"You can take a Windows application written in C/C++ for x86 and x64, and recompile it to target ARM - barring a few rare corner cases, it would really just work."
In theory and for small simple programs sure. But for ancient legacy apps some even containing x86 assembly optimizations, It is never that simple.
And even if it was it would negate the main advantage of windows, it's massive legacy of applications. Half of that legacy is abandonware at this point.
What are you going to choose a laptop with ARM that only runs a subset of recompiled applications, or one with x86 that run new and all legacy software.
MS doesn't need a new kernel for mobile, they need a new interface with the Priority on Touch.
You have to be naive, to be under some kind of illusion that this wouldn't happen.
China desperately want foreign technology and if you want access to their market, you must set up joint ventures and share technology. Once the technology has been captured they will launch their native industry, with your technology, and compete with you.
This has happened repeatedly, yet our brilliant western capitalists fall for it, over and over. A few quarters of higher stock prices and bigger bonuses to pad their pockets today, while a new competitor undercutting them tomorrow is someone elses problem.
I have read about this during a couple of previous appearances. It doesn't really improve on ICE efficiency. It is more about packaging and power/weight, which is good. But not revolutionary.
It might be a great Range Extender engine, but I don't see people rushing replace anything with this.
As much as people want to kvetch and moan about this, I can see the 11" MBA decimating the basic Plastic Macbook sales. They are priced the same yet here you get slicker design, more portability, SSD, aluminum case. I don't think either serves as a main computer, so why not go for the extra portability.
As far as Jobs building a netbook (I hate that designation) after saying Apple wouldn't, what he actually said Netbooks are just cheap laptops, all they did better was be cheaper. Clearly this isn't Apple moving into sub $500 laptops (and it also not Atom powered with horrid graphics). This is not Apples Netbook.
I think they are viable options that will move a lot more MBA, but naturally the same people that complain about every Apple product will complain about these.
Certainly not. I went with 6 people, 2 really liked, 2 were indifferent and two disliked (myself included).
It was the most over-hyped movie of the decade. Successful massive over-hype plus novelty for many who wanted to see great 3D possibly for the first time.
It was a mediocre, extremely cliched story with excellent CGI and annoying 3d, that still included standard 3D tropes of spears/guns jutting out of the screen.
Except this is GM, who brought us 1-4th gear lockout on Manual transmission Corvettes, just to game the EPA test, despite it being more annoying in the real world.
It must seriously fall apart at higher speed if you need to put in a bypass at 70+.
Seriously, even if you think GM has turned white knight, that doesn't care about EPA numbers, and just wants to do the right thing, how much efficiency would have to be lost to warrant the extra cost/complexity.
From an engineering perspective unless the results are drastically bad, you would just live with a small drop in efficiency at 70+MPH in RE mode, where you wouldn't expect a largely city oriented car to spend a lot of time.
You simply don't do something like this, unless you really need to.
ZunePass. XBox Live Integration. Office integration. A better UI and UI concept (imho).
I guess that will matter to Microsoft fans. But I don't have Xbox, don't want to rent music and don't actually want a "smartphone".
But I do pay attention to technology, and I find it amusing to watch each new release of phones where everyone goes all gaga over a phone. "Ooooh look, square boxes for an interface, I must have it!!!".
I don't have a smartphone, they just seem like a huge waste of money to me.
"And the iPhone seems to have gotten a little long in the tooth, falling behind Android in many areas, feeling very rigid and "controlled", with few choices."
I don't know if you haven't really read anything about WP7, but it is cloning the Old iPhone, no "cut n' Past", no real multi-tasking, no flash, no side loading applications.
If iPhone "rigid and controlled" is bothering you, it won't change much in WP7, why not go to Android. What do you think WP7 will give you that Android won't?
7" is too big. It isn't really portable as in throwing it in your pocket or using a belt clip. 7" is too small. It really won't hold a full page PDF/Comic.
If I was on the go I would prefer pocketable 5" (Dell streak size).
For at home or a transportable (requiring a bag) I would actually prefer 10+ and about 1200x800 resolution for looking full screen at PDFs/Comics.
An attempt to fill both niches meets none of them very well.
IMO licenses should be adhered to or you shouldn't use the technology. This applies to both closed and open source licenses, not just licenses we like this week because the benefit us.
"Google went to the effort of developing a clean-room bytecode interpreter so they did not just game the rules as you imply. "
And why did they do that?
Oh yes to get around licensing. I don't care if they made more technical effort to do it, they are still gaming the rules.
The intent of Java has always been to keep it to a standard, and the license is all about not subsetting/supersetting.
