We initially began writing this review in it [The Polaris Office documents app] to get a feel for the keyboard -- until the tablet froze up and we lost a couple hundred words.
There may be some problems with the initial choice of software, but that's not to say you can't do anything productive.
One would probably not set out to write the next great Novel on such a device, but that is not the only definition of "productive". You can read email, the web, and books, create and edit spread sheets, documents and photos. You can collaborate over the internet with video conferencing.
And you can choose to do this without the keyboard while sitting on the couch pounding down a beer.
If productive to you means editing your autocad drawings and compiling kernels, then clearly this is not the device for you.
The 16-gigabyte version will cost $399; the 32GB version runs $499. The keyboard dock is another $149. So for $550 -- less than the cost of a 32GB Wifi-only Motorola Xoom, you can have a 16GB Android tablet/laptop.
I'm guessing this thing will spend most of its life undocked, once you read your email and start surfing the net. Tablets are couch computers for the most part. How often will want to dredge up the keyboard, balance it on their lap while using it anywhere other than a desk or table?
For the amount of typing one does on a tablet, it might be that some of the predictive on-screen keyboards would be faster for most typing.
My key signed in person at the East Mudville branch of the Bank Of Kentucky is more believable than your typical PGP signature, signed by gawd knows who.
Most any phone that does wifi works fine with your home router which is in infrastructure mode.
Most Android phones that can serve as a wifi router work in infrastructure mode. (The term master mode is technically incorrect. The proper designation is infrastructure mode). They appear to any nearby wifi devices as a normal router, and laptops, netbooks, wifi tablets and even other cellphones connect to them just fine.
I just reach for my Nexus One, tap wifi tethering, and any nearby device sees another access point with WPA2 security.
It does use battery faster, but I've gotten several hours out of it.
What kind of moron hasn't even read about this project to know that it is NOT being run by the Government but rather by Private companies OF YOUR CHOICE?
How come you feel qualified to weigh in with an opinion and start calling other people morons when you haven't even checked your facts?
No, the only difference is because it is Government encouraged, which means banks will get on board. All the prior ones were piecemean approaches which never gained significant traction because they adhered to no standards but their own.
From your own links: (nist.gov) 3. Will the government run the Identity Ecosystem? No. The Identity Ecosystem will be created and run primarily by the private sector.
Clearly you know nothing about what you are talking about, and haven't been paying attention to Iraq or Afghanistan. There weren't any A-10s employed in taking out Iraq's infrastructure or attacking Taliban hideouts. They are all FA-18s and large numbers of F16s and Strike Eagles (F15s).
The A-10 a single purpose aircraft. Its a tank killer and that is ALL it is ever used for. It has no other purpose.
You are comparing an A-10 with 16,000 pounds of payload that can reach mach.56 with a range of 800 miles with an F16 that can carry 17,000 pounds at mach 2, for a range of 2600 miles and defend itself in the process.
The A10 is designed strictly as a tank killer. Its Slow.
Its not going to do well when it has to dash in several hundred miles and take out a bridge, a runway, or large buildings. And if anything else shows up to defend said bridge or building, it can't drop its payload and fight air-to-air.
Seriously, are you nuts? The A10 is a single purpose aircraft that even the Airforce wants to get rid of.
Not a good idea. This is essentially what detonation (pinging) is. You need a specific spot of origin, then a progressive burn across the combustion chamber. This yields a slow gentle pressure wave (relatively speaking) on the power stroke, rather than a massive, parts-breaking kick.
Hmmmm, maybe you could look at Blair1Q's post and TFA and explain to both of them that what they invented won't work.
Lasers also improve efficiency. Conventional spark plugs sit on top of the cylinder and only ignite the air-fuel mixture close to them. The relatively cold metal of nearby electrodes and cylinder walls absorbs heat from the explosion, quenching the flame front just as it starts to expand.
