the battery would have to have large capacity and be able to deliver it in 10 minutes or less
Not really.
The battery would be plugged in and stay in the car. Maybe even automatically switch it to an energy conservation mode to get it to the nearest charging station. For longer (remote area) rescues, you could probably even hire/use a battery or generator trailer.
Making things electric allows for a lot of smarts to be included.
You completely fail to understand what these boxes do.
"Two months ago, Skype replaces user-hosted P2P supernodes with Linux grsec boxes hosted by Microsoft, but for what?
I found some brilliant and valuable comment about this:
I think wiretapping is one of the big reasons for the rearchitecture. Skype officially claimed they could not comply with wiretapping requests because of the P2P network as late as 2008 (http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-9963028-38.html), and Microsoft was already working on wiretapping VoIP in 2009 (http://blog.tmcnet.com/blog/tom-keating/microsoft-patents-voip-and-skype-wiretapping.asp)."
I'm sure vendors will very quickly develop a "gas canister" sized portable battery pack for emergencies. It'll be even more convenient than the current petrol versions.
Two months ago, Skype replaces user-hosted P2P supernodes with Linux grsec boxes hosted by Microsoft, but for what?
I think wiretapping is one of the big reasons for the rearchitecture. Skype officially claimed they could not comply with wiretapping requests because of the P2P network as late as 2008 (http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-9963028-38.html), and Microsoft was already working on wiretapping VoIP in 2009 (http://blog.tmcnet.com/blog/tom-keating/microsoft-patents-voip-and-skype-wiretapping.asp).
We wanted our VOIP services to be free of CALEA backdoors
Make sure you don't use Skype.
Microsoft has replaced user-hosted P2P supernodes with Linux grsec boxes hosted by Microsoft. There's been a lot of speculation about reasons. This looks plausible.
I think wiretapping is one of the big reasons for the rearchitecture. Skype officially claimed they could not comply with wiretapping requests because of the P2P network as late as 2008 (http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-9963028-38.html), and Microsoft was already working on wiretapping VoIP in 2009 (http://blog.tmcnet.com/blog/tom-keating/microsoft-patents-voip-and-skype-wiretapping.asp).
Words uttered in 2001. Words which more than anything exhibit Ballmer's (mis)understanding of how GPL and other open source licenses work
Words uttered in 2007:
Microsoft claims that free software like Linux, which runs a big chunk of corporate America, violates 235 of its patents. It wants royalties from distributors and users.
Microsoft has brought a lawsuit against car navigation system manufacturer TomTom. The products in question incorporate Linux, and at least one of the seven patents involved concerns a Linux kernel implementation rather than TomTom's own software. Is this Microsoft's first direct salvo against Linux?
Is this a serious suit, or an effort to stir up fear, uncertainty, and doubt about Linux at a critical time, when government and industry is taking up Open Source in a big way?
Oddly enough, they shouldn't care because hell has frozen over and Microsoft is using Linux.
They should care because Microsoft is taking steps to centralise what was a peer-to-peer telephony system. By adding supernodes that they control, they are positioning Skype to transition to a system where everybody's data goes through Microsoft servers rather than direct person to person.
They're happy to have us discussing Linux because the privacy implications are what they don't want us talking about.
In other words, they got a binding commitment out of them not to use standards essential patents on non FRAND terms
FRAND as in $15/handset? That's as much as Microsoft charges manufacturers for it's whole OS! Anyway, Microsoft has no need to wield the patents themselves. They'll use a third party, most likely Nokia. Pretty much exactly as they tried to do with the SGI patents.
No, the real question is why do you repetitively make anti MS troll comments here on Slashdot?
Why would that be the real question? I'm nobody important.
Finally this is obviously not an attempt to black mail these companies.
Yes it is.
It's also the reason the MS shills are so desperately trying to ridicule anyone who suggests Apple, Microsoft Nokia and Oracle are in bed together.
"Before he died, Steve Jobs said 'I'm going to destroy Android'."
"The fact that both Microsoft and Apple desire to destroy the Android market; and the other facts listed above; lead one believe that Microsoft and Apple truly are partners and, as such, could be looked upon, for purposes of anti-trust challenges, as a single monopolistic entity,"
“Netscape’s strategy is to make Windows and the Apple Macintosh OS all but irrelevant by building the browser into a full-featured OS with information browsing. Over time Netscape will add memory management, file systems, security, scheduling, graphics and everything else in Windows that applications require. Netscape hopes that its browser will become a de facto platform for software development, ultimately replacing Windows as the mainstream set of software standards.”
His response (amongst others Microsoft was prosecuted for) was to collude with Apple to ensure Internet Explorer was the default browser on Macs.
no need to be rude, especially when you're on such shaky ground yourself.
