My Motorola Nextel i1000Plus flip phone, released in 1999, has two soft buttons on the front, as displayed (using a later version as an example) in this image.
If a call comes in, the left button becomes an "ignore" button. Press it and the call goes straight to voicemail. At the same time, the right button becomes a "speakerphone" button, allowing you to answer the call and put it on speakerphone at the same time.
I've been using RC3 for a few days and it has problems with many sites. Flash doesn't work, some AJAX sites don't work. Some images don't display.
It does seem better in terms of memory usage and displays pages it can display (particularly those with lots of Form elements) much faster.
But these lingering bugs will be enough to turn off many users who decide to give it a try.
Re:Google Consolidating All Info For Advertising?
on
Google Base Launches
·
· Score: 1
Google has the example of recipes in their easy documentation, but google base doesn't really seem suited to this or any non-volatile use. All the data expires after 30 days. It looks as if you can restore it, but that isn't completely clear from the UI.
If I were creating an online recipe database I surely wouldn't want it to expire every 30 days nor would I want to have to remember to go restore it every 30 days.
No, it seems to me that this is what people in the financial community were saying it was -- an eBay killer in its first stages. It lets people list products and services for sale, for free, and encourages the purchase of adwords ads to promote the items.
What will obviously happen is that 5000 people will list a similar item, then some of them will buy adwords ads to promote their listings. Most of those who do this will end up losing money because the adwords ads will cost more than they end up making on the product, but in the meantime Google will have made a bunch of cash.
Then, a future version, after they get critical mass, will add user ratings, etc. and they'll end up being a major eBay competition. Then they'll probably offer a payment service and other ways to monetize the whole thing.
They may also fork it (metaphorically speaking) and end up providing a categorized non-volatile or semi-volatile database for other item types (for example, controlling the volatility based on item type, number of accesses and user rating, etc.).
But the big push here has to be to make money by evolving into an eBay killer.
The likely candidate is a device like this one, which you carry in your pocket.
It doesn't interface to a computer except by you pressing the button, looking at the number and then typing it into the login screen.
My bank, HSBC, already uses them. I have a red and grey one sitting here on my desk. It's annoying to have to carry it around, but it's not huge, so the main annoyance would be losing it.
By the way, I'm not the only person who thinks these devices are the way it will go. Vasco stock went up 9.36% today.
Your pet theory is a prescription for disaster. You are assuming that:
- The spec, written in the absence of consultation with the developers, will be for something that is possible to implement. - Whomever writes the spec really knows what people will want to use. - No incremental UI testing and feature testing is required. - Users know if they'll like something before they use it.
In my experience, such an approach is taken by know-nothing marketing managers. What ends up happening is that the product never gets finished, because it wasn't do-able in the first place.
A more reasonable approach is to have a roadmap, then build the first iteration, do user testing, refine it, build the second iteration, etc.
Developers should be involved from the start so they can explain what's easy and what's hard to implement.
That way, something is available for testing and feedback quickly, and you don't run into the problem of minor features or wacky interface elements which are extremely difficult to implement taking up 80% of the development time.
With the latest Swedish study showing that the risk of developing brain tumors from cell phone usage appears to be highly correlated with the typical power output, it becomes important to use a service with good reception.
Generally, the less bars of reception you see, the more power your phone is putting out and hence the more is getting beamed into your brain.
There have also been claims made that CDMA, because it uses asynchronous bursts is less damaging than GSM which uses synchronous bursts of power.
Two good reasons to use Verizon which is CDMA with the best coverage.
"lock" in the context of GSM phones means "prevent from using on another carrier's network".
An "unlocked" phone will take a SIM card from any GSM carrier and will work on that carrier's network. a "locked" phone will only work with SIM cards from the carrier who provided the phone.
This is different from the security code you're referring to on the Verizon phones.
Using Windows NT servers is a symptom of lack of technical knowledge in a company.
Windows servers tend to be unreliable security risks, so you're getting yourself into a double headache by supporting them: not only do you have to deal with the servers, but you also have to deal with the corporate mentality which approved them in the first place.
So my approach: just say "NO!" and don't work for companies where you're expected to support Windows servers.
Then you don't need cross-platform knowledge and you don't get the headaches.
If a store started spraying it into the air and women started going into labor and having premature babies, the lawsuits and legal settlements would be astronomical.
Google collects limited non-personally identifying information your browser makes available whenever you visit a website. This log information includes your Internet Protocol address, browser type, browser language, the date and time of your query and one or more cookies that may uniquely identify your browser.
The problem is that this information, when correlated with information from web sites you're using such as user names, passwords, etc. (all of which would be routed through their proxy and caches except for https information which goes through the proxy but not the caches), can tell them, or anyone else who has access, exactly who you are, where you surf and what you do.
