Slashdot Mirror

All of the above are true (or, are at least true for you) but they aren't important to the masses, and that's why other phones outsell the BlackBerry, and their management is too brain-dead to deal with it.

"BlackBerry smartphones will never have cameras because the No. 1 customer of ours is the U.S. government," Mike Lazaridis would say in meetings. "There will never be a BlackBerry with an MP3 player or camera."

And yet he was too fucking dumb and/or stubborn to realize that only 8% of working Americans work for the government, which means 92% of employed Americans DON'T work for the government. (And plenty of teens have disposable income and no jobs at all, so that's like 95% of the country he's ignoring.) Why limit yourself like that? Dumb, dumb, dumb. I agree that there's a market for less-featureful phones but if you think it's a big market you're deluding yourself. What's so hard about making both?

"The strength of a Blackberry is productivity." - depends on what you're used to. I know people who are fantastically productive with an iPhone. (Or any other device. You talk about taking lots of notes on one--if I were going to take lots of notes, I'd get a better device. Like the old joke: a handgun is what you use to defend yourself while you make way to a REAL weapon.) But for every person who can type a bit faster or eke out a little more battery life with a BlackBerry, there are 99 others who are 10x more productive due to apps that are orders of magnitude better than anything available on a BB. BlackBerries are very productive, within a very narrow definition of "productive."

One example: I had a BlackBerry Curve 8330 from work (right after they came out) and a personal iPhone. Having used the iPhone's awesome maps, I checked out the BB's maps one day. To say that the iPhone's maps are an order of magnitude better than the BB's is a gross understatement. They are two, maybe three orders better. For every one thing a BB does better than another device, there are ten things every other device does better than a BB. And unless your absolute top priorities are (for example) battery life, network usage, and a good physical keyboard, you're going to be better served by something else.

Just like an organism must have enough food to survive, a company must be profitable to survive, and there just isn't enough market to keep RIM in business much longer. (Or if there is, they'll be a shadow of their former selves and a fraction of the total market, unless they really drastically change--which they haven't shown much indication of doing.)

This is what happens when you send a government to do a man's (or woman's, or group of private citizens') job. We could stand to learn something from the successful, small WISPs and other small-time broadband providers (one of which I am a happy subscriber to).

Check this out for more information about how it's getting done Europe.

Injunctions do happen, and the companies are prevented from importing devices. It happened to Qualcomm in 2007. Qualcomm quickly worked around it by implementing their chips in a way that worked around the patent. But don't think that this is an idle threat.

Engadget has a fair description of each of Apple's claims as well as links to each of the patents in question.

The ORIGINAL FUCKING STORY IS ON THE REGISTER

For fuck's sake, stop this linking to every scumbag linkspamming plaigiarising blogger who submits his crappy blog to scam some ad hits.

Seoul, South Korea was #1 on the list, and it may be for reasons other than just generally good Internet connectivity:

It's the home of co.cc, which Google recently blacklisted for being a den of evil.

If it was before the co.cc Google Death Penalty then maybe we should re-run the study in a few weeks.

From Google pulls co.cc subdomains from search, brings our global malware nightmare to an end:

Google classifies [the company behind co.cc] as a "freehost" -- it belongs to a Korean [emphasis added] company...

IMHO, releasing only part of the source code is indeed, like GP said, more dangerous than no release at all. Just that he forgot to mention that it's potentially dangerous in both directions - both to the world at large ("oh look, stuff to test for exploits!"), and to Microsoft ("OAMG they're hiding something! You can't even test what's there without violating a license!").

That is not correct in this case. The problem is that everyone believed the article when they said that this was the code from Windows Phone 7. This is actually the code from Microsoft's vans that collected geolocation data. (similar to Google's vans that logged everyone's WiFi packets that got them into strife). The fact that they didn't release the entire code is irrelevant because none of us have the binaries with which to compare the source code. Therefore there are also no security problems with them releasing this code either.

Read their privacy statement, because you sound like an idiot, they dont keep ip addresses for years on end. You alos dont have a profile just from having a Youtube account. It's sad how many idiot slashdotters fall for this MS/Facebook Privacy FUD. http://www.engadget.com/2011/05/12/facebook-admits-hiring-pr-firm-to-smear-google/

HP has the same problem as Nokia and RIM. Company execs aren't putting enough resources into their new OS's to get things moving.

Nokia had a good thing started with Maemo/Meego. Just look at the recent N950, N9 reviews by Engadget and others (
http://www.engadget.com/2011/06/21/nokia-n9-first-hands-on/ ; http://www.engadget.com/2011/06/30/nokias-n950-demos-meego-harmattan-in-marathon-video/ ). A great start/ideas, but they didn't put enough of their not insubstantial resources behind it to get it developed quickly. They gave developers a mixed message, which had a lot of them sitting back waiting to see if there was going to be full commitment by the company before joining in.
Result, the new OS floundered from lack of backing, and they ended up turning to Microsoft.

