On one hand your have the music and film industry complaining about piracy of their product and being completely ignorant that their business model is out of date.
On the other hand there is the chance of counterfeit components appearing on cars, trains or aircraft that produce a serious hazard in a situation where potentially lives are at risk.
Mind you we have a third problem in that we have fake politicians that don't really know anything but what their advisors tell them.
I've been to America several times and there are a few things that prevent this happening. First of all the Fiesta is far too small for your average American consumeer. These cars sell massively here in Ireland but they just won't work in America because you'll hear all of the horror stories about how they're not safe because they're small. Realistically the average weight and size of your average American citizen is a lot more too.
The current Ford Fiesta is exactly the same size as the mkI Ford Focus, which if I remember correctly was a big sales success for Ford in the USA. In fact the likelihood is that due to improved packaging, the chance is that the interior could be even bigger and have better crash protection.
True some Americans like big cars, but if the price of oil goes Northwards again (which appears likely, without even considering the impact of the AGW lobby), surely they will need to consider the fact that fuel consumption may be a factor in their next purchase.
I'll agree that the Ka is probably a bit too small and radical for the time being.
Since they are using jailbroken iPhones, it is quite possible that they are not paying Apple for the rights to use Apple's proprietary connector.
I'll think you will find that the connector is patented, so no doubt unless the manufacturer intend to licence the connector (which means the product will have to work with non-jailbroken iphones), they do not have much chance on challenging the patent, since they are already breaking one. It also makes me think that if the idea was so great then why didn't icontrolpad patent the idea themselves (after all, there were other touch screen based systems that could of done with something similar even before Apple launched the iPhone)
To be honest though, with what is being published on the icontrolpad website, surely it would be cheaper to build their own game console as they appear to be demonstrating games that were written for other handheld games platforms.
Sorry, but I think your comments are a bit out of date.
1. Most cars these days use CANBUS as the main communication system. As a result the interconnections between each of the main Electronic Control Units within the car are transmitted via a differential signal, that is designed to be less susceptible to EM interference. Anyway, many digital circuit (even in cars and aircraft) operate at less than 5V these days due to the fact that modern microprocessors need lower voltages in order to operate faster. Ensuring that the electronic control unit is correctly installed is more of a problem; while the production line workers are highly trained to install the units properly in the car, the weakness is that after the car warranty has ended, virtually anybody can replace the electronic control unit.
2. Static electricity is more of a problem during construction of a unit rather than the operation. The problem is that static electricity will normally induce a latent failure that may take time to propagate itself. In order to avoid this, car electronic manufacturers take extreme caution in production cells to ensure that exposure to static electricity is kept to an absolute minimum (ground straps, conductive plans, restrictive access to production facilities etc...). The finished unit will almost certainly have lightening protection on external connectors that will clamp static electricity, so special installation facilities are not needed in the factory/garage.
3. While the operation range of under bonnet/hoot is typically -40 to +100C, automotive electronics today are built using high reliability components (for example components manufactured to one of the AEC-Q standards, that are in many cases now superior to MIL-Standard components in reliability and construction) that can in some circumstances operate up to 150C (for example the recent introduction of X8R dielectric for automotive applications).
4. In the setting of the inside of an electrical control unit, these kinds of problems would be identified and designed out during the development stage. This requires a lot of work, not only in ensuring that the PCB is laid out correctly, but testing of the unit to ensure that common interference such as mobile/cell phones, TV transmitters does not affect operation of the unit, while ensuring that the unit does not generate excessive interference. Unfortunately this does not always work, as the test environment may not necessarily be representative of the final installation. Therefore, in all cases the unit design will be re-tested installed in a vehicle under operating conditions using a vehicle EMC test chamber (a heavily screened room that contains a rolling road/Chassis Dynamometer). The object of these tests will be to ensure that to the best of the knowledge available, the vehicle design will not be subject to known electrical interference risks. However, what this cannot do is consider the implication of a poorly fitted control unit (as I explained in item 1)
The basic premises with all products, whether electrical or mechanical controlled, is economic risk. It is a fact that you cannot eliminate risk, but you can take action to reduce it. To be honest, as an electronic engineer whom has experience in the Military, Automotive Test and Aerospace industries, I think that the problems with the Toyota cars are down to a number of complex issues that few people can really appreciate. A lot of people will point at software, as this is a relatively poorly understood industry and most peoples experience is through Microsoft products, which are not normally used on equipment where there is a risk of personal injury or death. But in the end even here there are a number of problems that are not appreciated (control of which peripherals are connected, different graphics cards, motherboard type etc..) which can have an impact on system reliability.
The article referenced in this thread actually relates to a facility to which I am aware of (TRIMUF), as I happen to work with one of
When talking of trademarks, the Australian Woothworths company actually had absolutely nothing to do with the FW Woolworth company and its famous US and UK stores (and apparently stores in other countries that are still trading under the Woolworths brand). One of the founders of the Australian company, Ernest Robert Williams, called the company Woolworths as part of a dare, only to find that FW Woolworth had not trademarked the name in Australia, therefore the trademark was deemed valid.
This highlight the issue of trademarks. Even in a globalised society, a company cannot expect by implication that its trademark will automatically be protected across the world, without registering the trademark correctly. If it were, could Volkswagen sue Apple for the use of the "i" letter since the company first used the designation on the Golf GTi in 1975?
Perhaps somebody could trademark the word iDIOT, to prevent situations like this from occurring.
Sounds like we have a difference in administration approach between open source and closed source software.
Open Source - It's Free - But if you want something special you will need specialists to write the software and test it for you - Cost lots - You'll have to pay for your own training - If you change your computers in future, chances are the software may still be able to be made to work
Closed Source - It's expensive - Carefully researched product - will probably meet the needs of your business without much tailoring - Training will be provided as part of package - If you change your system in future, chances are you will need to buy the latest version of the software at greater expensive
Options for legacy systems - virtualisation or emulation - but both have their own administration costs
However, there is one factor that I haven't discussed yet, that is the attitude and stability of the software vendor. - Some vendors write such highly specialised versions of software that they change little between versions. If you are using such a system then is it probably worth risking the software being closed source. - But some vendors want to maximise profit, so they will revise the software with short lifecycles and sometime be sneaky enough to remove commonly used features on more basic versions of the software, so that when you do upgrade you have to pay even more or change your processes around the lack of that particular feature.
The horrible truth is that IT companies have a habit of pulling wool of the eyes of governments. This is partly due to the fact that the requirements are often vague and incomplete, but also due to the complexity that governments insist on without understand the consequences. Fact is programming time is like any other engineering type function, it costs money.
