First, it is important to remember, only satellite monitoring for 121.5 ELT is stopping. Ground and air based monitoring is still ongoing. Secondly, CAP (Civil Air Patrol; Axillary Air Force) does not have equipment to track 406. Keep in mind, CAP performs the bulk of the required search and rescue operations in the US. All 406s I'm aware of have a dual mode of 121.5/406. This means it's more likely you'll actually be located by rescue crews using 121.5.
The problem is, because of the FAA, there is no competition. This means purchase plus install for a really nice 406 unit can cost in excess of $5000 for a $200-$400 ELT. Now that lower priced units, and units which are compatible with existing installs are finally starting to come onto the market you'll start to see increase in the number of installations. Yet the bulk of these installs will likely occur either during an aircraft's annual or when the existing ELT's battery requires replacement. The combination of the two means installs should start to increase sometime over the next 24-months.
In the meantime, many have elected to go with much cheaper solutions. Personal Locater Beacons (PLBs) and SPOT are very popular with pilots because they can be had at a fraction of the cost despite their reduced sized and increased capabilities.
The big advantage of the 406 ELT is the specification allows for a data component. Specifically, it allows an aircraft's GPS to continuously update the ELT with its current location. In the event of an emergency, the ELT can be manually armed or be set off from excessive G's (impact). Once set off, the ELT immediately transmits the last known location received from the GPS. This allows for very high accuracy position reporting. Of course the problem is, pilots want this capability and most existing manufacturers are attempting to rape owners.
Right now, Artex's ME406 is about the only reasonably priced unit available and it hasn't been on the market all that long.
Lastly, let's not forget satellite monitoring of 121.5 is really pretty crappy. Your typical detection window requires three satellites to pass overhead, ignoring the fact it can technically be done in two. The detection capabilities of the existing satellites are pretty crappy. And if one of the Russian satellites are in the mix, you may even require four satellite passes overhead before anyone is dispatched. This means you're looking at anywhere from 10-36 hours before someone picks up the phone to get people looking for you - unless you filed an optional flight plan. In the end, loss of satellite detection for 121.5, while certainly not good, is not really a nightmare scenario.
In the end, the best thing to do is to simply let someone know when you're flying, where you're going, the route you're taking, and the time you expect to arrive. Ideally, this is someone at your destination. And should you not show or be heard from, teach them to call the FAA or an official briefing station. At that time, they can immediately dispatch a search effort. Meaning, for many pilots, this is actually a better plan than filing a flight plan with the FAA. Routes which are not direct or too complicated to convey to laymen should be filed via flight plan.
I've read several articles over the years about how MS' IP stack has failed to keep up with various protocol improvements and optimizations. That may account for some of it.
IIRC, there was also something about non-Pro editions being limited in both the number of concurrent connections and their throughput. I didn't notice if they said what specific version of XP was used.
And it could be duguk is correct. Perhaps the windows driver just really blows - though I find that doubtful as Windows is typically the first optimized driver target for most hardware. And even still, on modern hardware, we're likely talking about differences in latency and CPU rather than these types of huge swings.
It did have to do with him being Republican, because Republicans under Bush have been wrong on nearly everything these last 8 years.
Can you be more specific. It seems most people are in a hurry to Blame GWB for things which have absolutely nothing to do with GWB. I'm often surprised how often people quote the press only to find out the press misrepresented, exaggerated, or flat out lied to the public.
BTW: Obama SUPPORTS the 2nd Amendment. That's a fact, look it up.
Its a fact he doesn't. Look up his voting record when it comes to gun related issues. He has consistently voted against guns every time he's had the option.
Saying one supports the second amendment so long as its cost prohibitive for someone to actually own or use a gun (with non-lead bullets) is not supporting the second amendment at all. Saying he does is a farce. Believing he does is to be uninformed.
Some studies have shown, for commercial aircraft, sleep deprivation may account for as much as 50% of all human error related accidents. The statistics are much higher for trans-Atlantic pilots; where it is notoriously known they don't get enough sleep.
Of course, this also accounts for the numerous reports of pilots sleeping on the job while flying on autopilot.