Lasers, Taira explains, can focus their beams directly into the center of the mixture. Without quenching, the flame front expands more symmetrically and up to three times faster than those produced by spark plugs
I'd like to see the data on improved fuel consumption.
I don't see why laser ignited fuel-air mixture will be all that much cleaner than a spark ignited mixture. The only possible source of improvement would be that a laser could ignite fuel over its entire path, rather than at a single point, making for a more even combustion pattern.
Belgium, Denmark, the Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, Israel, India, and 22 other countries seem to disagree with you. Almost all the NATO airforces have chose to proceed with the Ground Attack updates to their fleet rather than invest in F/A-18 or Tornadoes.
F-16C/D had a unit cost of US$18.8 million. Its replacement, the F35 is $150mil. I'd say that was pretty cost effective, especially for smaller countries.
and isn't that one of the entire points behind Bluetooth anyways?
Its also one of the points behind WIFI.
Almost any Android Smartphone phone can do WIFI tethering these days. And a Wifi Stack can handle WPA2 encryption, where as most bluetooth stacks provide you with no clear idea of how secure the connection is.
It hardly matters which you use, other than wifi if a far more secure interface and much more robust.
You are going to run another radio anyway, why opt for bluetooth over wifi, especially when they are usually built into the same chipset. There is no power saving involved in one over the other.
When I turn on my wifi tethering in my Nexus One, AT&T doesn't know its tethering, and I have a fully encrypted WPA2 hotsopt.
USAF Block 40/42s and 50/52s and NATO's F-16s will have common core avionics and software. With the recent software upgrade, these aircraft will have the capability to deploy support smart weapons with inertial, GPS and laser guidance systems, supporting advanced weapons such as the GBU-31 Joint Direct Attack Munition (JDAM), AGM-154 Joint Stand-Off Weapon (JSOW), CBU-103/104/105 Wind-Corrected Munitions Dispenser (WCMD) and EGBU-27 enhanced laser-guided bombs.
What does it mean that the Novell patent suite will be "subject to GPLv2"? Does that mean that software licensed under GPLv2 will be given a free pass from possible infingement of these patents? What about software licensed under GPL v3?
I speculated above it gives MSFT free use of these patents PRIOR to them becoming subject to the GPL, and therefore releases MSFT from having to follow the terms of the GPL.
Microsoft is essentially getting a slurp of the licenses before the OIN or GPLv2 gets its hands on them. The get all the advantages of OIN membership without giving anything back.
We simply don't need state of the art for those battles, so why waste the money on it.
Bulk up the fleet with a cheaper plane that can do 99% of what our air forces need to do, and then keep a smaller number of F-22's ready for if we really do end up going to war with another superpower.
For the states we have been going up against, the Ancient F16 does just fine. Keep a smaller number of F22s ready to maintain Air Superiority. The F16 is probably the most cost effective attack aircraft ever made. And yes, its been obsolete for 30 years. The saving grace is that everything any potential enemy has in quantity has been obsolete for longer.
Slashdot Mirror
I can remove it any time I want.
Makes calls over both 3g and wifi
Security issues fixed.
So Wrong on all three counts, plus you haven't learned your alphabet.
If you want some real criticisms, you might have noted that Skype for Android is a memory hog, and a bit of
a battery hog as well.
Quote Story:
We initially began writing this review in it [The Polaris Office documents app] to get a feel for the keyboard -- until the tablet froze up and we lost a couple hundred words.
There may be some problems with the initial choice of software, but that's not to say you can't do anything productive.
One would probably not set out to write the next great Novel on such a device, but that is not the only definition of "productive".
You can read email, the web, and books, create and edit spread sheets, documents and photos. You can collaborate over the
internet with video conferencing.
And you can choose to do this without the keyboard while sitting on the couch pounding down a beer.
If productive to you means editing your autocad drawings and compiling kernels, then clearly this is not the device for you.
Spoken like someone who has never owned a touch screen device.