RIM had been giving the developers the same mixed message about where they are headed. QNX could be an awesome phone OS. Frankly, I'm not sure why someone wasn't putting it on phones years ago. Will it succeed? If it does, it will be despite the big brass's ambivalent attitude.

And now we have HP, which bought a great little OS in WebOS from Palm, that just didn't have the money to dig themselves out of the hole they let themselves get into.

HP's administration said they were going to "double down on WebOS." Their new CEO says they are going to "be cooler than apple". He's also said they were going to avoid the same mistakes made in the past and that they would now "ship products within weeks of announcement"".

HP keeps claiming they have 'incredible scale' and vast resources to make WebOS a success. But since the purchase of Palm, they haven't put their money where their mouth is.

What have they done with those vast resources?

They let the bulk of the creative talent from Palm, the folks who had all the great ideas that make WebOS the induitive OS that it is, leave to go to Apple, Google, or anywhere but HP.

They've put out the Veer, which is basically a smaller version of the original pre, with slightly upgraded hardware.

They have essentially converted a tablet that they were originally going to have run a MS OS. Their Touchpad is bulkier, heavier, and has slower hardware than the competition. And the OS is laggy.

The 'Cool thing' about the Touchpad was that it is supposed to synch with their(new) phones, (Veer, and Pre3). The veer is selling terribly because it's too tiny for a smartphone.

And the Pre3? The Pre3 was announced in February. It's going to ship (in the U.S.) in the Fall. With specs that are way outclassed by phones already released with Android, and facing a likely new iPhone in the fall, as well as some insanely better hardware in the Galaxy S2.

Not much to show for HPs vaunted vast resources.

And then there's customer service...

Original Pre owners were strung along for many months by HP, who told them their Pre phones would be upgraded to WebOS version 2.x and finally get FLASH, that was promised to them 2 years ago when the phone first went on sale. Then at the last minute, folks found out (via twitter, not even a real press release) that that wasn't going to happen.

Then they said they'd do something to 'make things right' to the WebOS users. What did they do finally? Their marketing guys attempted to upsell those folks by giving them a $50 coupon for the touchpad. But only if they got the high end 32MB version. And only if they did it within 30 days of the notice.

Not timely, not cool HP.

I'm afraid WebOS is fated to go the way of BeOS. O

HP has the same problem as Nokia and RIM. Company execs aren't putting enough resources into their new OS's to get things moving.

Nokia had a good thing started with Maemo/Meego. Just look at the recent N950, N9 reviews by Engadget and others (
http://www.engadget.com/2011/06/21/nokia-n9-first-hands-on/ ; http://www.engadget.com/2011/06/30/nokias-n950-demos-meego-harmattan-in-marathon-video/ ). A great start/ideas, but they didn't put enough of their not insubstantial resources behind it to get it developed quickly. They gave developers a mixed message, which had a lot of them sitting back waiting to see if there was going to be full commitment by the company before joining in.
Result, the new OS floundered from lack of backing, and they ended up turning to Microsoft.

RIM had been giving the developers the same mixed message about where they are headed. QNX could be an awesome phone OS. Frankly, I'm not sure why someone wasn't putting it on phones years ago. Will it succeed? If it does, it will be despite the big brass's ambivalent attitude.

And now we have HP, which bought a great little OS in WebOS from Palm, that just didn't have the money to dig themselves out of the hole they let themselves get into.

HP's administration said they were going to "double down on WebOS." Their new CEO says they are going to "be cooler than apple". He's also said they were going to avoid the same mistakes made in the past and that they would now "ship products within weeks of announcement"".

HP keeps claiming they have 'incredible scale' and vast resources to make WebOS a success. But since the purchase of Palm, they haven't put their money where their mouth is.

What have they done with those vast resources?

They let the bulk of the creative talent from Palm, the folks who had all the great ideas that make WebOS the induitive OS that it is, leave to go to Apple, Google, or anywhere but HP.

They've put out the Veer, which is basically a smaller version of the original pre, with slightly upgraded hardware.

They have essentially converted a tablet that they were originally going to have run a MS OS. Their Touchpad is bulkier, heavier, and has slower hardware than the competition. And the OS is laggy.

The 'Cool thing' about the Touchpad was that it is supposed to synch with their(new) phones, (Veer, and Pre3). The veer is selling terribly because it's too tiny for a smartphone.