With regard the the article, there is too little information to say whether the Australian Government have made the right choice. However, if you want to base the information on the experience with UK government, chances are the politicians have made a complete hash of whatever decision they have made, because they when want a system to perform too many different functions without realising that they are trying for levels of efficiency that could never be achieved, cost more money and finally ending up with a system that doesn't work properly due to fundamental design structures.
Sometimes it is best not to try and implement a one size fits all policy, but too break parts down into their constituents and build systems on a more modular basis. For example two departments may use software from different vendors and have to exchange data, with each other in a define way - the interface software could be open source based and maintained either by the company/organisation/government or a contractor. However, there will be a point when you get to the lack of diminishing returns when trying too hard costs even more, at which point you implement risk management and move on. The problem is that governments are full of people that think they "Know it All", but they in fact "Know everything about nothing" and don't understand when to stop arguing a case as they is no more benefit to what they are saying, obstructing proper process.
So to answer, Open Source or Closed Source - it depends on the application and how you understand the pitfalls.
I wonder whether as a result of this policy that IE6 becomes one of the many different browser options, just to keep happy those businesses with legacy code that wont work on anything else!
Now that really would cause Microsoft a headache - competing with its own lack of standards...
Not that many web designers will be happy with this though!
Vista took too long to develop, but during that period too many software vendors wrote bad web interface code for business applications that would only work with IE6 and not IE7, Firefox, Oprah or any other browser. Let us face it, IE6 has known compatibility problems. This problem is compounded by the fact that Microsoft chose not to support IE7 on Windows 2000. Therefore, it did not make sense to repair this bad code if it meant that older machines would immediately become obsolete unless with XP or Vista was installed, especially as XP was made available as an alternative to Vista Business Edition allowing the burying of heads in sand.
If the bad code was rewritten to support any suitable browser, then most business would try and use a different operating system other than windows. That is probably why Microsoft have released their mistake and backtracked allowing business to continue to use XP. But this solution has a double edged sword that they need to be wary of; when Windows 7 arrives, will be be even less compatible with business software than Vista? With the way the economic downturn is going, by the problem software developers waiting and not planning to resolve the problems presented by Vista, how will these businesses survive much beyond 2010? and what impact will that have on Microsoft as a result?
As for home use, I have been using Vista for 12 months. Don't find many problems, but then I'm using the 32 bit edition and don't need to using web browser based business applications.
With regard to complaints about minimum specification, Vista 32 is ironically holding back the specification of home PCs due to its inability to address more than 4GB of RAM. It sounds like everybody will have to adopt a 64 bit Windows pretty soon.
The main problem within the UK is that over the last few decades we have decided that we have rights rather than understand that responsibilities go with those rights. We have always had a "thug" (or gang) culture somewhere in our society, but we have never had the leadership to sort out these problems directly, instead we blame ethic minorities, drugs, gambling and any other area of perceived illegal activity, all of which are indirectly related to thug culture. However, we never appear to properly examine the problem because we are too quick to blame and not to understand.
I have a very good example. I was involved in a serious car accident on Friday, quite frankly I should not be here, yet alone sitting at the computer uninjured. The accident was caused by the car I was travelling in (being driven by my future father in-law) was side-swiped by a left hand drive Portuguese lorry trying to more into the middle lane of the motorway, without realising that we were there. The car spun, hit the soft embankment, rolled twice and dug itself in upright on all four wheels.
There is a known problem with these lorries in that they have a massive blind spot. Unfortunately, knowing our xenophobic press, if the actually bother to do their research as this problem is quite serious, they would seek to ban every foreign lorry on British roads, even though Irish lorries are Right Hand Drive and British and Irish lorries cold potentially have the same blind stop when driven in Continental Europe, as they drive on the right instead of the left.
I myself don't blame the lorry driver in so much that he was doing his job. I do feel that the company that hired the lorry and haulier hold responsibility for attempting to cut costs.
For want of a better expression, there is technology in a £30 mobile phone (i.e. camera and screen) that could be used as an effective blind spot mirror. In addition, many cars today have reversing sensors that could be employed to warn lorry drivers that the lane next to them is not clear.
Now what has this got to do with knife crime? not a lot you would think? Well actually it has. Sadly you are more likely to die at the hands of a car than a knife in the UK. On that level will You Tube be banning the viewing of any car on their website? Of course not. Cars (and I suppose lorries) can be used to kill and so can knives, but then knives are even more vital to society than cars; you can't cut your food without a knife, but you can walk instead of drive.
So, when are we answer the question properly - Why do people wish to carry knives for self defence?
In my verdict, music publishers (and to a lessor extent film companies) are wasting the breath. The issue is QUALITY and not QUANTITY.
Most illegal P2P stuff is going to be MP3, and offered in a low bit rate at that. For music purists this affects the sound quality by a wide margin. In fact the sound quality has been affected by increasing the volume of quiet parts while reducing the volume of loud parts; the detail has been lost.
So what has the music industry done? first of all it tries to close down the networks; after limited success the model changes to 2p2. Next it tries to sue downloaders; and gets bad press. Now it tries to frustrate but trying to get the ISPs of heavy downloaders to act and close/reduce bandwidth of accounts affected.
Then of course when the industry tries to provide legal downloads, not only do most of them have useless DRM that only stops the 100% law abiding citizen for listening to the music how they want, but they try to charge money for a product that is otherwise no better than the illegal download and still much worse than a legal CD. Of course you can easily make the assumption that the reason why the quality is so low is because the quality of the artist being pushed is of a similar low quality.
Radiohead got it right with their "in Rainbows" album. Yes you could pay anything you wanted for the album in digital form, but strangely when the official CD release came out it was still a big success. What this says is that there is still market for a high quality release, even if it still comes in physical media.
And then that goes onto my next point, if the music industry were interested in music rather than just "making money", then they would be looking at ways to add value to buying a CD (why didn't they push SACD?), or providing albums in online in lossless formats.
Another thing that really gets my "goat" is when I see an album on iTunes with bonus tracks that are not on the physical release. Surely, if the music industry really wants a future it should stop treating those of us that prefer the quality of a CD like the vinyl audiophiles were treated in the late 1980's (i.e. shabby).
And to the final thing that is forgotten by the music industry, use illegal p2p at your peril, with so much malware at their posing as music and films; I'll think I will avoid that thank you very much. If fact this also makes a mockery of DRM, as the attitude of some companies appears to be if something trashes your drive, tough; you can only re-activate the DRM file so many times when you'll have to buy the file again (makes a CD so much more appealing).
Perhaps now as proper artists take control of their own music more, the music industry will learn to provide what the customer wants and that means not ripping them off.
As far as I am aware (and bearing in mind that I am a component engineer in the aerospace industry working equipment that is fitted to both Boeing and Airbus aircraft) there are currently NO LEAD FREE SOLDERS approved for use on critical applications on commercial jet aircraft. The Aerospace is currently out of scope of the RoHS directive as aircraft are not on open sale to the domestic consumer.
