In 1972, when my parents built the house I grew up in, they put in an intercom system. At the time, I'm sure it was an "oooh, wow" gadget. We hardly ever used it, and today there's one terminal remaining in the house which, by today's standards, is incredibly dated-looking and ugly. On top of that, it probably lasted longer than the electronics produced these days. The lesson I take from that is to keep it simple, design for potential additions/upgrades if needed (the "add conduits" advice given multiple times in this thread) and make sure anything you do add can be easily replaced, upgraded or removed so that it's not an eyesore in 20 years. Things like in-floor heating sound like a great idea reading some of the other posts here, but I wonder: what will happen when that system fails down the road? Rip up the entire floor to fix it or replace it? (I'd actually like an answer to this if anyone knows.)
I'd put that "gadget" money into the better energy efficiency ideas which have been mentioned in other comments here -- especially simple design features that will continue to pay off throughout the life of the house with little or no maintenance. One simple non-tech suggestion I'd like to add: consider adding internal doors so that unused parts of the house can be closed off and left at a cooler (or warmer) temperature than the parts of the house you actually spend time in. For example, many houses have a ground floor where everything is open and the kitchen, family room, living room and dining room are all connected. If you live somewhere with cold winters, it doesn't make sense to be heating up the living room and dining room if you're spending all your time in the family room. With a closed door separating them you could shut off the heating vents in the unused room(s) and save on heating costs. This also helps limit noise travel when company is over. (Note that if you live somewhere with genuinely cold winters, you might not want to do this with rooms that have water pipes, as they could freeze and burst.)
Sorry few others here seem to see the value in finding a function for still-useful technology that you probably picked up for free.
Up until a couple years ago I used an old WM6 device as a streaming internet radio player. Perfect function for it, as it remained plugged in and so battery life was never a concern, and it meant rarely having to interface with the device (which was of course clonky and sluggish by today's standards).
Another possible use which I recently stumbled upon is using them as baby monitors. No idea if there are dedicated apps for this for WM, but it sounds like you might be willing to create one yourself, which is great (and if you do, I hope you share it). This is actually a brilliant use for old smartphones because:
1. many of the dedicated solutions on the market use analog transmission (which results in static) or, if digital, are quite expensive ($100+)
2. they can remain plugged in so battery life isn't an issue
3. it's not really an issue if the phone's screen is cracked
4. they can potentially interface with someone's current smartphone, which they probably have close-at-hand anyway
AI and robotics (the latter being dependent upon AI) have the potential to change our lives on the same scale that the internet already has. IBM is betting big because the payoff could be massive.
Why do people use WhatsApp when, at least for Android (which runs on ~80% of the world's smartphones), it's an app that requires a $1/year subscription after your first year, and when there are many free services that do the same thing (any instant messaging service) and more (VoIP, video calls), and which have desktop clients (because I'd rather reply from my laptop when I'm already using it anyway)?
I've thus far refused to use WhatsApp because I find it pointless given the free, arguably better alternatives. Am I missing something? Does WhatApp have some killer feature that no other app/service has? What makes it better than, say, Google Hangouts or Viber (which even has a desktop client for Linux). Am I wrong in thinking that WhatsApp's continued popularity is only due to WhatsApp's existing popularity?
4. Returns. Let's say you aren't satisfied with something purchased from a Chinese seller. They say they're happy to refund your money if you return it. Do you know how much it costs to ship a 1-pound package to China? $15 ($16.75 if done from the Post Office). Do you think they're going to reimburse you for that? And that cost is without any kind of tracking, so it wouldn't surprise me to hear that your package never showed up (whether lost or "lost").
The reason Alibaba will take over from Amazon and Ebay is simple.
Have you ever ordered from China before? Because your comments overlook a few things.
1. Shipping. I have never received anything that's been shipped from China in less 3 weeks, and it's usually been closer to 5 or more. (Coincidentally, just before finishing my final comments below, a small package of keychain LED lights arrived which I ordered 4 weeks and 6 days ago.) Sometimes that's ok if it's a cheap gadget I don't need in a timely fashion (keychain LED lights being a perfect example), but for most things I'm willing to pay a few extra bucks to have something within a few days instead of a few weeks, especially when you factor in point #2.