This is from 2010:
"On Thursday, June 30th, Microsoft, in collusion with Apple, Nokia and RIM bought Nortel's 6000 patents spanning Mobile and Wireless technologies for $4.5 Billion, beating Google, who began the bid in April with $900 million. While in the smelling distance of the booty, they started threatening every handset manufacturer in sight for licensing Android patents, asking for as much as $15 per phone, while simultaneously offering indemnity from patent lawsuits for Windows Mobile based phones."
The DoJ ok'd the sale in questionable circumstanes, despite clear doubts about the process. No doubt Microsoft learned from its earlier experiences:
"Dear Ms. Varney:
The American Antitrust Institute urges the Department (a) to commence an in-depth investigation
of the proposed purchase of Nortel’s portfolio of more than 6,000 patents and patent applications,
many of which may be vital to the future of mobile communications and computing devices, to
Rockstar Bidco LP, a consortium consisting of Apple, Microsoft, Research in Motion, EMC, Sony
and Ericsson...
We are respectfully troubled by the Department’s Early
Termination of the HSR waiting period on this transaction two weeks ago, in sharp contrast to the
Department’s announcement this past April of its intervention into the proposed purchase of
Novell’s portfolio of approximately 882 patents and patent applications, many relating to mobile
communications and computing devices, to CPTN Holding LLC, a consortium consisting of Apple,
Microsoft, EMC and Oracle,
So there is no doubt at all that Microsoft, Apple and Nokia are colluding to kill Android. The only real question is what it cost them to get the US DoJ to allow it.
I'll second that. I scored a 9U road case from a commissioning contract several years ago. It's done sterling duty in a couple of houses and works very well, with built in cable management. It's built like a brick dunny and looks like it'll last forever.
Wow, no wonder it got the 2nd Place of the Best Tablet Reward on CES
Ainol is a new name to most US consumers, but they are well known in China. I am not very surprised to see they won the best tablet reward 2nd place on CES this year, but I am quite amazed when I finally got a hold of NOVO 7 Aurora.
It's so cool, so nice, just like an Apple product. Actually the shinning white case mimics the Apple style as well. If they print an Apple logo on the back, you will believe it's an Apple 7" iPad.
Please - the only reason Microsoft is backing away from it now is because they were caught supporting it.
They haven't backed away from it. It's only one of their reputation managers in MSM adding some positive spin.
To quote a Reddit poster:
Ugh, this is the same pattern as SOPA. Microsoft supported SOPA (which is the house version of the PROTECT IP act, which they still support) for a month until it started to get bad press. Then they changed their position to "it needs more work". They never said they opposed it.
The person who interpreted that as "opposition" was... Declan McCullagh of CNet! The very same guy who is now trying to give the impression that Microsoft no longer supports CISPA.
If you think that's the only implication, then I think you're a bit naiive.
If you're concerned about your IP, you shouldn't use cloud storage.
Microsoft's SkyDrive terms aren't a lot different
* You understand that Microsoft may need, and you hereby grant Microsoft the right, to use, modify, adapt, reproduce, distribute, and display content posted on the service solely to the extent necessary to provide the service.*
The real issue is wether mobile device makers will be able to use the fact that they live in their customers pockets to give themselves an upper hand over search engines and Big Data.
Where do the mobile device makers go to get their information?
Slashdot Mirror
I'd love to hear what business model can possibly compete with stealing.
A predatory monopoly. http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/default.aspx
Google has not really done any innovation after their search engine and advertising platform.
I (and my business) found this incredibly useful during recent earthquakes and floods http://www.google.org/crisisresponse/. Who did they buy it from?
Google Maps was crushingly superior to all of its major web-based competitors.
Likewise Street View changed the way most of us use maps.
I really don't see much difference.
What about between Google search and Bing. Any copying happened there?
the battery would have to have large capacity and be able to deliver it in 10 minutes or less
Not really.
The battery would be plugged in and stay in the car. Maybe even automatically switch it to an energy conservation mode to get it to the nearest charging station. For longer (remote area) rescues, you could probably even hire/use a battery or generator trailer.
Making things electric allows for a lot of smarts to be included.
You completely fail to understand what these boxes do.
"Two months ago, Skype replaces user-hosted P2P supernodes with Linux grsec boxes hosted by Microsoft, but for what?
I found some brilliant and valuable comment about this:
I think wiretapping is one of the big reasons for the rearchitecture. Skype officially claimed they could not comply with wiretapping requests because of the P2P network as late as 2008 (http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-9963028-38.html), and Microsoft was already working on wiretapping VoIP in 2009 (http://blog.tmcnet.com/blog/tom-keating/microsoft-patents-voip-and-skype-wiretapping.asp)."
http://skype-open-source.blogspot.com.au/2012/05/microsoft-wiretapping-on-skype-now.html
I'm sure vendors will very quickly develop a "gas canister" sized portable battery pack for emergencies. It'll be even more convenient than the current petrol versions.
