktop with a 8800GT, and stomps my desktop performance when running win7 natively.

Hacker rattles 21,000 iPhone unlockers

Michael C

Dumb people

Look, If you're going to hack something, especially if it's of questionable legal footing to do so, NEVER exchange identity information that could lead back to you, or the device or the software youre hacking, and especially, don't pay for it!

This is common sense, when doing something potentially illegal, don't leave a trail!

This is one of the reasons I have not hacked my iPhone. (the others basically fall to I really don't see any software of use I have to hank my device for, and I'm completely happy with AT&Ts service in my are, it's much better than the competition's service quality)

Kate Winslet sports top celeb bod

Michael C
Pint

next year

Bridget Regan might make the list. Here's to hoping!

Nokia jacks up Apple patent complaint

Michael C
FAIL

links?

Can we please see some links in these articles to the complaints, summary of them, or patents in question?

Articles like this just lead to arguments of fanboi/anti-Apple unless we have resources to review to see which company is playing patent troll and which one might actually infringe.

Novell stacks Linux and Mono for mainframes

Michael C

@ John Smith 19 and other things

1) we're an AIX, Windows, and Linux shop with about 3500 non-host servers and a few z8s, z9s and z10s kicking around. We started messing around with z/Liunux on IFLs almost 2 years ago. We have over 400 linux guests on IFLs now. Corporate directive is now "if it runs on Z it goes on Z, no questions asked." We are bought into it wholesale!

It's not about the IFL and Suse licensing savings (we don't pay anywhere near $25K per IFL btw, that must be retail not street pricing). The REAL savings in in IBM and other licensing. See, most softwarei is licensed by what IBM calls a "processor value unit" or PVU. P6+ processor are equal to 120 PVUs each (A Xeon core is 100), and on a 8 or 16 core machine with VIO we might be able to run 4 -16 distinct WebSphere installations, costing nearly 2,000 PVUs in licensing. A typical webshere cluster (cell) costs tens of thosands in license alone to deploy. On some of our PVUs we have as many as 30 instances of Webshere running.

4 PVUs in our z10 cost us (give or take the sale of the day, IBM never publishes these numbers), about $50-60K each. Linux is another $10-15K depending on the winds. WebSphere is 120PVUs per IFL. 4 IFLs fully licensed with Suse and WebSphere run under $300K when we package a deal (we usually buuy 8-10 at a time). The equivalent license for websphere alone on P6+ or Intel hardware would exceed that total hardware support and license price. Then, we've got the z10 for MIPS use as well... and it;s rediculously highly availabe, and IBM doesn't screw around supporting it like they do rack hardware...

Tiny TV could make billions for FCC

Michael C

Good plan

1) providers should be all for this, as the energy required to get the signal to where it's received would both be less, and it would provide better signal in more places where it;s currently weak. Leet transmit power means less electricity bill dollars.

2) the FCC would pay for this out of pocket, on a short term low interest loan, and make back 10 times the loan amount when the frequencies go to auction.

3) the current range of frequencies available assumed more than 20 broadcast stations in each market. Most have far less since most moved to cable/sattelite leaving onle the big 5 networks on towers (and small time local chanels like eTV). We could easily shrink the entire frequency swath and still offer the same channels in the same or better quality on less air as there would be less crossover of channels from area to area.

4) smaller (shorter) towers may be able to operate underneath FAA tower limits, making them far less expensive to operate, and cost a fraction to have someone change beacon lights on. They each also need far less land. The land the current towers are on is also very valuable in many cases, with amazing views of the surrounding country, and could be worth tens of millions per big tower we can take down.

5) all new towers means no structural expenses for 25+ years, the expected life of broadcast TV.

6) the new digital boxes do handle signal mirroring much better, and everyone now has them (who wanted them) so there's no upgrade kickback issues like we had moving to digital in the first place.

Even if this cost 6 billion to pull off (triple the estimate), subsidized for 3 years at 1% during the build out, if it made back half their low estimate (which is very low already), it would triple the FCC's investment (posibly 10 times that profit if they hit the high number) and be a nice kickback into broadband stimulus money, cable subsidies, WiMax rollout, or a simple tax refund to those on subscription services. $30b could go a long way...

I'm for not only doing this, but in the process, let's compact the signals into a narrower swatch of band, changing what channels some networks are on, so that channels are less randomly scattered across the band. In rural areas with fewer frequencies available we could free up more airwave for wireless internet, something that costs too much to cable in some areas, and in dense cities, we'll have more air for cell phones. All this without dropping anyone from coverage of current broadcast TV, and for a large portion, it would turn static laden channels 30-40 miles from towers into cruystal clear signals.