Their privacy policies completely fail to address this issue.
With Aspects you're doing dynamic wildcard modifications of code based on procedure names!
If that wasn't horrifying enough, it also circumvents the compiler (or interpreter)'s error checking.
This is even scarier and less controllable than old COBOL self-modifying code feature (the much reviled ALTER X TO PROCEED TO Y... statement), long since removed from the language.
What Bricolage basically does is to let organizations create a document publishing workflow with various privilege domains.
What this means is that you can sub-divide the work, and let graphic artists create the page templates, then let writers put information into the pages and submit them for publishing, then let editors review the pages and put them live.
Each user can be set up so they have control over given functions for given sites or sub-sites, and there can be multiple levels of workflow/approval for each function.
This is perfect for a magazine, where you want authors to be able to submit stories and editors to be able to review them without requiring either to know HTML or anyone else to later have to put the content into a template. That process is all automatic.
It also is useful for any organization which needs to do similar activities ie: let a department manage their own sub-site, which will be formatted exactly to corporate standards without having to know HTML and with or without oversight and approval.
You just know that if Microsoft had a "Prepare This Computer for Resale" command, it would require a $99.95 "Registration and Authorization Fee" to register the Windows installation for the new user.
If you didn't pay then... oops! Your Windows installation just got erased along with everything else!
I have a general-interest site (no particular geeky interest), so one would think my stats would be more typical, but I see no Firefox at all, unless Firefox identifies as Netscape 5?:
ie6: 84% ns5: 7% ie5: 5% safari/125.12: 1%
The remaining 2% Netscape 4.0 Yahoo! Slurp Netscape 3.0 Microsoft Internet Explorer 4.0 Googlebot/2.1 Safari/125.9
As far as entertainment is concerned, the maximum video resolution DVD could provide, 720x480,
was shortly overcame by the progress pace and new technical features of new TVs, multimedia projectors or other image display devices.
Slashdot Mirror
My Motorola Nextel i1000Plus flip phone, released in 1999, has two soft buttons on the front, as displayed (using a later version as an example) in this image.
If a call comes in, the left button becomes an "ignore" button. Press it and the call goes straight to voicemail. At the same time, the right button becomes a "speakerphone" button, allowing you to answer the call and put it on speakerphone at the same time.
What?
You don't edit on a light table. You just look.
A $500 program isn't needed for just looking.
I'm amazed they're releasing 1.5 already.
I've been using RC3 for a few days and it has problems with many sites. Flash doesn't work, some AJAX sites don't work. Some images don't display.
It does seem better in terms of memory usage and displays pages it can display (particularly those with lots of Form elements) much faster.
But these lingering bugs will be enough to turn off many users who decide to give it a try.
Google has the example of recipes in their easy documentation, but google base doesn't really seem suited to this or any non-volatile use. All the data expires after 30 days. It looks as if you can restore it, but that isn't completely clear from the UI.
If I were creating an online recipe database I surely wouldn't want it to expire every 30 days nor would I want to have to remember to go restore it every 30 days.
No, it seems to me that this is what people in the financial community were saying it was -- an eBay killer in its first stages. It lets people list products and services for sale, for free, and encourages the purchase of adwords ads to promote the items.
What will obviously happen is that 5000 people will list a similar item, then some of them will buy adwords ads to promote their listings. Most of those who do this will end up losing money because the adwords ads will cost more than they end up making on the product, but in the meantime Google will have made a bunch of cash.
Then, a future version, after they get critical mass, will add user ratings, etc. and they'll end up being a major eBay competition. Then they'll probably offer a payment service and other ways to monetize the whole thing.
They may also fork it (metaphorically speaking) and end up providing a categorized non-volatile or semi-volatile database for other item types (for example, controlling the volatility based on item type, number of accesses and user rating, etc.).
But the big push here has to be to make money by evolving into an eBay killer.
The likely candidate is a device like this one, which you carry in your pocket.
It doesn't interface to a computer except by you pressing the button, looking at the number and then typing it into the login screen.
My bank, HSBC, already uses them. I have a red and grey one sitting here on my desk. It's annoying to have to carry it around, but it's not huge, so the main annoyance would be losing it.
By the way, I'm not the only person who thinks these devices are the way it will go. Vasco stock went up 9.36% today.
This just follows Google's trend of producing services that track everything you do.
They don't allow access to their free WiFi without a VPN because the VPN allows them to monitor everything you do and learn more about you.
They can then put together your browsing, your searches and the topics of your Gmail to get a great picture of you.
Not evil, huh?
Somehow I'm not buying that.
Your pet theory is a prescription for disaster. You are assuming that:
- The spec, written in the absence of consultation with the developers, will be for something that is possible to implement.
- Whomever writes the spec really knows what people will want to use.
- No incremental UI testing and feature testing is required.