And the Pre3? The Pre3 was announced in February. It's going to ship (in the U.S.) in the Fall. With specs that are way outclassed by phones already released with Android, and facing a likely new iPhone in the fall, as well as some insanely better hardware in the Galaxy S2.

Not much to show for HPs vaunted vast resources.

And then there's customer service...

Original Pre owners were strung along for many months by HP, who told them their Pre phones would be upgraded to WebOS version 2.x and finally get FLASH, that was promised to them 2 years ago when the phone first went on sale. Then at the last minute, folks found out (via twitter, not even a real press release) that that wasn't going to happen.

Then they said they'd do something to 'make things right' to the WebOS users. What did they do finally? Their marketing guys attempted to upsell those folks by giving them a $50 coupon for the touchpad. But only if they got the high end 32MB version. And only if they did it within 30 days of the notice.

Not timely, not cool HP.

I'm afraid WebOS is fated to go the way of BeOS. O

HP has the same problem as Nokia and RIM. Company execs aren't putting enough resources into their new OS's to get things moving.

Nokia had a good thing started with Maemo/Meego. Just look at the recent N950, N9 reviews by Engadget and others (
http://www.engadget.com/2011/06/21/nokia-n9-first-hands-on/ ; http://www.engadget.com/2011/06/30/nokias-n950-demos-meego-harmattan-in-marathon-video/ ). A great start/ideas, but they didn't put enough of their not insubstantial resources behind it to get it developed quickly. They gave developers a mixed message, which had a lot of them sitting back waiting to see if there was going to be full commitment by the company before joining in.
Result, the new OS floundered from lack of backing, and they ended up turning to Microsoft.

RIM had been giving the developers the same mixed message about where they are headed. QNX could be an awesome phone OS. Frankly, I'm not sure why someone wasn't putting it on phones years ago. Will it succeed? If it does, it will be despite the big brass's ambivalent attitude.

And now we have HP, which bought a great little OS in WebOS from Palm, that just didn't have the money to dig themselves out of the hole they let themselves get into.

HP's administration said they were going to "double down on WebOS." Their new CEO says they are going to "be cooler than apple". He's also said they were going to avoid the same mistakes made in the past and that they would now "ship products within weeks of announcement"".

HP keeps claiming they have 'incredible scale' and vast resources to make WebOS a success. But since the purchase of Palm, they haven't put their money where their mouth is.

What have they done with those vast resources?

They let the bulk of the creative talent from Palm, the folks who had all the great ideas that make WebOS the induitive OS that it is, leave to go to Apple, Google, or anywhere but HP.

They've put out the Veer, which is basically a smaller version of the original pre, with slightly upgraded hardware.

They have essentially converted a tablet that they were originally going to have run a MS OS. Their Touchpad is bulkier, heavier, and has slower hardware than the competition. And the OS is laggy.

The 'Cool thing' about the Touchpad was that it is supposed to synch with their(new) phones, (Veer, and Pre3). The veer is selling terribly because it's too tiny for a smartphone.

And the Pre3? The Pre3 was announced in February. It's going to ship (in the U.S.) in the Fall. With specs that are way outclassed by phones already released with Android, and facing a likely new iPhone in the fall, as well as some insanely better hardware in the Galaxy S2.

Not much to show for HPs vaunted vast resources.

And then there's customer service...

Original Pre owners were strung along for many months by HP, who told them their Pre phones would be upgraded to WebOS version 2.x and finally get FLASH, that was promised to them 2 years ago when the phone first went on sale. Then at the last minute, folks found out (via twitter, not even a real press release) that that wasn't going to happen.

Then they said they'd do something to 'make things right' to the WebOS users. What did they do finally? Their marketing guys attempted to upsell those folks by giving them a $50 coupon for the touchpad. But only if they got the high end 32MB version. And only if they did it within 30 days of the notice.

Not timely, not cool HP.

I'm afraid WebOS is fated to go the way of BeOS. O

No, it wasn't a rebuttal. It was meant to spur you to actually provide an argument. As it is, it took two posts for you to even attempt that. You didn't present it as an opinion - you didn't say "I think the iPhone outclass Android" or "I'm of the opinion that iPhone outclasses Android" - you said "iPhone outclasses Android". That's presenting it as a fact.