2. Trust in the seller. If you have ordered things directly from China, as I've done through eBay, DealExtreme and others, you know that often what arrives after 5 weeks can be of shockingly poor quality and/or not what you paid for. For example, I recently ordered some US to Euro AC wall plug adapters. They were assembled so ridiculously poorly that I had to disassemble and reassemble each one for them to be decently functional (still scratched all to hell). In another recent instance, a seller got into a drawn out argument with me when I left them a bad review for shipping a terrible quality product: a microUSB cable that wouldn't charge any smartphone and which didn't match the one pictured, though it was close enough that I'm sure they were hoping I wouldn't notice. They were of the opinion that because they refunded my money I shouldn't leave them negative feedback, and whined like a 4-year old about how damaging it would be to their business. Granted, you can have such issues in any virtual marketplace, which brings us to point #3.
3. Trust in the marketplace owner. I trust that if something goes wrong with an Amazon Marketplace transaction, Amazon will go to basic lengths to make sure I'm not getting screwed over. The same goes for eBay to a lesser extent, but still more than Alibaba. I still haven't ordered anything through AliExpress. Why? Because I'm taking enough of a gamble already ordering from Chinese sellers on eBay, who is known for always siding with the buyer in disputes.
As someone who occasionally sells online, I am glad that Alibaba is getting some attention and creating some competition for eBay (and with it, Paypal). But to suggest that Alibaba will put the likes of Amazon out of business seems rather short-sighted -- or at least premature. You may have a point with eBay -- at least giving them a run for their money if Alibaba opens up to US sellers seeking refuge from eBay's excessive selling fees. If they're smart, this is exactly what they'll do with all this IPO money.
LOL. People have been saying that for over a decade and it ain't happening. It seems like the myth lives on by being rekindled in new generations of geeks who weren't around to see the prognosticating last go 'round.
I agree that they're not dying as in becoming obsolete, but they're certainly dying in terms of consumer demand. I'd guess that 90-95% of my friends don't own and desktop and will never buy one again.
Add to that the fact that many companies automatically retire systems after 3 years (warranty expired) resulting in lots of incredibly capable enterprise-class desktops available for under $200 through Craigslist. Really, unless you're a gamer, there's little reason to buy a brand new desktop as a consumer.
The problem is already solved, it just needs to be more widely implemented. Secondary authentication by phone (i.e. receiving an SMS) ensures that no one can get into my Gmail account if they happen to have my password. If my phone gets stolen, I'm going to know to take action quite soon, and they still have to get past the lock screen (though this does raise a good argument for making sure calls/SMS are not be answerable/readable without unlocking the device). Regardless, it would solve 99.99% of the problem.
Another idea I could see catching on is some kind of token ring, like a mix of an NFC ring and those RSA SecureIDs that spit out a random 6-digit code every minute to authenticate, but instead of the user having to type in the code, they just tap their phone/palmrest/screen with the ring. Assuming the rings are available in a few varieties for less than $10, I think most people would opt to use one if it meant avoiding annoying secondary security questions and having to keep a list of impossible to remember passwords (which they still have to change because sites get compromised). It avoids biometric requirements and has the possibility for anonymity (buy a ring at the supermarket, link it to any email account).
How do you typically use your Surface? That "I don't bother to turn on my desktop anymore" comment is the same comment you hear from a lot of people enjoying the instant-on trait of a tablet, and in the tablet and touch screen world, iOS and Android are more familiar if you have one or the other on your smartphone (over 90% of smartphone users) and probably cheaper. "But it has a keyboard" -- but do you actually use it much though? I see that keyboard, and especially that kickstand method of propping up the screen, and immediately think I'd rather have a proper lightweight laptop, or a sub-$200 Chromebook (instant-on, great battery life).
