That is very true. In addition to the earlier post above (http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=596309&cid=23964553) the on demand MP3 stitcher that I developed was developed entirely on a PC (running windows), but deployed on a Sun Sparc, with NO need to adapt the code or recompile whatsoever. Considering the complexity of the program (dynamically stitching MP3 files, scanning individual frames, validating, etc) and that it processes on average 30 files a minute (at around 1 - 2 second per file), it was just a joy to be able to deploy the same WAR file on the following architecture running tomcat 5.5 without any changes.
- Sun Blade T6320 (8 way SPARC0) running Solaris - Sun Netra X4200 M2 Server (x86 Opteron) running Solaris - Generic PC development server running Linux - Development PCs running Windows XP
I have developed a JAVA based server application (running in tomcat) that dynamically stitches MP3 files together on request. Lets just say, that in operation, it is as fast as the equivalent in C++, with the advantage of quicker fixes/development and is easier to make it scale on multi processor systems.
Sure when you "first" run it, it runs at about 25% to 30% of any equivelent C program, but after serving about 2 to 3 complete files, the JIT compiler starts kicking in, and speeds increase to within 70 to 80% of the C code. and within about 10 requests and further optimisation by the JIT, it comes to 95% to 110% of the speed of the C code. Yes it actually runs faster at times.
AS a response to the AC, which I believe is incorrect, and ever so slightly trollish.
1. Mozilla is a profit-making corporation just like Microsoft, with income in the tens of millions through Google's start page - but, unlike Microsoft, it doesn't create a non-profit "Foundation" to give the impression that it's some charity reliant on donors and cheerleaders The Mozilla FOUNDATION is the owning entity. It is a non-profit, and Profit does not go to stockholders, etc. The Mozilla Corporation (the "for profit" subsidiary of Mozilla Foundation) was set up specifically because the money coming from Google, et al. However, the "corp" is owned by a non profit. Unlike others where the "non profit" is sometimes owned by a "corp"
2. Yes, adherence to web standards is better than IE7, but worse than Safari3.1 (much worse, before FF3) - it's just another browser, guys; Which web standards? Yes, Safari scores higher in "Acid 3". but in the real world Firefox does do better than Safari (both are generally better than IE). Take this from a developer.
2. Installation of Firefox 3.0 is dependent upon agreeing to a compulsory EULA with terms just as draconian as some of old Bill's - hopefully you've read it all before installation, but my favourite is paragraph 4, which warns that a privacy policy exists which may be changed arbitrarily, so you are to check the web site for updates at regular intervals. This is pure FUD. The code behind it is available under a far more permissive GPL/MPL/LGPL license, and alternative binaries can be obtained for with that license (eg IceWeasel, to name one). Can you do that with Safari/Opera/IE?
AS for the privacy guide, this is in almost ANY properly written privacy guide, and a legal requirement in this day and age.
For example, if a new government law came into place, regarding privacy and information stored, Mozilla will be forced to comply. Therefore, it is unrealistic, and unlawful to claim an unchanging privacy policy.
The PS3 also runs Linux! (officially, no need to hack), Officall Sony Supported Distro is Yellow Dog, but there are versions of Fedora, Ubuntu, and Debian. Easy upgrade of HD with 2.5 SATA drives (without messing your warrenty) Add a normal USB keyboard, and mouse (or use a bluetooth one, if you prefer)
I second that, irfan view is an awesome program for what it does. I love the way you can "slideshow" scroll through files using left and right keys (has bitten me too at times, by not saving!), its "non desctructive" JPEG rotate.
Sure its no Photoshop/GIMP, but when dealign with a lot of files quickly and simply, its pretty good.
And why do you miss it? Its still available, and its still being updated!
I work in a "corporate" environment (a LARGE corporate environment, actually) which uses Google Apps (corp gmail, etc). We moved from outlook to Google Apps. Painfull at first, I have to admit in the long run, gmail beats outlook for being usable, on a day to day basis. plus, if you REALLY have to use outlook, you can always drop down to IMAP access, when you need it.
I also have to agree with the Java comment. The JRE IS getting better every version, and faster. Java in applets are getting more useful. I have even seen Linux and DOS booting up, in a x86 emulator running in a Java applet. But, Suns Java is a bit in your face these days, and worse, it doesnt get rid of older versions (I understand keeping v1.5 when you install 1.6, but keeping 1.6, when you install bugfix 1.6update1, is a bit silly). And installing Yahoo Toolbar, is lame.
Still at least with Java being open source, there is always OpenJDK, etc.
And I avoid to call them "Church", just "Scientology" is sufficient.