Since 1994 the Aerospace and Military industry have been using commercial components to keep down costs as a result of the Perry Directive. This means that while the assemblies are manufactured using Tin Lead (Sn/Pb) solders, the components are now supplied with a Lead Free solder finish on the solderable terminations in order to comply with the RoHS requirements on commercial equipment. The problem is that different manufacturers have different finishes, and the suitability of that finish can very much depend on the design of the component (surface mount or through hole technology) and the design of the PCB to which it is attached (ground plane design), as well as the type of lead free solder that has been used.
In addition, some lead free solders (such as Tin Bismuth) which have lower melting points that traditional Tin/Lead, leading to poor solder joints if mixed with a tin/lead process.
To summarise, the problems that can be caused by using lead free solders are significant and there are more problems than just tin whiskering. The solution is knowledge of the problem and careful assessment of every component and processes used if the product is going to be used in a long life, high reliability product, irrespective of whether the product comes under the RoHS are not.
What about the 4GB limit in Vista 32?
on
DDR3 RAM Explained
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
The problem with sales of DDR3 is probably down to the fact that most computers are being sold with versions of Vista 32. To really make a difference with faster SRAM would probably also mean having a larger amount of SRAM. But the problem is Vista 32 only addresses just under 4GB of SRAM. As many computers for the home market max out by being supplied with 4GB of SRAM as new, the computers are effectively un-upgradable unless a different operating system is used. This leaves an interesting situation:-
1. Run Vista 64 - but then a large portion of hardware and software will not work as you cannot sign unapproved drivers.
2. Run Linux
3. Buy a MAC
And there is the problem, the alternatives to using DDR3 are in fact called using a different operating system and adding standard DDR2 memory, which is more cost effective that paying the extra for the DDR3 SRAM.
The only area I could possibly see DDR3 technology in the commercial hardware is in cutting edge graphics cards, where performance is everything. Unfortunately, as Vista 32 is already at is technology limit and that many potential users of this technology will baulk at the price, I can see games console manufacturers adopting this technology before the general PC market.
We the people of the EU are waiting for the resurrection of our champion, leader and poodle of George W. Bush, namely Prime Minister Tony Blair as President Blair of the European Union, our true lord and master, whom will sort out this mess and give and order of merit of business practices to Mr William Gates.
The following week Great Britain leaves the EU.
I think I understand what has happened. Microsoft took so long developing Vista to replace XP (which wasn't bad as it was based on 2000 Professional) that the 32 bit version of the operating system has become obsolete by virtue of many computers already being sold with 4Gb of RAM, which 32 bit Vista cannot address. Of course this causes a horrible problem for Microsoft, as Windows XP64 had poor support for hardware drivers causing a number of software compatibility issues.
With 64 bit driver support improving, Microsoft could of cause just encourage the sale of 64 bit versions of the operating system. But the problem is that while this may be suitable for the Professional Market, as company IT departments could see bigger benefits going for broke an installing a complete new network (although there is the risk of them installing Linux as well), the consumer market would have problems with the new operating system as much of the games software will stop working and items such as printers, scanners and other related hardware needing to be replaced. Not good.
So I suspect that Microsoft have come up with the solution that they should of thought of before they launched Vista; a 64 Bit only operating system with a 32 bit mode operating through some akin to VMWare possibly based on XP rather than Vista. The big advantage here is that you can disable all the DRM features in the 32bit mode and make the files unplayable as an attempt to keep up the performance when using the older software, while the main operating system will retain all the horrible DRM that users have learnt to hate, but at least users will not suffer in the performance of 32 bit Vista.
So the conclusion is simple, Microsoft got Vista 32 bit horribly wrong. Trying to support computers that were already obsolete at the time of launch by having a "Home Basic", when XP was still perfect for this market was a huge blunder. By insisting that Vista needed a more powerful computer would have improved the user experience and would have increased sales for the consumer market in the long term. Now what you have got is a half baked operating system that does not deliver enough benefits to justify its existence; hence the need for Windows 7!
The UK has spent the last 5 years trying to build a common Health Record Database for all NHS patients. Those of you that are aware, the HNS is a public run service that covers the health needs of the entire population, although Private medical Insurance is available if required at extra cost. So far this "Database" has cost the UK Taxpayer £12 billion ($24 US Dollars) and has delivered nothing but chaos, confusion and a lack of investment in frontline databases that are currently in use, meaning that records go missing, data discs with confidential data get lost etc... http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7158498.stm
The fundamental problem is that politicians think that databases are the answer to everything, being handy for issuing speeding fines, holding criminal records and identity details of everybody in the country, but they haven't quite got round to the concept that the accuracy the data within a database is the most important aspect and it is often the data processing factor that often falls down. They forget the basic fundamental questions like:-
How long does the data take to propagate into the system properly? If I tax my car late on Friday will the computer database not be updated until Monday, meaning that I'm going to be constantly pulled over by the Police and threatened with my transport being impounded for the weekend, even though it is perfectly legal?
What happens if the data is incorrect? Our beloved UK government wants an all encompassing ID card system, which will reference a number of different databases. How can they be absolutely sure that the data is at least 6 sigma (3.4 defects per million records) if not 100% correct (note that the old saying 99.9% doesn't even being to recognise the real accuracy required).
If the data is incorrect who is responsible? If there are many bodies involved, you can guarantee that none of them will agree who is at fault until lawyers get involved, especially if they are civil servants and/or politicians.
Who ensures that the data is secure? We in the UK had ZIP encrypted discs containing details of 25 million people (about 2/5 of the UK population) lost by the HRMC recently. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7117291.stm
One the face of it using an open system for designing a database is a good idea in principle, but it is the people that are responsible for these databases that need to know exactly why they are important and why reliance on such databases is a recipe for disaster if proper considerations are not made. Part of the problem is that many of the people choosing these databases probably don't have a first clue in how a database works, that is the problem we face.
I did notice that this week the new Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd cancelled a National ID card system that was planed by the Howard Administration. This move appears to come from somebody that appears to understand the complex nature of such a system, its cost and its lack of benefit. There are many ways that can be used to determine somebodies identify (bank cards, passport, birth certificate) and having all of them referenced at the same place isn't the most cost effective solution.
I think that the problem with Open Office is that Microsoft Office has no real competition, hence it can afford to ignore everybody else.
The problem is very simple, when it comes to using Operating Systems there is very effective competition to Windows, namely Unix, Linux (and its many variations), BSD and MAC OS. While many of these systems are low cost to own, they do provide Microsoft with an incentive to provide a better operating system.
