Gee whiz then I would need two of these gadgets. Our house measures without the garage and closets about 3500 square feet. Actually that kind of sucks since the vacuum cleaner would be running constantly.
My question though is what about the dog factor. I have English Bulldogs that consider vaccuum cleaners the enemy...
Having lost one data set from a defective drive I thought I learned my lesson. I backed up my data, etc. But then the backup drive starting dying. Quickly I backed up that drive.
What is the moral? When harddrives die they do so by becoming sick. In all of the cases of my drives dying they have little problems or make noises. Then the noises become more problematic and the drive fails to boot sometimes. I have learned once my drive becomes sick, it is time to move on and get a new drive for backup purposes.
I personally prefer backing up data to drives because backup systems are simply not geared to handle changing data in the 20-30 Gig range.
While that may be true, I think that is also what makes it more insecure. I have seen tons of documentation for programmers how to manage security. This means a programmer REALLY needs to know their stuff. In other words most programmers will not know their stuff. And as a result the apps are insecure. But the cause of the insecurity is not the app, but the OS because it is SO DAMM DIFFICULT.
While UNIX security may be simpler, it did not take me a huge effort to understand.
I use Windows and LINUX daily. My notebook is usually running XP and I have to say they screwed up security royally. The easy to use guides like "make available to shared users" actually opens your machine royally. The not shared locks everything done. But there is no middle. I had to go back to traditional NT security to twiddle how I wanted things.
Here is why I am gripping. I have a home network. And on this home network typically it is my wife and I. But sometimes I have friends come by with their notebooks. So they hook into my network. At that point I want per user security. Try to do that with the new "easy" to use XP security...
It all boils down to the same thing. NT has better security, but it is so DARN difficult that managing it effectivily is impossible.
Would not work. In Europe they caught on. The digitize the picture, remove the hues and lo-and-behold a license plate number appears. Downside then is that they have you for speeding and obstruction.
Does not work worth a damm. Why? Because here in Europe they tried that same trick. What did the law do? They computerized the images and then toned down the hues and lo-and-behold a license plate number appeared.
The problem with this approach is that they difference between the background with the license plate and the numbering is too large and no flash remove the contrast.
The only one that truly works are polarizers.
But even now in Europe they are stopping putting out ummanned cameras. People are contesting it too much. For example lets say that you get caught speeding, you say, hey that was my friend in the US. Your friend in the US says, yupe was me. The local law is powerless to do anything. Therefore they now catch speeders the old fashioned way of snapping their picture and then stopping them immediately.
People will go a block further to get what they want. The scenario you are presenting is a choice scenario. If you had a choice sure you would not go the extra bit. I know have friends who to specific places and they are slightly out of the way.
Now about setting up a city wide network. Of course it will happen. Consider this URL http://www.starbucks.com/retail/wireless.asp.
Star bucks is not managing the wireless, but T-Online a telco. Telco's and ISP's already have this roaming and seamless access stuff worked out. They just need the real estate where this makes sense. Hence why Star Bucks did a deal with T-Online.
I think it will be a wifi patchwork. For example at home I doubt you will be using wifi to connect to your provider. No need since you already have broad band.
Where I see Wifi saving costs is at conferences I attend. Instead of installing fixed line internet, they just plug in a few towers and let people figure out the rest. It works and saves money for the conference people.
In other words wifi works when you are in hotspots that do not belong to you, but you want Internet access.
Wifi about a wide area mobile data service. Absolutely. Sweden has already done it. http://www.telia.com/bvo/info/gen_info.jsp.html?OI D=Wireless+Broadband+Access&CID=-28401
The backhaul costs are not higher because in most of the hotspots there are already backbones (due largely to broadband). Actually there are many projects in the West of North America that are proving this actually results in cheaper because they set up towers and only require a single backbone.
Billing is already solved, because ISP's on fixed net have billing today, which is called roaming. I have a local ISP, but when I go to other countries I use roaming from IPass.
Not much security, granted, but there is SSL just like there is not much security on the Internet.
If the user is travelling they can use it because trains and planes are already outfitted for internet access. The plane or train provides the backbone.
When I discussed about Wifi, this was the exact same argument that was given. And the answer is that roaming will apply. It already does since there are providers like IPass that are now giving wireless access to other wireless providers.
Now about wanting it at different points. There is a large common denominator. And if people know that there is access then they will change their habits. We already do it today for other things. For example if there is a coffee joint out of your way, but you like the coffee, you will go there.