AMD revs up Stream SDK

Michael C

drumb roll please

New Radeon and Fire series Mac compatible cards anoucenment pending in 3, 2, 1...

Panasonic releases more capacious, less explosive laptop battery

Michael C
WTF?

Qs

1) is it the same weight or lighter?

2) does it cost the same or less?

3) by "not explode" clearly by design this does not indicate "won't burn", so it;s obviously still combustible and suffers from heat issues, they just found a way to allow that to dissipate without explosive force. Since Most LiIons that do combust don't acctually "explode" anyway, explain how this is in any way better than LiPo, which are far more difficult to cause to short and combust (as long as you use a LiPo aware charger, or have batteries that have charge limiting circuits, which almost all do).

4) why are we still investing in Li-Ion technology when others including LiPo, SCiB, Sulfer, and others show far more promise with better density, lower weight, lower cost, and are safer?

Hackintosher goes titsup

Michael C

@Steve70

1) your analogy is flawed as both of those are seperate retail items. A correct analogy is that Microsoft does not allow the reinstall of their OEM licences on new hardware, and then apply the retail Win7 Ultimate upgrade to it, without paying full price for heir OS. Microsoft, being a near monopoly, and subject to numerous cases of governmnet control, is doing the EXACT SAME THING you say Apple is doing ilelgally. Your bought the hardware, but only LICENSE the OS that came with it. Apple is simply saying you can not install an upgrade of their OS on non-apple hardware as the OEM license that came with the Mac is non-transferable. Since they CHOOSE not to sell the full license seperately, which is their legally protected choice and to which anticompetitive regulation does not apply, what Psystar did was in full violation of Apple's EULA and license terms, and doing so as a commercial entity for profit is blantantly against numerous federal stauates that have now been upheld, clearly indicating which side the law is on.

Apple is NOT telling you what you can and can't use the MACHINE for, they're telling you the OS is non-transferable. That's all. They have every legal right to protect that, and Psystar, by distributing their systems with "upgrade" copies of OS X is in full violation of copywrite by assisting a purchaser with overriding the EULA and providing tools or instructions that permit installing an upgrade ontop of a non-licensed machine laching a pre-existing EOM license.

Engines and components are not licensed, and are subject to first sale doctrine. The only conditions Porche can put on preventing the sale are simply to void the waranty on the machine. However, the opposite, taking a Honda, putting a remanufactured Porche Moter in it, decaling it up, and selling it AS a Porche, and telling buyters it's supported at least in some level by Porche, you bet your ass Porche would have the dealer in court. MANY shops have been accused, tried, and shut down for selling cars that "look like" others, being sold as counterfeit. That is what Psystar did.

Apple does not have the power to contro what you di with stuff they sell, only with what the DO NOT SELL, namely, the OEM license. This has been FULLY supproted by the courts numerous times in numerous businesses. There is "License" and "purchase", and both have been defended successfully at the supreme court level. You can in fact resel a "liceense" if it was a RETAIL license (recent ruling against AutoDesk for example) however, in that case they tried to prevent the resale when the license only indicated internally (and not on packaging) that is was non-transferable. Apple is clear in their OEM language, and in the outer packing for retail upgrades to that OEM license, that apple branded Mac computer is required.

I can't deny your claim that the folks at Psystar, and their previous legal defense, are complete fucking morons, but please don't lead folks to believe apple may have been behind that... That's just insane.

You're also right, we have not heard the end of this. the judge specifically indicated Rebel EFI should not be distributed, though he did not explicity order the destruction of that product. He gave Apple the easy ability to simply request that be reintroducted if abused, and requires no retrial for additional sanctions or orders in this case to be released. Apple simply need complain and provide evidence Psystar has marketed ANY technology, software, or even simple instructions that lead someone to bypass Apple's fully vetted and approved license terms, or to inatll any unlicenced or unapproved apple software on non-apple hardware. This is not over, but I think some folks from Psystar abe about to see a very quick contempt of court ruling, have Rebel EFI taken and destroyed, and likely will see additional SEVERE penaties (outlined in the ruling already as a warning), and will also likely see not only jail time, but finally will see their investors revealed, rebuked, and possibly themselves improsoned if they had anything to do with bypassing the judges orders.

Sony Vaio X

Michael C

No through my wallet

Look, i understand thin and light. Getting under 1.5KG (3lbs) and staying the size of a standard pad of paper is a nice acheivement. However, loosing 1 lb or so below that is not relevelnt, not is making it much smaller. 11.1" is TOO small. It does not sit on a lap properly, and takes of no less horizontal space in a bag. Too thin can also be a problem, as I'd suspect something this flimsy would be too easy to break. It really needs to be closer to the thickness of a pencil, and shaving a mm or a few off that is also still irrelevent to portability.