Calling them "Cult" will also lend them credibility for something they aren't.
And by the way, isn't "Church" a Christian designation? But Scientology is a completely different thing, and has really not much to do with Christianity. Maybe you should tell that to Saint IGNUcius (aka Richard M. Stallman) and his Church of Emacs:) http://www.stallman.org/
I don't know about USA, but here in the UK, T-Mobile, does the least "Branding"/"Lockdown" of phones sold.
Ok, I admit I do not like what they do to the Icons (they have a standard icon set) but normally they do not remove features. (They tried at first with the N95 and its in built SIP functionality, but were forced via a lawsuit to put it back in!)
They DO Sim lock the phones, but considering they do give a HUGE discount, that is fair, and its not too difficult to unlock most phones, and they have an official way of doing it, when your commitment period is over.
I tend to get my T-Mobile upgrades from Carphone Warehouse, as they give me unlocked unbranded phones, but to be honest, there is usually not MUCH difference.
A poster below explains how SMS worked previously, that it effectively uses part of the "wasted" sideband in the GSM signalling. This sideband always exists, and if the payload was not used, it is effectively wasted.
If you call that wasted bandwidth, then just think of all the bandwidth wasted by unused network capacity! You know, at rural areas, at night etc... By that logic, all mobile phone use should be free when there is wasted bandwidth in the network...
Again, you didn't understand what I meant by "wasted" bandwidth. Effectively, in GSM, there is a need for the phone to periodically (and often) connect to the Cell (and vice versa) as part of this connect, a small data packet is sent to and from. Either phone initiated, or cell initiated. This packet is part of the sub-band carriers, and is reserved away from call use. It will not take away any bandwidth from calls at all. This packet is extremely small, I have forgotten the exact size, but its somewhere along the 250 bytes size.
However, the current presence scheme does not use ALL of this packet, and there is a lot of empty space, doing nothing. SMS was traditionally slotted into this "wasted" space, which would otherwise be blank.
One simpl reason is, that free SMSes would decrease amount of phone calls made. Therefore the cost of an SMS must reflect the cost of communicating the same thing over a phone call. The price should be optimized so that total revenue from both SMS and phone calls is maximized (also considering the peak network capacity etc). I do not know the situation in the USA, but in the UK, and most of europe, and probably the rest of the world. Amongst the public (not business) users, SMS already is used far more than phone calls. This is even considering in most cases, SMS communication can be far more expensive than the equivelent call.
Eg, a call to say: "Darling I am stuck on the train will be late" "what time will you be in" "8:00 am" "Ok, take care see you soon"
Would only take a minute and would cost about 10p, or normally part of the free minuites. The same conversation via SMS would reach 40p (4x10p messages). Though would more likely be a single message, and a possible response (10/20p).
Secondly the actual bandwith used: a 160 char Text message uses 140 bytes for 10p. a 1 minuite phone call at 2G GSM (9600bps) would use 60 x 9600bits = 576000bits = 72000 bytes, for the same 10p call. This is actual usable bandwith. add overhead, etc, the actual bandwith is higher. Add to that, that phone calls are a QoS issue, where bandwidth HAS to be reserved during a phone call, and cannot be "shaped" in the way data can be.
With 3g, and 3.5G (HSDPA) with maximum bandwith approaching 3.5 MBps, and more. and with "data plans" such as my T-Mobile Web and Walk plus, which gives me effectively 3GB data transfer per month at ANY rate (2.5G GPRS, 3G UMTS, or 3.5G HSDPA) at £12 a month. Also I have just switched my contract to a T-Mobile "solo" package, which for £30 per month (and only a 30day contract, not 18 months, or two years), gives me 1400 minuets a month to any landline/mobile, and (finally)unlimited text. It just puts it all into perspective about what CAN be done, what is TECHNICALLY possible, and what is COMMERCIALLY possible.
But while people are willing to pay 10p per message, and look at bundles as "value" the companies will continue to cream their profits!
ITs the same reason why a HDMI cable costs £30 in Dixons, and the SAME cable, from an online retailer can cost £4. People pay for a perceived value (Digital is greater than analogue), and until their perceptions change, companies will be willign to charge for it.
I really don't know about what is going on in the USA, regarding these "costs", but I used to work for LogicaCMG (who at one point was responsible for the production of 75% of all the SMS servers in the world). I have also maintained software for routing SMS throughout the world.
Let me tell you, the actual costs of sending SMS is peanuts. In 2001 it was approximately 0.1p per message. Its actually much cheaper now. This includes cost of electricity, processor power, and all other associated costs.