Now about the problems of 3G and cost, well that is a given and cannot be removed. Setting up Wifi is simple and not expensive. Setting up 3G costs lots of money because you are trying to solve many problems at once. Wifi only tries to give you wireless Internet. It does not try to give you phone conversations, or GPS positioning, or online live movies. That is what 3G is trying to give you.
While that would sound like a good idea I doubt it will happen.
I have a house in both Canada and Switzerland. At my house in Canada, I am about ten clicks out of broadband coverage. Guess what I am also about ten clicks out of wireless coverage. In switzerland I have wireless, but also broadband.
While this argument is a bit off topic, it shows that the wireless people are only really interested in providing access to the densest populations. This means 3G and other cell technologies overlap and complement not replace, which is the argument that you are making.
Of course your argument is something that the telcos should be listening to. Because I sure would love to have broad band access in Canada. I am willing to pay, but nobody wants to give me access.
Absolutely... I think you mentioned the needs of X millions of people. Sadly the telcos are realizing this as well and thinking "Ok so we spent X billions for?"
Ironic that I answer your reply because the banner ad on this page talks about the Tablet PC with 802.11B building in... www.mira2go.com LOL....
Everyone is missing what is actually happening in the market. A while back I gave a talk about this and said that 3G is basically dead. In the US and the world. Why? WiFi. The problem that 3G has is that it attempts to be everything to everyone. WiFi not. In 98 a study was done in Berlin on student behaviour and wireless. What did they find out? Students want hot spot wireless.
This means when they sit down for a coffee they will want access to the Internet. When they sit down in the library they will want wireless. But when people are walking around they only want voice wireless. In other words Internet wireless is a hotspot type technology. You will want it at home, at the airport, on the train, in the office at StarBucks.
3G cannot compete with this since creating hotspot areas are much cheaper and faster. While 3G braggs about 1 MBit, Wifi is already at 11Mbits and moving up.
Sorry folks, 3G is dead! Unless of course 3G is as cheap as Wifi, then 3G will survive. But that would mean somehow somewhere the telcos are going to have to figure out how to make 3G cheap.
The Windows metaphor is actually not bad. I learned it and moved on. My brother 11 years my junior (23) learned it in about ten minutes. He never complained once.
The problem is that we are in a transition similar to when horse and buggies went out of fashion for cars. Those used to the old way have no idea what to do with the new. So do you blame the car makers? No people have to learn and move on.
And about my grandmother learning? Guess what my mother who is approaching 60 has learned it. My inlaws who are in their sixties have learned it. It might have taken them a bit longer, but they got it and moved on.
Like when people had to learn VCR's, remote control's, radio, and other technology in general, people learn it and move on. Actually if you want to make the point, what about those people that rode on horses instead of walking? I beat that was a shock of a life time for some cave people.
What people tend to forget is that we actually had to learn to read a dashboard on a car.
For a fair comparison take yourself back to when horse and buggies were the transportation of the day. Do you REALLY think people knew what to make of a car, with its steering wheel, brakes and gas pedal? I THINK NOT! If I may quote Alan Cooper a GUI specialist, often the best user interface is not the friendliest, but the one that solves the task most efficiently. Case in point spreadsheet. Nobody ever asks again how to manipulate numbers on a spreadsheet. But yet a spreadsheet in its full form is rather complex. So why can we use a spreadsheet? Because we learned it!
The real test, which was proven by your comment is that it took you ten minutes to learn when you were ten years old. And since it took ten minutes I see it like a dashboard that you learned and moved on.
Not at all. I think he is burnt out and has no idea what to do next. Maybe in a few years things will be different. But now he simply does not care. That is the impression I got in the interview.
Exactly. This is MS's latest love slave. It did not work out that well with the others. Or MS has a new "VISION" and, well, you need new partners to realize that vision.
The old partners (IBM, DELL, BRISTOL, MAINSOFT, etc) just do not get it, like Microsoft does. But as the saying goes what comes around goes around. And right now one of the first companies that MS screwed over (IBM), looks pretty menancing for MS.
I am sorry, but signing something does not mean you are entering into a binding contract. From my engineering law, it depends if it is civil law and criminal law. Civil law is where the money is made from suing. Hence the company is saving its butt from that. But in criminal law you cannot simply sign things away. For example if the company broke the law by doing things like aiding drug lords launder money, then no contract in the world can hold that you keep trade secrecy.
Otherwise the mafia could have it really easy and say, sure you can sign this contract. And read the small print if you pay we break body parts. At that point the mob could be legal, which we all know is not!
