This is why you should never buy any electronic device, no matter how useful. The very moment you click on "place order", something twice as good and half as expensive will appear on the market, and make you hate yourself!
Probably you could use a stylus, but the screen's not designed for more precision than you could get with a forefinger.
This device is too small to be a real laptop. But you're right, it's too big to be a pocket device. It's one of those in-between devices I hate. Still, somebody must like them, 'cause there sure are a lot of them.
This is yet another all-in-one device, a category I hate. Do people actually want this? I suspect they exist solely because that's what wireless providers want to sell. The alternative is simple cell phones that interoperate with PDA and other pocket devices -- and wireless providers don't sell those other devices, so they don't make any money off them.
I haven't RTFAed, myself, but from what I've read elsewhere, you have it right.
Not a clear winner? Depends on who you are. If you want more powerful forms applications, but don't think that XForms will be widely implemented before the next Ice Age, then Web Forms is the clear winner. If you want a nice clean, well-specified, easy to implement forms specification, XForms is the clear winner. And if you don't care...
This is your typical W3C specification hassle. The W3C keeps grinding out really detailed new specifications, but seems totally indifferent to the fact that that these specs take forever to get implemented in the real world, if they ever do. It's not as bad as it used to be, since everbody except Microsoft seems to be on the standards bandwagon. (Netscape used to be militantly indifferent to standards.) But unfortunately, Microsoft still has 95+% of the browser market.
When I do input on a handheld device, I prefer a stylus to a keyboard, since it takes two hands to type, and I'm not a motie. Yet all PDAs now seem to be deisgned with a keyboard instead of a stylus. Oh well...
If you click on the links on this page, you'll find that the company plans future phones using the same hardware, but with Windows CE or Symbian in place of Linux. They're hedging their bets!
... my 2.5G wireless phone can give me internet access on a shoestring (with free evenings and weekends) but [not] that always-on quality.
If your network uses GPRS (I'm told most 2.5G networks do), then you have a connectionless network, and in theory an "always on quality" is a basic feature. The reality may be that your provider forces a login procedure on you that prevents that. (Just as DSL providers mostly force their users to establish a PPPoE connection, even though the DSL link itself is always on.) There's probably a way around that, but I have no GPRS experience to guide you with.
If you have another protocol, then you might consider switching providers.
Or it may be that a particularly lame post simply made a moderator laugh.
What you're really saying is this: you think you understand what the poster was thinking better than I do, and that the moderators back you up. My response: whatever. Get back to me when you finish that ESP course. I'm too lazy to assume that post says anything except what it says.
As usual, somebody focuses on one data point and thinks that's the whole story. The MIPS 4300i in the Nintendo is not in the same class as the IA-32 processors in PCs, even if it does have a wider data path. If you'd been following the Intel-AMD processor wars, you'd know that the big issue is how we evolve beyond the IA-32. It's obvious that the successor will be 64-bit, but that's only one particular feature.
Intel and HP chose to work together on a development effort to produce a totally new processor that offers drastically improved performance, but doesn't execute IA-32 code very well. AMD chose to emphasize IA-32 support instead of overall performance. As in the past, backward compatibility won out over superior technology, and AMD has been winning market share from Intel.
Intel is doing a course correction for its 64-bit strategy -- not suddenly moving into the 64-bit world.
For me, any of the pre-pay plans are cheaper than a land line. I don't use enough minutes to exceed $20 every three months. You know a log of local providers willing to sell you a phone line for $7.00 a month?
Well, lifeline service is at about that level, but basically you have a very good point. I'll have to give your links a look.
Your provider is cheaper than landline? That makes me want to know who your provider is. Though it may also be why they don't have a tower that can reach your basement.
If the providers that do reach your basement aren't too much more expensive, you might consider switching. If you choose your handset carefully, it might overcome the poor signal.
Money is the key issue. It costs a lot to live in Silicon Valley. In most of the country, $60K is a lot. But it's not enough to afford a decent house within an hour's drive of Google's current headquarters in Mountain View.
What's really interesting is that they bought the land, presumably with an eye to developing it themselves. Which means yet another attempt to build a geek paradise office building. A risky enterprise -- CEOs such as Phillipe Kahn have lost there jobs over this sort of thing.
The problem is, all true geeks nurse a desire to work at Google. Which is why (a) Slashdot keeps doing drool drool articles about them; and (b) they don't really need anybody's help recruiting people. Indeed, unless you have a really good resume, you probably shouldn't even bother.
I stand corrected. Though I have to point out that Bruce's first point (how it works) is redundant. And his second point is kind of questionable. The difficulty of making the IA-32 do this sort of thing is precisely why VMWare has no real competitors.
Ha ha. The point is not just that you emulate the processor, but that you emulate the complete environment. In theory, you can do this without processor emulation using the Virtual Machine Monitor feature in IA-32 chips. Unfortunately, nobody except VMWare has figured out how to do this well enough to support guest OSs reliably.
I sometimes want to play old DOS games on my P3 machine. A lot of these games work in Real Mode, period. And they often can't do sound except on specific sound cards. I can:
Get a second machine for game playing. I don't spend that much time playing games. At least I hope not...
Reboot to DOS every time I want to run a game. Inconvenient, and the sound doesn't always work.
Fire up VMWare. Except I can't afford a copy right now...
Run DOSBox, which emulates not only a 286-class processor, but other legacy hardware such as sound cards and Hercules Graphics.