A poster below explains how SMS worked previously, that it effectively uses part of the "wasted" sideband in the GSM signalling. This sideband always exists, and if the payload was not used, it is effectively wasted.
Whilst it is true that although "free" there is a finite limit on the total number of sidebands available for SMS, again technology has come up with a different answer. Most modern GSM phones (Especially Sony Ericsson, and I am certain the others have menu options too) have the ability to send SMS via GPRS as opposed to GSM sideband. GPRS has a far higher bandwidth, and on 3G/HSPDA it can go up to 3.5Mbit per second. This "data rate" is already offered to most people at FAR less costs than SMS.
The point being is that SMS is extremely cheap for the operators. So why the insane costs? Lets take one2one-uk (now t-mobile-uk). When they started their SMS service in 1997/1998, they charged 4p per message, and made a tidy profit at the time. Very soon afterwards, they ramped their costs to 10p per message. They said they did this to match what vodafone, etc was doing. It appeared that their surveys shown that customers were willing to pay 10p per message!?!
This was around about the time the 3G auctions happend, and the operators in Europe blew huge amounts of money bidding for the frequencies, hoping the dot com boom will bring immense profits (ie they were greedy)
What actually happened was, that the dot com era flopped, and the services they were looking to profit from the 3G era simply vanished. Laden with debt, they have used SMS to provide their method of debt recovery.
Its just pure profit. It particularly shows when they also charge 10p per message when sent through their web interface. grrrrrrrrrr.
What's even more galling is that that T-Mobile charge 20p per message to send abroad, and when abroad they charge 40p per message (rip off).
Now when you consider T-Mobile charges 20p per message for MMS (which can contain MUCH more text, and Pictures, AND sound - and should cost more to send). and its 20p irregardless of whether you send from within the UK, or abroad, and to any number in the world. So it PROOVES that the operators CAN reduce costs.
Finally the same phones sending or receiving SMS and MMS, can also send Email at potentially more cost benefits, and you can see how crazy the whole situation is.
I can "partly" understand BT charging 10p per text message send via the "landline" here in the UK (yes we have SMS send and receive through landlines as well, with a suitable phone). But its a bit more involved through a landline, as it involves a "hidden" data call both ways to send/receive.
I fully agree with you. I myself bought a Nokia N95 8GB for the same reasons. And trust me, I am NOT a Nokia fanboi, as I swore myself off Nokia 6 years ago, after a really bad customer service complaint, and moved to Sony Ericsson.
The fact is I wanted a phone, with a "decent enough" camera (my D-SLR is not practical to carry around to parties), price, Music, storage, performance, high speed internet, GPS, and also the ability to change batteries (this is a phone foremost).
The 1st gen iphone does NOT suit my needs. the 2nd gen iphone MAY suit my needs (it may not).
the N95 8GB DID suit my needs, and despite my "hate" for Nokia, i bit the bullet and got it. I am largely happy with it, my main annoyances rather minor, and mainly because I still find Sony Ericsson have a more logical menu layout, and better SMS handling (pred text, delivery reports), and better IMAP push support. However, there is no Ericsson that currently does everything I need.
Hi, I think you are wasting your time arguing with them. I can see pretty clearly from your past posts you are hardly a "Nokia Mouthpeice". You happend to live in Europe (as I do) and
Unfortunately, even here on Slashdot, sometimes Apple fans can be pretty bad. Even when you put an informative post, some will resort to name calling, or worse say you are a Nokia fanboy.
I myself make a earlier comment saying I find it strange that some people writing here buy the iphone, then are disappointed, then plan on buy the 2nd gen version, whilst also "praising" the iphone, and wonder why poeple laugh at them.
I bought the iPhone, and yes disappointed it didn't have 3G support, and
but this is a 1st gen product from Apple and I could forgive them for not having EVERYTHING they wanted to have for their 1st gen launch. and
I am extremely happy with the iPhone, and plan on buying the 2nd version as soon as it comes out. Now lets look at facts. 1) you WERE disappointed that it didn't have 3G support 2) yet you "forgive" them for not having everything 3) you are planning on buying the second version when it comes out. (adding to Apples profit)
Now if you bought the iPhone because it was what you want it for, that's great. Its a good phone. But you have already stated the 1st gen phone was NOT everything you wanted it for, and you have stated planning on buying the next phone. Two phones with one totally replacing the other. Certainly wasteful in money and environment. Also you are hoping the new iphone will have those features the original lacked.
Me, I was going to get an iphone. And when i realised the limitations, I decided that I needed something NOW, and instead put my money on a Nokia N95 8GB.