Don't forget a number of these are actually caused by pilot transfers. When a pilot finishes their shift, they must place the aircraft on autopilot before turning off their station and transferring control to the replacement pilot at a different console. Pilots sometimes forget to place the aircraft on auto pilot. Once they shut down their system, the aircraft has no input. This generally causes the aircraft to go into emergency mode which is forced landing mode. This throttles back the aircraft and starts a spiralling descent.
Yes, it's human error, but not the type of error where the pilot actually flies it into the ground.
I say this because of the high number of Predator crashes
Don't forget a number of these planes were actually downed from small arms fire. Even with full size aircraft, human error is often attributed to crashes when it really isn't a factor at all.
Example: A small, single engine plane on short final (low to the ground and slow airspeed) encounters wind sheer which forces it into the ground. Cause of crash may be, "Human error. Failure to maintain positive control of craft and while close to the ground. Failure to initiate a go-around." I'm not kidding, stuff like this is actually recorded in NTSB and/or FAA crash records. Of course it ignores the fact that it is impossible for some craft to escape wind sheer. And in fact, it has caused the crash of large, commercial jets before. The problem is serious enough commercial jets now have wind sheer detection systems on board and large airports now detect and report the condition.
Additionally, as many as a half dozen commericial jet crashes which were originally attributed to human error have since been determined to be attributed to humans actually doing things properly. In fact, in these cases, the cause of the crash was actually failed hydraulic valves causing the rudder to operate in reverse direction; meaning correct corrective action by humans actually cause the problem to become worse. Yet it's still dubbed, "Human error."
Long story short, don't get too caught up believing in "pilot error" claims.
Re:Large uptick in Qt usage?
on
Qt Becomes LGPL
·
· Score: 1
Actually you're right, I was thinking of moc. It's been a while since I last did some Qt coding.
Re:Large uptick in Qt usage?
on
Qt Becomes LGPL
·
· Score: 1
I wonder where that "Qt apps start slower" thing comes from.
Actually it's a well documented issue. Feel free to do some searches. As I originally said, I'm not sure it's still an issue. The responses seem to be a mixed bag.
Re:Large uptick in Qt usage?
on
Qt Becomes LGPL
·
· Score: 1
Please, don't say something like that, I hate using applications made in wx
So you have the look of your native widget set? WX apps look like native applications. I'm not 100% sure that's the case on Mac, but I believe it to be true.
I voted against Obama, because I think his political views are nonsense.
Many voted against Obama because many of his views generally are nonsense and just about every significant opinion held on current affairs have proved to be the wrong opinion to hold. Many voted against Obama because they believe in the US Constitution. Obama seemingly likes to pick and choose the parts he likes. He'd rather the 2nd amendment go away. Conversely, many voted for Obama because he wasn't Republican and is black.
Many voted against McCain because he's white, Republican, and told voters the truth. McCain has been at this long enough to know better. The public doesn't want the truth, they want to feel warm and fuzzy - and that's what Obama does for many.
In short order we'll have an idea of his leadership capabilities but based on what we know so far, real solutions won't originate from him. Frankly, the fact he's trying hard to surround himself with dissenting opinions does give hope he realizes he doesn't have the answers.
Re:Large uptick in Qt usage?
on
Qt Becomes LGPL
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
The only complaint I've seen before about Qt is that it's too expensive for proprietary apps
Then you've not been listening. Many don't like the noteworthy long start up times of Qt apps compared to say Gtk. Many don't like the need for obtuse tools like SIP. I know for a while they were working to address the long start up times I've not followed where that went. Perhaps it's no longer an issue.
Frankly, the API of Qt make Gtk look like a pile of vomit, but simple fact is, Qt is not the perfect GUI programming environment.
Now that you post it, I do recall those facts. Seems I confused the first account I heard about it with the actual facts. I was hoping to look up the accident before I posted.
The wannabe-genius will simply call the clusterfuck "elegant"
And there are people living under bridges who really do believe aliens are trying to control their thoughts. It doesn't make it true. Delusions of grandeur will always exist. Thankfully I've only run into a handful of such people in my career.
