Re: There's also the antenna technology.
Ah, yes, British Satellite Broadcasting, back in 1990:
1614 posts • joined 13 Jun 2008
That is, in fact *exactly* what Starlink gives. They do supply a router as well, but I threw that into the network spares box and plugged the "dish" straight into the back of my pfSense firewall.
We've not had a landline here for, oh, about 8 years, I think?
You're quite a long way out on Starlink's bandwidth. I've just run a test and got 207Mbps down, 37Mbps up (and 24ms latency, which is nice). I've seen speeds up to 350Mbps down, and 60Mbps up, but not both at the same time.
It is, I have to say, a very, very nice system. We did have one of the original bi-directional systems using a geostationary satellite, and the bandwidth was astonishing for the time (14Mbps in a age of 128Kbps from ISDN, from memory) but the latency was also astonishing, at over a second. Quite usable for web browsing, as they had an intelligent proxy that bundled up the whole page and squirted it to the user in one big burst, overcoming some of the HTTP latency sensitivity. Telnet sessions were hilarious, though.
New Shepard burns hydrogen. No carbon footprint at all.
SpaceX's Starship is burning methane, specifically so they can manufacture it on-site from the atmosphere, using electricity from renewal sources. No carbon footprint at all.
Surprising though it may be, these guys have thought about this stuff.
Yup, all of that, and more.
I've never understood why people get so wound up about an OS. It is what it is, it works, and it works better than the alternatives (FTAOD, I don't see MacOS and Windows as direct competitors, given the vertical integration Apple have enforced down the years - two very different approaches, of which the Microsoft approach suits me better).
<shrug> I can't help coming to the conclusion that a lot of this is simply about badly shaved apes allowing their tribal subconscious to rule their more rational side.
That's your choice to make, knock yourself out. But the choice should be made on the basis of actual real facts, rather than rumour and falsehood, yes?
Me, I run a whole range of OSs, for a whole range of tasks. Windows on the desktop, various flavours of Linux and OpenBSD for server and network stuff, VMware hypervisor underpinning a lot of them, Android on phones and tablets. I think there's a couple of VMS machines in the loft, but that's ancient history. It's all good.
1) You don't need a working Internet connection at all times, only when you are initially installing Windows. It works perfectly well off-line with a Microsoft account, even if your files are stored on OneDrive (they can be cached locally and will sync when you next connect);
2) You don't need to give Microsoft anything other than a valid email address to set up a Microsoft account. And that email address can be dedicated purely for use with a single PC if you like.
> this is going to slow down take up massively
It occurred to me this morning that perhaps something Microsoft learned from Windows 10 was that a slower take-up can be beneficial for them. Windows 10 as it exists today is very different to the launched version five years ago, it has evolved and changed as the population has grown. And today, they have 1.3 billion live instances, which isn't too shabby.
I wonder if perhaps this has been seen as a good experience for Microsoft?
We had lunar rovers in 1971. You can bet that some form of light utility vehicle will be in the very first cargo to be set to Mars.
I mean, sure, the distances will still be limited. But that's the least of the problems to be overcome, really.
Also, 24 hours? They can live on board ship after landing for weeks, if necessary.
I can't speak for our colonial cousins, but on MoD sites in the UK it's very common to have armed guards requesting that one put any mobile devices, memory sticks, or digital media of any sort into a locker before entering certain areas.
Which can make administration work on servers a bit of a chore.
I find it *hugely* amusing that worshippers at the Church of Jobs have been telling us for years that the hardware specs don't matter, it's the user experience that is key.
Now the M1 chip has come along, and all we have heard for the last six months is hardware specs, quoted endlessly as if they are the only thing that matters.
Here's a thought for you. It's going to come as quite a shock, you might want to sit down. Here goes:
Most users don't need high performance in a laptop. They run Office applications, and do a bit of web browsing. All these Apple weenies showing how fast they can edit 4K videos and manipulate 3D models? We're just not interested.
That rather depends on the actions and reactions of the various nation states in the face of climate change.
In an extreme worst-case scenario, dwindling resources and growing populations could easily trigger WW3, and I for one would rather be watching that from a bunker on Mars than a bunker on Earth.
Of course, that rather presupposes that the bunker on Mars is self-sufficient, which is going to take a while to achieve.
Not least of working for a Televideo distributor in the '80s. One of their "terminals" was actually a PC, with an all-in-one motherboard in the bottom of the stand, which talked to the Televideo Novell Netware servers via RS-422 fast serial links. Quite advanced for the day.
Anyway, one of our customers was a company that maintained London black cabs, in an underground workshop somewhere on the outskirts of central London, I forget where exactly. They had something like 20 bays, and a constant stream of cabs coming and going.
I went up there one day to change out the BIOS ROM chips on their half-dozen PC. The outsides of the systems were reasonably clean, by the standards of other workshop PCs I have known. But, oh my, the state of the motherboards...
Officially according to working procedures in every organisation I've worked with or in.
It is exactly as you say. The SSD can be removed, so that the device can be sent off for repair without the danger of data leaking. Whether the SSD is then destroyed, or filed securely for re-fitting to another device for the same user, is largely irrelevant.
That was, in fact, pretty much what I wrote, so why did you feel the need to argue, whilst re-stating the same position?
It's instructive that the Surface Pro 7+ is only sold through the Surface for Business channel, don't you think?
What's your point? Pretty much every single step of human endeavour is built on the developments that have gone before. DC-X does not invalidate what SpaceX are doing now, and neither do pragmatic decisions about getting fuel from existing sources, for now. There are plans to move on to synthesised fuels, later.
However, it should be noted that said goals are basically "maximise the amount of cash we can screw out of the US government".
Meanwhile, SpaceX continue to establish an actual, genuine spaceport, complete with a production line to build as many Starships as they can find space to queue up.
I would say that the target audience is business people who travel to meetings. This might just be the mythical device that I have been chasing all my working life, that allows me to finally ditch the corporate ball and chain that is my briefcase.
I've already slimmed down what I carry immensely, courtesy of a Surface Pro (and now a Pro X, which is very lovely) in combination with the OneDrive service, which means I no longer have to carry any paperwork at all.
The Duo may well allow me to go to a lot of meetings without a briefcase at all. This, I approve of.
Whether or not it works in practice, well, we'll see.
Microsoft are playing this rather intelligently, and not calling the Duo a phone. It's a portable computer that is capable of making phone calls.
Now, this might seem like sophistry of the worst kind, but for me it was rather accurate. I try where-ever possible to avoid either making or receiving phone calls, but the ability to do so is occasionally useful.
"Nobody, anywhere in the whole of the world, seriously believes that Macs are invulnerable."
Sorry, but that is complete tosh. Every single non-technical Mac owner I know has at some point told me that one reason for their decision to buy a Mac was that they don't have any viruses or malware.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2021