However, Microsoft Office has no real competition. Some people will say "but what about Open Office", but the problem is that while it may be free, there is no incentive for anybody to develop program other than for the simple joy of it. Unfortunately developing a office tool today is not like developing an operating system, as you have to offer dictionaries, grammar tools, paper formatting and tool integration to support every country in every region of the world; something you either buy or pay for a lot of work to be done. The problem is that the commercial alternatives to Microsoft Office have all but died out (Word Perfect etc..), hence the market share for Microsoft Office is probably greater than that of Windows.
The solution is that somebody needs to take Microsoft on where it hurts, i.e. offer a proper Office suite that costs less than Office. Unfortunately the only company that is any position to do this is Apple, but having been hurt by Microsoft when Explorer was withdrawn for Mac OS after Apple launched Safari, I doubt whether they would even attempt to tackle this problem as Mac without Office would be a problem for interoperability with documents in the future. There is of course Star Office, but that is just a commercial version of Open Office.
So the solution is that we get total bloatware and zero innovation. While I have not used Office 2007 yet, I suppose that like 2000, XP and 2003 there is little innovation over 97, which was actually quite a good piece of software.
For your information, I do use Thunderbird as my home email client along with Open Office on my Home PC. But believe me, if I was running a small business, I would have no option but to pay the "Microsoft tax", even if I was not using Windows.
I personally think that the only reason that Microsoft does not sell Office as part of the operating system (which for many people it could be described as, especially when it comes to Outlook) is that not only do they make most of their money from Office, but if they did they would suddenly find being themselves being prosecuted for anti-trust by the EU and US.
Surely when Windows XP is no longer available, the unofficial Windows compatibility mode for old hardware will be to run the computer in Linux and only use Vista when the is no software solution available for what you are trying to achieve.
And of course if you want to play games, you will probably be buying a Wii instead of a computer anyway.
With all of these good rumours going round about Vista, I have suddenly in the last month got a PC upgrade at work - complete with Windows XP!
Perhaps the rumours that Microsft are going to stop new licences of XP at the end of the year and the fact that Office 2007 doesn't work on Windows 2000 and that our oracle applications don't work in IE7 has made the company I work for realise that XP wasn't that bad after all.
I recently read an article in a well respected professional journal that highlighted that the reliability of 45nm microprocessors and the cost of building the fabs to manufacture then are the two biggest factors that will kill Moore's Law. The problem is that it has been proven already that 65nm microprocessors have a MTBF in the region of a few years, while it is currently looking like the 45nm IC will struggle with a MTBF of just 12 months. There is already discussion that the software on these microprocessors will have to take into account that portions of the substrate may fail, which means that the software will effectively become less efficient, thus removing any advantage of 45nm technology.
Admittedly nano technology may help here in improving the design and construction of transistor gates. But until the technology is ready, which may be a few years off yet, the only way processors are likely to get more powerful is for the size of the silicon to get physically bigger.
However, I think where the OLPC will have an effect is in the bottom end of the Laptop and PDA market. These computers will probably work really well when being used akin to a Citrix terminal connecting to a traditional desktop PC. Microsoft might even make a bit of money out of selling Vista Ultimate to home network users as a result.
I have come to the conclusion that today there are very few reason for a desktop.
1. Cost - but most cheap desktops are rubbish 2. Screen Size - but then most laptops allow you to run dual screens. I only use a laptop at the moment at home and believe me I love using two screens. Try this on many desktop Pcs without buying a new graphics card, unless you have an Apple that is. 3. Lack of internal upgrades - but most new desktops have smaller chassis and after a few months it will still become difficult to upgrade without changing the motherboard, essentially replacing the whole computer. 4. 3D video cards - My laptop has a reasonable video card ofr the day (it is two years old). It will not play the latest games, but then if I wanted to play games I would by an XBOX360/PS3/WII because I wouldn't have so many constant you need to upgrade issues and the basic hardware is soo much cheap. 5. The old chassis form factor is too big for the modern office.
The advantage of a laptop is a computer that takes up less space. The problem is that most of them are not very portable.
The problem will be is that the latest PDAs and Smartphones (iPhone included) that have wifi and standard web browser can easily be used to virtually control a desktop or laptop using remote desktop software, some of which is free. On this basis, I think that the large laptop will become obsolete in the next few years, to be replaced by small form desktops and larger screen PDAs.
Apple are well ahead with the MINI, IPhone and IMAC.
The problem with Microsoft now is I think that it has decided that users want to use their computers in a more efficient way. The problem is that it hasn't quite got round to understanding that for the model that are hoping to adopt they will need to effectively offer their product for free.
I could give you the most obvious answer, Linux - most distributions are free, you pay for the support. But even more importantly companies such as LOGMEIN.COM are now offering free basic services like those discussed in the article that allow users to remotely log onto MAC and Windows PC from virtually any web browser (I suppose that would even include the iPhone). In addition, with many companies already using VNC and Citrix (whom admittedly are in parntership with Microsoft), it seams that they are a little late to the party.
1. If you go to Tokoyo, you will find most people walking round with a 3G/4G phone in one hand and an ipod in the other. The iPod has massive market penetration in Japan; the iPhone will when lanuched in Japan will have a large potential market. However, the previous generation of mobile phones (i.e. those before 3G) are totally incompatible with GSM. This is the main reason while the Asian market will have to wait until the battery technology improves.
2. 3G phones are still massive in size and have poor battery consumption when compared with GSM, hence the 3G version of the Mototrola V3 RAZR is almost twice the thickness of the GSM version. Europeans have a tendancy to go for smaller, more stylish phones, hence market penetration of 3G phones is fairly low. There are older members of the European population that like bigger phones, but they also don't like lots of technical functions; they are not in the market for an iPhone.
3. Most of the rest of the World have GSM, but 3G support is not consistent.
4. There are many phone users in European countries that now use pay as you go phone packages. This is because of the stupid attitude of mobile phone operators with regard to roaming charges for different countries; something the EU has recently tried to resolve. As the people whom are likely to buy an iPhone in Europe are likely to be those that travel a lot, having an unlocked phone will probably be a competitive advantage.
5. If I select an ISP, for my broadband connection, why should I be restricted to which model of computer I should use? Surely it is much better to buy a phone and then buy a contract for data/phone calls separately?
Something very similar has happened in the UK recently. May I refer you all to the following webpage http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/6677985.stm. Computer based tools are like any other tool, unfortunately if they are poorly though out they can cause harm. What I think that will happen in the case described in this thread is that somebody will pick a really bad lawyer through the website and then loose their case as a result. As a result in the publicity, the site will end up discredited and people will stop using it.
The moral of the story is don't expect one tool to have all the correct answers. The problem is that many people in the world are not bright enough to understand this.