With this, I can: - listen to music - watch movies - use GPS (very handy in London, and great for social events in many ways) - Access the internet ANYWHERE at 1.5 Mps, even on a train, with my laptop, using bluetooth. - use normal headphones without an adapter - take photos that are reasonable. - IMAP push. - Carry a spare battery, in case the main one runs out (it is primarily a phone and a phone with no power due to excess media playback/internet browsing fails in its primary use as a phone)
I am certainly not disappointed, I purchased this because it fit my needs, and the iphone didn't. Maybe one day in the future, when this is old, I may get the 2nd/3rd/4rth generation iphone if it suits my needs, or even a Google Andriod based phone, or even heaven forbid, a MS WM phone.
But at least I didn't purchase a phone having to "forgive" Nokia for not doing what I wanted. Nor did I have to plan on buying a new phone later to do what I originally wanted to do. I will only replace this phone When it doesn't function.
That is why people are laughing at you for buying an iphone. Because you drunk the Apple kool aid, and bought a phone which clearly didn't fit your needs, and now you are further promising to fund Jobs retirement plan, by buying the second generation one.
That being said, I don't think the iphone is a bad PHONE, and have recommended it to some friends, who don't have any further needs.
Hmmm, not always true, I know I am a geek, and been one since I was seven, yet I don't have any problems scouting for girlfriends. Although finding the "right one" is not always easy, in general I think the old stereotype of "geeks" not finding girlfriends, is false. I certainly find ladies seek more geeks these days, than the usual jock from the football pitch.
Mind you I live in London UK, and I am South Asian. I don't think that makes any difference though.
Unlike most prior Sony things (aside from CD, of course), they learned that it takes an industry to make a format succeed. So they managed to get nearly every CE company, and most of the film studios, as partners in Blu-Ray. Just a small nitpick, but Sony was also responsible for the 3 1/2" Floppy Disk/Drive, which admittedly was a huge success, but maybe because they left to to be developed by their engineers, and not their marketers!
I am closely looking at the forthcoming SonyEricsson XPERIA X1. That phone seems to have some very interesting capabilities. Intrestingly its a Windows Mobile phone (the first by SonyEricsson). And before you completely diss Windows Mobile, its a LOT more "open" than iPhone, and has been around for a long time.
The phone seems to be made by HTC to SonyEricsson's specs (there is some clues as to the origins, such as use of MicroSD, instead of Memorystick, and the use of a USB, instead of SE's Proprietary FastPort connector)
Specs wise, it is a WVGA touchscreen phone (800 x 480), with quad band GSM, Tri Band 3G, HSDPA (7.1mbits), Assisted GPS, pullout keyboard, full bluetooth implementation, Wireless, a "finger" touch screen, with a nifty Panels interface by SE (iPhone like eyecandy)
They have recently demonstrated a prototype, and it does look pretty good, and its not that big in your hand either.
The K530 i think is based on the EMP (Ericsson Mobile Platform) U250 platform, which is a very stable platform. It forms the basis of the newer K800 too. and its a pretty good platform. The K800 also supports Java multitasking too (running in the background, loading multiple midlets etc)
Most of the older Ericsson phones (including the "Sony" Ericssons, which are still good old Ericssons at heart), were built like bricks. I still have my T28, my R320 and I know of people that still have the old school 2 line ones.
The Chassis was made of steel, and took incredible amount of abuse. Nokias were just not as strong.
They don't make them like they used to. I think my K800i is not as strong as those old warriors, and its still a fairly strong phone for the current market.
Tarantella (the OLD SCO - Santa Cruz Operation) was acquired by Sun Microsystems in July 2005, and is now a division of Sun Microsystems.
Just to elaborate on the parent, the ORIGINAL SCO was called the Santa Cruz Operation. I will call this company SCO, and the "new" ex caldera company TSG (for The Sco Group).
SCO was formed in 1978, and in 1983 acquired the rights to Ship Microsoft Xenix (Microsoft's own version of Unix for the x86 processor). SCO ported Xenix to the 386 processor, and eventually Microsoft transferred ownership of Xenix to SCO, with an agreement that leaves Microsoft owning 25% of SCO (not sure what happened to that "investment" afterwards).
In 1989, SCO produced SCO Unix from system V version 3.2 base, and eventually added TCP/IP, as well as the SCO open desktop (Unix + X + a desktop env). They still supported Xenix.
In 1995, SCO acquired the source code for System V ver 4 from Novell, as well as the license administrator for UNIX on behalf of Novell. They also acquired Novell UNIXware. They renamed SCO Unix to "Open Unix" and kept Unixware as Unixware. They did apparently try to merge the sources into one product in 1997. They were also part of the 86open group.