It's an expensive niche product. Hell, even tablets are kind of a niche product. I sold my tablet because between my smartphone and laptop, I found I was never going to the tablet. I imagine that will only become more common with large-screen smartphones becoming the norm.
"... blaming 'weak' sales of low- and medium-end smartphones."
I'd suggest that their weak sales has something to do with the fact that their phones are ridiculously overpriced. Samsung seems to think that they're the 'Apple' of Android phones and that they can price their offerings accordingly. Look at their Galaxy S4 Mini and just announced S5 Mini models: mid-range devices (both have only 1.5GB RAM) with flagship prices.
Then there's Samsung's "budget" phones. They also just announced the Galaxy Ace 4. The most obvious difference from last year's Ace 3? They cut the RAM in half, from 1GB to 512MB. That's right, they actually made the specs worse. Maybe we should thank them for not making the processor slower, too (they both have 1GHz dual-cores).
Meanwhile, we've hit the point of having very decent Android phones from the competition available for $100 or less purchased outright (see LG Optimus F6). The S4 Mini, now a year old, is still running $300+ purchased outright. Why would the average buyer spend an extra $200 for incremental upgrades like an 8MP camera vs 5MP, 1.5GB of RAM instead of 1GB?
Samsung's had a great run, but I think we're seeing the beginning of the end, with the competition nipping at their ankles.
Deutsche Telekom is still the majority shareholder of T-Mobile US, and they don't use matching GSM or W-CDMA frequencies. They do both use GSM and W-CDMA though, so the phones are compatible, though European smartphones are often lacking the correct W-CDMA bands for 3G use in the US. It's even worse with LTE.
So if humans ever do populate Mars, they'll face strains of bacteria which even NASA can't kill. Wouldn't this make an argument for not going to such extremes to try to rid such rovers of any and all bacteria?
I can't tell if some people really haven't heard these terms before or it's some deep sarcasm.
Feature phone = your average dumb phone. The phone you had before you had a phone that you could download and run mobile-OS specific applications. Its "features" probably included a calculator, calendar, camera and built-in WAP browser (even if you never used it), and probably allowed you to download and run Java apps (even if you never did). It may have even had a built-in music player. No options to install a new browser or media player, though there were some decent Java apps, like language-translation dictionaries.
Basic smart phone = budget Android phone or maybe something from the Nokia Asha line. We're already seeing Android phones in the $50 range. Most of us would consider them to be crap, but if you live in a developing country and you're coming from a dumb phone, just having something like GPS is a big step up, and probably all you can afford.
Shocking as it may seem, I think we actually need one more Linux distro: a lightweight, bullet-proof simple OS that keeps itself securely up to date with little to no user interaction and provides what 95% of grandmas need: an icon to launch a web browser. Something very much like Chrome OS, but which can be easily installed on old laptops and features automatic updates (neither of which apply to Hexxah's builds of Chrome OS).
In absence of such a distro, if you know of a good guide for turning something like Linux Mint 13 (LTS) XFCE into the above, please post here.
I've got a couple 70-something members in my family who are running XP laptops just to run a web browser: email and the basics. Having moved to Linux myself and being the family computer guy, I'm wanting to switch these two laptops to some lightweight flavor of Linux that will work for them and require little or no support from me. I've tried many different lightweight distros in the past year, but I thought I'd ask here for input from any of you who have actually done what I'm about to do.
Requirements:
- fast and light: will run fine on a Thinkpad T41 (which doesn't support PAE kernel)
- Windows-like interface (I'm thinking LXDE, definitely not Unity)
- easy to use Wi-Fi manager (some of the Wi-Fi managers in lightweight Linux distros are way too technical for a novice)
- once a year if any on-site maintenance (remote maintenance is fine if necessary)
- auto updates in background but with very low chance of system breaking with an update (maybe no auto updates is better?)