I certainly won't accept half or less performance for clearly minor aesthetic improvements.

An Atom? I'd have to have 2 notebooks when i really travel. This is TOO low performance. Someone's gonna ruin Sony's day by offering a similar design for half the price any day now...

Michael C

@andy 70

I agree with you completely, but also think this applies to ALL sony products...

Sony is overpriced across their whole model line. Their TVs cost more and don;t look or have as good of specs as LG or Samsung. Their PCs are too proprietary and also too expensive for the spec. Their HT receivers blow up too often. Their speakers pale in comparrison to others like Klipsch and HK. Their cameras have nice lenses, but again proprietary, as is the memory stick format. Ericson phones have left the earth almost completely due to either high price or inferior design or both, as have the Sony PDAs.

Having worked several years in a retail shop, i can also attest that Sony had the highest percentage of non-waranty repairs by far, and were close to the bottom for product reliability under waranty (we tracked our sales vs repairs and provided this to our customers if they asked). Sony's reapirs also seemed to take longer...

Today I have no single Sony product in my house. I'm still considdering a PS3 only because there's no viable competition, and no xBox games interest me that are not also available on PC. (not to mention the included BR player and now NetFlix supprot).

Iraqi insurgents hack US drones with $26 software

Michael C

Don't Panic!

Before the FUD starts flying in this forum too, lets keep a few facts on the table.

1) this is only a video feed from an onboard camera, not telemetry video with the overlays that someone at the drone's remote console sees.

2) the drone is not hacked. This is a man-in-the middle reception only process. In no way are they ineracting with the drone.

3) the control frequencies are not interfered with. Those are highly secure, and come from multiple redundant points. Even if they could interfere with those bands and jam the drone's reception, it has a flight and return plan based on waypoints and GPS guidance, it can't be remotely crashed.

4) hacking a drone, even if you could decrypt the signal, not only would rely on getting it to respond, but you'd have to know intimate details of the control signals. You can't just plug a joystick into a laptop and expect it to turn left when you do.

5) if its anything like other flight computers I've seen, and worked on code for, it's not one computer, but 3, running on different hardware platforms and running on different OS. ALL THREE have to generate the same response at the same time in order for it to accept input. If one system goes rogue because it's been hacked, the other two ignore it, and the operator is informed a computer is down.

6) being close enough to get this feed, if it's coming for you, is simply notification you have a few minutes to live. When the drone(s) do arrive, as they did on a village early yesterday, they come in packs, and drop 10 or more missles in numberous runs. If you got the feed, and fled, the pilots watching the feed could simply take out your truck too.

7) even if you knew one was coming, and were ready with a shoulder launchable surface to air missle, odds of you hitting this drone are real small, and you're dead anyway. They're expendible, likely you don't think you are yourself. It's why we designed them...

8) the "predator" HAS been redesigned. The feeds are from older birds we still use, but there's already a 3rd generation shipping to the military, and a 4th generation in the works, as well as hardware overhauls on older units, no differnt than the F16 has had numerous computer replacements over decades.

Honestly, this is not a big deal. The video is crucial for manual operation that it be smooth and digital error free. Back in the 90s, encrypting in real time a video feed like that in such a way that dirty frequncy bands would still produce clean video (lots and lots of ECC on top of the encryption), would have added rediculous computational requirements to both the bird and the pilot station equipment, and would likely have led to video feed processing delays of a second or two, we simply did not have the tech to do it.

Wireless e-car recharge tech within range?

Michael C

You're kidding, right?

1) I have a brand new car with $12K worth of batteries in it. They're under waranty for 10 years. I'm gonna just let some knucklehead (with a forklift) take those out and replace them with some generic batteries, that might not even have the same specs? HELL no.

2) Plug-In hybrids don't require the charge, they run on gas just fine if you run low (over 50 miles since the last charge). Swapping the batteries to avoid a lenghy charge time is simply not required. Charging at night taked 4-10 hours depending on the car and your in-home electrics. It's not a big deal

3) full electric cars are for commuters, not family trips cross country. They have predictable ranges over 100 miles, many up to 200, and shoudl not require battery replacement.

4) Car designs would have to be completey changed, into a much worse design, to support swappable packs. Currently, they're mounted underneath where the drivetrain is in your current car. Removal would require the car to be on a lift, or for an underground facility to be built.

5) without robotic assists, exactly how do you plan to quickly remove and replace 500lbs of battery (and that's just in the Volt, some electrics are over 1000lbs). You need forklifts, plus heavy duty shelves for storage, and HUGE storage areas. It would take 30-60 minutes to swap this out, including hooking the packs up to chargers to recycle for the lext customer.

