Verizon always used to be very open to what they allowed on their network - you simply had to call them to get an ESN change on the account. I used a few phones which were originally made for Sprint that way. That only changed when the FCC rules requiring GPS support in phones happened - to guarantee compliance and avoid large fines, they stopped allowing just any old phone.
Do you have some direct evidence that they're looking for phones they originally sold, or simply looking to make sure they're legal to put on the network? They might also have a legitimate concern that they're able push PRL updates, and that it supports the appropriate bands, so they're not paying roaming fees beyond what they would on a phone they sell.
You do realize this was posted to the "entertainment" section, right? Nerds watch TV for entertainment, and this is new, so this is news for nerds. That you don't care about it doesn't change that.
LOL. Your ignorance is showing. Different carriers use different frequencies, because they have to, both technically and legally. Many phones work on multiple frequency bands, there's no "lock-in" as you claim. The same is true in Europe, where different providers are assigned the use of different frequencies within the available bands.
Going back to the original AMPS "A side/B side" US cellular system, which eventually aggregated to essentially ATT/VZW, one side chose CDMA and the other TDMA when they moved to digital. When PCS expansion came into play, the new carriers likewise picked between the available technologies. It's not like any of them are proprietary. The US has more frequency bands in use because of what could be made available. Phones can be made to cover all bands, but it costs more and consumers generally aren't interested in paying for that flexibility, since they can simply get a new phone and change providers when their contract is up.
The current direction is that all US carriers will eventually end up with VoLTE, but during the transition from current technologies there will be a period where technology prevents interoperability of some equipment between some carriers.
With the exception of the iPhone, Verizon has never locked phones to their network, at least as the word "locked" is applied to cell phones.
VZW uses CDMA for voice. The only other US carrier to do so is Sprint. A VZW phone will work on Sprint, except for the fact that Sprint won't allow any phone they didn't sell on their network. It used to be that Verizon would let you put a Sprint phone on their network, though. Then Sprint went WIMAX for a while, and VZW went LTE.
In any case, there's nothing which keeps a VZW phone locked to their network. Not being able to use most of their phones on a different network is purely a technology issue. There are some VZW "world phones," which will work on other networks just fine.
Finally, with regard to locked iPhones, they will unlock them when your contract is done.
I doubt the spec will say a device must be able to deliver 100W. It will be allowed, not required. There will be negotiation involved to determine the max power a device will deliver/can draw.
Really, the only use you can see is a wall outlet? How about standardizing laptop power on this, eliminating all the proprietary "brick on a leash" power supplies, much like has happened with (most) cell phones? How about a single cable connection between a desktop and printer (no separate power cable for the printer)? How about a USB air conditioner, not just a fan (jk:-) )?
But it's odd that they didn't test with low levels of ethylene and ammonia, too. Those, along with hydrogen sulfide, are already well known to have roles in the ripening process of fruits. That makes me believe that the claim "Everything else that's ever been done on plants was looking at hydrogen sulfide in high concentrations," is overstated.
2.4G is very regulated, under Part 15 of the FCC rules. Perhaps most important of which are the limits on actual and radiated power, which allow coexistance based on range.
"Unregulated" is very different than "unlicensed."
It's not new. A very quick Google produced this, from 6 years ago:
Dead Reckoning technology allows a GPS to continue tracking your position on the map even when little or no signal is available, such as when driving through a tunnel or in dense urban environments, and is one of the few benefits of an integrated in-car GPS navigation system over a portable GPS.
California-based GPS chip manufacturer, SiRF, is announcing SiRFDiRect technology that delivers the same in-car DR capabilities previously available on in-car wired systems only.
According to SiRF, "SiRFDiRect gives our portable navigation device customers a competitive edge by enabling them to provide in-car system navigation accuracy."