- ACPI support (at least lid closed = suspend)
- printer support
Chromium OS seems like a good option, and it will run on one laptop (Thinkpad T61) but I'm pretty sure it uses a PAE kernel, ruling out the T41. I've been looking at Lubuntu, Peppermint OS, Porteus, Slax, Puppy Linux. All seem like viable options with a 30-minute test drive, but this is where I'm seeking feedback: on how some of these distros might be good or bad choices in the long-term, especially given that I won't be able to be physically present if something goes wrong.
The FCC making it legal is one thing. Airlines allowing it is another. Given the overwhelmingly negative response I've seen on this so far today, I think it's pretty safe to say that any airline that decided to allow passengers to make calls on their phones would risk losing business -- especially the business of frequent flyers. People who fly a lot tend to be quite familiar with the annoyances of flying, so why would they want to fly an airline that potentially adds another?
What I haven't seen mentioned is whether you'd have to pay a premium for such calls. Assuming you have to pay cruise ship rates (over $2 a minute), that would definitely discourage people from making long chit-chat phone calls to pass the time of their flight. Likewise, I'm sure a time limit on calls could be easily implemented. With such conditions in place, I'd probably be ok with it, and I'd certainly appreciate it if I was ever in a situation where I really needed to make a phone call en route to my destination.
Posting anonymously since I'm a motoroogle employee... you'll be disappointed. I certainly am. At this point, I expect google to shut us down or spin us off.
Care to elaborate on why we'll be disappointed? I ask because this thread is focused on (perceived) performance of smartphones, and I know Motorola caught some criticism for not giving the Moto X better silicon to compete with other flagships, but personally, I think their tactic is pretty smart: focusing on functionality for the average user instead of performance capabilities which most people don't care about. I'd actually consider buying a Moto X if it weren't for the non-removable battery (deal breaker for me).
Slashdot Mirror
In 1972, when my parents built the house I grew up in, they put in an intercom system. At the time, I'm sure it was an "oooh, wow" gadget. We hardly ever used it, and today there's one terminal remaining in the house which, by today's standards, is incredibly dated-looking and ugly. On top of that, it probably lasted longer than the electronics produced these days. The lesson I take from that is to keep it simple, design for potential additions/upgrades if needed (the "add conduits" advice given multiple times in this thread) and make sure anything you do add can be easily replaced, upgraded or removed so that it's not an eyesore in 20 years. Things like in-floor heating sound like a great idea reading some of the other posts here, but I wonder: what will happen when that system fails down the road? Rip up the entire floor to fix it or replace it? (I'd actually like an answer to this if anyone knows.)
I'd put that "gadget" money into the better energy efficiency ideas which have been mentioned in other comments here -- especially simple design features that will continue to pay off throughout the life of the house with little or no maintenance. One simple non-tech suggestion I'd like to add: consider adding internal doors so that unused parts of the house can be closed off and left at a cooler (or warmer) temperature than the parts of the house you actually spend time in. For example, many houses have a ground floor where everything is open and the kitchen, family room, living room and dining room are all connected. If you live somewhere with cold winters, it doesn't make sense to be heating up the living room and dining room if you're spending all your time in the family room. With a closed door separating them you could shut off the heating vents in the unused room(s) and save on heating costs. This also helps limit noise travel when company is over. (Note that if you live somewhere with genuinely cold winters, you might not want to do this with rooms that have water pipes, as they could freeze and burst.)
Sorry few others here seem to see the value in finding a function for still-useful technology that you probably picked up for free.
Up until a couple years ago I used an old WM6 device as a streaming internet radio player. Perfect function for it, as it remained plugged in and so battery life was never a concern, and it meant rarely having to interface with the device (which was of course clonky and sluggish by today's standards).
Another possible use which I recently stumbled upon is using them as baby monitors. No idea if there are dedicated apps for this for WM, but it sounds like you might be willing to create one yourself, which is great (and if you do, I hope you share it). This is actually a brilliant use for old smartphones because:
1. many of the dedicated solutions on the market use analog transmission (which results in static) or, if digital, are quite expensive ($100+)
2. they can remain plugged in so battery life isn't an issue
3. it's not really an issue if the phone's screen is cracked
4. they can potentially interface with someone's current smartphone, which they probably have close-at-hand anyway
How am I supposed to be different if my phone's screen looks like everyone else's?