DOSBox is a really impressive bit of software, but it demands a lot of cycles to get the job done. (Typically, 75% of the CPU time on my P3 when I do VGA games full screen. Playing in a window is impossible unless I step down the color depth of my display.) So it's not good for much except real- and protected-mode games. An open-source emulator that doesn't have that kind of overhead would be very useful.
Slashdot Mirror
This is why you should never buy any electronic device, no matter how useful. The very moment you click on "place order", something twice as good and half as expensive will appear on the market, and make you hate yourself!
This device is too small to be a real laptop. But you're right, it's too big to be a pocket device. It's one of those in-between devices I hate. Still, somebody must like them, 'cause there sure are a lot of them.
This is yet another all-in-one device, a category I hate. Do people actually want this? I suspect they exist solely because that's what wireless providers want to sell. The alternative is simple cell phones that interoperate with PDA and other pocket devices -- and wireless providers don't sell those other devices, so they don't make any money off them.
Not a clear winner? Depends on who you are. If you want more powerful forms applications, but don't think that XForms will be widely implemented before the next Ice Age, then Web Forms is the clear winner. If you want a nice clean, well-specified, easy to implement forms specification, XForms is the clear winner. And if you don't care...
This is your typical W3C specification hassle. The W3C keeps grinding out really detailed new specifications, but seems totally indifferent to the fact that that these specs take forever to get implemented in the real world, if they ever do. It's not as bad as it used to be, since everbody except Microsoft seems to be on the standards bandwagon. (Netscape used to be militantly indifferent to standards.) But unfortunately, Microsoft still has 95+% of the browser market.
I have a sense of humor for things that are meant to be funny.
When I do input on a handheld device, I prefer a stylus to a keyboard, since it takes two hands to type, and I'm not a motie. Yet all PDAs now seem to be deisgned with a keyboard instead of a stylus. Oh well...
Ah, you did notice that this guy has a keyboard? And no stylus. Not much use for handwriting recognition.
If you click on the links on this page, you'll find that the company plans future phones using the same hardware, but with Windows CE or Symbian in place of Linux. They're hedging their bets!
That won't work by itself. You need to browse a few porn sites to pick up some drive-by spyware infestations. Problem solved!
If your network uses GPRS (I'm told most 2.5G networks do), then you have a connectionless network, and in theory an "always on quality" is a basic feature. The reality may be that your provider forces a login procedure on you that prevents that. (Just as DSL providers mostly force their users to establish a PPPoE connection, even though the DSL link itself is always on.) There's probably a way around that, but I have no GPRS experience to guide you with.
If you have another protocol, then you might consider switching providers.
Better yet, you can set forward-on-busy to your cell phone.
That answers the requirement for low cost and instant-on. But not the requirement for low speed...
What you're really saying is this: you think you understand what the poster was thinking better than I do, and that the moderators back you up. My response: whatever. Get back to me when you finish that ESP course. I'm too lazy to assume that post says anything except what it says.
Intel and HP chose to work together on a development effort to produce a totally new processor that offers drastically improved performance, but doesn't execute IA-32 code very well. AMD chose to emphasize IA-32 support instead of overall performance. As in the past, backward compatibility won out over superior technology, and AMD has been winning market share from Intel.
Intel is doing a course correction for its 64-bit strategy -- not suddenly moving into the 64-bit world.
You can see even worse things here.
So what if Google is 99% about search? That's like saying NASA just shoots off rockets. Finding stuff is hard.
Wouldn't it make more sense to pipe the hot air into the heating system?
Well, considering that you didn't notice the 20 previous "it's a dupe!" posts, you're in no position to point fingers!
If the providers that do reach your basement aren't too much more expensive, you might consider switching. If you choose your handset carefully, it might overcome the poor signal.
If you think Google is mainly about "web apps that do typeahead", you know very little about them. Which means you know very little about geekdom.
What's really interesting is that they bought the land, presumably with an eye to developing it themselves. Which means yet another attempt to build a geek paradise office building. A risky enterprise -- CEOs such as Phillipe Kahn have lost there jobs over this sort of thing.
The problem is, all true geeks nurse a desire to work at Google. Which is why (a) Slashdot keeps doing drool drool articles about them; and (b) they don't really need anybody's help recruiting people. Indeed, unless you have a really good resume, you probably shouldn't even bother.
I stand corrected. Though I have to point out that Bruce's first point (how it works) is redundant. And his second point is kind of questionable. The difficulty of making the IA-32 do this sort of thing is precisely why VMWare has no real competitors.
Wrong.
I sometimes want to play old DOS games on my P3 machine. A lot of these games work in Real Mode, period. And they often can't do sound except on specific sound cards. I can:
- Get a second machine for game playing. I don't spend that much time playing games. At least I hope not...
- Reboot to DOS every time I want to run a game. Inconvenient, and the sound doesn't always work.
- Fire up VMWare. Except I can't afford a copy right now...
- Run DOSBox, which emulates not only a 286-class processor, but other legacy hardware such as sound cards and Hercules Graphics.
DOSBox is a really impressive bit of software, but it demands a lot of cycles to get the job done. (Typically, 75% of the CPU time on my P3 when I do VGA games full screen. Playing in a window is impossible unless I step down the color depth of my display.) So it's not good for much except real- and protected-mode games. An open-source emulator that doesn't have that kind of overhead would be very useful.