I think it depends. If the company broke a civil law, then you could not sue. However, if they did something criminal then the contract is unenforcable. Criminal law dictates that it has precedence and there is nothing anybody can write to stop you from saying something. In fact then you would be criminal as well as an accomplice.
And the answer is that there is no answer. If you are idea is good you want worldwide coverage since US coverage will simply force somebody to move offshore. However, if you end up staying solely on US soil you have to fork over the money. The problem of not doing that is that you will get a poorly worded patent.
Consider it as follows. Would you actually let a lawyer write your code for you? Not at all since a lawyer does not understand code and you do not understand lawyer speak.
That is why patent reform (eradication) is necessary. Patents only serve to protect those with money and not who should have coverage namely small time inventors.
No Formula 1 is extremely boring. The problem with the tech is that it really doesn't not bring any benefit anymore.
Previously it made engines faster, stronger and influenced cars. But now we have 500 HP monsters on the road. So I ask you what are you going to do with a 500 HP monster? Only in Germany can you semi use that speed, but even then it is dangerous. My car is limited to 250 KPH (cheaper insurance) and 250 KPH is damm fast. My average speed is probably about 160 KPH (traffic, other people, etc).
The fuel limit was dropped so fuel efficiency is not important. The body of the car is made with kevlar, carbon fibre, which has about a snow's ball's chance in hell in making it to regular cars.
In other words Formula 1 like sailing has become the modern day version of polo that nobody will pay that much attention to, but rich people come to be seen.
Now about sports being boring to watch? Hah, not watched something like Hockey, eh?
Thank-you for answering my post. I was intending this tongue in cheek (can't help it I am a sarcastic Canadian) and not actually directed at you. Hence why I modded myself down to 1 instead of the usual two.
It is sad, you appreciate true talent. And you willing to give money, but yet it is not possible.
It also gets my goat, "Well for every one act we fund there are ten that do not work". Yada, yada, yada...
Sorry, but these days the big record labels have formula's and they NEVER take on artists that will not sell something. Hence their failure level is not as high as they say. What the labels need to do is become more efficient! And that is being forced by things like Napster, etc.
Slashdot Mirror
Gee whiz then I would need two of these gadgets. Our house measures without the garage and closets about 3500 square feet. Actually that kind of sucks since the vacuum cleaner would be running constantly.
My question though is what about the dog factor. I have English Bulldogs that consider vaccuum cleaners the enemy...
Ok so what is MS going to do? Start a software embargo against one person?
Will they raise this issue at the UN and demand a resolution? Hmmm, that would require votes from China and France who are LINUX supporters?
Politics, Politics, my head just spins....
Having lost one data set from a defective drive I thought I learned my lesson. I backed up my data, etc. But then the backup drive starting dying. Quickly I backed up that drive.
What is the moral? When harddrives die they do so by becoming sick. In all of the cases of my drives dying they have little problems or make noises. Then the noises become more problematic and the drive fails to boot sometimes. I have learned once my drive becomes sick, it is time to move on and get a new drive for backup purposes.
I personally prefer backing up data to drives because backup systems are simply not geared to handle changing data in the 20-30 Gig range.
Yeah we have been living under a rock, since I looked at the Redhat management team and I did not find Bob Young....
When did this happen?
While that may be true, I think that is also what makes it more insecure. I have seen tons of documentation for programmers how to manage security. This means a programmer REALLY needs to know their stuff. In other words most programmers will not know their stuff. And as a result the apps are insecure. But the cause of the insecurity is not the app, but the OS because it is SO DAMM DIFFICULT.
While UNIX security may be simpler, it did not take me a huge effort to understand.
I use Windows and LINUX daily. My notebook is usually running XP and I have to say they screwed up security royally. The easy to use guides like "make available to shared users" actually opens your machine royally. The not shared locks everything done. But there is no middle. I had to go back to traditional NT security to twiddle how I wanted things.
Here is why I am gripping. I have a home network. And on this home network typically it is my wife and I. But sometimes I have friends come by with their notebooks. So they hook into my network. At that point I want per user security. Try to do that with the new "easy" to use XP security...
It all boils down to the same thing. NT has better security, but it is so DARN difficult that managing it effectivily is impossible.
Would not work. In Europe they caught on. The digitize the picture, remove the hues and lo-and-behold a license plate number appears. Downside then is that they have you for speeding and obstruction.
Does not work worth a damm. Why? Because here in Europe they tried that same trick. What did the law do? They computerized the images and then toned down the hues and lo-and-behold a license plate number appeared.
The problem with this approach is that they difference between the background with the license plate and the numbering is too large and no flash remove the contrast.
The only one that truly works are polarizers.
But even now in Europe they are stopping putting out ummanned cameras. People are contesting it too much. For example lets say that you get caught speeding, you say, hey that was my friend in the US. Your friend in the US says, yupe was me. The local law is powerless to do anything. Therefore they now catch speeders the old fashioned way of snapping their picture and then stopping them immediately.
People will go a block further to get what they want. The scenario you are presenting is a choice scenario. If you had a choice sure you would not go the extra bit. I know have friends who to specific places and they are slightly out of the way.
Now about setting up a city wide network. Of course it will happen. Consider this URL http://www.starbucks.com/retail/wireless.asp.
Star bucks is not managing the wireless, but T-Online a telco. Telco's and ISP's already have this roaming and seamless access stuff worked out. They just need the real estate where this makes sense. Hence why Star Bucks did a deal with T-Online.
I think it will be a wifi patchwork. For example at home I doubt you will be using wifi to connect to your provider. No need since you already have broad band.
Where I see Wifi saving costs is at conferences I attend. Instead of installing fixed line internet, they just plug in a few towers and let people figure out the rest. It works and saves money for the conference people.
In other words wifi works when you are in hotspots that do not belong to you, but you want Internet access.
Wifi about a wide area mobile data service. Absolutely. Sweden has already done it. http://www.telia.com/bvo/info/gen_info.jsp.html?OI D=Wireless+Broadband+Access&CID=-28401
The backhaul costs are not higher because in most of the hotspots there are already backbones (due largely to broadband). Actually there are many projects in the West of North America that are proving this actually results in cheaper because they set up towers and only require a single backbone.
Billing is already solved, because ISP's on fixed net have billing today, which is called roaming. I have a local ISP, but when I go to other countries I use roaming from IPass.
Not much security, granted, but there is SSL just like there is not much security on the Internet.
If the user is travelling they can use it because trains and planes are already outfitted for internet access. The plane or train provides the backbone.
When I discussed about Wifi, this was the exact same argument that was given. And the answer is that roaming will apply. It already does since there are providers like IPass that are now giving wireless access to other wireless providers.
Now about wanting it at different points. There is a large common denominator. And if people know that there is access then they will change their habits. We already do it today for other things. For example if there is a coffee joint out of your way, but you like the coffee, you will go there.
Now about the problems of 3G and cost, well that is a given and cannot be removed. Setting up Wifi is simple and not expensive. Setting up 3G costs lots of money because you are trying to solve many problems at once. Wifi only tries to give you wireless Internet. It does not try to give you phone conversations, or GPS positioning, or online live movies. That is what 3G is trying to give you.
While that would sound like a good idea I doubt it will happen.
I have a house in both Canada and Switzerland. At my house in Canada, I am about ten clicks out of broadband coverage. Guess what I am also about ten clicks out of wireless coverage. In switzerland I have wireless, but also broadband.
While this argument is a bit off topic, it shows that the wireless people are only really interested in providing access to the densest populations. This means 3G and other cell technologies overlap and complement not replace, which is the argument that you are making.
Of course your argument is something that the telcos should be listening to. Because I sure would love to have broad band access in Canada. I am willing to pay, but nobody wants to give me access.
Absolutely... I think you mentioned the needs of X millions of people. Sadly the telcos are realizing this as well and thinking "Ok so we spent X billions for?"
Ironic that I answer your reply because the banner ad on this page talks about the Tablet PC with 802.11B building in... www.mira2go.com LOL....
Everyone is missing what is actually happening in the market. A while back I gave a talk about this and said that 3G is basically dead. In the US and the world. Why? WiFi. The problem that 3G has is that it attempts to be everything to everyone. WiFi not. In 98 a study was done in Berlin on student behaviour and wireless. What did they find out? Students want hot spot wireless.
This means when they sit down for a coffee they will want access to the Internet. When they sit down in the library they will want wireless. But when people are walking around they only want voice wireless. In other words Internet wireless is a hotspot type technology. You will want it at home, at the airport, on the train, in the office at StarBucks.
3G cannot compete with this since creating hotspot areas are much cheaper and faster. While 3G braggs about 1 MBit, Wifi is already at 11Mbits and moving up.
Sorry folks, 3G is dead! Unless of course 3G is as cheap as Wifi, then 3G will survive. But that would mean somehow somewhere the telcos are going to have to figure out how to make 3G cheap.
The Windows metaphor is actually not bad. I learned it and moved on. My brother 11 years my junior (23) learned it in about ten minutes. He never complained once.
The problem is that we are in a transition similar to when horse and buggies went out of fashion for cars. Those used to the old way have no idea what to do with the new. So do you blame the car makers? No people have to learn and move on.
And about my grandmother learning? Guess what my mother who is approaching 60 has learned it. My inlaws who are in their sixties have learned it. It might have taken them a bit longer, but they got it and moved on.
Like when people had to learn VCR's, remote control's, radio, and other technology in general, people learn it and move on. Actually if you want to make the point, what about those people that rode on horses instead of walking? I beat that was a shock of a life time for some cave people.
What people tend to forget is that we actually had to learn to read a dashboard on a car.
For a fair comparison take yourself back to when horse and buggies were the transportation of the day. Do you REALLY think people knew what to make of a car, with its steering wheel, brakes and gas pedal? I THINK NOT! If I may quote Alan Cooper a GUI specialist, often the best user interface is not the friendliest, but the one that solves the task most efficiently. Case in point spreadsheet. Nobody ever asks again how to manipulate numbers on a spreadsheet. But yet a spreadsheet in its full form is rather complex. So why can we use a spreadsheet? Because we learned it!
The real test, which was proven by your comment is that it took you ten minutes to learn when you were ten years old. And since it took ten minutes I see it like a dashboard that you learned and moved on.
I actually like this. My code actually works without ten million compiler faults when I try to integrate multiple source code bases together.
I use wxWindows quite a bit and have to say it is a great toolkit...
Not at all. I think he is burnt out and has no idea what to do next. Maybe in a few years things will be different. But now he simply does not care. That is the impression I got in the interview.
Exactly. This is MS's latest love slave. It did not work out that well with the others. Or MS has a new "VISION" and, well, you need new partners to realize that vision.
The old partners (IBM, DELL, BRISTOL, MAINSOFT, etc) just do not get it, like Microsoft does. But as the saying goes what comes around goes around. And right now one of the first companies that MS screwed over (IBM), looks pretty menancing for MS.
I am sorry, but signing something does not mean you are entering into a binding contract. From my engineering law, it depends if it is civil law and criminal law. Civil law is where the money is made from suing. Hence the company is saving its butt from that. But in criminal law you cannot simply sign things away. For example if the company broke the law by doing things like aiding drug lords launder money, then no contract in the world can hold that you keep trade secrecy.
Otherwise the mafia could have it really easy and say, sure you can sign this contract. And read the small print if you pay we break body parts. At that point the mob could be legal, which we all know is not!
I think it depends. If the company broke a civil law, then you could not sue. However, if they did something criminal then the contract is unenforcable. Criminal law dictates that it has precedence and there is nothing anybody can write to stop you from saying something. In fact then you would be criminal as well as an accomplice.
And the answer is that there is no answer. If you are idea is good you want worldwide coverage since US coverage will simply force somebody to move offshore. However, if you end up staying solely on US soil you have to fork over the money. The problem of not doing that is that you will get a poorly worded patent.
Consider it as follows. Would you actually let a lawyer write your code for you? Not at all since a lawyer does not understand code and you do not understand lawyer speak.
That is why patent reform (eradication) is necessary. Patents only serve to protect those with money and not who should have coverage namely small time inventors.
No Formula 1 is extremely boring. The problem with the tech is that it really doesn't not bring any benefit anymore.
Previously it made engines faster, stronger and influenced cars. But now we have 500 HP monsters on the road. So I ask you what are you going to do with a 500 HP monster? Only in Germany can you semi use that speed, but even then it is dangerous. My car is limited to 250 KPH (cheaper insurance) and 250 KPH is damm fast. My average speed is probably about 160 KPH (traffic, other people, etc).
The fuel limit was dropped so fuel efficiency is not important. The body of the car is made with kevlar, carbon fibre, which has about a snow's ball's chance in hell in making it to regular cars.
In other words Formula 1 like sailing has become the modern day version of polo that nobody will pay that much attention to, but rich people come to be seen.
Now about sports being boring to watch? Hah, not watched something like Hockey, eh?
Thank-you for answering my post. I was intending this tongue in cheek (can't help it I am a sarcastic Canadian) and not actually directed at you. Hence why I modded myself down to 1 instead of the usual two.
Thanks again...
It is sad, you appreciate true talent. And you willing to give money, but yet it is not possible.
It also gets my goat, "Well for every one act we fund there are ten that do not work". Yada, yada, yada...
Sorry, but these days the big record labels have formula's and they NEVER take on artists that will not sell something. Hence their failure level is not as high as they say. What the labels need to do is become more efficient! And that is being forced by things like Napster, etc.