AI and robotics (the latter being dependent upon AI) have the potential to change our lives on the same scale that the internet already has. IBM is betting big because the payoff could be massive.
No one would steal it, because they'd think it's a toy. But seriously, call me when it boots Linux Mint 17, and is available in black or silver.
Why do people use WhatsApp when, at least for Android (which runs on ~80% of the world's smartphones), it's an app that requires a $1/year subscription after your first year, and when there are many free services that do the same thing (any instant messaging service) and more (VoIP, video calls), and which have desktop clients (because I'd rather reply from my laptop when I'm already using it anyway)?
I've thus far refused to use WhatsApp because I find it pointless given the free, arguably better alternatives. Am I missing something? Does WhatApp have some killer feature that no other app/service has? What makes it better than, say, Google Hangouts or Viber (which even has a desktop client for Linux). Am I wrong in thinking that WhatsApp's continued popularity is only due to WhatsApp's existing popularity?
I just remembered a 4th point:
4. Returns. Let's say you aren't satisfied with something purchased from a Chinese seller. They say they're happy to refund your money if you return it. Do you know how much it costs to ship a 1-pound package to China? $15 ($16.75 if done from the Post Office). Do you think they're going to reimburse you for that? And that cost is without any kind of tracking, so it wouldn't surprise me to hear that your package never showed up (whether lost or "lost").
The reason Alibaba will take over from Amazon and Ebay is simple.
Have you ever ordered from China before? Because your comments overlook a few things.
1. Shipping. I have never received anything that's been shipped from China in less 3 weeks, and it's usually been closer to 5 or more. (Coincidentally, just before finishing my final comments below, a small package of keychain LED lights arrived which I ordered 4 weeks and 6 days ago.) Sometimes that's ok if it's a cheap gadget I don't need in a timely fashion (keychain LED lights being a perfect example), but for most things I'm willing to pay a few extra bucks to have something within a few days instead of a few weeks, especially when you factor in point #2.
2. Trust in the seller. If you have ordered things directly from China, as I've done through eBay, DealExtreme and others, you know that often what arrives after 5 weeks can be of shockingly poor quality and/or not what you paid for. For example, I recently ordered some US to Euro AC wall plug adapters. They were assembled so ridiculously poorly that I had to disassemble and reassemble each one for them to be decently functional (still scratched all to hell). In another recent instance, a seller got into a drawn out argument with me when I left them a bad review for shipping a terrible quality product: a microUSB cable that wouldn't charge any smartphone and which didn't match the one pictured, though it was close enough that I'm sure they were hoping I wouldn't notice. They were of the opinion that because they refunded my money I shouldn't leave them negative feedback, and whined like a 4-year old about how damaging it would be to their business. Granted, you can have such issues in any virtual marketplace, which brings us to point #3.
3. Trust in the marketplace owner. I trust that if something goes wrong with an Amazon Marketplace transaction, Amazon will go to basic lengths to make sure I'm not getting screwed over. The same goes for eBay to a lesser extent, but still more than Alibaba. I still haven't ordered anything through AliExpress. Why? Because I'm taking enough of a gamble already ordering from Chinese sellers on eBay, who is known for always siding with the buyer in disputes.
As someone who occasionally sells online, I am glad that Alibaba is getting some attention and creating some competition for eBay (and with it, Paypal). But to suggest that Alibaba will put the likes of Amazon out of business seems rather short-sighted -- or at least premature. You may have a point with eBay -- at least giving them a run for their money if Alibaba opens up to US sellers seeking refuge from eBay's excessive selling fees. If they're smart, this is exactly what they'll do with all this IPO money.
desktops are dying
LOL. People have been saying that for over a decade and it ain't happening. It seems like the myth lives on by being rekindled in new generations of geeks who weren't around to see the prognosticating last go 'round.
