Slashdot Mirror

What a sad, sad state of affairs. Any moron given enough time fiddling with several devices will come up with the idea that maybe it would be cool to sync email, calendars, and contacts. Maybe even schedule a meeting or two.

Unless they are specific to syncing meetings, emails, and contacts with Exchange servers without first getting a licensing deal like HTC and Apple did.

Exchange is just one way of doing that stuff, and it's one that belongs to Microsoft. If you try to go around it, well, good luck fighting off the deserved lawsuit.

I bet IMAP syncing is not being argued over.

Made by HTC, not Motorola

He said "brand from" not "made by".

Motorola markets the Droid brand under 4 names - Droid, Droid Pro, Droid 2 and Droid X

HTC markets 2 phones with the name Droid - the Droid Incredible and the Droid Eris

You know, you could, i don't know, buy a phone? I don't really know how it's in the States, but here in Belgium you can walk into any old store and buy a phone that comes from the manufacturer directly

Good for you. In the US you can't just "buy a phone" like you window-shop for hardware. It's similar to how you're stuck with a single power company for specific areas (seeing how reception sucks in suburbs and even some city blocks where one dominant provider has a decent signal.) For multi-provider areas, you have to choose your company first, and then see their phone selection.

Many multi-carrier stores of the brick/mortar have little selection for your specific carrier because unpopular models don't turn a profit; they carry five or six latest models for that carrier and a single sub-$100 phone (normally requires a contract unless it's 3 year-old tech lacking MMS.) There are no smartphone bargains to be had because everything older than 18 months is unshelved. People are denied their right to purchase smartphones unless they buy a contract WITH a data plan commitment ($40 extra per month.) Till Sprint's recent move this summer, the big carriers did NOT have $70 unlimited everything plans --you'd need to pay $100+ a month to have on-the-road redundancy for services you don't require if at home. That's near the cost of home-based cable/phone/internet rate, at a reduced quality due to cell tech sucking for calls and low-tier internet speeds. you see where we're going with our bitter realization that monthly cellphone is considered a lrent, contract and pricewise.

Now, might choose to go online, which is NOT how most people buy cellphones --think salesman at your local store just like you yourself suggested. Online, manufacturers tend to not sell you things and instead link you to a brick/mortar retailer, returning to the above. For isntance, Motorola's Droid X just links to Verizon. They do have their online store to purchase some phones directly, but if you want the Droid X, you go to Verizon and can expect the phone's OS to lock you into their penny pinching paywall enslaved environment. You can go to Amazon and pay full price for the phone, but jailbroken phones sell at the phone's full $400+ price plus a premium.

The US has this anti-metric-system-like business mentality where something that is poisonous in the rest of the world is consumed and demanded in a vicious cycle, with no end in sight. For contracts to end, you'd need a 180 degree turn from the providers, and profits margins plus our recession will not permit that. Their lockin is as bad as Microsoft lockin.

You know, you could, i don't know, buy a phone? I don't really know how it's in the States, but here in Belgium you can walk into any old store and buy a phone that comes from the manufacturer directly

Good for you. In the US you can't just "buy a phone" like you window-shop for hardware. It's similar to how you're stuck with a single power company for specific areas (seeing how reception sucks in suburbs and even some city blocks where one dominant provider has a decent signal.) For multi-provider areas, you have to choose your company first, and then see their phone selection.

Many multi-carrier stores of the brick/mortar have little selection for your specific carrier because unpopular models don't turn a profit; they carry five or six latest models for that carrier and a single sub-$100 phone (normally requires a contract unless it's 3 year-old tech lacking MMS.) There are no smartphone bargains to be had because everything older than 18 months is unshelved. People are denied their right to purchase smartphones unless they buy a contract WITH a data plan commitment ($40 extra per month.) Till Sprint's recent move this summer, the big carriers did NOT have $70 unlimited everything plans --you'd need to pay $100+ a month to have on-the-road redundancy for services you don't require if at home. That's near the cost of home-based cable/phone/internet rate, at a reduced quality due to cell tech sucking for calls and low-tier internet speeds. you see where we're going with our bitter realization that monthly cellphone is considered a lrent, contract and pricewise.

Now, might choose to go online, which is NOT how most people buy cellphones --think salesman at your local store just like you yourself suggested. Online, manufacturers tend to not sell you things and instead link you to a brick/mortar retailer, returning to the above. For isntance, Motorola's Droid X just links to Verizon. They do have their online store to purchase some phones directly, but if you want the Droid X, you go to Verizon and can expect the phone's OS to lock you into their penny pinching paywall enslaved environment. You can go to Amazon and pay full price for the phone, but jailbroken phones sell at the phone's full $400+ price plus a premium.

The US has this anti-metric-system-like business mentality where something that is poisonous in the rest of the world is consumed and demanded in a vicious cycle, with no end in sight. For contracts to end, you'd need a 180 degree turn from the providers, and profits margins plus our recession will not permit that. Their lockin is as bad as Microsoft lockin.

Most phone vendors have long offered the sales model that Google ultimately offered. Motorola's store is here: http://www.store.motorola.com./ You can order a number of Motorola smart phones there, and, as with the Nexus One, pay the full MSRP for an unlocked phone.

Of course, good luck getting a discount from your network carrier unless it's T-Mobile. And while they don't promote it, the model is the same.

The problem is, that's not the model Google originally spoke of. They were going to release the phone unbundled, period. If they had actually done that, they could have sold it for $250-$300... supposedly they cost $170-$180 to make, based on the usual folks doing a dissection and price estimate. But Google really just pretended at this -- they kept the price as artificially high as any other cellphone, so they had the option of selling though T-Mobile as well. That's not the real experiment they spoke of, but that is the one they actually conducted.

They were afraid, though. They talked big about changing the model, but they didn't change the model. Yes, they sold the phones directly. So do most other cellphone vendors... here's Motorola's direct-buy store: http://www.store.motorola.com./

Yes, they're expensive... so was the Nexus One. That was Google's first point of failure. The reason the MSRP on a cellphone is so high, dramatically higher than any other piece of consumer gear, is that these are made to be sold en mass to the telcos. Verizon doesn't pay full MSRP for a Droid, but they pay as a percentage of the MSRP. That's the hack the telcos came up with long ago, to help prevent the rise of unbundled phones. If you want to get into a major carrier's store, you have to price your phone like crazy, or lose a bundle on each unit you sell to them.

Google said they wanted the direct sales model, but they didn't only want that... they still had to be able to go into the T-Mobile stores. And so they released the Nexus One with a ridiculous price... about $30 less than the Droid you could always buy directly from Motorola.

Second big failure is network support... a smartphone is pointless without 3G support. The Nexus One supports 3G on T-Mobile's frequencies (1700MHz and 2100MHz), but not on AT&T's frequencies (850MHz and 1900MHz). And there's not even a good reason for that... they still have to support 850MHz and 1900MHz for 2G with roaming. The bad reason, of course, is that the telcos have opposed phone portability, so it would take extra hardware, most likely, to be able to support multiple GSM carries in the USA. Regardless of the reasons, Google failed here too... the Nexus One was not really transportable to other GSM systems, it was fully functional only on T-Mobile.

Here's Motorola's remaining product line. Bar code equipment. Some RFID gear. Two-way radios for cops, taxis, and such. A few specialized mobile computers. Some cable TV gear.

That's a huge comedown for what was once a company competitive with Intel in microprocessors.

http://www.motorola.com/Business/US-EN/Service+Provider

also google "Motorola ASN" and "Motorola CAPC"

His only source is a post on a message board, which is itself nothing but speculation.

Well, and this: http://community.developer.motorola.com/t5/MOTODEV-Blog/Custom-ROMs-and-Motorola-s-Android-Handsets/bc-p/4290#M432title=Custom
"Securing the software on our handsets, thereby preventing a non-Motorola ROM image from being loaded, has been our common practice for many years."

And just in case you I need a [citation needed] tag...

http://community.developer.motorola.com/t5/MOTODEV-Blog/Custom-ROMs-and-Motorola-s-Android-Handsets/bc-p/4290#M432title=Custom

3rd paragraph down

We understand there is a community of developers interested in going beyond Android application development and experimenting with Android system development and re-flashing phones. For these developers, we highly recommend obtaining either a Google ADP1 developer phone or a Nexus One, both of which are intended for these purposes. At this time, Motorola Android-based handsets are intended for use by consumers and Android application developers, and we have currently chosen not to go into the business of providing fully unlocked developer phones.

The use of open source software, such as the Linux kernel or the Android platform, in a consumer device does not require the handset running such software to be open for re-flashing. We comply with the licenses, including GPLv2, for each of the open source packages in our handsets. We post appropriate notices as part of the legal information on the handset and post source code, where required, at http://opensource.motorola.com./ Securing the software on our handsets, thereby preventing a non-Motorola ROM image from being loaded, has been our common practice for many years. This practice is driven by a number of different business factors. When we do deviate from our normal practice, such as we did with the DROID, there is a specific business reason for doing so. We understand this can result in some confusion, and apologize for any frustration.

We understand there is a community of developers interested in going beyond Android application development and experimenting with Android system development and re-flashing phones. For these developers, we highly recommend obtaining either a Google ADP1 developer phone or a Nexus One, both of which are intended for these purposes. At this time, Motorola Android-based handsets are intended for use by consumers and Android application developers, and we have currently chosen not to go into the business of providing fully unlocked developer phones.

The use of open source software, such as the Linux kernel or the Android platform, in a consumer device does not require the handset running such software to be open for re-flashing. We comply with the licenses, including GPLv2, for each of the open source packages in our handsets. We post appropriate notices as part of the legal information on the handset and post source code, where required, at http://opensource.motorola.com./ Securing the software on our handsets, thereby preventing a non-Motorola ROM image from being loaded, has been our common practice for many years. This practice is driven by a number of different business factors. When we do deviate from our normal practice, such as we did with the DROID, there is a specific business reason for doing so. We understand this can result in some confusion, and apologize for any frustration.

100W per box is way high; the model Comcast gave me (the Motorola DTA100) uses 5.37 watts while on, per the manufacturer. Not nothing, but over an order of magnitude better than you're claiming.

My cable box, what looks like a Motorola DCT3416 (don't have the unit in front of me) uses about 40W of power whether the unit is on or not. Neither Motorola nor the cable company care about the fact that it adds $4 per month to the power bill. Nor do they care that the UI is an utter disaster. For example, to turn on or off Closed captioning, you have to turn off the unit, press menu, and access it in the service menu. You can't just use the TV's CC decoder because it's garbled on digital channels from the box.

100W per box is way high; the model Comcast gave me (the Motorola DTA100) uses 5.37 watts while on, per the manufacturer. Not nothing, but over an order of magnitude better than you're claiming.

I suspect that Android will end up with a similar rep to Windows - too many hardware platforms and compatibility issues.

And no-one develops software for Windows because it's too hard and 90% of the world runs Apple because it's simple.

Awaken from your dreamy state, the fragmentation in Windows isn't an issue and neither is it in Android. As with Windows you can expect a lot of third party development tools that will deal with the testing issues. In fact, you don't even need a phone in order to test a simple application, you can do that with the Virtual Machines provided in the Android SDK, which is free and runs on Windows, Linux and Mac.

A quick Google has turned up that Motorola has already released a toolkit to help Android developers with Motorola handsets.

http://www.motorola.com/Business/US-EN/Business+Product+and+Services/Mobile+Computers/Handheld+Computers

...that's just one manufacturer. There are dozens. Now that WM7 seems to have completely dropped the ball for this kind of stuff, I imagine most of them will be either sticking with Windows Phone 'Classic' (aka 6.5) or going over to pure Windows CE.

"Android fragmentation begins"? I don't think so. It's in full-swing.

Seems like every week some marketing dweeb comes up with the brilliant idea to create yet another app store. Motorola and Lenovo have their own, as does China Mobile. That's not even counting the dime-a-dozen independent entries with names like Handango, Cellmania, AndAppStore, MobiHand, GetJar, Nexva, SlideMe, etc. etc.

I am an Android developer, and get an email every week from yet another app store. Each has its own custom requirements and contract overhead, and they expect us to do the work for free for the "privilege" of joining their flock and whatever scheme-of-the-day they are concocting as their business plan.

No thanks. I dump those emails and stick with the Android Market. For all its flaws, developers need to show solidarity and work towards improving it. The alternative is to give away your work and place it in the hands of the likes of wireless carriers, who will continue their land grab game at the expense of the developers, innovators, and consumers.

Some phones seem to survive being run over and abused quite well. My wife and I both have Motorola Razr2 V9 phones, and last winter, my wife managed to drop hers in a muddy puddle, where it remained overnight, and where I happened to drive over it *twice* on my old Chamberlain tractor. It survived that with just a cracked front screen and a stiff hinge. A couple of weeks later, she dropped it in the loo.

I might have been tempted to abandon the phone there, but she didn't, and it's still working now. I guess if I really wanted to destroy it, I've got a 60lb sledge-hammer that might just work...

Most cell phones in the US are subsidized. You can pay the $99 and then the 2-yr contract or the unsubsidized price of $599. It's your choice...

Apple won't sell me an unlocked iPhone. Amazon doesn't have it, nor does Newegg.

Another point to make is that Apple has no control over what AT&T will charge you for the contract.

Not directly, but the fact that they only sell an AT&T-locked version means that I must go through AT&T to use get one. If Apple wasn't so restrictive, I could buy an unlocked version from them and use it with my existing AT&T account, or my T-Mobile account.

The only point of contention is that the iPhone is only on AT&T at the moment.

As far as I'm concerned, that's like saying "the only difference between 0 and 1 is that they aren't the same."

For example you can't use a T-Mobile Motorola RAZR on Verizon's network. You have to buy a Verizon Motorola RAZR(v3) because it uses a different band.

Ah, but I can buy an unlocked Razr and use it on either AT&T's network or T-Mobile's network.

Thank you very much, but no. My phone has been rooted, but that has NOTHING to do with customs roms. Contrary to what motorola has done with the droid, where the bootloader allows any rom to be flashed, or contrary to what HTC has done with the nexus one, motorola designed the milestone's bootloader so that it would only allow roms digitally signed with their own key to be flashed. One of motorola employee even said that people looking to use custom roms should buy an HTC dream or an google nexus one... http://community.developer.motorola.com/t5/MOTODEV-Blog/Custom-ROMs-and-Motorola-s-Android-Handsets/ba-p/4224

Another explanation would be that this behavior is simply in keeping with their brand archetype, the magician. Apple obviously pays close attention to the way their products are received; they've had many failures. However, unlike their competition, they have no trouble burying a bad idea quickly. Do you remember the iPod BoomBox? Do you remember the Motorola Rokr? Apple notices when their stuff isn't well received and then it's gone.

By the same token, you don't expect the magician to hang out with the audience after the show. Merlin does not pass out a Rate My Performance card. Nor does Merlin hope to see you at Comdex. Being aloof is simply part of the brand identity, and you can't do that if you let each little division have their own blog.

You should have just gotten new one using warranty. Since droid seems to get the same sort of bug, it is quite possible there is simply a bad batch of omap 3 processors going around.

My N900 has been very stable. I've had it for over 5 weeks now and I've so far gotten a single reboot. That was when I was trying to open unsupported file with development version of KMplayer. Even then the phone just autobooted and everything was back to normal.

I would have to say N900 is surprisingly stable for something so new and groundbreaking.

Go to a phone manufacturer's website - e.g. http://www.store.motorola.com/ [motorola.com] and you'll find plenty of phones you can buy completely unlocked and working on Verizon's (or any other carrier's) network.

Sorry, you can't buy a phone even from Motorola that will work on the Verizon network unless it's branded for the Verizon network. This means that it comes with the crippled Verizon UI and software. Believe me, I've tried. I would pay extra money for a phone that came with the Motorola OS but if I'm going to wind up with one that has the Verizon UI on it anyway why shouldn't I take their discount and get it directly from them?

Where's my market in non-carrier branded devices for the Verizon network?

Go to a phone manufacturer's website - e.g. http://www.store.motorola.com/ and you'll find plenty of phones you can buy completely unlocked and working on Verizon's (or any other carrier's) network. You'll pay a bit more; but you'll get exactly what you are looking for.

Works great for GSM based networks. Don't know how well for CDMA-based networks like Verizon's though since CMDA doesn't use SIM cards to switch easily between phones...

BTW - on http://www.store.motorola.com/ you can get phones with or without contracts. You just likely have to search a bit more to find what you want without a contract. And phones marked for one carrier may work on another carrier's network as well (e.g. T-mobile vs. AT&T/Cingular) but they don't guarantee it.

Where's my market in non-carrier branded devices for the Verizon network?

Go to a phone manufacturer's website - e.g. http://www.store.motorola.com/ and you'll find plenty of phones you can buy completely unlocked and working on Verizon's (or any other carrier's) network. You'll pay a bit more; but you'll get exactly what you are looking for.

Works great for GSM based networks. Don't know how well for CDMA-based networks like Verizon's though since CMDA doesn't use SIM cards to switch easily between phones...

BTW - on http://www.store.motorola.com/ you can get phones with or without contracts. You just likely have to search a bit more to find what you want without a contract. And phones marked for one carrier may work on another carrier's network as well (e.g. T-mobile vs. AT&T/Cingular) but they don't guarantee it.

Better yet, why don't you give your carrier or whomever sold you the phone a call about it, I'm sure they'd love to hear from you!

Motorolla are curtailing the Droid's success by marketing only to the USA.

The Motorola Milestone is what's being marketed to the rest of the world. Exact same phone as the Droid, but in a GSM flavor that has multitouch enabled. Would be trivial to get one to use on AT&T or T-Mobile in the US, but it uses a different band for 3G, so you would be limited to EDGE/GPRS or 802.11g. Oh, and it's about 550 euro (~$817). Slightly more expensive than the CDMA counterpart here in the US ($550 without a contract last I checked).

Why should these companies choose a different strategy for Android-based phones than they do for any other phones? A very quick glance at their websites reveals the total number of mobile phone products they produce:

Samsung: 166
HTC: 39
Motorola: 107

So, in answer to your question of "why", these companies are doing the same thing with Android that they do with other mobile platforms. Is it a good idea to make a huge number of different phones? I think Steve Jobs would agree with you that it isn't. However, HTC, Samsung, and Motorola are not doing anything new. This is their "tried and true" business model. In fact, it would be strange to expect them to do something different just because their new mobile OS of choice is Android.

Remember when Motorola went from the MicroTac (which was anything but micro) to the StarTac?

The first StarTacs were $1200. Next gen was $600, then $250, then $99, then they went away, now Motorola is going away too.

As far as I am concerned, the StarTac was the height of evolution of the cellular phone.

You're referring to the ROKR, right?

Here is the manual for the AT commands for the Motorola G24 GSM modem.

Also, fuck you.

I support motorola cable boxes so I know a little bit about cable cards. The whole point of an MCard is that is supports two tuners. I don't own a tivo but I've heard 1 MCard lets you use both tuners. The motorola equivalent only requires one MCard for it's two tuners. Perhaps when the installers visited you they gave you an older SCard instead. I wouldn't put it past them.

It's my understanding that Android is a mobile OS based in Linux [wikipedia.org] so why do we need to feature new phones? Can't we take an already popular model (like the Chocolate or Razr or whatever the devil it is the kids consume these days) and just compile it down to match the architecture and write the drivers for the devices on the phone?

The motorola razr2 v8 already comes with Linux:
https://opensource.motorola.com/sf/projects/razr2v8

The Motorola F3 has a (fairly rudimentary) E-Ink display, and only costs about $25 for an unlocked handset.

If they can get these things in a lot of devices, the $150mil R&D should be easily recoverable. Remember that the Kindle also includes a wireless modem, storage, and a decent amount of processing power.

Now the only problem is how to charge your Bluetooth headset up? :o)

My Motorola HT820 bluetooth headphones charge through a mini/micro usb port. Looks like they're no longer available (in the UK) but the S9 is a newer version.

Not knowing what D-VHS unit your using I couldn't tell ya, at the end of the day it really depends on the cable box and the D-VHS unit. Say combine this, this and for $3 probably one of these you then end up with a story like this (Which was in August 2005, Knoppmyth has since matured significantly!)

And if you want a bastardised 4 pin cable, then here is your answer. And if your D-VHS unit or Cable box doesn't support what you want to do, then I'd hazard a guess that the cable is probably the least of your worries ;)

Motorola makes a product that streams video back from first responder vehicles over mesh networks that has been available for a couple years now. One of the customers is the LAPD.

http://www.motorola.com/business/US-EN/Mobile+Video+Sharing_US-EN.do?vgnextoid=c5dc23805ae46110VgnVCM1000008406b00aRCRD

That looks like a newer version of the L6.

My L6 has been durable, fantastic, and simple with no problems except for one: the buttons are way too damn small.

It's great for the ladies or for very small hands in general but I have to use my finer motor skills else I get the keypad-mashing effect.

Check out the MOTOFONE - it's super slim, very simple UI that only makes calls, and it's got a super-low power e-ink display that gives a battery life of like a week. Also it's super cheap, you can get it for like $30-$50 unlocked with no contract.

You're right, because they offer to give it away to anyone who comes to their website http://direct.motorola.com/hellomoto/motosupport/source/SoftwareUpdateSummary.asp?country=USA&language=ENS&web_page_name=SUPPORT&strCarrierId=Sprint&strPhone=RAZR&strCable=Mini%20USB%20Data%20Cable

Phone is easily reflashable including mods that add telnet and FTP ;-)

Meanwhile, other manufacturers have been able to ship phones with a Bluetooth API for six years or so... A reference implementation and test suite is available under the APL, and has been for a very long time. Just shows how utterly stupid it is to create new standards when perfectly good ones already exist.

The main page for gOS nowhere mentions Ubuntu or even Debain, heck, Linux isn't even mentioned! The main page for Ubuntu clearly states that it is A) Linux and B) made from Debian, as of now it even has a banner celebrating Debian.

You mean like Apple's homepage talks about Darwin and BSD, or Microsoft's homepage talks about NTOSKRNL? Or Motorola sells its linux phones with strong LiMo branding? (game: count the number of times the work 'Microsoft' appears on that page)

Ubuntu may garner some geek cred there, but it's not going to be helpful with their marketing to the Windows user base. Linux has a bad reputation for ease of use. gOS users can find out they're using Linux after they've been happy with it for a while.

How gOS behaves towards the community is an entirely different matter, and I don't know anything about that.

more...

http://www.motorola.com/business/v/index.jsp?vgnextoid=20e284c606de6110VgnVCM1000008406b00aRCRD motorola canopy system. can do several mile hops. yes, the radios are expensive, but a LOT less than 10k. Thus, in relation to the cable company's solution, this is cheep and easy.

I was just looking for someone I could agree with. There's really no need to triangulate anything.

Just install an RFID portal on every door and corridor of the house! It could be one of these: Motorola XR440. Connect them to a switch, like the new Motorola RFS6000, so you can easily manage all of them...

Finally, develop some software for the readers (they run Windows CE) to talk to your tracking application.

All the items to be tracked should be tagged with EPCGlobal compliant tags. Enter the item information in your database.

At this point, you can get to know the last room the items entered or exited.

It won't be cheap, though.

No kidding! Some others that aren't hard to find...

http://developer.motorola.com/
http://na.blackberry.com/eng/developers/
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsmobile/developers/
http://www.nokia.com/A4126236

Thank heaven that Apple paved the way, it's amazing these other companies in the mobile market were able to adapt so quickly...

(All links are for developers, I didn't check but I think all have SDKs available.)

Lots of people seem to be confused about whether Clearwire is WiMax.

My Clearwire device has an FCC ID of PHX-RSU2510F. The FCC docs say that it operates on 2.496-2.690Ghz. The chipset leads me to believe that it is an implementation of the Motorola Expedience Wireless Broadband CPE.

The Motorola RDM specs say that the device can operate in Expedience (up to 2W) or WiMax (up to 0.5W) modes. They also say that in Expedience mode it is a layer 2 smart bridge, while in WiMax mode it is a router with NAT, DHCP and firewall functions.

Since my device acts like a layer 2 bridge, I conclude that it is in Expedience mode. Having just checked the Wikipedia article, I see that the first paragraph agrees:
"Clearwire currently uses Expedience wireless technology, dubbed Pre-WiMax, transmitted from cell sites over licensed spectrum of 2.5-2.6 GHz in the U.S. and 3.5 GHz in Europe."

So no, they use the WiMax frequency range, but they can transmit a stronger signal. That seems to be the main difference between the technologies.

This Motorola promotional video talks about some of the infrastructure and business justifications for using their Expedience gear:

Check out the specs on the Motorola (formerly BroadBus) B-1 Video Server:

http://www.motorola.com/content.jsp?globalObjectId=7727-10991-10997

Sounds like a good use for a terabyte of RAM to me.

Disclosure: I currently work for Motorola, but I don't speak for them, and don't have any involvement with this product beyond salivating over it when it was announced that we were buying BroadBus.

Who on earth needs a skillset like that?

Then, he will scoop up all of the unemployable engineers at slave labor wages, laughing the entire time while sitting atop his throne made of golden skulls. In fact, this article was probably penned while he sat atop said throne.

And he would have gotten away with it, too, if it weren't for you meddling kids.