In-Car GPS systems tap into the car's accelerometer and brake light to determine speed and position when no GPS signal is available. SiRF's DR sensor achieves the same accuracy, seamlessly switching between DR and regular GPS, but can be embedded in the device or mounted on the dashboard. SiRF says the chips will be available to OEM manufacturers in Q3 this year.
...and that refers to similar capability available even earlier.
..until you discover that you can't aim the bulb as you'd wish. There's only about 1/4 turn between contact and full tight with a standard E26 socket. So now, you need not just a lopsided bulb, but one that has its own aiming mechanism. Your fixture is also, if any good at all, designed to reflect light from the back, which would constitute a significant part of the light pattern. You may well find that acts to diffuse the light, reducing glare.
No, it's not stupid at all. The article specifically mentioned that was a requirement for "A lamps," i.e. replacements for the common household incandescent bulb. Those illuminate is a manner similar to the requirement, which is specific to "Omnidirectional Lamps."
LED replacements for non-omnidirectional bulbs, like the common PAR floodlight bulbs, have their own requirements.
The requirement only applies to "lamps intended to replace existing standard electric lamps," and it's there to make sure an LED replacement produces a pattern of light similar to the bulb it's replacing.
I have no idea where the 170 degrees mentioned in the article comes from. They probably meant 270, double the 135 mentioned below, because it's assumed to be symmetrical.
Products shall have
an even distribution
of luminous intensity
(candelas) within
the 0 to 135 zone
(vertically axially
symmetrical).
Luminous intensity
at any angle within
this zone shall not
differ from the mean
luminous intensity
for the entire 0 to
135 zone by more
than 20%.
At least 5% of total
flux (lumens) must
be emitted in the
135-180 zone.
Distribution shall be
vertically
symmetrical as
measured in three
vertical planes at 0,
45, and 90.
"The US defense budget is 700,000 million. If we reduced the defense budget by.1% (iow, by a factor of.001), we could get another 700 million for this project."
Or, we could simply reduce the deficit by that amount, instead of continuing to spend money we don't have.
It's even easier than that. If an employer has sufficient reason to believe an employee has broken a contractual commitment, they can sue them and get a subpoena or warrant for the info. There's no reason to allow fishing expeditions.
Slashdot Mirror
...and if the TLD is so important to them, why didn't those countries file an application for it? Amazon, the company, is the only one who did.
They're acting like juvenile children - "MOMMY! I don't have a candy bar - Joey shouldn't have one, either!"
The same thing that's wrong with amazon.river or amazon.basin/river, I suppose.
Verizon always used to be very open to what they allowed on their network - you simply had to call them to get an ESN change on the account. I used a few phones which were originally made for Sprint that way. That only changed when the FCC rules requiring GPS support in phones happened - to guarantee compliance and avoid large fines, they stopped allowing just any old phone.
Do you have some direct evidence that they're looking for phones they originally sold, or simply looking to make sure they're legal to put on the network? They might also have a legitimate concern that they're able push PRL updates, and that it supports the appropriate bands, so they're not paying roaming fees beyond what they would on a phone they sell.
You do realize this was posted to the "entertainment" section, right? Nerds watch TV for entertainment, and this is new, so this is news for nerds. That you don't care about it doesn't change that.
LOL. Your ignorance is showing. Different carriers use different frequencies, because they have to, both technically and legally. Many phones work on multiple frequency bands, there's no "lock-in" as you claim. The same is true in Europe, where different providers are assigned the use of different frequencies within the available bands.
Going back to the original AMPS "A side/B side" US cellular system, which eventually aggregated to essentially ATT/VZW, one side chose CDMA and the other TDMA when they moved to digital. When PCS expansion came into play, the new carriers likewise picked between the available technologies. It's not like any of them are proprietary. The US has more frequency bands in use because of what could be made available. Phones can be made to cover all bands, but it costs more and consumers generally aren't interested in paying for that flexibility, since they can simply get a new phone and change providers when their contract is up.