I agree that they're not dying as in becoming obsolete, but they're certainly dying in terms of consumer demand. I'd guess that 90-95% of my friends don't own and desktop and will never buy one again.
Add to that the fact that many companies automatically retire systems after 3 years (warranty expired) resulting in lots of incredibly capable enterprise-class desktops available for under $200 through Craigslist. Really, unless you're a gamer, there's little reason to buy a brand new desktop as a consumer.
The problem is already solved, it just needs to be more widely implemented. Secondary authentication by phone (i.e. receiving an SMS) ensures that no one can get into my Gmail account if they happen to have my password. If my phone gets stolen, I'm going to know to take action quite soon, and they still have to get past the lock screen (though this does raise a good argument for making sure calls/SMS are not be answerable/readable without unlocking the device). Regardless, it would solve 99.99% of the problem.
Another idea I could see catching on is some kind of token ring, like a mix of an NFC ring and those RSA SecureIDs that spit out a random 6-digit code every minute to authenticate, but instead of the user having to type in the code, they just tap their phone/palmrest/screen with the ring. Assuming the rings are available in a few varieties for less than $10, I think most people would opt to use one if it meant avoiding annoying secondary security questions and having to keep a list of impossible to remember passwords (which they still have to change because sites get compromised). It avoids biometric requirements and has the possibility for anonymity (buy a ring at the supermarket, link it to any email account).
How do you typically use your Surface? That "I don't bother to turn on my desktop anymore" comment is the same comment you hear from a lot of people enjoying the instant-on trait of a tablet, and in the tablet and touch screen world, iOS and Android are more familiar if you have one or the other on your smartphone (over 90% of smartphone users) and probably cheaper. "But it has a keyboard" -- but do you actually use it much though? I see that keyboard, and especially that kickstand method of propping up the screen, and immediately think I'd rather have a proper lightweight laptop, or a sub-$200 Chromebook (instant-on, great battery life).
It's an expensive niche product. Hell, even tablets are kind of a niche product. I sold my tablet because between my smartphone and laptop, I found I was never going to the tablet. I imagine that will only become more common with large-screen smartphones becoming the norm.
So what you're saying is that using Chrome will make me invisible? Awesome!
Informative, and I wish I had mod points to mod this up. Relevant article here: http://www.news.cornell.edu/st...
"... blaming 'weak' sales of low- and medium-end smartphones."
I'd suggest that their weak sales has something to do with the fact that their phones are ridiculously overpriced. Samsung seems to think that they're the 'Apple' of Android phones and that they can price their offerings accordingly. Look at their Galaxy S4 Mini and just announced S5 Mini models: mid-range devices (both have only 1.5GB RAM) with flagship prices.
Then there's Samsung's "budget" phones. They also just announced the Galaxy Ace 4. The most obvious difference from last year's Ace 3? They cut the RAM in half, from 1GB to 512MB. That's right, they actually made the specs worse. Maybe we should thank them for not making the processor slower, too (they both have 1GHz dual-cores).
Meanwhile, we've hit the point of having very decent Android phones from the competition available for $100 or less purchased outright (see LG Optimus F6). The S4 Mini, now a year old, is still running $300+ purchased outright. Why would the average buyer spend an extra $200 for incremental upgrades like an 8MP camera vs 5MP, 1.5GB of RAM instead of 1GB?
Samsung's had a great run, but I think we're seeing the beginning of the end, with the competition nipping at their ankles.
Deutsche Telekom is still the majority shareholder of T-Mobile US, and they don't use matching GSM or W-CDMA frequencies. They do both use GSM and W-CDMA though, so the phones are compatible, though European smartphones are often lacking the correct W-CDMA bands for 3G use in the US. It's even worse with LTE.
So if humans ever do populate Mars, they'll face strains of bacteria which even NASA can't kill. Wouldn't this make an argument for not going to such extremes to try to rid such rovers of any and all bacteria?