Design, responsiveness, developer APIs, usability, aesthetics, integration with music and app stores, security, lack of malware, third party software, third party hardware

And again, you have a list features with no real discussion:

• Design: Where and how are the aesthetics of an iPhone superior to Android
• Responsiveness: What aspects of the Android interface lag, or are less responsive than iOS?
• Developer APIs: Both have them; what makes iPhone's superior?
• Aesthetics: How is this distinct from "Design"
• Integration: Well, I'll dispute the plural since iPhone can only interface with a single app or music store, while Android can use many. I'll give you music store, since Android doesn't do that natively, but what makes iPhone's app store integration better than Android's Google Market?
• Security: Again, any examples?
• Lack of Malware: iPhone, malware is hardly unknown. I'll grant you, Android is more vulnerable than an un-jailbroken iPhone - that's the trade-off you get for being in control of your own device. If you stick to each device's respective app stores, your chances of getting malware are vanishingly slim - AFAIK, there's been one instance where a bunch of apps were uploaded with malware on Android, and Google had them down within days.
• Third Party Software: Looking at sheer numbers, Apple has the advantage - although Android is accelerating faster. I don't really think numbers are a great measure anyway - the proliferation of fart apps and cheap clones tends to cloud the issue. In practical use, I've never heard of an app on the iPhone I wanted that I couldn't get an equivalent of on Android. The reverse isn't true - I've got a couple of apps on my android that my iPhone-ing friends can't replicate, simply because the Android gives devs greater access to the hardware (location-based stuff, generally, such as Locale)
• Third Party Hardware: Can you give an example of an area where Android lacks hardware support? I do see more hardware for the Apple than the Android, but frankly, most of it is crap. Both Android and iPhone have your basic car adapters, music docks, headsets. Yet to find anything available for one but not the other that I'd want.

On to your other list:

• Open source: I'd hesitate to say even most geeks care about this that much. This is targeted at handset manufacturers rather than end-users
• Multiple hardware vendors: On the other hand, I think people do definitely care about this, and this is an outgrowth of the Open Source point. The sheer variety of Android-powered devices means that people can pick devices tailored to their needs, rather than the one-size-fits-all iPhone model.
• Side-loading of apps: The number of people I know who've jailbroken their iPhones suggest to me that people do actually care about this
• Untethered, PC-free synching: I know I was a bit puzzled when one of iPhone using friends started raving about it when he installed iOS5 - it seemed so basic to me, I didn't even know iPhones lacked it previously

And I'll further add customization and widgets - Android lets you configure your phone how you want it - from wallpaper to widgets - whereas iPhones are significantly less custo

You mean like LG felt when Apple ripped-off the earlier Prada design to make the Iphone?

Only company from the list that I worry about is Apple. They're really been left and right everyone about patent issues. Microsoft, not so much, unless some patent troll has attacked them first. Same goes for RIM. Sony is bad in other fronts, they're not really suing for patent issues. But Apple has been handling their patent related issues really dirty, dumping thousand+ page sues, trying to enforce ban on competitor products and in their developer agreement for iPhone/iPad they require all software developers to give away their ideas to Apple when submitting their application - after which they can decide if to accept or reject the app and maybe implement it themselves. Like when Apple ripped off an wireless sync app made by a one guy.

based on what?

Probably the worst thing Microsoft is currently doing is threatening and then shaking down Android device manufacturers( http://www.engadget.com/2011/06/27/microsoft-inks-android-patent-deal-with-itronix-causes-more-hea/), it's also hard to ignore:

• Paul Allen... http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703294904575385241453119382.html
• Microsoft funding SCO's litigation against the Linux Kernel http://www.eweek.com/c/a/Linux-and-Open-Source/Leaked-Memo-Revives-SCOMicrosoft-Connection-Furor/

I actually thought the assurances were descent. Try looking at the SLA for your other cloud products to compare. Plus I've had Microsoft hosted Exchange for almost 2 years now and can't remember a single outage.

But what's sad is that the title of this 'article' and summary tries so obviously and desperately to frame the SLA in the worse possible light.

How about reporting something newsworthy, like the fact that Microsoft released Windows Phone 7.5 Beta 2 ( Mango release ) to the entire development community yesterday.

Still misunderstanding the world I see...

Maybe you would prefer it if MSFT took the "sue your ass off" route that Apple currently uses?

And what "sue your ass off" route would that be, exactly? The only major lawsuit that come to mind that aren't countersuits are the one against Samsung for copying Apple's designs. It's quite possible there are more, but it's definitely not some sort of "route that Apple currently uses".

It is kind of funny though, you mention lawsuits that MS has undertaken, and are currently undertaking, but somehow they *aren't* taking a '"sue your ass off" route', whereas Apple, who isn't engaged in such suits, is?

Uhm.. regardless of Microsoft, Apple is considered a quite aggressive litigious company. To the extent of even suing teenage driven Mac fan sites. Which though not patent related is RIAA-level low in my view. Some other Apple lawsuits or threats (not by a long shot an extensive list, but what turned up in a quick search) in addition to Samsung suit you mentioned and not including suits like the multitouch patent suit Apple filed against Motorola, as you excluded "countersuits".

Apple sues HTC for infringing 20 iPhone patents
Apple Threatening Patent Lawsuits Over New Palm Pre
Amazon Appstore is now live, Apple is suing for the name
The Reason Why Apple Is Suing Sanho Corp. (HyperMac) Revealed


--
“And boy, have we patented it.” — Steve Jobs, 2007.

The millennium bridge sways because people are walking incorrectly.

You're holding your phone wrong.

A common response for engineers and software developers is to blame the users for doing it wrong. Usually the users win. No matter what, though, the developers lose.

Ignoring your paranoid flamebait, someone should point out that there's plenty of other products like that, so I guess I will. Apple's iOS has a kill switch and Amazon removed 1984 and Animal Farm from all Kindles following a licensing dispute with the rights holders. And let's not forget the PS3 Other OS fiasco. Also, any DRM system that has to contact the master server to determine if a game is properly licensed (Steam, Spore's DRM, Games for Windows Live...) can have the same effect.

If it bothers you so much, jailbreak and pirate everything. No regulatory body has ever succeeded in stamping out a black market for which there was sufficient financial incentive; in this era of information, notoriety and ego will suffice instead, and have sufficed for the past thirty years, since the invention of the first copy prevention mechanism. Yar-har, fiddle dee-tee.

Eventually, the people who commission these systems will get the clue that a free culture is the best solution. Until then, just work around their silly unenlightened nonsense. But remember to pay them. They need to survive too.

> 48-core systems (which are insanely cheap),

Cheap. 48-core. In the same sentence!
Thats.... intriguing. i googled and found a couple of links for 48 core intel and AMD systems
http://www.engadget.com/2010/04/10/intels-48-core-processor-destined-for-science-ships-to-univers/ (Intel -- honest to goodness, 48 cores on a die)
http://www.guru3d.com/news/amd-shows-48core-magny-cours-system/ -- ("48 core" AMD system ... actually 4 12-core CPUs on a motherboard)

I'm guessing this is the Intel system which is only for academia.

Can you provide some more details? Prices, clock speed?

Why give up the huge support base and massive app availability of Android or iOS for.. well, Something Else.

Why give up the massive app availability of Windows Mobile 6.5 for ... well Something Else.

According to Gartner

http://www.engadget.com/2011/05/19/gartner-1-6-million-windows-phone-7-devices-sold-in-q1-consume/

There were 36 million Android handsets sold last quarter. There were 3.6 million Microsoft ones. Unfortunately for Microsoft only 1.6 million of those were Windows Phone 7, i.e. 2 million were Windows Mobile 6.x.

When my Sony Ericsson X1 was being repaired I bought another Windows Mobile device to run the applications I use every day. So I got an HTC HD2 rather than a HD7. Right now if I lost the HD2 I'd probably just buy another one. There's no reason for me to move to WP7. I suspect a lot of WM6.x users feel the same way. And the HD2 is a pretty good handset that can run WM6.x, WP7 or Android. The HD7 can only run WP7 and right now WP7 is a disaster for applications - all of the WM6.x ISVs have announced that they won't port to WP7 and have stopped new builds on WM6.x. But on WM6.x you can still use the old builds. For things I use everyday like Pleco, that's good enough for me while Pleco finish their port to Android. iGo's GPS software works on WM6.x and Android. It won't ever run on WP7. Opera works on WM6.x and Android. It won't ever run on WP7. Basically all the WM6.x software vendors will never support WP7 but either have already ported to Android or are committed to doing so. So in the short term I'll stay on WM6.x but in the long term I'll move to Android.

And if you're already using Android or iPhone you're not going to switch to WP7 for much the same reason.

So I can't really imagine how WP7 can ever succeed. Especially not with adverts like this

Hot Apps: Burn It All, Lunchbox, Urban Dictionary, Simon, Apict

Maybe they should rename it WP7 something like Yo! or HipStah! Or something impossible to search for on Google like "C#" or ".Net".

Or Neegro to capitalize on some of the buzz Nokia created with their Meego commercial whilst still aiming for an young urban market. I.e. the sort of gangster wannabe white middle class suburban kids that listen to rap music steal pairs of Nikes from each other at gun point.

No. Whilst many people regard the mere suggestion as being outrageous I still strongly suspect that WP7 is not going to be a great success.

As for economy and TOC, I'm staying on what most people consider the less than green side. I have a sports car that gets 26mpg. It gets me and up to 3 passengers and luggage or groceries from Point A to Point B quickly. MSRP was around $38k, and I paid $25k one year used. Now at 11 years old and 120,000 miles, if it were a EV or hybrid, it would have likely required two battery swaps and who knows what other changes. What's MTBF on the motors they use? How do the electronics stand up in hot climates? As a good old fashion IC motor, it's required 2 water pumps, an alternator, and 2 new batteries, and a few other little things

(emphasis added by me)

"Consumer Reports decided to do a re-test a 2002 Prius, with 206,000 on the clock, and found that it delivered 46.3mpg, compared to 48.6 in the original test with a new car. Lower? Yes, but not bad for 206,000 miles."