6) charging hundreds of battery packs per day at a gas station is virtually impossible on our current electric grid. We don;t have the transmission capacity to get that much high speed charge juice to one location. You're talking about several thousand KWh's per day per gas station potentially.

7) logistics: Swapping pacs while commuting would not be the norm, which means it's long distance travel. Imaging the battery usage, and which stations need how many packs going and coming from beach areas in summer, or on big holiday weekends!

8) holy crap the storage! A pack is 6 -8 feet long and 5 feet wide and over a foot thick. A busy station might need hundreds of these! Not only would that be a huge storage issue, it's also a million+ dollar investment.

9) By the time any of this could be built, we'll have mass circulation of SCiB battery packs (already in mass production and beginning to gain in popularity). These can be rapid charged to 85% in under 10 minutes, about the time it takes to fill up a gas tank, or grab snack and take a piss on interim stops on long trips. If you can go more than 150 miles between 10 minutes stops, you're bladder is better that most average families.

10) by standardizing on pack design, capacity, voltage, and more now, you prevent battery technology innovation from being used. Once you;ve spent a hundred billion buying excess packs (which we do not have in the supply chain, and which are in demand enough, so requesting more would have a big impact on price) and major overhauls to thousands of gas stations, they'll expect that to last 10 years at least. We have better battery tech coming out every year or two. You propose we simply stop advancing for 10 years, if not more.

Swappable packs will not happen in my lifetime. GIVE UP on this. Every reason it makes sense will not be a reason in 5 years, and every reason not to will still be there. Give up on H2 powered cars while you're at it, since you probably still think that's a good idea too.

Let me also note this: Our current grid infrastructure in the US can not support more than 0.5% of people using electric cars in our cities, and at max might support 3% of people with electric cars averaged across the grid. We have about 30 TRILLION to spend to overhaul the grid and build more power infrastructure to support 25% of people. This is a 30-40 year process. We can not push electric cars any more beyond them being a basic nich item that simply exists to forward car design and battery technology. Beyond that, costs would spiral out of control and noone could afford them (as it is, they're a $5K sink that can never be recouped as it is).

Next: We DO need to get off oil. H2 is not an option. EV is not an option. So what is? RFTS. Never heard of it? Neither have most people, but it's been an in-use process for MAKING gasoline since WWII. Some energty (which can come from carbon nuetral wind), some sequestered CO2 (most new coal plants being built are sequestering, and have nowhere to send their waste), and some water (which can be dirty, undrinkable water, not taking from freshwater supplies), and you can make any hydrocarbons you want from lowly greases to jet fuels. Modern science and over 60 new patented improvements, and mass scale design thinking, have put RFTS in a position to make unlimited fuel, carbon neutral, for about $60 a barrel at the factory, and at about $3 a gallon at the pump. check out www.dotyenergy to learn more. This is PROVEN, in-the-field science that's over 60 years old, and it;s now a real option to replace oil.

Michael C
FAIL

Holy Magnets Batman!

The field strentghs required to deliver anything more than a trickle charge at 110v to a car would be rediculous! Most home plug-ins (other than the Prius 2012 with a pathetic 5Kwh battery and 15 mile range) will be charged at home on high amp 240v circuits.

Look, the Volt car takes 8 hours to charge on a high volt, hig amp cable. it never really lets it's 16KWh battery get below 50%, so the average charge should be about 8KWh. That means 8 hours of 1KW power use per hour, which is a MASSIVE amount of power to pass via induction coils. Anything within a few feet of this pad would be magnetically erased, everything ferrous in the garrage would be slowly magnetized, and long term exposure to fields of those strengths has never really been studied and could be a significant health risk. You're also talking about having to magnetically shield many parts of the car, since placing a laptop bag on the floor could cause data loss if the magentic pad was underneath.

This is a huge cost to the car, a 10% power loss (and that's assuming near contact, it's a factor of CUBES efficiny loss if you park too far away!), and a huge risk.

Also, has anyone seen the power cords for cars? I have. it is IMPOSSIBLE to be shocked by one. It's not a household plug, not even like your dryer cord. It has an intelligent circuit in it and NO POWER goes through the cable at all except a carrier signal until it detects perfect contact with the car's electrical outlet. Further, the contacts are not exposed. And as far as it lying on the floor? they're typically installed on a hook system and springs so they automatically retract to a position against the wall. Yes, there are 110v outlets on these cars as well, but that's for when you;re not home and have to plug in somewhere random, but at home you'll be using a custom external charging system that's professionally installed by an electrician, and most houses will need an aditional or expanded circuit box to handle it, possibly an replacement or additional mainline from the power company... (If you don;t have a 300amp main, and want an electric car, you'll likely need one).