In 2000/2001, SCO sold its OpenUnix, Unixware, services, (virtually its entire UNIX business) to Caledera, and renamed itself Tarantella, to focus itself on this groupware product of the same name. Caldera renamed itself to "The SCO group"
The point of this little lecture, is that Caledra DIDN'T buy out SCO, or vice versa, even though their actions may imply otherwise. Also note the "license administrator for UNIX, on behalf of NOVELL"
Also note, it was the "real" SCO who was part of monterrey, not Caldera.
Now Tarantella exists as part of Sun, and its technologies, which are similar to Citrix but for unix/linux too, based on X, and other terminal services, are a part of the Sun Secure Global Desktop.
...if you READ what i WROTE, i said that they were ALSO very successfull at PUTTING DV/Firewire in the hands of ordinary customers... I was just trying to say, they invented stuff.. and also they helped make stuff available to ordinary customers. Nothing wrong with what was said.
Slashdot Mirror
That is very true. In addition to the earlier post above (http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=596309&cid=23964553) the on demand MP3 stitcher that I developed was developed entirely on a PC (running windows), but deployed on a Sun Sparc, with NO need to adapt the code or recompile whatsoever. Considering the complexity of the program (dynamically stitching MP3 files, scanning individual frames, validating, etc) and that it processes on average 30 files a minute (at around 1 - 2 second per file), it was just a joy to be able to deploy the same WAR file on the following architecture running tomcat 5.5 without any changes.
- Sun Blade T6320 (8 way SPARC0) running Solaris
- Sun Netra X4200 M2 Server (x86 Opteron) running Solaris
- Generic PC development server running Linux
- Development PCs running Windows XP
I have developed a JAVA based server application (running in tomcat) that dynamically stitches MP3 files together on request. Lets just say, that in operation, it is as fast as the equivalent in C++, with the advantage of quicker fixes/development and is easier to make it scale on multi processor systems.
Sure when you "first" run it, it runs at about 25% to 30% of any equivelent C program, but after serving about 2 to 3 complete files, the JIT compiler starts kicking in, and speeds increase to within 70 to 80% of the C code. and within about 10 requests and further optimisation by the JIT, it comes to 95% to 110% of the speed of the C code. Yes it actually runs faster at times.
AS for the privacy guide, this is in almost ANY properly written privacy guide, and a legal requirement in this day and age.
For example, if a new government law came into place, regarding privacy and information stored, Mozilla will be forced to comply. Therefore, it is unrealistic, and unlawful to claim an unchanging privacy policy.
Oblig Slashdot Anechdote:
The PS3 also runs Linux! (officially, no need to hack), Officall Sony Supported Distro is Yellow Dog, but there are versions of Fedora, Ubuntu, and Debian.
Easy upgrade of HD with 2.5 SATA drives (without messing your warrenty)
Add a normal USB keyboard, and mouse (or use a bluetooth one, if you prefer)
Oh, and i forgot, the PS3 also Runs Linux (officially, no need to hack), plus a normal USB keyboard (or a bluetooth one if you have one)
I second that, irfan view is an awesome program for what it does. I love the way you can "slideshow" scroll through files using left and right keys (has bitten me too at times, by not saving!), its "non desctructive" JPEG rotate.
Sure its no Photoshop/GIMP, but when dealign with a lot of files quickly and simply, its pretty good.
And why do you miss it? Its still available, and its still being updated!
I work in a "corporate" environment (a LARGE corporate environment, actually) which uses Google Apps (corp gmail, etc). We moved from outlook to Google Apps. Painfull at first, I have to admit in the long run, gmail beats outlook for being usable, on a day to day basis. plus, if you REALLY have to use outlook, you can always drop down to IMAP access, when you need it.
I also have to agree with the Java comment. The JRE IS getting better every version, and faster. Java in applets are getting more useful. I have even seen Linux and DOS booting up, in a x86 emulator running in a Java applet. But, Suns Java is a bit in your face these days, and worse, it doesnt get rid of older versions (I understand keeping v1.5 when you install 1.6, but keeping 1.6, when you install bugfix 1.6update1, is a bit silly). And installing Yahoo Toolbar, is lame.
Still at least with Java being open source, there is always OpenJDK, etc.
Calling them "Cult" will also lend them credibility for something they aren't.
And by the way, isn't "Church" a Christian designation? But Scientology is a completely different thing, and has really not much to do with Christianity. Maybe you should tell that to Saint IGNUcius (aka Richard M. Stallman) and his Church of Emacs
http://www.stallman.org/
No it wont, for security reasons the radio stack will NOT be a part of android! :)
I don't know about USA, but here in the UK, T-Mobile, does the least "Branding"/"Lockdown" of phones sold.