Google gamed the rules, told Sun to screw off and will now face Oracle in court.
Instead of abiding by the spirit and intent of the license, Google instead chose to ignore it entirely by exploiting a loophole. After that IMO all bets are off. If Oracle nails them because they didn't carry out their exploit cleanly, just deserts for attempting the exploit.
If Google respected the license they wouldn't be in court.
I understand where you are coming from, but I disagree and hence my point, this isn't as clear cut as SCO vs IBM. I think there will be plenty of people that once they read about how Google attempted to just use a technicality to avoid licensing will see the other side.
BTW when the story first broke, my first reaction was "Those damn Oracle bastards", but after I read some back-story, my opinion changed to Google attempting and exploit here to get out of licensing.
Slashdot Mirror
"You can take a Windows application written in C/C++ for x86 and x64, and recompile it to target ARM - barring a few rare corner cases, it would really just work."
In theory and for small simple programs sure. But for ancient legacy apps some even containing x86 assembly optimizations, It is never that simple.
And even if it was it would negate the main advantage of windows, it's massive legacy of applications. Half of that legacy is abandonware at this point.
What are you going to choose a laptop with ARM that only runs a subset of recompiled applications, or one with x86 that run new and all legacy software.
MS doesn't need a new kernel for mobile, they need a new interface with the Priority on Touch.
Can anyone make a sane case for this?
Intel Medfield is supposed to close the power gap on ARM and will be out before product from this port will.
Arm and x86 netbook both with windows, both competing with each other, and not binary compatible with each other.
Seriously I think the original info source is faulty and this is really Win CE 7 (already ARM) for tablets.
Really? where?
I bet you can't install ad blocking either. Google is not the champion of Open, they are the champion of Google.
You have to be naive, to be under some kind of illusion that this wouldn't happen.
China desperately want foreign technology and if you want access to their market, you must set up joint ventures and share technology. Once the technology has been captured they will launch their native industry, with your technology, and compete with you.
This has happened repeatedly, yet our brilliant western capitalists fall for it, over and over. A few quarters of higher stock prices and bigger bonuses to pad their pockets today, while a new competitor undercutting them tomorrow is someone elses problem.
The US is a bizarre statistically outlier when it comes to healthcare spending and outcomes:
http://www.stat.columbia.edu/~cook/movabletype/mlm/healthscatter2.png
Drastically outspending everyone while having some of the poorest outcomes.
Sadly, because of lobby money it will never be fixed.
I have read about this during a couple of previous appearances. It doesn't really improve on ICE efficiency. It is more about packaging and power/weight, which is good. But not revolutionary.
It might be a great Range Extender engine, but I don't see people rushing replace anything with this.
Wow.
A lot of the competition only get last mile access through Bell/Rogers, have their own back end that actually provides the bandwidth.
There is no reason that they should be able to sell that bandwidth at whatever rate they want to customers.
This is an insane anti-competitive ruling, bought by the Bell/Rogers monopolies with lobby money.
It fills me with the urge to DEFECATE!
It wasn't charged in 6 minutes.
This is a company looking for financial backing and they are providing about as much detail as EEstor.
If they truly have a world beating battery, you simply have to submit one cell for rigorous testing and they would get all the funding they need.
A publicity stunt with little data sets off my scam alarm bells.
Seriously?
As much as people want to kvetch and moan about this, I can see the 11" MBA decimating the basic Plastic Macbook sales. They are priced the same yet here you get slicker design, more portability, SSD, aluminum case. I don't think either serves as a main computer, so why not go for the extra portability.
As far as Jobs building a netbook (I hate that designation) after saying Apple wouldn't, what he actually said Netbooks are just cheap laptops, all they did better was be cheaper. Clearly this isn't Apple moving into sub $500 laptops (and it also not Atom powered with horrid graphics). This is not Apples Netbook.
I think they are viable options that will move a lot more MBA, but naturally the same people that complain about every Apple product will complain about these.
"but everyone that went to see it liked it"
Certainly not. I went with 6 people, 2 really liked, 2 were indifferent and two disliked (myself included).
It was the most over-hyped movie of the decade. Successful massive over-hype plus novelty for many who wanted to see great 3D possibly for the first time.
It was a mediocre, extremely cliched story with excellent CGI and annoying 3d, that still included standard 3D tropes of spears/guns jutting out of the screen.
I won't see Avatar 2. Fool me once...
At most 3d would take double the bandwidth, having dual frames instead of single frames.
They are simply trying to cash in on the extra box office from the 3D surcharge.
http://www.engadget.com/2010/09/11/nielsen-survey-shows-high-interest-in-3dtv-low-interest-in-payi/
A pretty awesome graph that shows that you pretty much have to sell this site unseen.