Forgetting to plug in? That's also simple. A position sensor in the car and garage, like a simple bluetooth connect, and the car could essentially "yell" at you if you've parked it for more than 10 minutes and have not plugged it in yet... This could be by texting you, sending you an e-mail alert, call you on the phone, blinking some light inside your house, honking it's horn, any number of alert mechanisms could be used for a reminder of "you forgot to plug in the car." Heck, it could scoll a notice across your TV with the right connection.

Apple silences Psystar's rebel yell with injunction

Michael C
Stop

What's illegal...

...is not adding the EFI, it's the fact they're using "upgrade" copies of OSX on machines that do not have existing OEM licenses.

That they are doing is equally as illegal as letting people take an existing OEM copy of Windows and move it to new PC hardware. They are specifically marketing that this is what they do, wether or not they personally install it. It;s like selling the Windows 7 Anytime Upgrade for Ultimate on a new PC without an OS...

Also, It also places Apple support to be responsible for the software support for the apps that come with OS X, at least, up until a point that they determine it is not apple hardware. Heavier loads on their update services for unpurchased OS copies, strings of forum questions, irritated users who might not be fully aware apple did not supprot the product they bought, and lessend quality of operation (the Psystar machines are buggy and do not include full OS X functionality or performance, nor does it include iLife (which is yet another "upgrade" version).

Plug-in Prius production plan posted

Michael C

WTF?

$30K for a car that gets about 15 MPG better than my current $18K car, and the EV only mode only goes 15 miles, so its not like I'm going to save a ton on that either. Heck, 15 miles is 1/3 of a gallon in that car, so less than $1 a day saved vs a regular Prius? Oh wait, that extra hundred and fifty pounds of battery might drop the fuel economy a mile or two as well, might be even less savings...

My car, 34Hwy, 27City. Prius 51/48. So, 15-20MPG better. First 15 miles per day would be at about half punp prices (current cost of Joules vs equiv energy in gas). I drive about 2500 miles in 3 months on average (slightly under normal, short commute). so less than 30miles per day. Best case scenario is every day is exactly equal (max battery use scenario). So, my car costs about 1 gallon per day (currently $2.50 a gallon, but lets go with a bad case a couple of years from now so average over 6 years might be at $4.00 a gallon). A Plug-in Prius would use 15 miles on EV and 15 miles on gas, so 1/3rd of a gallon ($1.32), plus half that again for the electricity, or roughtly $2 a day. That means trading in my car saves me only $2 a day, MAX theoretical savings, and that's based on $4 per gallon average price with electricity at half the price of that. (vs today's gas price, is about $1.20 saved).

At $2 a day, assuming I drive the car for 10 years, I'd save only $7K. Plug-in Prius costs $12K more, plus options some of which my current car comes with and the Prius does not, plus the interest on the difference i might finance (I'm certainly not in a position to pay cash for a $30K car).

This is a BAD deal, over a $5K net loss over 10 years, and that assumes $4 a gallon average, that you KEEP the car 10 years (I trade in every 5-7 personally), and that you have no expensive out-of-warranty maintenance.

Lets say toy travel 3 times my rate, 90 miles per day. My car costs $12 per day (again at $4/gallon). Prius costs about $7. That's $5 per day. Sounds better, until you considder this is 32K miles per year, 3 times normal, your warranty would expire (except the battery), in 3 years, and in 5-66 the car would be near 200K miles and be in dire need of replacement if it did not already completely fail, and the repair costs over 5 years would exceed the repair costs of 10 years of an average driver. Yes, saving $5/day vs $2/day is nice, but it;s a lot less likely the price will meet a $4/gallon average over such a reduced time period, and in the end, it breaks out to about the same savings, $5K lost over the term of use of the car, except in this case, you might need to buy 2 to get to 10 years, meaning the cost is substantiually MORE ($5K loss twice).

Lets look instead at another option: Lets say instead of loosing $500-100 a year on a hybrid vs a cheap but efficinet standard ICE like a Camary, a Jeep Compas, etc, including investing (financing) up fron the $12K extra to only recoup half over 10 years, that you just drive the other car, and take the difference in the car payment and give it to the electric company to invest in wind turbines. Something between $500 and $1000 a year. Do this for 10 years, with 250 other households in your neighborhood. Your pocket will have the EXACT same amount of meoney in it, so you won;t notice vs your current bedgeted finances. Over 10 years, that 2.5Million buys a wind turbine installation capable of powering your 250 houses, plus anopther 150 more. In return for your 10 year investment, the power company gives you 50% off your electric bill, for the 50-75 year life of that wind turbine (with reguler motor replacement about every 30 years). The wind turbine is 100% paid off, the power company makes half as much on your power (you save $1000 a year now), but they have no fuel costs, so the power is essentially free, aka a 50% margin (current power companies make 10-20% if they're lucky). The other 150 houses run by that tower make them 100% profit.