Ok, I admit I do not like what they do to the Icons (they have a standard icon set) but normally they do not remove features. (They tried at first with the N95 and its in built SIP functionality, but were forced via a lawsuit to put it back in!)
They DO Sim lock the phones, but considering they do give a HUGE discount, that is fair, and its not too difficult to unlock most phones, and they have an official way of doing it, when your commitment period is over.
I tend to get my T-Mobile upgrades from Carphone Warehouse, as they give me unlocked unbranded phones, but to be honest, there is usually not MUCH difference.
Again, you didn't understand what I meant by "wasted" bandwidth. Effectively, in GSM, there is a need for the phone to periodically (and often) connect to the Cell (and vice versa) as part of this connect, a small data packet is sent to and from. Either phone initiated, or cell initiated. This packet is part of the sub-band carriers, and is reserved away from call use. It will not take away any bandwidth from calls at all. This packet is extremely small, I have forgotten the exact size, but its somewhere along the 250 bytes size.
However, the current presence scheme does not use ALL of this packet, and there is a lot of empty space, doing nothing. SMS was traditionally slotted into this "wasted" space, which would otherwise be blank. One simpl reason is, that free SMSes would decrease amount of phone calls made. Therefore the cost of an SMS must reflect the cost of communicating the same thing over a phone call. The price should be optimized so that total revenue from both SMS and phone calls is maximized (also considering the peak network capacity etc). I do not know the situation in the USA, but in the UK, and most of europe, and probably the rest of the world. Amongst the public (not business) users, SMS already is used far more than phone calls. This is even considering in most cases, SMS communication can be far more expensive than the equivelent call.
Eg, a call to say:
"Darling I am stuck on the train will be late"
"what time will you be in"
"8:00 am"
"Ok, take care see you soon"
Would only take a minute and would cost about 10p, or normally part of the free minuites. The same conversation via SMS would reach 40p (4x10p messages). Though would more likely be a single message, and a possible response (10/20p).
Secondly the actual bandwith used:
a 160 char Text message uses 140 bytes for 10p. a 1 minuite phone call at 2G GSM (9600bps) would use 60 x 9600bits = 576000bits = 72000 bytes, for the same 10p call. This is actual usable bandwith. add overhead, etc, the actual bandwith is higher. Add to that, that phone calls are a QoS issue, where bandwidth HAS to be reserved during a phone call, and cannot be "shaped" in the way data can be.
With 3g, and 3.5G (HSDPA) with maximum bandwith approaching 3.5 MBps, and more. and with "data plans" such as my T-Mobile Web and Walk plus, which gives me effectively 3GB data transfer per month at ANY rate (2.5G GPRS, 3G UMTS, or 3.5G HSDPA) at £12 a month. Also I have just switched my contract to a T-Mobile "solo" package, which for £30 per month (and only a 30day contract, not 18 months, or two years), gives me 1400 minuets a month to any landline/mobile, and (finally)unlimited text. It just puts it all into perspective about what CAN be done, what is TECHNICALLY possible, and what is COMMERCIALLY possible.
But while people are willing to pay 10p per message, and look at bundles as "value" the companies will continue to cream their profits!
ITs the same reason why a HDMI cable costs £30 in Dixons, and the SAME cable, from an online retailer can cost £4. People pay for a perceived value (Digital is greater than analogue), and until their perceptions change, companies will be willign to charge for it.
yes, most Sonyericsson phones support IMAP push VERY well. Try it, no need for a blackberry if all you want is messaging.
I really don't know about what is going on in the USA, regarding these "costs", but I used to work for LogicaCMG (who at one point was responsible for the production of 75% of all the SMS servers in the world). I have also maintained software for routing SMS throughout the world.
Let me tell you, the actual costs of sending SMS is peanuts. In 2001 it was approximately 0.1p per message. Its actually much cheaper now. This includes cost of electricity, processor power, and all other associated costs.
A poster below explains how SMS worked previously, that it effectively uses part of the "wasted" sideband in the GSM signalling. This sideband always exists, and if the payload was not used, it is effectively wasted.
Whilst it is true that although "free" there is a finite limit on the total number of sidebands available for SMS, again technology has come up with a different answer. Most modern GSM phones (Especially Sony Ericsson, and I am certain the others have menu options too) have the ability to send SMS via GPRS as opposed to GSM sideband. GPRS has a far higher bandwidth, and on 3G/HSPDA it can go up to 3.5Mbit per second. This "data rate" is already offered to most people at FAR less costs than SMS.