You eventually have to trust someone.
Maybe, but never a Microsoft-controlled Skype.
Two months ago, Skype replaces user-hosted P2P supernodes with Linux grsec boxes hosted by Microsoft, but for what?
I think wiretapping is one of the big reasons for the rearchitecture. Skype officially claimed they could not comply with wiretapping requests because of the P2P network as late as 2008 (http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-9963028-38.html), and Microsoft was already working on wiretapping VoIP in 2009 (http://blog.tmcnet.com/blog/tom-keating/microsoft-patents-voip-and-skype-wiretapping.asp).
We wanted our VOIP services to be free of CALEA backdoors
Make sure you don't use Skype.
Microsoft has replaced user-hosted P2P supernodes with Linux grsec boxes hosted by Microsoft. There's been a lot of speculation about reasons. This looks plausible.
I think wiretapping is one of the big reasons for the rearchitecture. Skype officially claimed they could not comply with wiretapping requests because of the P2P network as late as 2008 (http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-9963028-38.html), and Microsoft was already working on wiretapping VoIP in 2009 (http://blog.tmcnet.com/blog/tom-keating/microsoft-patents-voip-and-skype-wiretapping.asp).
http://skype-open-source.blogspot.com.au/2012/05/microsoft-wiretapping-on-skype-now.html
Words uttered in 2001. Words which more than anything exhibit Ballmer's (mis)understanding of how GPL and other open source licenses work
Words uttered in 2007:
Microsoft claims that free software like Linux, which runs a big chunk of corporate America, violates 235 of its patents. It wants royalties from distributors and users.
http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune_archive/2007/05/28/100033867/
Words uttered in 2009:
Microsoft has brought a lawsuit against car navigation system manufacturer TomTom. The products in question incorporate Linux, and at least one of the seven patents involved concerns a Linux kernel implementation rather than TomTom's own software. Is this Microsoft's first direct salvo against Linux?
Is this a serious suit, or an effort to stir up fear, uncertainty, and doubt about Linux at a critical time, when government and industry is taking up Open Source in a big way?
http://www.datamation.com/osrc/article.php/3807801/Bruce-Perens-Analyzing-Microsofts-Linux-Lawsuit.htm
Microsoft are just getting media sly. They haven't really changed otherwise.
"Currently" being the operative word.
So what? Why should the average person care?
Oddly enough, they shouldn't care because hell has frozen over and Microsoft is using Linux.
They should care because Microsoft is taking steps to centralise what was a peer-to-peer telephony system. By adding supernodes that they control, they are positioning Skype to transition to a system where everybody's data goes through Microsoft servers rather than direct person to person.
They're happy to have us discussing Linux because the privacy implications are what they don't want us talking about.
In other words, they got a binding commitment out of them not to use standards essential patents on non FRAND terms
FRAND as in $15/handset? That's as much as Microsoft charges manufacturers for it's whole OS! Anyway, Microsoft has no need to wield the patents themselves. They'll use a third party, most likely Nokia. Pretty much exactly as they tried to do with the SGI patents.
No, the real question is why do you repetitively make anti MS troll comments here on Slashdot?
Why would that be the real question? I'm nobody important.
Yes but we have Google shills like you to defend against the MS shills though!
Nice smear, but I'm more of a freetard than a shill.
Nonsense, Microsoft and Apple together have nothing close to a monopoly in the mobile OS market.
And they didn't have a monopoly on the web browser market either. That didn't stop them colluding to create the IE6 decade.
Finally this is obviously not an attempt to black mail these companies.
Yes it is.
It's also the reason the MS shills are so desperately trying to ridicule anyone who suggests Apple, Microsoft Nokia and Oracle are in bed together.
"Before he died, Steve Jobs said 'I'm going to destroy Android'."
"The fact that both Microsoft and Apple desire to destroy the Android market; and the other facts listed above; lead one believe that Microsoft and Apple truly are partners and, as such, could be looked upon, for purposes of anti-trust challenges, as a single monopolistic entity,"
http://voices.yahoo.com/is-microsoft-trying-kill-android-software-11018092.html for those of us who've been around for a while, this might seem familiar.
In the mid '90s, Bill gates stated:
“Netscape’s strategy is to make Windows and the Apple Macintosh OS all but irrelevant by building the browser into a full-featured OS with information browsing. Over time Netscape will add memory management, file systems, security, scheduling, graphics and everything else in Windows that applications require. Netscape hopes that its browser will become a de facto platform for software development, ultimately replacing Windows as the mainstream set of software standards.”
His response (amongst others Microsoft was prosecuted for) was to collude with Apple to ensure Internet Explorer was the default browser on Macs.