no, on a small scale this is not too good of a system (technically speaking, financially it's GREAT, but you can't count on the wind of a single turbine to keep lights on). but lets say we could get 250,000 households to invest. Now we could build 1,000 wind turbines, spread across all parts of america (a significant investment) and use them to power 400,000 homes. Or we could get 25 million homes (less than 25% of households in america), and we could power 40 million homes (likely more with improved efficncy from redundancy, larger scale generators, and better tower placement. That's $1000 a year for 10 years to have 50 years of power for 40 million homes, and a power discount for the 25 million investors equalling 1000 for 40 years. In other words, instead of buying a Prius now, invest the same 10 grand, feel NO financial impact for 10 years, and then get BACK $40K in savings, and remove more CO2 from the system than buying 5 Prius would have done. Lets see, $40K in profit, better energy return, free fuel for 50 years: Can we get some government oversight over here for fuck's sake????

Oh, the whole "running out of oil" thing: check out http://www.dotyenergy.com. We no longer need to drill for oil to make gasoline. The power from just 50m of the homes above would be enough to fuel 35 million homes worth of cars using RFTS (making fuel from water, carbon, and energy). It;s no vaorware, it;s bee in use since WWII, and can now be done at about $3 a gallon at the pump ($60-80 a barrel at the plant). This would still give unlimited 100% carbon nuetral fuel for the next 50 years until we build enough additional wind turbines and further battery development so we can drive 100% electric cars in 30 years or so that only cost $1K or $2K more than current cars. and, it would use our current fuel infrastructure in the meantime, unlike H2 or Ethanol which requires new pipelines and changes or replacements for your car.

there ARE other options, they're cheaper, and they're more effective, and they're more actionable. The reson you don't know about them is they can not be monopolized easily by big firms (anyone with $200 million could build an RFTS plant and make fuel for a small city and directly compete). There's no grant money for this technology due to lobying, so it gets buried.

Talk to your congrgessmen, or invest in RFTS and Wind power. Talk to your local power company and offer an investment for a future return on power if they buoild new green power systems.

FYI: I have NO business or professional affiliation with Doty Energy and am not compensated in any way for my statements. (I went to college with some of the folks that work there, that's all).

Android 2.0: what to expect

Michael C

iPhine not perfect, but Verizon's network is not an alternative

Look, yea the iPhone could add some APIs for the iPod interface to allow backround streaming (already rumored to be coming in 3.2/3.3 OS), and they could do something similar for GPS (I'd even accept that it would only work that way when docked to protect battery life, which btw, GPS background support is rumored for OS 4). It lacks FM tunig (except it;s there in the hardware, and folks have already found the APIs for it in the current beta build, so it;s likely coming REAL soon).

All that, which isn't a big deal. Yes, someone could make a better device (it would have to be a lot better), but even then, I'm not leaving AT&T's 3G netowrk for Verizon's:

1) can't do voice and data at the same time on their network. BIG PROBLEMm i do this 5-10 times a day with my iPhone. Can't look up e-mails on a call, can't talk while looking up an address, can't send a text while streaming music, phone won;t even ring. This is a HUGE issue noone is playing up properly

2) Verizon costs more. Plans are the same prices for the same minutes, but no rollover minutes. Data plan is capped at 5GB with rediculous overage charges. ActiveSync use (even via your own server) requires an additional $15 above the $30 data plan. Tethering (when it finally becomes available, some time mid 2010) will reportedly be $40 a month, compared to AT&T rumored to be offering it for "not more than $20." Termination fees are doubled. Phone protection plans cost more. Prorated replacements are STRICTLY held to once every 2 years (vs AT&T making deals equal to Verizons at 12 months, and double that at 18).

3) Verizon support SUCKS compared to AT&T. There's a whole group dedicated to just iPhone support, and they're good at it. I've had far more billing issues with Verizon as well.

4) Your Google Voice number can not be in your "circle."