The point being is that SMS is extremely cheap for the operators. So why the insane costs? Lets take one2one-uk (now t-mobile-uk). When they started their SMS service in 1997/1998, they charged 4p per message, and made a tidy profit at the time. Very soon afterwards, they ramped their costs to 10p per message. They said they did this to match what vodafone, etc was doing. It appeared that their surveys shown that customers were willing to pay 10p per message!?!
This was around about the time the 3G auctions happend, and the operators in Europe blew huge amounts of money bidding for the frequencies, hoping the dot com boom will bring immense profits (ie they were greedy)
What actually happened was, that the dot com era flopped, and the services they were looking to profit from the 3G era simply vanished. Laden with debt, they have used SMS to provide their method of debt recovery.
Its just pure profit. It particularly shows when they also charge 10p per message when sent through their web interface. grrrrrrrrrr.
What's even more galling is that that T-Mobile charge 20p per message to send abroad, and when abroad they charge 40p per message (rip off).
Now when you consider T-Mobile charges 20p per message for MMS (which can contain MUCH more text, and Pictures, AND sound - and should cost more to send). and its 20p irregardless of whether you send from within the UK, or abroad, and to any number in the world. So it PROOVES that the operators CAN reduce costs.
Finally the same phones sending or receiving SMS and MMS, can also send Email at potentially more cost benefits, and you can see how crazy the whole situation is.
I can "partly" understand BT charging 10p per text message send via the "landline" here in the UK (yes we have SMS send and receive through landlines as well, with a suitable phone). But its a bit more involved through a landline, as it involves a "hidden" data call both ways to send/receive.
So there you go.
I fully agree with you. I myself bought a Nokia N95 8GB for the same reasons. And trust me, I am NOT a Nokia fanboi, as I swore myself off Nokia 6 years ago, after a really bad customer service complaint, and moved to Sony Ericsson.
The fact is I wanted a phone, with a "decent enough" camera (my D-SLR is not practical to carry around to parties), price, Music, storage, performance, high speed internet, GPS, and also the ability to change batteries (this is a phone foremost).
The 1st gen iphone does NOT suit my needs. the 2nd gen iphone MAY suit my needs (it may not).
the N95 8GB DID suit my needs, and despite my "hate" for Nokia, i bit the bullet and got it. I am largely happy with it, my main annoyances rather minor, and mainly because I still find Sony Ericsson have a more logical menu layout, and better SMS handling (pred text, delivery reports), and better IMAP push support. However, there is no Ericsson that currently does everything I need.
Hi, I think you are wasting your time arguing with them. I can see pretty clearly from your past posts you are hardly a "Nokia Mouthpeice". You happend to live in Europe (as I do) and
Unfortunately, even here on Slashdot, sometimes Apple fans can be pretty bad. Even when you put an informative post, some will resort to name calling, or worse say you are a Nokia fanboy.
I myself make a earlier comment saying I find it strange that some people writing here buy the iphone, then are disappointed, then plan on buy the 2nd gen version, whilst also "praising" the iphone, and wonder why poeple laugh at them.
Without repeating what I said in the earlier post, please read this:
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=536090&cid=23225490
1) you WERE disappointed that it didn't have 3G support
2) yet you "forgive" them for not having everything
3) you are planning on buying the second version when it comes out. (adding to Apples profit)
Now if you bought the iPhone because it was what you want it for, that's great. Its a good phone. But you have already stated the 1st gen phone was NOT everything you wanted it for, and you have stated planning on buying the next phone. Two phones with one totally replacing the other. Certainly wasteful in money and environment. Also you are hoping the new iphone will have those features the original lacked.
Me, I was going to get an iphone. And when i realised the limitations, I decided that I needed something NOW, and instead put my money on a Nokia N95 8GB.
With this, I can:
- listen to music
- watch movies
- use GPS (very handy in London, and great for social events in many ways)
- Access the internet ANYWHERE at 1.5 Mps, even on a train, with my laptop, using bluetooth.
- use normal headphones without an adapter
- take photos that are reasonable.
- IMAP push.
- Carry a spare battery, in case the main one runs out (it is primarily a phone and a phone with no power due to excess media playback/internet browsing fails in its primary use as a phone)
I am certainly not disappointed, I purchased this because it fit my needs, and the iphone didn't. Maybe one day in the future, when this is old, I may get the 2nd/3rd/4rth generation iphone if it suits my needs, or even a Google Andriod based phone, or even heaven forbid, a MS WM phone.
But at least I didn't purchase a phone having to "forgive" Nokia for not doing what I wanted. Nor did I have to plan on buying a new phone later to do what I originally wanted to do. I will only replace this phone When it doesn't function.
That is why people are laughing at you for buying an iphone. Because you drunk the Apple kool aid, and bought a phone which clearly didn't fit your needs, and now you are further promising to fund Jobs retirement plan, by buying the second generation one.
That being said, I don't think the iphone is a bad PHONE, and have recommended it to some friends, who don't have any further needs.
Hmmm, not always true, I know I am a geek, and been one since I was seven, yet I don't have any problems scouting for girlfriends. Although finding the "right one" is not always easy, in general I think the old stereotype of "geeks" not finding girlfriends, is false. I certainly find ladies seek more geeks these days, than the usual jock from the football pitch.
Mind you I live in London UK, and I am South Asian. I don't think that makes any difference though.
I am closely looking at the forthcoming SonyEricsson XPERIA X1. That phone seems to have some very interesting capabilities. Intrestingly its a Windows Mobile phone (the first by SonyEricsson). And before you completely diss Windows Mobile, its a LOT more "open" than iPhone, and has been around for a long time.
The phone seems to be made by HTC to SonyEricsson's specs (there is some clues as to the origins, such as use of MicroSD, instead of Memorystick, and the use of a USB, instead of SE's Proprietary FastPort connector)
Specs wise, it is a WVGA touchscreen phone (800 x 480), with quad band GSM, Tri Band 3G, HSDPA (7.1mbits), Assisted GPS, pullout keyboard, full bluetooth implementation, Wireless, a "finger" touch screen, with a nifty Panels interface by SE (iPhone like eyecandy)
They have recently demonstrated a prototype, and it does look pretty good, and its not that big in your hand either.
The K530 i think is based on the EMP (Ericsson Mobile Platform) U250 platform, which is a very stable platform. It forms the basis of the newer K800 too. and its a pretty good platform. The K800 also supports Java multitasking too (running in the background, loading multiple midlets etc)
Most of the older Ericsson phones (including the "Sony" Ericssons, which are still good old Ericssons at heart), were built like bricks. I still have my T28, my R320 and I know of people that still have the old school 2 line ones.
The Chassis was made of steel, and took incredible amount of abuse. Nokias were just not as strong.
They don't make them like they used to. I think my K800i is not as strong as those old warriors, and its still a fairly strong phone for the current market.
you guys pay for INCOMING text?
And to think us Brits have been complaining about the daylight robbery of our providers, at least we don't have to pay incoming!
WGA is a very big DRM..........
Tarantella (the OLD SCO - Santa Cruz Operation) was acquired by Sun Microsystems in July 2005, and is now a division of Sun Microsystems.
Just to elaborate on the parent, the ORIGINAL SCO was called the Santa Cruz Operation. I will call this company SCO, and the "new" ex caldera company TSG (for The Sco Group).
SCO was formed in 1978, and in 1983 acquired the rights to Ship Microsoft Xenix (Microsoft's own version of Unix for the x86 processor). SCO ported Xenix to the 386 processor, and eventually Microsoft transferred ownership of Xenix to SCO, with an agreement that leaves Microsoft owning 25% of SCO (not sure what happened to that "investment" afterwards).
In 1989, SCO produced SCO Unix from system V version 3.2 base, and eventually added TCP/IP, as well as the SCO open desktop (Unix + X + a desktop env). They still supported Xenix.
In 1995, SCO acquired the source code for System V ver 4 from Novell, as well as the license administrator for UNIX on behalf of Novell. They also acquired Novell UNIXware. They renamed SCO Unix to "Open Unix" and kept Unixware as Unixware. They did apparently try to merge the sources into one product in 1997. They were also part of the 86open group.
In 2000/2001, SCO sold its OpenUnix, Unixware, services, (virtually its entire UNIX business) to Caledera, and renamed itself Tarantella, to focus itself on this groupware product of the same name. Caldera renamed itself to "The SCO group"
The point of this little lecture, is that Caledra DIDN'T buy out SCO, or vice versa, even though their actions may imply otherwise. Also note the "license administrator for UNIX, on behalf of NOVELL"
Also note, it was the "real" SCO who was part of monterrey, not Caldera.
Obligatory Wiki link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tarantella,_Inc.
Now Tarantella exists as part of Sun, and its technologies, which are similar to Citrix but for unix/linux too, based on X, and other terminal services, are a part of the Sun Secure Global Desktop.
...if you READ what i WROTE, i said that they were ALSO very successfull at PUTTING DV/Firewire in the hands of ordinary customers... I was just trying to say, they invented stuff.. and also they helped make stuff available to ordinary customers. Nothing wrong with what was said.