Slashdot Mirror
I have some rather mixed feeling about this....
On one hand your have the music and film industry complaining about piracy of their product and being completely ignorant that their business model is out of date.
On the other hand there is the chance of counterfeit components appearing on cars, trains or aircraft that produce a serious hazard in a situation where potentially lives are at risk.
Mind you we have a third problem in that we have fake politicians that don't really know anything but what their advisors tell them.
I've been to America several times and there are a few things that prevent this happening. First of all the Fiesta is far too small for your average American consumeer. These cars sell massively here in Ireland but they just won't work in America because you'll hear all of the horror stories about how they're not safe because they're small. Realistically the average weight and size of your average American citizen is a lot more too.
The current Ford Fiesta is exactly the same size as the mkI Ford Focus, which if I remember correctly was a big sales success for Ford in the USA. In fact the likelihood is that due to improved packaging, the chance is that the interior could be even bigger and have better crash protection.
True some Americans like big cars, but if the price of oil goes Northwards again (which appears likely, without even considering the impact of the AGW lobby), surely they will need to consider the fact that fuel consumption may be a factor in their next purchase.
I'll agree that the Ka is probably a bit too small and radical for the time being.
Since they are using jailbroken iPhones, it is quite possible that they are not paying Apple for the rights to use Apple's proprietary connector.
I'll think you will find that the connector is patented, so no doubt unless the manufacturer intend to licence the connector (which means the product will have to work with non-jailbroken iphones), they do not have much chance on challenging the patent, since they are already breaking one. It also makes me think that if the idea was so great then why didn't icontrolpad patent the idea themselves (after all, there were other touch screen based systems that could of done with something similar even before Apple launched the iPhone)
To be honest though, with what is being published on the icontrolpad website, surely it would be cheaper to build their own game console as they appear to be demonstrating games that were written for other handheld games platforms.
Sorry, but I think your comments are a bit out of date.
1. Most cars these days use CANBUS as the main communication system. As a result the interconnections between each of the main Electronic Control Units within the car are transmitted via a differential signal, that is designed to be less susceptible to EM interference. Anyway, many digital circuit (even in cars and aircraft) operate at less than 5V these days due to the fact that modern microprocessors need lower voltages in order to operate faster. Ensuring that the electronic control unit is correctly installed is more of a problem; while the production line workers are highly trained to install the units properly in the car, the weakness is that after the car warranty has ended, virtually anybody can replace the electronic control unit.
2. Static electricity is more of a problem during construction of a unit rather than the operation. The problem is that static electricity will normally induce a latent failure that may take time to propagate itself. In order to avoid this, car electronic manufacturers take extreme caution in production cells to ensure that exposure to static electricity is kept to an absolute minimum (ground straps, conductive plans, restrictive access to production facilities etc...). The finished unit will almost certainly have lightening protection on external connectors that will clamp static electricity, so special installation facilities are not needed in the factory/garage.
3. While the operation range of under bonnet/hoot is typically -40 to +100C, automotive electronics today are built using high reliability components (for example components manufactured to one of the AEC-Q standards, that are in many cases now superior to MIL-Standard components in reliability and construction) that can in some circumstances operate up to 150C (for example the recent introduction of X8R dielectric for automotive applications).
4. In the setting of the inside of an electrical control unit, these kinds of problems would be identified and designed out during the development stage. This requires a lot of work, not only in ensuring that the PCB is laid out correctly, but testing of the unit to ensure that common interference such as mobile/cell phones, TV transmitters does not affect operation of the unit, while ensuring that the unit does not generate excessive interference. Unfortunately this does not always work, as the test environment may not necessarily be representative of the final installation. Therefore, in all cases the unit design will be re-tested installed in a vehicle under operating conditions using a vehicle EMC test chamber (a heavily screened room that contains a rolling road/Chassis Dynamometer). The object of these tests will be to ensure that to the best of the knowledge available, the vehicle design will not be subject to known electrical interference risks. However, what this cannot do is consider the implication of a poorly fitted control unit (as I explained in item 1)
The basic premises with all products, whether electrical or mechanical controlled, is economic risk. It is a fact that you cannot eliminate risk, but you can take action to reduce it. To be honest, as an electronic engineer whom has experience in the Military, Automotive Test and Aerospace industries, I think that the problems with the Toyota cars are down to a number of complex issues that few people can really appreciate. A lot of people will point at software, as this is a relatively poorly understood industry and most peoples experience is through Microsoft products, which are not normally used on equipment where there is a risk of personal injury or death. But in the end even here there are a number of problems that are not appreciated (control of which peripherals are connected, different graphics cards, motherboard type etc..) which can have an impact on system reliability.
The article referenced in this thread actually relates to a facility to which I am aware of (TRIMUF), as I happen to work with one of
When talking of trademarks, the Australian Woothworths company actually had absolutely nothing to do with the FW Woolworth company and its famous US and UK stores (and apparently stores in other countries that are still trading under the Woolworths brand). One of the founders of the Australian company, Ernest Robert Williams, called the company Woolworths as part of a dare, only to find that FW Woolworth had not trademarked the name in Australia, therefore the trademark was deemed valid.
This highlight the issue of trademarks. Even in a globalised society, a company cannot expect by implication that its trademark will automatically be protected across the world, without registering the trademark correctly. If it were, could Volkswagen sue Apple for the use of the "i" letter since the company first used the designation on the Golf GTi in 1975?
Perhaps somebody could trademark the word iDIOT, to prevent situations like this from occurring.
Sounds like we have a difference in administration approach between open source and closed source software.
Open Source
- It's Free
- But if you want something special you will need specialists to write the software and test it for you - Cost lots
- You'll have to pay for your own training
- If you change your computers in future, chances are the software may still be able to be made to work
Closed Source
- It's expensive
- Carefully researched product - will probably meet the needs of your business without much tailoring
- Training will be provided as part of package
- If you change your system in future, chances are you will need to buy the latest version of the software at greater expensive
Options for legacy systems
- virtualisation or emulation - but both have their own administration costs
However, there is one factor that I haven't discussed yet, that is the attitude and stability of the software vendor.
- Some vendors write such highly specialised versions of software that they change little between versions. If you are using such a system then is it probably worth risking the software being closed source.
- But some vendors want to maximise profit, so they will revise the software with short lifecycles and sometime be sneaky enough to remove commonly used features on more basic versions of the software, so that when you do upgrade you have to pay even more or change your processes around the lack of that particular feature.
The horrible truth is that IT companies have a habit of pulling wool of the eyes of governments. This is partly due to the fact that the requirements are often vague and incomplete, but also due to the complexity that governments insist on without understand the consequences. Fact is programming time is like any other engineering type function, it costs money.