The 16-gigabyte version will cost $399; the 32GB version runs $499. The keyboard dock is another $149. So for $550 -- less than the cost of a 32GB Wifi-only Motorola Xoom, you can have a 16GB Android tablet/laptop.
I'm guessing this thing will spend most of its life undocked, once you read your email and start surfing the net. Tablets are couch computers for the most part.
How often will want to dredge up the keyboard, balance it on their lap while using it anywhere other than a desk or table?
For the amount of typing one does on a tablet, it might be that some of the predictive on-screen keyboards would be faster for most typing.
Exactly. Thanks for emphasizing my point.
My key signed in person at the East Mudville branch of the Bank Of Kentucky is more believable than your typical PGP signature, signed by gawd knows who.
Nope. Not true.
Most any phone that does wifi works fine with your home router which is in infrastructure mode.
Most Android phones that can serve as a wifi router work in infrastructure mode. (The term master mode is technically incorrect. The proper designation is infrastructure mode). They appear to any nearby wifi devices as a normal router, and laptops, netbooks, wifi tablets and even other cellphones connect to them just fine.
I just reach for my Nexus One, tap wifi tethering, and any nearby device sees another access point with WPA2 security.
It does use battery faster, but I've gotten several hours out of it.
and it carries an air-to-ground payload capability that dwarfs the F-16.
No. It doesn't. 16,000 pounds, vs the F16's 17,000 pounds.
What kind of moron hasn't even read about this project to know that it is NOT being run by the Government but rather by Private companies OF YOUR CHOICE?
How come you feel qualified to weigh in with an opinion and start calling other people morons when you haven't even checked your facts?
No, the only difference is because it is Government encouraged, which means banks will get on board. All the prior ones were piecemean approaches which never gained significant traction because they adhered to no standards but their own.
From your own links:
(nist.gov)
3. Will the government run the Identity Ecosystem?
No. The Identity Ecosystem will be created and run primarily by the private sector.
Clearly you know nothing about what you are talking about, and haven't been paying attention to Iraq or Afghanistan.
There weren't any A-10s employed in taking out Iraq's infrastructure or attacking Taliban hideouts. They are all FA-18s and large numbers of F16s and Strike Eagles (F15s).
The A-10 a single purpose aircraft. Its a tank killer and that is ALL it is ever used for. It has no other purpose.
You are comparing an A-10 with 16,000 pounds of payload that can reach mach .56 with a range of 800 miles with
an F16 that can carry 17,000 pounds at mach 2, for a range of 2600 miles and defend itself in the process.
WiFi and bluetooth do not use the same amount of power. That is ridiculous.
Prove it.
Like I said, they re embedded in the same chipset on most smartphones.
Further, they have about the same range, and the same bandwidth.
The A10 is designed strictly as a tank killer. Its Slow.
Its not going to do well when it has to dash in several hundred miles and take out a bridge, a runway, or large buildings. And if anything else shows up to defend said bridge or building, it can't drop its payload and fight air-to-air.
Seriously, are you nuts? The A10 is a single purpose aircraft that even the Airforce wants to get rid of.
Not a good idea. This is essentially what detonation (pinging) is. You need a specific spot of origin, then a progressive burn across the combustion chamber. This yields a slow gentle pressure wave (relatively speaking) on the power stroke, rather than a massive, parts-breaking kick.
Hmmmm, maybe you could look at Blair1Q's post and TFA
and explain to both of them that what they invented won't work.
Lasers also improve efficiency. Conventional spark plugs sit on top of the cylinder and only ignite the air-fuel mixture close to them. The relatively cold metal of nearby electrodes and cylinder walls absorbs heat from the explosion, quenching the flame front just as it starts to expand.
Lasers, Taira explains, can focus their beams directly into the center of the mixture. Without quenching, the flame front expands more symmetrically and up to three times faster than those produced by spark plugs
I'd like to see the data on improved fuel consumption.