If someone comes out with an awesome iPhone competitor that's on AT&T, I'll switch, given the following: Device construction must be rock solid, no scratched screens, no cheap plastic, no flimsy feel, no bulky design, no slide-out keyboard; OS should be even more mature than Android though android is getting much better (3.0 might do it); There needs to be a thriving marketplace with tens of thousands of GOOD applications, with many free and most under $5, and big-name published apps and games for $10 or less; it has to have some powerful hardware with a better 3D frame rate than the iPhone in higher resolution; multi-tough is a requirement across all apps, GPS services should be free (if not turn by turn at least what google maps can do); Camera must have autofocus no fixed focus and take good video and at least 3MP images; It needs to do 720p or better output directly to a TV with a simple cable; it should sync at least contacts, mail, and basic items over bluetooth (music and video would be unbearably slow over that, so that can be ignored), and if possible include WUSB; it has to work with Mac and PC equally, and should get Apple's full partnership or a complete custom app to sync natively with iTunes (does not require full integration, only iTunes support via XML file for syncing all media objects in both directions); must have FULL exchange supoport, including free/bust, meeting creation, and label and flag support. Anything less, and its not better.

Free software lawyers hit Best Buy et al with GPL 'violation' claim

Michael C

What does this have to do with BestBuy

Everyone except bestbuy listed is a system integrator or manufacturer. bestBuy is simply a retailer, they do not manufacture the device, unless they've got some clone under their Insignia branding (which is typically made by someone else and simply has a lable slapped on it, and I'm sure there's LOTS of legalese in those contracts to ensure bestbuy can't be targeted for stuff like this under thier terms).

Apple responds to Nokia lawsuit, in kind

Michael C

silly

Apple did not create the chipset in the device, nor design the firmware and unerlying protocols the device is using, they simply wrote an OS to utilize the stull legally licenced to Samsung (or whoever makes the chip) and they're licensed to sell those chips to anyone. None of nokia's pattents impact software design, only chiptests, and underlying hardware. Apple is the wrong target, and the right one has an existing license.

Now, since nokia played hardball, Apple will swing the bat and knock out some of the few teeth they have left and pocket a nice wad of cash for themselves and their layers, knowck out a few nokia patents, and make more of telephone open source than it was before.

This case is a win-win for consumers, regardless of who's lawyers make more money.

Hackers root Motorola Droid

Michael C
WTF?

Wait, it's locked down? Say it aint so!

In Europe, you might have some better flexibility, but on Verizon, it's still a closed architecture. Yes, you can get apps from more sources than JUST Verizon's own marketplace, but its still limited to apps and developers who 1) submit through a basic process, 2) comply with Verizon TOS. This is actually a less ideal system than apple's store since the apps are still restrictive in scope, but now there's no review body inspecting the apps to ensure you're not the victim of data theft, abusive practices, and more.

The phone itself feels cheaply made and bulky, the battery life is pathetic, the app availability is still limited, the OS still feels like a beta implementation (I'd have given it a 1.5 version, not 2.0), and the calling plan is $15 more than the AT&T plan without tethering, and more than $30 more with it (whern it eventually becomes available sometime in mid 2010...), and on top of that, it's a CAPPED data plan with REDICULOUS overage fees. If I used Pandora on a Droid like I do on my iPhone, I'd be in for about $60-80 a month in dataplan overages on top of thier more expensive plan and slower 3G netowkr (not to mention, AT&T 3G is awesome in my area, and Verizon is the network that dropps calls and has weak signal in many areas!) ...and between Verizon's support, and dealing with motorolla, no thanks, I'll stick with my dedicated, Apple staffed, AT&T iPhone support thank you... Oh, and the Google GPS... If you're using it, YOU CAN'T TAKE CALLS!!! Verizon does not support concurrent phone and data support on their 3G implementation!!!

On a call and want to look up directions to somewhere? iPhone yes, Droid no.

Want to send a quick SMS while downloading a big PDF? iPhone yes, Droid no.

Listening to Pandora while waiting on an imporant call? Droid won't even tell you you got a voicemail when if failed to ring...

The iPhone is far from perfect, but it's evolving nicely, new features added regulary. Coming this year will be 1) FM reception, enabled simply by a firmware patch/OS upgrade for free, 2) possibly FM transmission (the chipset is capable of it), 3) APIs for iPod plug-ins (to allow Pandora and others background operation), 4) OS 4, almost certainly including a background function for GPS and improved alert functions of other apps. If I can run Pandora, GPS, and a phone call at the same time, then all complaints about backgrounding go away...

Top security firm: Default Windows 7 less secure than Vista

Michael C

It does warn...

I didn't notice this on my core machine when i upgraded it a couple of months ago, as the first thing I did was install AV and tweak some of the security settings. However, on tuesday I just blew away the wife's old notebook and put 7 pro on it. (she now has a shiny MacBook Pro 15" btw, a truly incredible machine... running Win 7 in a VM on top od 10.6 it gets a better framerate in DDO than my 8800GT, though it does take a bit longer to load maps and high detail graphics)

I did not install AV immediately on this machine as i had the wrong (older) version in my network share and did not have the new version shared out from a different folder it was recently downloaded to. I was pestered after every reboot to install an AV client. When i finally RDP's to the other machine and shared up the files, and installed AV, within a minute or two it prompted about out-of-date definitions.

