Posts by KroSha 350 publicly visible posts • joined 17 Jun 2009
That's what I'd like from a tv. All it needs is a really good display, with sufficient ports that I can plug whatever boxes in to it I'd like. My current set is a Sony with their XMB UI, which is pretty good. It came with Freeview and Freesat built in, but both of those are superseded now. Most of my "smart" viewing is done via the PS3, either over interwebs, or streamed from my NAS.
Good picture, good sound, lots of ports. Nothing else required.
This already happens, to some extent. The OSX installer will detect which hardware drivers are required in a given installation. Also, the discs that used to be shipped with a Mac where only good for that model, as they lacked the full range of drivers included in the Retail edition. Now, the Restore function tells the server what drivers it needs and downloads them in a rebuild.
It does make sense to have as many common modules as possible, but I personally preferred the previous lower levels of iOS functionality in OSX. It was easier to support in a business environment.
If the Govm't are so concerned about this, then they need to fix the tax rules. Taking the time to do it properly will mean more money for them, more competitiveness in the market (good for us) and they get to be seen doing something good. While they are at it, they need to fix personal tax dodgers like Phillip Green as well.
Multinational profits made in a country should be taxed in that country.
Thanks for the advice, but the iPad both suits my fancy and fills the requirements. I looked long and hard at the competition when deciding on a tablet and the iPad is best for me and what I want to do with it.
The beef I currently have is that the Apple YouTube app was pretty good, until it got pulled in iOS 6. The current Google one is not an iPad app, just an iPhone one. It just gets scaled up to the larger screen. This looks bloody shite on the big screen. The old app had a lot of the functionality of the full web page. The iPhone app is severely limited by comparison.
And just to clarify one of your points. Some apps are iPhone size (like Google Maps) and scale to the larger screen. A few are "for iPad". The vast majority (such as Galaxy On Fire) are dual format and contain both the iPhone and iPad layouts in a single app. So purchasing these apps once lets you use it on iPhone, iPod Touch or iPad, whichever you own.
I have a ReadyNAS Duo. I'm really happy with it. It's quieter now that I've replaced the stock fan, although it wasn't that bad in the first place. Upgrading the RAM made quite a difference, but was a PITA. Back when I got it, NAS support for Apple Time Machine was few and far between and this was a major factor in the purchase. I'm rather surprised this article went for a NV+ rather than an Ultra4.
>Which sounds like a logical argument until you realise that the only official way to use an iAnything is through purchasing from Apple's store, where they take a pretty cut from the revenue.
Not true. I have iDevices, but very rarely buy anything from the Apple stores. Apps are usually free, and music and video are sourced, converted and loaded though other channels.
Not particularly surprising. The Mini is a direct competitor, but the compromises made to make it viable, like the same pixel count as the iPad2, also screw it over. Those compromises are the exact reason Jobs didn't rate the idea of a SFF tablet. Of course, Amazon can charge whatever the heck it likes, as they really don't care about making a profit on hardware. Sales only mean more people buying content, whereas the iPad Mini has justify its existence.
The only real question remaining is; Will they blend? (The Fire, probably, the Mini not so much)
I've been using iTunes on Mac OS since the very beginning, and it's slowly become more and more unwieldy. I honestly believe that it's time to give the whole thing a serious redesign, preferably breaking it in to three separate apps.
1. Apple Media Store. The front end app store for buying all the stuff Apple so desperately wants to sell us.
2. iDevice Manager. Where we can load any media from the database(s) into the iDevice of your preference. This could also hook in to iPhoto and whatever other repositories exist in your file system.
3. iTunes. The database manager app that (shock!) just plays stuff, but does it very well and with minimum overheads.
The resources that iTunes currently needs for just playing a song is, quite frankly, daft. Apple has a perfectly adequate media player in Quicktime, but it never gets opened, just because iTunes wants to be the front end for everything.
It's quite simple really. The USPTO takes their fee, looks at the forms, makes sure it's all filled in correctly and rubber stamps it. They aren't technical and certainly aren't qualified to make judgements on validity and prior art. That's what the courts are for.
Meanwhile, the courts are of the opinion that the USPTO wouldn't grant the application without good cause, so they consider everything to be above board unless someone can convince them otherwise. Enter the scum-munching bottom-feeding patent lawyers who's opinion is for sale to the highest bidder.
Of course, this system works very well. After all, lots of patents are filed, so they must be useful, right?
indeed. The new app looks exceedingly sucky on an iPad screen. I actually liked the older app. OK, it wasn't brilliant, but the UI worked really well, and it was easy to find and watch the stuff you wanted. Neither the mobile site or the new app look or behave as much like the full site as the old one did.
Not what he asked. "We" want to be able to install as GUI-less Core, but still be able to run RSAT from "our" desktops. Y'know, remotely? Isn't that the point of Remote Tools; that they plug straight in to the command line, without using the command line?
Minor FAIL.
What'd be nicer would be an option in the installer that lets you make choices. OSX has a limited one, where you can choose not to install some language packs, or printer drivers that you'll never need. I'd like to see more choice, so you can really tailor the install to your needs.
With post-install slimming, my core OS was under 3GB, rather than the 7GB for a basic one. And that could have gone lower.
You may want to actually get some facts, or better still experience of supporting Macs alongside Windows, to form your opinions on.
http://www.zdnet.com/blog/apple/tco-new-research-finds-macs-in-the-enterprise-easier-cheaper-to-manage-than-windows-pcs/6294
Yes, the individual machines are more expensive for the initial purchase. But because; the Server is set price for unlimited seats (even in the old days when it was £500), the Macs tend to last longer due to better build quality and finally, support calls tend to be fewer, means that the TCO is better.
Even if the business doesn't invest in dedicated technician staff (and few do), there are plenty of Support Providers who will cover the hardware.
I've seen Macs deployed "in force", i.e. from 15-500, at firms specialising in art, law, design, public utilities, architecture, publishing, advertising and even High St retail. Whether it's just a few desks or 500, Mac support teams are ALWAYS smaller than their Windows counterparts, on a per user basis.
1. A Mac Pro with a hardware RAID card to connect it to a RAID box and a Fibre-link card makes a pretty good server. 12 core Xeon & 64GB is enough for most jobs. OK, I know it isn't rack mounted, but there are a fair few servers available from other OEMs that aren't either.
2. Bull. Open Directory is better and easier than Active Directory.
3. Given that the Server version is one bullet point away from the Client, it isn't much to release the upgrade. And y'know, some people don't want to pay the MS tax. Unix with a nice GUI and a decent set of tools lets some businesses run lots of clients with little requirement for support (right now, my team supports ~250 clients per person). Not too bad for £14.
Repost from HP thread 28th October http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/10/28/hp_tablet_market_run/
"Hang on... Decent spec'd hardware, at what was essentially a fair market price, and a reasonable OS failed to sell. So they canned it.
Now they want to sell what we assume will be a decent spec tablet, which they are going to have to sell at a fair market price, with an unknown OS? Let's face it, MS haven't exactly covered themselves with glory in the smartphone / mobile OS arena, and no one really knows how well the public are going to take to it.
But they expect it to sell and sell well enough to pay the licensing fees and still make a profit on it?
Hmm."
Nothing here changes that opinion...
There's a hole here. Copyright infringements for YouTube videos are processed by YouTube. They take the video offline if it's subject to a notice. Those notices don't go to Google Search. For that to happen, then there would have to be two notices, one to YouTube to get it removed and one to Google to get the search listing demoted. How many lawyers are going to do that if just one notices gets the result of having the clip pulled?
Or maybe Search would just pass the notices to YouTube for action?
"Actually he did have backups of his phone - on his MacBook
He had backups of his MacBook - in the iCloud.
This was not enough, but he did have backups"
iCloud is not a backup. Had he done things properly and taken a backup with Time Machine, then not only would he have the contents of his Macbook, but that would contain the contents of his iPhone as well, stored in his iTunes Library.
Really basic FAIL for a tech journo.
"The Cloud" has got to be the most b*****it term of the decade. For some reason, The Bosses think it's some kind of drokkin' magic. Wake up, morons! It's a SAN, one with a VPN on the front. It's not a cloud, it's a bloody big box of HDDs. Everything is still recorded on platters, it's still just hardware, not some kind of magic smoke.
If you're a SME, then maybe it's more cost effective to host stuff externally. Personally, I think they'd be better off hiring someone who knows what they're doing and run all storage in house.
Nukes, cos that's how the Cloud will finish for too many businesses.
+1. The problem is still the publishers. As long as they continue to run their markets as if the only way to obtain content is to purchase a physical copy from the shops, nothing will improve. They need to realise that there are very few barriers to obtaining anything from anywhere, if you know where to look.
Staggering release schedules, equally staggering costs for 1 & 2 night rentals and the general low quality of 80% of the output means that the general public no longer thinks the offerings are worth what they want to charge.
"A physical backup would have helped, but most people are unlikely to have a backup schedule to prevent precious documents/photos/contacts etc. from being deleted."
This is precisely why Apple introduced Time Machine; something like 7% of user regularly backed up their data at the time. It's not exactly difficult; you plug in a USB / Firewire HDD (or connect to a network share) and it does a backup of your HDD, a full one first and then incrementals. Anyone who has a Mac has NO EXCUSE for not having a recent backup. I rather suspect that the first question the Genius asks will be along those lines. At which point he'll look embarrassed and mutter "no".
+1. The Cloud is not a suitable backup strategy. All it does is keep your devices in sync. Anyone who thinks that Apple / Google / MS / Dropbox is keeping all their stuff safe deserves to lose it all.
Back your stuff up yourself. It doesn't matter what you use; Time Machine, CCC, rsync, as long as you have at least one (bootable) copy in the event that your main HDD goes south. It's YOUR data and YOUR responsibility to ensure its safety.
Only at the platform? So when you're stuck for 10mins in a tunnel whilst the train ahead is at the platform because somebody has thrown up all over the floor, you still can't get signal. Sorry to all you who can't bear to be out of touch, but this is a colossal waste of time. Unless you have a real, solid connection, all the time for everyone, who cares?
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