I had a headlight fault in my car. It seems the ground wire to the headlights broke internally. 15 minutes and $5 in parts later it was fixed in the auto parts store parking lot. A friend of mine has a Prius. Hers has a headlight fault, where the headlights will just turn themselves off or flash, due to an overheating controller. It costs hundreds of dollars, and serious work to just get the light out. Google around for replacing a Prius headlight, and you'll see plenty of pictures where you have to take the front bumper off to accomplish it.

First, you seem to concentrate headlight bad luck around you, anecdotally.

Also anecdotally, I have a friend with a Subaru Tribecca that also has to remove the bumper to replace a headlight bulb. And since my friend didn't know that - he actually ended up causing $1000 in damage trying to do it without removing the bumper, but it still would have cost him $200 in labor to get it done. Now he knows what needs to be done and how to do it so he can do it himself without breaking things, but it is still a pain in the ass.

So I guess that negates your "green cars are bad because a prius headlight is hard to fix" argument.

I also read horror stories about the first generation of the VW New Beetle that required pulling the engine to replace a headlight assembly (I read in a forum about someone who lost one to a rock). Some times a design makes it hard to fix something. It has nothing to do with if it is a hybrid, or electric, or magic ferry dust, or powered by grinding up puppies and kittens. A bad design is a bad design.

My second car is a used full size SUV. That's my spare vehicle, in case the first one is down for some reason, and for transporting anything larger than my car will carry. I dare anyone to consider doing home renovations driving a Tesla Roadster. :) You won't even fit a stack of bricks or a few sheets of plywood in a Prius. :) The mileage isn't great, but if I can accomplish in one trip what would take 4 in a smaller car, the effective efficiency is better. And sometimes there is just no substitute for an urban assault vehicle. :)

Since your SUV is your second car you can still get a hybrid or electric car for your primary car for your daily use, and still have that SUV to haul those bricks and plywood. :)

Yes, but what about $28,000? Apparently possible, but not possible to sell.

Tesla received $465M in Federal money according to engadget. They couldn't possibly have burned thru it already.

This makes way more sense - much the same as the iPod-out API is being integrated into in-car entertainment. Apple doesn't want to deal with making the in-car computer / navigation / control system, they'll just expose a door into their world that BMW, Mercedes, Ford, etc. can use.

http://www.engadget.com/2010/07/08/bmw-supports-ipod-out-fills-your-2011-auto-with-2001s-finest-u/

Since bitcoin seems to be completely resistant to any manipulation

Except that a single compromised account on an exchange caused severe devaluation:

http://www.engadget.com/2011/06/22/compromised-account-leads-to-massive-bitcoin-sell-off-eff-recon/

This is a real shame IMHO; I've watched the Engadet video of the device in action and I have to say that compared to iOS or Android I'm seriously underwhelmed by the Harmatten UI - the underlying OS may well be superb, but with that current interface I can't see Joe Public taking much interest.

Seems? How can you say it is sluggish you haven't even tried it out personally? Or were you just judging the performance based on the videos. I have the prototype and it is extrememely fast and snappy indeed. Even Engadget which is biased towards Apple is impressed

Don't get me wrong though it looks pretty good so far: http://www.engadget.com/2011/06/21/nokia-n9-first-hands-on/

Engadget has a couple: Nokia N9 first hands on. It looks quite slick!

No, but it's a huge fucking stretch to assume it's even remotely likely.

For certain values of "huge", apparently. Eye of the beholder, and all that. I personally don't see it as that much of a stretch. Nothing that improves Apple's bottom line is ever a stretch.

[citation needed]

Really? Are you willfully ignorant, or is it not by choice? Explain how the iPhone exclusivity deal with AT&T, whereby iPhone customers are not free to choose their own carrier, is good for the customers. This is the same argument that Sony and other companies gave with regard to DRM, that DRM was there to "help consumers manage their rights", instead of screwing legitimate customers for the benefit of the content industry. The exclusivity deal does not help Apple customers, the customers are screwed for the benefit of Apple and AT&T.

Apple makes the agreements it needs to in order to gain access to important third party goods and services.

Hey man, you can justify it all you want. If Apple requires user agent strings to be accurate, I'm sure you'll be saying that they needed to do that in order to "gain access to important third-party goods and services." Namely, the money of third-parties going into Apple's account. Apple didn't need to make an agreement with AT&T, they could have opened up the iPhone to all carriers and all of them, every single one, would have been scrambling for it. I would love to quote a number for you about how much AT&T paid Apple for that privilege, but the contract between them that affects you as their customer is not public. You seem pretty OK about that, though. You're trying to get people to come up with actual scenarios whereby Apple would make a change like this, but those agreements are not, and never have been, public.

And your lumping together of "attacks and defenses" is unreasonable.

It's not "unreasonable" to call fanboys fanboys. The Apple-bashing fanboys pile on, and the Apple-defending fanboys are right behind them.

Um... There's no reason to attack them. The attacks are the reason to defend them.

And why do you feel the need to defend them? If the attacks are not based on fact, why not just ignore them? Why is it worth your time to defend Apple? If no one bothered to defend them, the attacks would stop.

It's worth noting that companies like VMware are working on virtualization technology for Android. This would allow handsets to switch between work and home OS images, allowing consumer handsets to be used during work time as secure corporate handsets.

It's possible this could become attractive to the enterprise... no BES, and you can repurpose equipment the employee already owns.

How did this even get through the Firehose? Guess there are a lot more Apple fanboys on Slashdot then I thought... Even an Engadget review would've been more in-depth and useful than this one... and that's saying something...

http://www.engadget.com/2011/06/08/samsung-galaxy-tab-10-1-review/

They griped about no SD card slot, but gave it a 8/10. I'd trust them a hell of a lot more than Clayton Morris...

Here's a nice movie IBM made to commemorate the last 100 years. It appeared in my submission from January that didn't get picked up. Oh well.

The false statement here is #3. Nokia was not insisting on disproportionate value from Apple compared to other licensees, because other licensees have brought their own patents to the table, and not just money (in some cases, those were purely cross-licensing deals). At that point, the "disproportionality" boils down to the value of those patents, which is a rather subjective measure.

However, I think that the proposed deal was likely fair to Apple, because otherwise they would have sued Nokia in EU courts for anti-competitive practices, precisely because Nokia agreed to license patents under RAND; and these things are generally taken more seriously in Europe than in US. It's also likely why they have now settled.

This article is old but a fairly thorough treatment of the matter.

And this one does a good job explaining the story behind the years-long battle.

I had to look it up, it's hard to keep track of who's starting the wars and who's responding. Nokia sued and sued again. Apple counter-sued in the middle there.

"We're talking about the elimination of the wall switch."

So if I forget my phone at work, I can't turn the lights on in my apartment? Brilliant!

The idea of interfaces using the new Android stuff is interesting, but it seems like we'll get into another one of those situations where everyone defines their own standard (which they change when convenient) and nothing works well. The light bulbs in one room are GE bulbs which can't be controlled the by same software as the Sylvania bulbs, but that's OK because the new bulb uses different software than the old ones so I need a patch to the software for that. Look in a book for any home receiver or DVR and look at the HUNDREDS of codes used to control various AV equipment, even from a single manufacturer.

I'll wait for some good standards to be ironed out and become dominant before jumping on this bandwagon. It never really happened in the TV space. Being able to look up a TV show on my iPhone in a guide program and push a button to tune to it would be nice, but that only works right now with some company's cable boxes and their app.

Of course, do I really care if I can individually adjust every light (or anything else) in my house? I doubt I need that kind of control. We're going to go through that phase where people find out what's useful... and I'm not interested in being someone stuck with an something like the Android fridge Samsung has started advertising.

Of course on Slashdot patents=bad ; and of course as well no one is going to read the Fine Article, particularly if it is in french. The google "translation" and the various interpretations in english people have put out are not helping. Nowhere in the article is it written that this institution will massively collect stupid patents for little money and sue companies like Microsoft.

First you have to admit that patents have at least on principle some validity. Someone has an idea for a commercial new product, describes it in a patent and get some limited protection. It is totally unfair of large company to read such patents and implement the idea at a lower cost without paying licenses.

The idea here is to allow small-to-medium companies to benefit from patents as well. While a small company can certainly file for patent, they do not have the resources to defend them in court or otherwise, so basically they are more or less moot, except as bargaining chips for acquisition. The French government puts out a lot of money (think NSF-like grants but also industrialization grants) and they are not seeing as many industrial success as hoped. One reason, they reason, is that small companies cannot defend their ideas against larger companies, both in Europe and overseas. Other nations have government-based patent protection. Do you think the CSIRO patents for 802.11a/g were trolling?

So this institution will help small-to-medium French companies defend their portfolio. The initial idea is no to collect patents but to propose services. Indeed they will put together defensible cases by polling patents in some cases, but the stated aim is to get licenses income for the companies, not for this new institution by itself. This is not the same as trolling I think.

Essentially the French government doesn't want to see its industrialization monies get wasted too much. What's bad about this ?

Show me when you could actually use an iPhone in January, 2007.

It came out on June 29th.

http://www.engadget.com/2007/06/03/iphone-release-date-confirmed-yours-on-june-29th/

And, I doubt that HTC got the Touch out THAT quickly - as in, it was conceived before the iPhone was announced, I suspect.

Again, didn't I just say that a bad implementation doesn't mean it wasn't done?

I didn't say WinMo was an advantage, though, just an attribute.

But, there's always the IBM Simon - fully touch-driven UI, and it has finger-friendly UI elements, so it's clearly not a pure stylus device (not even sure if it has a stylus.) In 1994.

You know there were smart phones before the iphone. Sure apple made the UI simpler and had it flow nicely but they certainly didn't invent it. Its just windows mobile 2003 with application shortcuts on the front page (instead of pressing start all programs). I don't know why I'm even bothering with you its like trying to convince a religious fanatic the earth isn't 4000 years old.

Really now? Apple didn't just make the UI simpler, they completely changed it.

Name one phone before the iPhone that had a browser that people actually wanted to use?

Name one phone before the iPhone that had a useable, non-stylus-oriented touchscreen interface?

Name one phone before the iPhone that had a useable, non-stylus-oriented touchscreen keyboard? Whether you personally like it is immaterial. Name one. This and this is what a "touchscreen" phone looked like before the iPhone. BTW, I have one of those Treos. It is the biggest POS on the planet. The UI freezes up constantly for seconds at a time, for no reason, even when just using the hardware "joystick", and while you can sort of use the touchscreen with your finger, with the exception of the dialpad, the UI features are definitely designed for a stylus. And if you touch the "end" button for more than a fraction of a second, it disables the phone (takes it off line) completely, and with no confimation dialog. You usually only find out when you haven't received calls for a few hours, and people bitch you out about "never answering your phone".

Name one phone before the iPhone that had random-access voicemail?

Name one phone before the iPhone where the phone manufacturer defined the feature set, not the Carrier?

If the iPhone wasn't a game-changer, then why have so many other phones since the iPhone desperately tried to copy it?

If the iPhone wasn't a game-changer, then why did Google's Android immediately abandon its shameless clone of the Blackberry interface and form-factor in favor of a shameless clone of the iPhone's "Springboard" and the iPhone form-factor? Same thing goes for most Windows Phones, which HTC has even become desperate enough to sell for a PENNY, LOL!!!

Sorry. It is the Windows Phone and Android fanbois that are in serious, almost delusional, denial; not the Apple fans.

Perhaps you mean the iPhone version of: Rage?

That one is a "on-rails" shooter as the iPhone compared to a PC is a limited device. But, the upcoming full-release for the PC and consoles is a full not-rails game.

OMFG it's even better than you (or I) thought. Not only can the screen be the camera, but you can also just stick a camera behind the screen. I knew about the first patent but didn't catch Apple getting the second.

Cue breathy voice: View Apple patents and see why 2011 will be like 1984.

There were Android prototypes predating the iPhone announcement, like the HTC Omni and this rather suggestive keyboard candybar (doesn't look like an iPhone to me). Remember, Android was a company that had been developing their software for years before Google bought it.

Try again.

And if you don't understand the phrase, "And all the music iTunes matches plays back at 256-Kbps iTunes Plus quality — even if your original copy was of lower quality," please see Engadget's live coverage which details it for you.

2:55PM If any songs don't match they'll be uploaded for you. Anything that's matched is upgraded to 256Kbps AAC, without DRM.

They addressed this already:

2:55PM If any songs don't match they'll be uploaded for you. Anything that's matched is upgraded to 256Kbps AAC, without DRM.

Errrrm... probably on one of the sites that saw the announcement at WWDC at a guess. For example, maybe Engadget (if you scroll down a bit on their liveblog to around 1:37PM, you can even see the big shiny "Only in the App Store" slide).

Errrrm... probably on one of the sites that saw the announcement at WWDC at a guess. For example, maybe Engadget (if you scroll down a bit on their liveblog to around 1:37PM, you can even see the big shiny "Only in the App Store" slide).

That's not what Engadget seem to think. Of course, when Apple originally announced OS X Lion was going to be available from the App Store they said it was in addition to existing retail channels, but you know what Apple are like for changing their mind...

Here's the live blog (well not so live now) of the event. It has the essential information.

http://www.engadget.com/2011/06/06/wwdc-2011-liveblog-steve-jobs-talks-ios-5-os-x-lion-icloud-an/?sort=newest&refresh=60