Win 7 absolutely pesters about the lack of AV in its default state.

Dell intros 'smallest' desktop PC made with desktop parts

Michael C

Power Brick NOT inside

Look at the photo! It clearly shows power cord entering a power system external to the 24x24x6.5 chassis when connected to that god awful (and much bulkier and less convenient than an iMac) form factor. Also, a Celeron? please... "full desktop not laptop parts" never includes Celeron when the competition uses Core2Duo (not the mobile version either) on 1066MHz frontside buses in a smaller chassis.

OK, so i go to Dell. Configure one of these with the exact same specs (though the Dell's Duo's start at 2.93 and the Mac is using a 2.66). 4GB 1066RAM, 320GB 7200RMP, DVD RW, Wifi N, etc. No mouse, keyboard or any other options, not even the stand or a monitor, nothing but the base PC. It lacks bluetooth, and lacks 1080P out with it's pathetic intel GMA, but it;s a bit faster than a Mac mini. UNFORTUNATELY, It's $1158 as configured, WITHOUT a monitor, meaning it not only costs $200 more than a comperable mini (which btw has the 9400 GPU and could play WOW, which the Dell could not), but it;s also $8 more than a 22" iMac, which also adds a webcam, speakers, mic, bigger HDD, and steps up to a 3.06GHz processor! (oh, and a 22" LED backlit screen). The iMac, including the screen, also uses less electricity...

Fuck you Dell, no thanks.

Apple said to snub Intel's next-gen mobile chip

Michael C

not a story

Look, Apple and nVidia just spend a ton of R&D dollars developing Grand Central, which includes support for GPU generic processing. Intel's tech not only does not support this, but it;s integrated processor for Arrandale is substandard to nVidia's offering.

Apple has a great partnership with nVidia (and we all know they've allways kept the line to ATI open as well, and have been continually working with their parts in lab tests and system design as well). Integrating the Arrandale intel chip would make it difficult if not impossible to offer an additional onboard chip as they do with the nVidia 9400/9600M combo. We also know nVidia has some new mobile chips on the horizon (and already has a 9700 in the field). so we should be expecting a laptop refresh in Q1/Q2 using the newer chips.

Arrandale may be a good processor, but the GPU components are not as powerful as a 9400. Though there's some watts savings, it's limited to 1 or 2, which is fairly negligible, and even paired with an alternate GPU, the Mac could not use both the intel and nVidia (or ATI) concurrently as they do with the 9400/9600M combo meaning the top end graphics would also take a perfomance hit (in both GPU and CPU performance) and add complexity to the architecture design. it would also restrict minis and low end notebooks from using GPU acceleration technologies.

This is a bad plan any way you slice it. Apple DOES have the clout with intel (as their single most profitable customer by large margins) to get exclusive rights to chips as they're released, and also to sway intel's product lineup to their favor. I expect either an arrandale without a GPU being offered to Appple (one actually without it on die at all, not just disabled but present), and I also expect Apple, if they did use the chip at all, to have exclisive sales of it for 1-2 months before Dell and the others get it.

Fanboi site squeaks on crocked iMacs

Michael C
Thumb Down

42

@lionel Baden,

All damaged on the bottom left?

Actually, no, 42, if you had RTFA. 42 out of 280 were damaged on the bottom left... That's less than 25% by my count... In fact, 42 out of 58 with a cracked screen were damaged on the bottom left, but that's still not an outragous number considdering no details of PAGACKE damage were given or the the condition the box arrived in, and this although not out of millions, is still out of tens of thousands of units shipped.

I've worked in corporate and residentail IT areanas both, and have had more than 5,000 machines shipped though my shops or offices. The average DOA rate (at least 1 part damaged or non-functional if not the whole machine) is north of 5%. 90% of those are due to shipping mishandling.

This is a thin, 27" machine inslide a box designed to protect it from blunt impacts, but not necessarily tortion forces. The box is clearly lables as "ship this sice up" with the sice up being the handle at the top of the skinny end. However, in shipment I've seen these things lying across uneven box tops with other boxes on top, putting pressure and torques on parts of the packaging never designed to withstand.

Do not blame a manufacturer being hounded by greenpeace and varios other agenceis to minimize packaging for the failure of the carrier to follow handling instructions.

When you have numbers on how many PRISTINE packages arrive with damaged machines inside, and those numbers for Apple exceed those for others by vast and measurable limts, then you let me know. instead, lets start asking how much this is costing UPS, because it costs Apple nothing...

Page: