It's possible to thin wafers right down from the backside after initial manufacture. This is already done for the ICs used in smartcards - apparently the processed wafers are surprisingly flexible.
For Samsung the cost of producing an update is non-zero.
It's not as though they can just download the lastest version of Android, compile and sign it then make it available.
For a start there are the hardware drivers - if the underlying kernel has changed then these may need to be updated and or QAed again. If they're using a custom skin then that will probably need to be updated as well.
If they're making the update officially available then they also need to be able to support it - from initial QA to documenting the new software for technical support personnel.
Of course Samsung should provide some updates, however you can't pretend that it costs them nothing to do so. Also, the phone you bought 12 months ago still does everything it did when you bought it - bug fixes are one thing, but why should they continue to add new features for free when they've stopped selling that model?
Surely what's really needed is a direct monetary incentive for Samsung (or another manufacturer) to provide updated firmware.
How would people feel about paying $10 to get the latest version of Android with some new features? It worked for Apple with the iPod touch, although they also released a version with just bugfixes, available for free.
I think the key innovation (from a consumer point of view) was the laser diode. Whilst some early laser disc players used gas lasers, it was the laser diode that enabled the CD player and all the other consumer electronics applications you describe.
Yes, however Google makes its money by selling advertising alongside search results. As part of the scraping process, Scroogle removed these adverts. Therefore Scroogle cost Google bandwidth without giving anything back.
Personally I use Adblock, but sites are free to block people using that if they like. Which is just what Google has done in this case.
I'm not sure why people think it's in Apple's interested to discourage the adoption of Theora (apart from the fact that h.264 is meant to be a better codec technically anyway).
Yes, it would be great to have a freely implementable video codec standard in all web browsers - but with the current patent system (in the US anyway) that just isn't going to happen. Add to that the fact that h.264 decoding hardware is available in more and more SoCs and graphics cards (so, relatively speaking, Theora performance would be even worse - requiring higher bitrates and more power for equal quality) and this battle is already lost.
Active matrix OLED displays are actually really hard to manufacture compared to TFT LCDs.
A major issue comes from the fact that the TFT backplane has to supply an appreciable current to each pixel, rather than just a voltage as in LCDs. This means you can't get away with using amorphous silicon, you have to make the backplane out of Polycrystalline silicon which makes the whole production process a lot more complicated and also limits the size of panel that you can make.
Also, you generally you want to run the OLED elements in constant current mode, so you end up needing a current source circuit in each pixel. This increases the number of transistors you need per pixel from 1 or 2 in TFT to between 2 and 6 with OLED. And if any of them has a fault then you've got a dead pixel.
Indeed. One thing people are doing now is building optical feedback into every pixel, so as the OLED material ages more current is pushed through it to keep the brightness the same.
It'd be quite possible to run a check and throw a warning if a change effects greater than a certain percentage of domains. Or you could check against a sample of domains that really aren't going to change (I'm thinking mcdonalds.se, ibm.se etc etc).
In the UK one reason for some of the cost is interconnect fees. If you send a SMS to a phone on another network then your network has to pay a fee (3p per message if I remember correctly) to the destination network.
AFAIK it was about whether it should be taxed as a "games machine" or "computer". Computers have a lower import duty, hence they tried to get the console classified as one.
That's probably partly psychology, and partly the expensive CD player adding distortion that sounds nice. Hence why they probably also like valves, even though the sound reproduction is actually less accurate.
There's one problem with this scheme, namely lack of anonymity. Also if you give a receipt it opens the door to bribery, since an outside party can verify who you have actually voted for. Anyone with access to the database can also see who you voted for. Voting has to be anonymous.
If it's the size of the power connectors that's the problem then just use a connector with more conductors and route data and power over that. Like almost all removeable drive caddies you can buy now do.
USB speed is highly dependant on the processing power of the "host" computer. This is one of the main things that differentiates it from firewire. So whilst you may be able to do this you may well need another processer per drive or something silly like that. This would obviously drive up the cost a lot.
Also the cost of all those IDE->USB converters and custom "USB raid controller" is likely to push the cost of the array above that of a (much better) SATA or even SCSI one.
You'd be much better using SATA. It's designed for this sort of thing.
The pulsejet in the V1 Missile certainly couldn't be started whilst standing still. It had to be accelerated down a launching track using steam generated by mixing hydrogen peroxide and potassium permangenate. This was one of the issues with the V1 design - it required permanent infrastructure to launch it, whereas there were mobile launch teams (in around 3 trucks) that could launch a V2 from pretty much anywhere.
No, what I described is not the Doppler effect.
The doppler effect does not rely on interference between the wave being send and the reflected wave. If you want to read about the doppler effect actually read the document you linked to!
The radar guns rely on *interference* between the transmitted and reflected waves - part of the output is looped back to the reciever to allow then to combine.
As the distance between the car and the gun changes the output of the detector oscillates as the wave being transmitted and the reflected wave interfere constructively then destructively and so on, because the distance travelled by the reflected wave changes as the car moves towards/away from the gun. Thus when the distance the reflected wave travels is a multiple of the wavelength then constructive interference will occur and when the distace is a multiple of the wavelength plus half the wavelength then destructive interference will occur.
As you can see the number of times this happens in a given time period (e.g. a second) is determined by how fast the car is moving towards the gun.
Doppler effect has nothing to do with this.
Actually this isn't the case.
The radar guns work on the basis of the interference between the signal being emitted and the one being reflected off the car.
The faster the combined signal oscillates the faster the car is travelling towards it. This is easy to measure.
You will always have some terrorism. Maybe not much, but some.
Believing that you can somehow eradicate it by removing personal freedoms really is the height of stupidity.
And besides, I thought all of you valiant Americans were keen to "give your lives for freedom". Perhaps this is the price of freedom.
Actually I was there last week and distinctly remember that the label on the model of DNA states that it is a replica. The apollo 10 command module is the real thing though.
Slashdot Mirror
It's possible to thin wafers right down from the backside after initial manufacture. This is already done for the ICs used in smartcards - apparently the processed wafers are surprisingly flexible.
You just stick a man in it, and if they make it, it's man rated ;)
Were you involved in the space shuttle program?
The original N95 firmware was basically unusable though.
It took about a year for nokia to release a version that supported demand paging and actually made the phone usable.
For Samsung the cost of producing an update is non-zero.
It's not as though they can just download the lastest version of Android, compile and sign it then make it available.
For a start there are the hardware drivers - if the underlying kernel has changed then these may need to be updated and or QAed again. If they're using a custom skin then that will probably need to be updated as well.
If they're making the update officially available then they also need to be able to support it - from initial QA to documenting the new software for technical support personnel.
Of course Samsung should provide some updates, however you can't pretend that it costs them nothing to do so. Also, the phone you bought 12 months ago still does everything it did when you bought it - bug fixes are one thing, but why should they continue to add new features for free when they've stopped selling that model?
Surely what's really needed is a direct monetary incentive for Samsung (or another manufacturer) to provide updated firmware.
How would people feel about paying $10 to get the latest version of Android with some new features? It worked for Apple with the iPod touch, although they also released a version with just bugfixes, available for free.
I think the key innovation (from a consumer point of view) was the laser diode. Whilst some early laser disc players used gas lasers, it was the laser diode that enabled the CD player and all the other consumer electronics applications you describe.
Yes, however Google makes its money by selling advertising alongside search results. As part of the scraping process, Scroogle removed these adverts. Therefore Scroogle cost Google bandwidth without giving anything back.
Personally I use Adblock, but sites are free to block people using that if they like. Which is just what Google has done in this case.
......by using a different search engine.
Oh wait - you're weren't generating any revenue for them and were actually costing them bandwidth.
That will really show them!
This article from the BBC talks about doing something similar to make rain rather than just clouds.
This all rather presumes that Apple simply wants to sell as many iPhones (or iPhoneOS devices) as possible.
Apple want to be No. 1 in the top 50 or 25% of the market. That's where the profit margins are.
You can now buy phones running Android for £100. The hardware sucks. The margins must be pretty thin.
That isn't a game Apple wants to be in.
The key to Apples success is selling aspirational products. Sure their hardware is more expensive, but it also *feels* more expensive.
I'm not sure why people think it's in Apple's interested to discourage the adoption of Theora (apart from the fact that h.264 is meant to be a better codec technically anyway).
Yes, it would be great to have a freely implementable video codec standard in all web browsers - but with the current patent system (in the US anyway) that just isn't going to happen. Add to that the fact that h.264 decoding hardware is available in more and more SoCs and graphics cards (so, relatively speaking, Theora performance would be even worse - requiring higher bitrates and more power for equal quality) and this battle is already lost.
Active matrix OLED displays are actually really hard to manufacture compared to TFT LCDs.
A major issue comes from the fact that the TFT backplane has to supply an appreciable current to each pixel, rather than just a voltage as in LCDs. This means you can't get away with using amorphous silicon, you have to make the backplane out of Polycrystalline silicon which makes the whole production process a lot more complicated and also limits the size of panel that you can make.
Also, you generally you want to run the OLED elements in constant current mode, so you end up needing a current source circuit in each pixel. This increases the number of transistors you need per pixel from 1 or 2 in TFT to between 2 and 6 with OLED. And if any of them has a fault then you've got a dead pixel.
Indeed. One thing people are doing now is building optical feedback into every pixel, so as the OLED material ages more current is pushed through it to keep the brightness the same.
What about regression testing?
It'd be quite possible to run a check and throw a warning if a change effects greater than a certain percentage of domains. Or you could check against a sample of domains that really aren't going to change (I'm thinking mcdonalds.se, ibm.se etc etc).
In the UK one reason for some of the cost is interconnect fees. If you send a SMS to a phone on another network then your network has to pay a fee (3p per message if I remember correctly) to the destination network.
AFAIK it was about whether it should be taxed as a "games machine" or "computer". Computers have a lower import duty, hence they tried to get the console classified as one.
That's probably partly psychology, and partly the expensive CD player adding distortion that sounds nice. Hence why they probably also like valves, even though the sound reproduction is actually less accurate.
There's one problem with this scheme, namely lack of anonymity. Also if you give a receipt it opens the door to bribery, since an outside party can verify who you have actually voted for. Anyone with access to the database can also see who you voted for.
Voting has to be anonymous.
If it's the size of the power connectors that's the problem then just use a connector with more conductors and route data and power over that. Like almost all removeable drive caddies you can buy now do.
USB speed is highly dependant on the processing power of the "host" computer. This is one of the main things that differentiates it from firewire. So whilst you may be able to do this you may well need another processer per drive or something silly like that. This would obviously drive up the cost a lot.
Also the cost of all those IDE->USB converters and custom "USB raid controller" is likely to push the cost of the array above that of a (much better) SATA or even SCSI one.
You'd be much better using SATA. It's designed for this sort of thing.
The pulsejet in the V1 Missile certainly couldn't be started whilst standing still. It had to be accelerated down a launching track using steam generated by mixing hydrogen peroxide and potassium permangenate. This was one of the issues with the V1 design - it required permanent infrastructure to launch it, whereas there were mobile launch teams (in around 3 trucks) that could launch a V2 from pretty much anywhere.
No, what I described is not the Doppler effect.
The doppler effect does not rely on interference between the wave being send and the reflected wave. If you want to read about the doppler effect actually read the document you linked to!
The radar guns rely on *interference* between the transmitted and reflected waves - part of the output is looped back to the reciever to allow then to combine.
As the distance between the car and the gun changes the output of the detector oscillates as the wave being transmitted and the reflected wave interfere constructively then destructively and so on, because the distance travelled by the reflected wave changes as the car moves towards/away from the gun. Thus when the distance the reflected wave travels is a multiple of the wavelength then constructive interference will occur and when the distace is a multiple of the wavelength plus half the wavelength then destructive interference will occur.
As you can see the number of times this happens in a given time period (e.g. a second) is determined by how fast the car is moving towards the gun.
Doppler effect has nothing to do with this.
Actually this isn't the case.
The radar guns work on the basis of the interference between the signal being emitted and the one being reflected off the car.
The faster the combined signal oscillates the faster the car is travelling towards it. This is easy to measure.
You will always have some terrorism. Maybe not much, but some.
Believing that you can somehow eradicate it by removing personal freedoms really is the height of stupidity.
And besides, I thought all of you valiant Americans were keen to "give your lives for freedom". Perhaps this is the price of freedom.
Actually I was there last week and distinctly remember that the label on the model of DNA states that it is a replica. The apollo 10 command module is the real thing though.