I don't see why laser ignited fuel-air mixture will be all that much cleaner than a spark ignited mixture.
The only possible source of improvement would be that a laser could ignite fuel over its entire path, rather than at a single point, making for a more even combustion pattern.
Not cost effective? Says Who?
Belgium, Denmark, the Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, Israel, India, and 22 other countries seem to disagree with you. Almost all the NATO airforces have chose to proceed with the Ground Attack updates to their fleet rather than invest in F/A-18 or Tornadoes.
F-16C/D had a unit cost of US$18.8 million. Its replacement, the F35 is $150mil.
I'd say that was pretty cost effective, especially for smaller countries.
and isn't that one of the entire points behind Bluetooth anyways?
Its also one of the points behind WIFI.
Almost any Android Smartphone phone can do WIFI tethering these days. And a Wifi Stack can handle WPA2 encryption, where as most bluetooth stacks provide you with no clear idea of how secure the connection is.
Most places you go will have WIFI available, and if not, I'm betting you have a smartphone anyway. Tether with that for zero dollars.
It your job pays for the 3G bill, fine. But otherwise thats a lot of money for occasional use.
It hardly matters which you use, other than wifi if a far more secure interface and much more robust.
You are going to run another radio anyway, why opt for bluetooth over wifi, especially when they are usually built into the same chipset. There is no power saving involved in one over the other.
When I turn on my wifi tethering in my Nexus One, AT&T doesn't know its tethering, and I have a fully encrypted WPA2 hotsopt.
Shhhhhh, not so loud.
The Airforce hasn't figured that out and has been using F-16s in ground attack roles for years and years.
http://defense-update.com/features/du-1-04/f-16-upgrades.htm
USAF Block 40/42s and 50/52s and NATO's F-16s will have common core avionics and software. With the recent software upgrade, these aircraft will have the capability to deploy support smart weapons with inertial, GPS and laser guidance systems, supporting advanced weapons such as the GBU-31 Joint Direct Attack Munition (JDAM), AGM-154 Joint Stand-Off Weapon (JSOW), CBU-103/104/105 Wind-Corrected Munitions Dispenser (WCMD) and EGBU-27 enhanced laser-guided bombs.
the weather didn't win or lose the war.
Really? Someone needs to revisit the History books.
Both the Soviet counter-offensive in the Winter 1941 and the siege of Stalingrad in the Winter 1942 were brought to a screeching halt by winter.
What does it mean that the Novell patent suite will be "subject to GPLv2"? Does that mean that software licensed under GPLv2 will be given a free pass from possible infingement of these patents? What about software licensed under GPL v3?
I speculated above it gives MSFT free use of these patents PRIOR to them becoming subject to the GPL, and therefore releases MSFT from having to follow the terms of the GPL.
They will. Read TFA.
Microsoft is essentially getting a slurp of the licenses before the OIN or GPLv2 gets its hands on them. The get all the advantages of OIN membership without giving anything back.
We simply don't need state of the art for those battles, so why waste the money on it.
Bulk up the fleet with a cheaper plane that can do 99% of what our air forces need to do, and then keep a smaller number of F-22's ready for if we really do end up going to war with another superpower.
For the states we have been going up against, the Ancient F16 does just fine.
Keep a smaller number of F22s ready to maintain Air Superiority. The F16 is probably the most cost effective attack aircraft ever made. And yes, its been obsolete for 30 years. The saving grace is that everything any potential enemy has in quantity has been obsolete for longer.
Do you know how long it would take China to manufacture enough landing craft to transfer huge armies 81 miles.
China has manufacturing capabilities that could do this in two months. It would take the world over a month to figure out they were even doing so.
>
Had those men and vehicles been at Stalingrad, the initial strength could have gone from 270,000 to 470,000 men and 500 tanks to 2500 tanks.
The German supply lines would have been just that much more critical and inadequate.
Russia did not defeat the Germans as much as they simply slowed them down enough to let the weather defeat them.