The current direction is that all US carriers will eventually end up with VoLTE, but during the transition from current technologies there will be a period where technology prevents interoperability of some equipment between some carriers.
Nice troll.
With the exception of the iPhone, Verizon has never locked phones to their network, at least as the word "locked" is applied to cell phones.
VZW uses CDMA for voice. The only other US carrier to do so is Sprint. A VZW phone will work on Sprint, except for the fact that Sprint won't allow any phone they didn't sell on their network. It used to be that Verizon would let you put a Sprint phone on their network, though. Then Sprint went WIMAX for a while, and VZW went LTE.
In any case, there's nothing which keeps a VZW phone locked to their network. Not being able to use most of their phones on a different network is purely a technology issue. There are some VZW "world phones," which will work on other networks just fine.
Finally, with regard to locked iPhones, they will unlock them when your contract is done.
You can bet the bureaucratic management isn't being cut.
"place heavy fines on any one caught driving while in possession of a mobile device."
Like, say, a motor vehicle?
You're apparently out of the loop. HFT stabilizes the market by adding liquidity, or so we're told.
I doubt the spec will say a device must be able to deliver 100W. It will be allowed, not required. There will be negotiation involved to determine the max power a device will deliver/can draw.
:-) )?
Really, the only use you can see is a wall outlet? How about standardizing laptop power on this, eliminating all the proprietary "brick on a leash" power supplies, much like has happened with (most) cell phones? How about a single cable connection between a desktop and printer (no separate power cable for the printer)? How about a USB air conditioner, not just a fan (jk
is provided just in case you don't have a TV or radio, and your ISP blocks access to all news organizations. Remember, you heard it on /. first!
A:Re-release Win XP, and call it Windows 9.
But it's odd that they didn't test with low levels of ethylene and ammonia, too. Those, along with hydrogen sulfide, are already well known to have roles in the ripening process of fruits. That makes me believe that the claim "Everything else that's ever been done on plants was looking at hydrogen sulfide in high concentrations," is overstated.
2.4G is very regulated, under Part 15 of the FCC rules. Perhaps most important of which are the limits on actual and radiated power, which allow coexistance based on range.
"Unregulated" is very different than "unlicensed."
...and that refers to similar capability available even earlier.
..until you discover that you can't aim the bulb as you'd wish. There's only about 1/4 turn between contact and full tight with a standard E26 socket. So now, you need not just a lopsided bulb, but one that has its own aiming mechanism. Your fixture is also, if any good at all, designed to reflect light from the back, which would constitute a significant part of the light pattern. You may well find that acts to diffuse the light, reducing glare.
You'd do better looking for a different fixture.
No, it's not stupid at all. The article specifically mentioned that was a requirement for "A lamps," i.e. replacements for the common household incandescent bulb. Those illuminate is a manner similar to the requirement, which is specific to "Omnidirectional Lamps."
LED replacements for non-omnidirectional bulbs, like the common PAR floodlight bulbs, have their own requirements.
The requirement only applies to "lamps intended to replace existing standard electric lamps," and it's there to make sure an LED replacement produces a pattern of light similar to the bulb it's replacing.
That's no stupid, it's wise.
The actual Energy Star requirements are for "Luminous Intensity Distribution," and call for:
Spoken like a true Keynesian. Spending only "works" to get out of a recession because it creates inflation. And it doesn't even do that well.
"The US defense budget is 700,000 million. If we reduced the defense budget by .1% (iow, by a factor of .001), we could get another 700 million for this project."
Or, we could simply reduce the deficit by that amount, instead of continuing to spend money we don't have.
Stay back! I have a bottle of booze, and I know how to use it.
I said it did, where?
Are you sure that wasn't the Israelis?
It's even easier than that. If an employer has sufficient reason to believe an employee has broken a contractual commitment, they can sue them and get a subpoena or warrant for the info. There's no reason to allow fishing expeditions.
And you think the US isn't doing the same thing, but hiding it better?