With regard the the article, there is too little information to say whether the Australian Government have made the right choice. However, if you want to base the information on the experience with UK government, chances are the politicians have made a complete hash of whatever decision they have made, because they when want a system to perform too many different functions without realising that they are trying for levels of efficiency that could never be achieved, cost more money and finally ending up with a system that doesn't work properly due to fundamental design structures.
Sometimes it is best not to try and implement a one size fits all policy, but too break parts down into their constituents and build systems on a more modular basis. For example two departments may use software from different vendors and have to exchange data, with each other in a define way - the interface software could be open source based and maintained either by the company/organisation/government or a contractor. However, there will be a point when you get to the lack of diminishing returns when trying too hard costs even more, at which point you implement risk management and move on. The problem is that governments are full of people that think they "Know it All", but they in fact "Know everything about nothing" and don't understand when to stop arguing a case as they is no more benefit to what they are saying, obstructing proper process.
So to answer, Open Source or Closed Source - it depends on the application and how you understand the pitfalls.
I wonder whether as a result of this policy that IE6 becomes one of the many different browser options, just to keep happy those businesses with legacy code that wont work on anything else!
Now that really would cause Microsoft a headache - competing with its own lack of standards...
Not that many web designers will be happy with this though!
is the fact that it ships with IE7 and not IE6.
Vista took too long to develop, but during that period too many software vendors wrote bad web interface code for business applications that would only work with IE6 and not IE7, Firefox, Oprah or any other browser. Let us face it, IE6 has known compatibility problems. This problem is compounded by the fact that Microsoft chose not to support IE7 on Windows 2000. Therefore, it did not make sense to repair this bad code if it meant that older machines would immediately become obsolete unless with XP or Vista was installed, especially as XP was made available as an alternative to Vista Business Edition allowing the burying of heads in sand.
If the bad code was rewritten to support any suitable browser, then most business would try and use a different operating system other than windows. That is probably why Microsoft have released their mistake and backtracked allowing business to continue to use XP. But this solution has a double edged sword that they need to be wary of; when Windows 7 arrives, will be be even less compatible with business software than Vista? With the way the economic downturn is going, by the problem software developers waiting and not planning to resolve the problems presented by Vista, how will these businesses survive much beyond 2010? and what impact will that have on Microsoft as a result?
As for home use, I have been using Vista for 12 months. Don't find many problems, but then I'm using the 32 bit edition and don't need to using web browser based business applications.
With regard to complaints about minimum specification, Vista 32 is ironically holding back the specification of home PCs due to its inability to address more than 4GB of RAM. It sounds like everybody will have to adopt a 64 bit Windows pretty soon.
The main problem within the UK is that over the last few decades we have decided that we have rights rather than understand that responsibilities go with those rights. We have always had a "thug" (or gang) culture somewhere in our society, but we have never had the leadership to sort out these problems directly, instead we blame ethic minorities, drugs, gambling and any other area of perceived illegal activity, all of which are indirectly related to thug culture. However, we never appear to properly examine the problem because we are too quick to blame and not to understand.
I have a very good example. I was involved in a serious car accident on Friday, quite frankly I should not be here, yet alone sitting at the computer uninjured. The accident was caused by the car I was travelling in (being driven by my future father in-law) was side-swiped by a left hand drive Portuguese lorry trying to more into the middle lane of the motorway, without realising that we were there. The car spun, hit the soft embankment, rolled twice and dug itself in upright on all four wheels.
There is a known problem with these lorries in that they have a massive blind spot. Unfortunately, knowing our xenophobic press, if the actually bother to do their research as this problem is quite serious, they would seek to ban every foreign lorry on British roads, even though Irish lorries are Right Hand Drive and British and Irish lorries cold potentially have the same blind stop when driven in Continental Europe, as they drive on the right instead of the left.
I myself don't blame the lorry driver in so much that he was doing his job. I do feel that the company that hired the lorry and haulier hold responsibility for attempting to cut costs.
For want of a better expression, there is technology in a £30 mobile phone (i.e. camera and screen) that could be used as an effective blind spot mirror. In addition, many cars today have reversing sensors that could be employed to warn lorry drivers that the lane next to them is not clear.
Now what has this got to do with knife crime? not a lot you would think? Well actually it has. Sadly you are more likely to die at the hands of a car than a knife in the UK. On that level will You Tube be banning the viewing of any car on their website? Of course not. Cars (and I suppose lorries) can be used to kill and so can knives, but then knives are even more vital to society than cars; you can't cut your food without a knife, but you can walk instead of drive.
So, when are we answer the question properly - Why do people wish to carry knives for self defence?
In my verdict, music publishers (and to a lessor extent film companies) are wasting the breath. The issue is QUALITY and not QUANTITY.
Most illegal P2P stuff is going to be MP3, and offered in a low bit rate at that. For music purists this affects the sound quality by a wide margin. In fact the sound quality has been affected by increasing the volume of quiet parts while reducing the volume of loud parts; the detail has been lost.
So what has the music industry done? first of all it tries to close down the networks; after limited success the model changes to 2p2. Next it tries to sue downloaders; and gets bad press. Now it tries to frustrate but trying to get the ISPs of heavy downloaders to act and close/reduce bandwidth of accounts affected.
Then of course when the industry tries to provide legal downloads, not only do most of them have useless DRM that only stops the 100% law abiding citizen for listening to the music how they want, but they try to charge money for a product that is otherwise no better than the illegal download and still much worse than a legal CD. Of course you can easily make the assumption that the reason why the quality is so low is because the quality of the artist being pushed is of a similar low quality.
Radiohead got it right with their "in Rainbows" album. Yes you could pay anything you wanted for the album in digital form, but strangely when the official CD release came out it was still a big success. What this says is that there is still market for a high quality release, even if it still comes in physical media.
And then that goes onto my next point, if the music industry were interested in music rather than just "making money", then they would be looking at ways to add value to buying a CD (why didn't they push SACD?), or providing albums in online in lossless formats.
Another thing that really gets my "goat" is when I see an album on iTunes with bonus tracks that are not on the physical release. Surely, if the music industry really wants a future it should stop treating those of us that prefer the quality of a CD like the vinyl audiophiles were treated in the late 1980's (i.e. shabby).
And to the final thing that is forgotten by the music industry, use illegal p2p at your peril, with so much malware at their posing as music and films; I'll think I will avoid that thank you very much. If fact this also makes a mockery of DRM, as the attitude of some companies appears to be if something trashes your drive, tough; you can only re-activate the DRM file so many times when you'll have to buy the file again (makes a CD so much more appealing).
Perhaps now as proper artists take control of their own music more, the music industry will learn to provide what the customer wants and that means not ripping them off.