I can't tell if some people really haven't heard these terms before or it's some deep sarcasm. Feature phone = your average dumb phone. The phone you had before you had a phone that you could download and run mobile-OS specific applications. Its "features" probably included a calculator, calendar, camera and built-in WAP browser (even if you never used it), and probably allowed you to download and run Java apps (even if you never did). It may have even had a built-in music player. No options to install a new browser or media player, though there were some decent Java apps, like language-translation dictionaries. Basic smart phone = budget Android phone or maybe something from the Nokia Asha line. We're already seeing Android phones in the $50 range. Most of us would consider them to be crap, but if you live in a developing country and you're coming from a dumb phone, just having something like GPS is a big step up, and probably all you can afford.
That's a relief. Everywhere I go I'm close to an area. It's like I'm surrounded.
Shocking as it may seem, I think we actually need one more Linux distro: a lightweight, bullet-proof simple OS that keeps itself securely up to date with little to no user interaction and provides what 95% of grandmas need: an icon to launch a web browser. Something very much like Chrome OS, but which can be easily installed on old laptops and features automatic updates (neither of which apply to Hexxah's builds of Chrome OS).
In absence of such a distro, if you know of a good guide for turning something like Linux Mint 13 (LTS) XFCE into the above, please post here.
I've got a couple 70-something members in my family who are running XP laptops just to run a web browser: email and the basics. Having moved to Linux myself and being the family computer guy, I'm wanting to switch these two laptops to some lightweight flavor of Linux that will work for them and require little or no support from me. I've tried many different lightweight distros in the past year, but I thought I'd ask here for input from any of you who have actually done what I'm about to do.
Requirements:
- fast and light: will run fine on a Thinkpad T41 (which doesn't support PAE kernel)
- Windows-like interface (I'm thinking LXDE, definitely not Unity)
- easy to use Wi-Fi manager (some of the Wi-Fi managers in lightweight Linux distros are way too technical for a novice)
- once a year if any on-site maintenance (remote maintenance is fine if necessary)
- auto updates in background but with very low chance of system breaking with an update (maybe no auto updates is better?)
- ACPI support (at least lid closed = suspend)
- printer support
Chromium OS seems like a good option, and it will run on one laptop (Thinkpad T61) but I'm pretty sure it uses a PAE kernel, ruling out the T41. I've been looking at Lubuntu, Peppermint OS, Porteus, Slax, Puppy Linux. All seem like viable options with a 30-minute test drive, but this is where I'm seeking feedback: on how some of these distros might be good or bad choices in the long-term, especially given that I won't be able to be physically present if something goes wrong.
It's nice to see that China is finally releasing dissidents.
The FCC making it legal is one thing. Airlines allowing it is another. Given the overwhelmingly negative response I've seen on this so far today, I think it's pretty safe to say that any airline that decided to allow passengers to make calls on their phones would risk losing business -- especially the business of frequent flyers. People who fly a lot tend to be quite familiar with the annoyances of flying, so why would they want to fly an airline that potentially adds another?
What I haven't seen mentioned is whether you'd have to pay a premium for such calls. Assuming you have to pay cruise ship rates (over $2 a minute), that would definitely discourage people from making long chit-chat phone calls to pass the time of their flight. Likewise, I'm sure a time limit on calls could be easily implemented. With such conditions in place, I'd probably be ok with it, and I'd certainly appreciate it if I was ever in a situation where I really needed to make a phone call en route to my destination.
He did do something: he was born not white.
Posting anonymously since I'm a motoroogle employee... you'll be disappointed. I certainly am. At this point, I expect google to shut us down or spin us off.
Care to elaborate on why we'll be disappointed? I ask because this thread is focused on (perceived) performance of smartphones, and I know Motorola caught some criticism for not giving the Moto X better silicon to compete with other flagships, but personally, I think their tactic is pretty smart: focusing on functionality for the average user instead of performance capabilities which most people don't care about. I'd actually consider buying a Moto X if it weren't for the non-removable battery (deal breaker for me).
"The Britsh are laughing! The British are laughing!"