Before trying 3d tv, they surveyed 25% very likely to buy. 13% Not likely at all.
After actually seeing 3DTV in action that flipped in the other direction with 12% very likely, and 30% not likely at all.
Right...
Except this is GM, who brought us 1-4th gear lockout on Manual transmission Corvettes, just to game the EPA test, despite it being more annoying in the real world.
It must seriously fall apart at higher speed if you need to put in a bypass at 70+.
Seriously, even if you think GM has turned white knight, that doesn't care about EPA numbers, and just wants to do the right thing, how much efficiency would have to be lost to warrant the extra cost/complexity.
From an engineering perspective unless the results are drastically bad, you would just live with a small drop in efficiency at 70+MPH in RE mode, where you wouldn't expect a largely city oriented car to spend a lot of time.
You simply don't do something like this, unless you really need to.
There still must be some detail missing from this picture.
They added the extra complexity of a power combining mechanism for extra efficiency and then only use at 70MPH and beyond.
That is outside EPA testing parameters, which means this extra complexity won't add anything to the all important for marketing EPA numbers.
So just how bad would the efficiency have to be through the ICE/Generator/Motor to add extra complexity to be used over 70MPH.
Something really doesn't add up.
ZunePass. XBox Live Integration. Office integration. A better UI and UI concept (imho).
I guess that will matter to Microsoft fans. But I don't have Xbox, don't want to rent music and don't actually want a "smartphone".
But I do pay attention to technology, and I find it amusing to watch each new release of phones where everyone goes all gaga over a phone. "Ooooh look, square boxes for an interface, I must have it!!!".
I don't have a smartphone, they just seem like a huge waste of money to me.
"And the iPhone seems to have gotten a little long in the tooth, falling behind Android in many areas, feeling very rigid and "controlled", with few choices."
I don't know if you haven't really read anything about WP7, but it is cloning the Old iPhone, no "cut n' Past", no real multi-tasking, no flash, no side loading applications.
If iPhone "rigid and controlled" is bothering you, it won't change much in WP7, why not go to Android. What do you think WP7 will give you that Android won't?
Microsoft just launched an attack against Motorola over Android:
http://www.engadget.com/2010/10/01/microsoft-files-itc-complaint-against-motorola-over-alleged-andr/
So they are certain someone will sue you if you use Android...
Please point out the previous QNX consumer hardware that indicates the experience needed to make an "awesome" tablet?
Because I am not getting the connection between industrial RTOS experience and producing a consumer tablet.
http://carrypad.com/2010/09/02/galaxy-tab-first-thoughts/
Chippy is usually accurate:
Price? 799 Euro.
WOW!
That's a huge amount of money. Now who's buying?
7" is too big. It isn't really portable as in throwing it in your pocket or using a belt clip.
7" is too small. It really won't hold a full page PDF/Comic.
If I was on the go I would prefer pocketable 5" (Dell streak size).
For at home or a transportable (requiring a bag) I would actually prefer 10+ and about 1200x800 resolution for looking full screen at PDFs/Comics.
An attempt to fill both niches meets none of them very well.
Long term standing creates a list of potential health issues as well (including increased risk for atherosclerosis) :
http://www.cwhn.ca/en/node/40808
The message is likely moderation in all things.
IMO licenses should be adhered to or you shouldn't use the technology. This applies to both closed and open source licenses, not just licenses we like this week because the benefit us.
"Google went to the effort of developing a clean-room bytecode interpreter so they did not just game the rules as you imply. "
And why did they do that?
Oh yes to get around licensing. I don't care if they made more technical effort to do it, they are still gaming the rules.
The intent of Java has always been to keep it to a standard, and the license is all about not subsetting/supersetting.
Google gamed the rules, told Sun to screw off and will now face Oracle in court.
Instead of abiding by the spirit and intent of the license, Google instead chose to ignore it entirely by exploiting a loophole. After that IMO all bets are off. If Oracle nails them because they didn't carry out their exploit cleanly, just deserts for attempting the exploit.
If Google respected the license they wouldn't be in court.
I understand where you are coming from, but I disagree and hence my point, this isn't as clear cut as SCO vs IBM. I think there will be plenty of people that once they read about how Google attempted to just use a technicality to avoid licensing will see the other side.
BTW when the story first broke, my first reaction was "Those damn Oracle bastards", but after I read some back-story, my opinion changed to Google attempting and exploit here to get out of licensing.
http://news.cnet.com/8301-13580_3-9817048-39.html
http://www.betaversion.org/~stefano/linotype/news/110/