As far as I am aware (and bearing in mind that I am a component engineer in the aerospace industry working equipment that is fitted to both Boeing and Airbus aircraft) there are currently NO LEAD FREE SOLDERS approved for use on critical applications on commercial jet aircraft. The Aerospace is currently out of scope of the RoHS directive as aircraft are not on open sale to the domestic consumer.
Since 1994 the Aerospace and Military industry have been using commercial components to keep down costs as a result of the Perry Directive. This means that while the assemblies are manufactured using Tin Lead (Sn/Pb) solders, the components are now supplied with a Lead Free solder finish on the solderable terminations in order to comply with the RoHS requirements on commercial equipment. The problem is that different manufacturers have different finishes, and the suitability of that finish can very much depend on the design of the component (surface mount or through hole technology) and the design of the PCB to which it is attached (ground plane design), as well as the type of lead free solder that has been used.
In addition, some lead free solders (such as Tin Bismuth) which have lower melting points that traditional Tin/Lead, leading to poor solder joints if mixed with a tin/lead process.
To summarise, the problems that can be caused by using lead free solders are significant and there are more problems than just tin whiskering. The solution is knowledge of the problem and careful assessment of every component and processes used if the product is going to be used in a long life, high reliability product, irrespective of whether the product comes under the RoHS are not.
The problem with sales of DDR3 is probably down to the fact that most computers are being sold with versions of Vista 32. To really make a difference with faster SRAM would probably also mean having a larger amount of SRAM. But the problem is Vista 32 only addresses just under 4GB of SRAM. As many computers for the home market max out by being supplied with 4GB of SRAM as new, the computers are effectively un-upgradable unless a different operating system is used. This leaves an interesting situation:- 1. Run Vista 64 - but then a large portion of hardware and software will not work as you cannot sign unapproved drivers. 2. Run Linux 3. Buy a MAC And there is the problem, the alternatives to using DDR3 are in fact called using a different operating system and adding standard DDR2 memory, which is more cost effective that paying the extra for the DDR3 SRAM. The only area I could possibly see DDR3 technology in the commercial hardware is in cutting edge graphics cards, where performance is everything. Unfortunately, as Vista 32 is already at is technology limit and that many potential users of this technology will baulk at the price, I can see games console manufacturers adopting this technology before the general PC market.
We the people of the EU are waiting for the resurrection of our champion, leader and poodle of George W. Bush, namely Prime Minister Tony Blair as President Blair of the European Union, our true lord and master, whom will sort out this mess and give and order of merit of business practices to Mr William Gates. The following week Great Britain leaves the EU.
Didn't know Steve was a member of UKIP!
I think I understand what has happened. Microsoft took so long developing Vista to replace XP (which wasn't bad as it was based on 2000 Professional) that the 32 bit version of the operating system has become obsolete by virtue of many computers already being sold with 4Gb of RAM, which 32 bit Vista cannot address. Of course this causes a horrible problem for Microsoft, as Windows XP64 had poor support for hardware drivers causing a number of software compatibility issues.
With 64 bit driver support improving, Microsoft could of cause just encourage the sale of 64 bit versions of the operating system. But the problem is that while this may be suitable for the Professional Market, as company IT departments could see bigger benefits going for broke an installing a complete new network (although there is the risk of them installing Linux as well), the consumer market would have problems with the new operating system as much of the games software will stop working and items such as printers, scanners and other related hardware needing to be replaced. Not good.
So I suspect that Microsoft have come up with the solution that they should of thought of before they launched Vista; a 64 Bit only operating system with a 32 bit mode operating through some akin to VMWare possibly based on XP rather than Vista. The big advantage here is that you can disable all the DRM features in the 32bit mode and make the files unplayable as an attempt to keep up the performance when using the older software, while the main operating system will retain all the horrible DRM that users have learnt to hate, but at least users will not suffer in the performance of 32 bit Vista.
So the conclusion is simple, Microsoft got Vista 32 bit horribly wrong. Trying to support computers that were already obsolete at the time of launch by having a "Home Basic", when XP was still perfect for this market was a huge blunder. By insisting that Vista needed a more powerful computer would have improved the user experience and would have increased sales for the consumer market in the long term. Now what you have got is a half baked operating system that does not deliver enough benefits to justify its existence; hence the need for Windows 7!
The UK has spent the last 5 years trying to build a common Health Record Database for all NHS patients. Those of you that are aware, the HNS is a public run service that covers the health needs of the entire population, although Private medical Insurance is available if required at extra cost. So far this "Database" has cost the UK Taxpayer £12 billion ($24 US Dollars) and has delivered nothing but chaos, confusion and a lack of investment in frontline databases that are currently in use, meaning that records go missing, data discs with confidential data get lost etc... http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7158498.stm
The fundamental problem is that politicians think that databases are the answer to everything, being handy for issuing speeding fines, holding criminal records and identity details of everybody in the country, but they haven't quite got round to the concept that the accuracy the data within a database is the most important aspect and it is often the data processing factor that often falls down. They forget the basic fundamental questions like:-
How long does the data take to propagate into the system properly? If I tax my car late on Friday will the computer database not be updated until Monday, meaning that I'm going to be constantly pulled over by the Police and threatened with my transport being impounded for the weekend, even though it is perfectly legal?
What happens if the data is incorrect? Our beloved UK government wants an all encompassing ID card system, which will reference a number of different databases. How can they be absolutely sure that the data is at least 6 sigma (3.4 defects per million records) if not 100% correct (note that the old saying 99.9% doesn't even being to recognise the real accuracy required).
If the data is incorrect who is responsible? If there are many bodies involved, you can guarantee that none of them will agree who is at fault until lawyers get involved, especially if they are civil servants and/or politicians.
Who ensures that the data is secure? We in the UK had ZIP encrypted discs containing details of 25 million people (about 2/5 of the UK population) lost by the HRMC recently. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7117291.stm
One the face of it using an open system for designing a database is a good idea in principle, but it is the people that are responsible for these databases that need to know exactly why they are important and why reliance on such databases is a recipe for disaster if proper considerations are not made. Part of the problem is that many of the people choosing these databases probably don't have a first clue in how a database works, that is the problem we face.
I did notice that this week the new Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd cancelled a National ID card system that was planed by the Howard Administration. This move appears to come from somebody that appears to understand the complex nature of such a system, its cost and its lack of benefit. There are many ways that can be used to determine somebodies identify (bank cards, passport, birth certificate) and having all of them referenced at the same place isn't the most cost effective solution.
I think that the problem with Open Office is that Microsoft Office has no real competition, hence it can afford to ignore everybody else.
The problem is very simple, when it comes to using Operating Systems there is very effective competition to Windows, namely Unix, Linux (and its many variations), BSD and MAC OS. While many of these systems are low cost to own, they do provide Microsoft with an incentive to provide a better operating system.