- Users know if they'll like something before they use it.
In my experience, such an approach is taken by know-nothing marketing managers. What ends up happening is that the product never gets finished, because it wasn't do-able in the first place.
A more reasonable approach is to have a roadmap, then build the first iteration, do user testing, refine it, build the second iteration, etc.
Developers should be involved from the start so they can explain what's easy and what's hard to implement.
That way, something is available for testing and feedback quickly, and you don't run into the problem of minor features or wacky interface elements which are extremely difficult to implement taking up 80% of the development time.
They're just showing off.
I want the floating car.
The new version from the Special Edition that really floats.
With the latest Swedish study showing that the risk of developing brain tumors from cell phone usage appears to be highly correlated with the typical power output, it becomes important to use a service with good reception.
Generally, the less bars of reception you see, the more power your phone is putting out and hence the more is getting beamed into your brain.
There have also been claims made that CDMA, because it uses asynchronous bursts is less damaging than GSM which uses synchronous bursts of power.
Two good reasons to use Verizon which is CDMA with the best coverage.
"lock" in the context of GSM phones means "prevent from using on another carrier's network".
An "unlocked" phone will take a SIM card from any GSM carrier and will work on that carrier's network. a "locked" phone will only work with SIM cards from the carrier who provided the phone.
This is different from the security code you're referring to on the Verizon phones.
Just say NO!
Using Windows NT servers is a symptom of lack of technical knowledge in a company.
Windows servers tend to be unreliable security risks, so you're getting yourself into a double headache by supporting them: not only do you have to deal with the servers, but you also have to deal with the corporate mentality which approved them in the first place.
So my approach: just say "NO!" and don't work for companies where you're expected to support Windows servers.
Then you don't need cross-platform knowledge and you don't get the headaches.
The link in the article just goes to the press release.
The actual book (full content for both screen and printer resolutions) is here
I wonder if the random use of oxytocin will be made impossible through insurance considerations.
It's used to induce labor and terminate pregnancy (see the prescribing information).
If a store started spraying it into the air and women started going into labor and having premature babies, the lawsuits and legal settlements would be astronomical.
They say:
The problem is that this information, when correlated with information from web sites you're using such as user names, passwords, etc. (all of which would be routed through their proxy and caches except for https information which goes through the proxy but not the caches), can tell them, or anyone else who has access, exactly who you are, where you surf and what you do.Their privacy policies completely fail to address this issue.
Everything Google does lately is designed to
monitor your surfing habits and email^h^h^h^h^h^h^h^h^h^h^h^h^h^h^h^h^h^h^h
make your life easier!
Perhaps you're thinking of tachyons , which (if they exist) go faster than the speed of light.
It's actually worse than goto.
... statement),
With goto you're branching to a specific label.
With Aspects you're doing dynamic wildcard modifications of code based on procedure names!
If that wasn't horrifying enough, it also circumvents the compiler (or interpreter)'s error checking.
This is even scarier and less controllable than old COBOL self-modifying code feature
(the much reviled ALTER X TO PROCEED TO Y
long since removed from the language.
What Bricolage basically does is to let organizations create a document publishing workflow with various privilege domains.
What this means is that you can sub-divide the work, and let graphic artists create the page templates, then let writers put information into the pages and submit them for publishing, then let editors review the pages and put them live.
Each user can be set up so they have control over given functions for given sites or sub-sites, and there can be multiple levels of workflow/approval for each function.
This is perfect for a magazine, where you want authors to be able to submit stories and editors to be able to review them without requiring either to know HTML or anyone else to later have to put the content into a template. That process is all automatic.
It also is useful for any organization which needs to do similar activities ie: let a department manage their own sub-site, which will be formatted exactly to corporate standards without having to know HTML and with or without oversight and approval.
You just know that if Microsoft had a "Prepare This Computer for Resale" command, it would require a $99 .95 "Registration and Authorization Fee" to register the Windows installation for the new user.
If you didn't pay then... oops! Your Windows installation just got erased along with everything else!
Sorry, I should have researched it first. The useragent string is:
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.7.6) Gecko/20050223 Firefox/1.0.1 StumbleUpon/1.9992
So the 7% in my stats includes the Firefox users....
If it's your site, you are one rich bastard!
I have a general-interest site (no particular geeky interest), so one would think my stats would be more typical, but I see no Firefox at all, unless Firefox identifies as Netscape 5?:
ie6: 84%
ns5: 7%
ie5: 5%
safari/125.12: 1%
The remaining 2%
Netscape 4.0
Yahoo! Slurp
Netscape 3.0
Microsoft Internet Explorer 4.0
Googlebot/2.1
Safari/125.9
So where's Firefox???
For example, the only description of google-goopy is No docs, no forum, no nothing but the files.
Not much effort going into this on Google's part so far.