Hello clueless.
no need to be rude, especially when you're on such shaky ground yourself.
This is from 2010:
"On Thursday, June 30th, Microsoft, in collusion with Apple, Nokia and RIM bought Nortel's 6000 patents spanning Mobile and Wireless technologies for $4.5 Billion, beating Google, who began the bid in April with $900 million. While in the smelling distance of the booty, they started threatening every handset manufacturer in sight for licensing Android patents, asking for as much as $15 per phone, while simultaneously offering indemnity from patent lawsuits for Windows Mobile based phones."
The DoJ ok'd the sale in questionable circumstanes, despite clear doubts about the process. No doubt Microsoft learned from its earlier experiences:
"Dear Ms. Varney:
The American Antitrust Institute urges the Department (a) to commence an in-depth investigation of the proposed purchase of Nortel’s portfolio of more than 6,000 patents and patent applications, many of which may be vital to the future of mobile communications and computing devices, to Rockstar Bidco LP, a consortium consisting of Apple, Microsoft, Research in Motion, EMC, Sony and Ericsson...
We are respectfully troubled by the Department’s Early Termination of the HSR waiting period on this transaction two weeks ago, in sharp contrast to the Department’s announcement this past April of its intervention into the proposed purchase of Novell’s portfolio of approximately 882 patents and patent applications, many relating to mobile communications and computing devices, to CPTN Holding LLC, a consortium consisting of Apple, Microsoft, EMC and Oracle,
http://www.antitrustinstitute.org/sites/default/files/Nortel%20letter%20to%20DOJ.7.6.11.pdf
So there is no doubt at all that Microsoft, Apple and Nokia are colluding to kill Android. The only real question is what it cost them to get the US DoJ to allow it.
At least that way, you're never in doubt about the goal of its creators.
I'll second that. I scored a 9U road case from a commissioning contract several years ago. It's done sterling duty in a couple of houses and works very well, with built in cable management. It's built like a brick dunny and looks like it'll last forever.
"Something made from leftover stuff scraped up off the factory floor from some company that nobody but them has heard of."
Care to take your head out of the sand?
Search: "Ainol Novo 7" About 44,000,000 results (0.47 seconds)
https://www.google.com/search?q=%22ainol+novo+7%22
Customer review:
Wow, no wonder it got the 2nd Place of the Best Tablet Reward on CES
Ainol is a new name to most US consumers, but they are well known in China. I am not very surprised to see they won the best tablet reward 2nd place on CES this year, but I am quite amazed when I finally got a hold of NOVO 7 Aurora.
It's so cool, so nice, just like an Apple product. Actually the shinning white case mimics the Apple style as well. If they print an Apple logo on the back, you will believe it's an Apple 7" iPad.
Latest Ainol Novo 7 Aurora android 4.0 tablet pc 7" IPS Capacitive screen Camera 1GB DDR3 8GB HDMI
http://www.aliexpress.com/product-gs/525833992-Latest-Ainol-novo-7-Aurora-android-4-0-tablet-pc-7-IPS-Capacitive-screen-Camera-1GB-wholesalers.html
Please - the only reason Microsoft is backing away from it now is because they were caught supporting it.
They haven't backed away from it. It's only one of their reputation managers in MSM adding some positive spin.
To quote a Reddit poster:
Ugh, this is the same pattern as SOPA. Microsoft supported SOPA (which is the house version of the PROTECT IP act, which they still support) for a month until it started to get bad press. Then they changed their position to "it needs more work". They never said they opposed it.
The person who interpreted that as "opposition" was... Declan McCullagh of CNet! The very same guy who is now trying to give the impression that Microsoft no longer supports CISPA.
http://www.reddit.com/r/technology/comments/swdtn/microsoft_backs_away_from_cispa_support_citing/c4hl9xe
That would be the "thing" that doesn't have fucking ads built into it.
Actually, their main competition DOES have ads built in.
http://www.wikihow.com/Remove-Crapware-Bloatware-from-Your-Windows-Computer
Does this mean you also can't store on your G-drive anything you don't have permission to reproduce.
No, it doesn't mean that.
TFA is a click-bait beat up. There's a FAQ here http://news.cnet.com/8301-1023_3-57420402-93/the-google-drive-faq/
If you think that's the only implication, then I think you're a bit naiive.
If you're concerned about your IP, you shouldn't use cloud storage.
Microsoft's SkyDrive terms aren't a lot different
* You understand that Microsoft may need, and you hereby grant Microsoft the right, to use, modify, adapt, reproduce, distribute, and display content posted on the service solely to the extent necessary to provide the service.*
The real issue is wether mobile device makers will be able to use the fact that they live in their customers pockets to give themselves an upper hand over search engines and Big Data.
Where do the mobile device makers go to get their information?