However, Microsoft Office has no real competition. Some people will say "but what about Open Office", but the problem is that while it may be free, there is no incentive for anybody to develop program other than for the simple joy of it. Unfortunately developing a office tool today is not like developing an operating system, as you have to offer dictionaries, grammar tools, paper formatting and tool integration to support every country in every region of the world; something you either buy or pay for a lot of work to be done. The problem is that the commercial alternatives to Microsoft Office have all but died out (Word Perfect etc..), hence the market share for Microsoft Office is probably greater than that of Windows.
The solution is that somebody needs to take Microsoft on where it hurts, i.e. offer a proper Office suite that costs less than Office. Unfortunately the only company that is any position to do this is Apple, but having been hurt by Microsoft when Explorer was withdrawn for Mac OS after Apple launched Safari, I doubt whether they would even attempt to tackle this problem as Mac without Office would be a problem for interoperability with documents in the future. There is of course Star Office, but that is just a commercial version of Open Office.
So the solution is that we get total bloatware and zero innovation. While I have not used Office 2007 yet, I suppose that like 2000, XP and 2003 there is little innovation over 97, which was actually quite a good piece of software.
For your information, I do use Thunderbird as my home email client along with Open Office on my Home PC. But believe me, if I was running a small business, I would have no option but to pay the "Microsoft tax", even if I was not using Windows.
I personally think that the only reason that Microsoft does not sell Office as part of the operating system (which for many people it could be described as, especially when it comes to Outlook) is that not only do they make most of their money from Office, but if they did they would suddenly find being themselves being prosecuted for anti-trust by the EU and US.
Surely when Windows XP is no longer available, the unofficial Windows compatibility mode for old hardware will be to run the computer in Linux and only use Vista when the is no software solution available for what you are trying to achieve. And of course if you want to play games, you will probably be buying a Wii instead of a computer anyway.
20 years ago INMOS developed the Transputer, an early attempt at a microprocessor that could work in parallel with other Transputers in an array.
I think that this is a case of prior art - case dismissed.
With all of these good rumours going round about Vista, I have suddenly in the last month got a PC upgrade at work - complete with Windows XP!
Perhaps the rumours that Microsft are going to stop new licences of XP at the end of the year and the fact that Office 2007 doesn't work on Windows 2000 and that our oracle applications don't work in IE7 has made the company I work for realise that XP wasn't that bad after all.
Firefox and open office never had it so good.
I recently read an article in a well respected professional journal that highlighted that the reliability of 45nm microprocessors and the cost of building the fabs to manufacture then are the two biggest factors that will kill Moore's Law. The problem is that it has been proven already that 65nm microprocessors have a MTBF in the region of a few years, while it is currently looking like the 45nm IC will struggle with a MTBF of just 12 months. There is already discussion that the software on these microprocessors will have to take into account that portions of the substrate may fail, which means that the software will effectively become less efficient, thus removing any advantage of 45nm technology.
Admittedly nano technology may help here in improving the design and construction of transistor gates. But until the technology is ready, which may be a few years off yet, the only way processors are likely to get more powerful is for the size of the silicon to get physically bigger.
However, I think where the OLPC will have an effect is in the bottom end of the Laptop and PDA market. These computers will probably work really well when being used akin to a Citrix terminal connecting to a traditional desktop PC. Microsoft might even make a bit of money out of selling Vista Ultimate to home network users as a result.
I have come to the conclusion that today there are very few reason for a desktop.
1. Cost - but most cheap desktops are rubbish
2. Screen Size - but then most laptops allow you to run dual screens. I only use a laptop at the moment at home and believe me I love using two screens. Try this on many desktop Pcs without buying a new graphics card, unless you have an Apple that is.
3. Lack of internal upgrades - but most new desktops have smaller chassis and after a few months it will still become difficult to upgrade without changing the motherboard, essentially replacing the whole computer.
4. 3D video cards - My laptop has a reasonable video card ofr the day (it is two years old). It will not play the latest games, but then if I wanted to play games I would by an XBOX360/PS3/WII because I wouldn't have so many constant you need to upgrade issues and the basic hardware is soo much cheap.
5. The old chassis form factor is too big for the modern office.
The advantage of a laptop is a computer that takes up less space. The problem is that most of them are not very portable.
The problem will be is that the latest PDAs and Smartphones (iPhone included) that have wifi and standard web browser can easily be used to virtually control a desktop or laptop using remote desktop software, some of which is free. On this basis, I think that the large laptop will become obsolete in the next few years, to be replaced by small form desktops and larger screen PDAs.
Apple are well ahead with the MINI, IPhone and IMAC.
The problem with Microsoft now is I think that it has decided that users want to use their computers in a more efficient way. The problem is that it hasn't quite got round to understanding that for the model that are hoping to adopt they will need to effectively offer their product for free.
I could give you the most obvious answer, Linux - most distributions are free, you pay for the support. But even more importantly companies such as LOGMEIN.COM are now offering free basic services like those discussed in the article that allow users to remotely log onto MAC and Windows PC from virtually any web browser (I suppose that would even include the iPhone). In addition, with many companies already using VNC and Citrix (whom admittedly are in parntership with Microsoft), it seams that they are a little late to the party.
A few truths:-
1. If you go to Tokoyo, you will find most people walking round with a 3G/4G phone in one hand and an ipod in the other. The iPod has massive market penetration in Japan; the iPhone will when lanuched in Japan will have a large potential market. However, the previous generation of mobile phones (i.e. those before 3G) are totally incompatible with GSM. This is the main reason while the Asian market will have to wait until the battery technology improves.
2. 3G phones are still massive in size and have poor battery consumption when compared with GSM, hence the 3G version of the Mototrola V3 RAZR is almost twice the thickness of the GSM version. Europeans have a tendancy to go for smaller, more stylish phones, hence market penetration of 3G phones is fairly low. There are older members of the European population that like bigger phones, but they also don't like lots of technical functions; they are not in the market for an iPhone.
3. Most of the rest of the World have GSM, but 3G support is not consistent.
4. There are many phone users in European countries that now use pay as you go phone packages. This is because of the stupid attitude of mobile phone operators with regard to roaming charges for different countries; something the EU has recently tried to resolve. As the people whom are likely to buy an iPhone in Europe are likely to be those that travel a lot, having an unlocked phone will probably be a competitive advantage.
5. If I select an ISP, for my broadband connection, why should I be restricted to which model of computer I should use? Surely it is much better to buy a phone and then buy a contract for data/phone calls separately?
The moral of the story is don't expect one tool to have all the correct answers. The problem is that many people in the world are not bright enough to understand this.