I really wasn't trying to solve a problem. I was agreeing with you. The only point I had was, far too often "genius code" is far from anything anyone would call elegant, including the author.
Some of the most genius code I've ever seen was jaw dropping in its simplicity, readability, and elegance. It showed an intuitive insight into the problem domain. IMO, that's what separates good code from genius.
and you're of course a dimwit if you cannot understand it.
A bit hostile are we? Perhaps I shouldn't agree with you in the future.
I've got to ask, are you looking for programmers who have a background in web development (including perl), VB, or Java?
I'm not trying to insult anyone, and please don't read anything into what I'm saying, but in my experience, these are the types of answers I typically see from coders who have those types of backgrounds.
The code that makes me mutter "that's pure genius" is usually not the kind of code you can't understand or is winded, twisted and a worthy entry for the obfuscated C-Code contest. It's usually code that is brilliantly simple yet very functional, fast and easy to understand.
The problem is, it normally takes genius to recognize genius. This is why far too many coders see their code, as your first characterization, and assume that's the standard for genius. Which is, after all, entirely your point.
For those wanna-be geniuses out there, if you can not refer to your code as "elegant", it is unlikely your code is "genius."
This sounds unsafe, but this is by design - They didn't want an electrical fault to kill an engine. The radios and such will die without the battery, but as long as the engine has fuel and air, it will turn.
Ignoring the latest generation of light, single and twin piston aircraft which have dual electronic ignition, which do require a functioning power bus and battery.
There is even an accident on record of a Diamondtwin engine crashing immediately after take off because of dead batteries, despite it being diesel. The fuel pumps are electric (not sure if its actually mechanical with electric axillary or fully electric) along with the retractable gear. Seems retracting the gear was enough to deplete the batteries, causing the fuel pumps to turn off. This caused both engines to simultaneously quit.
I would have provided a link to the NTSB accident report but the web site is currently unreachable for me.
Here's what they do to protect a C130 from a heat seeking missile
Flares are not very effective against modern heat seeking weapons; and that was true at least one generation of seekers ago. Modern heat seeking missiles are actually pretty good at distinguishing between the sun and exhaust, and exhaust and flares. Modern anti-heat seeking counter defensive systems actually use lasers to destroy the uber sensitive sensors contained within this class of missiles. If you notice "disco balls" on aircraft, especially helicopters, this is what they are; a heat seeking counter measure. And even then, they tend to only be fairly effective against single missile threats from the rear. Modern anti-aircraft doctrine calls for multiple missile threats against a single target. This is true for air to air engagements too.
Modern heat seekers have somewhere between 60%-90% kill statistics against modern anti-missile counter measures. As such, two missiles, statistically yields a 100+% kill ratio against all modern, KNOWN, defensive systems. Very manoeuvrable (vectored exhaust) aircraft and aircraft which have reduced heat signatures have better odds. Aircraft which employ both strategies fair significantly better, but the point remains. Few modern aircraft fall into one of those two categories, let alone both. Aircraft which are engaged from above, allowing for background radiation to assist in ones defence, also have higher survivability statistics.
Unfortunately the Android API's are an area that seems somewhat deficient in a number of places (real-time low latency PCM audio anyone - how can something so fundamental have been so badly done?!). Anyone wanting to write any half-way serious game or audio based app is stuck using a shitty "send-this-file-to-the-output" style API.
It's coming. Don't hold your breath but several serious API short comings should be addressed in the next major Android release. Android is without a doubt, very usable and easy to use. Is it an iPhone? No. Is it within reach of meeting or exceeding iPhone user's expectations? Yes, absolutely. The best thing here is, it's only software. To get ahead of Android and it's current (and forth coming) offerings will require iPhone users to buy yet another phone. That leaves current Android owners, versus current and future iPhone users, in a must better position; especially as Android continues to mature.
usability as a prime concern
That's not the first time I've read such a comment yet no one seems to be able to clearly state what that means. If you mean on screen keyboard, well, it's coming but I always wonder what stupid things people are doing that they require one handed typing. Considering the phone is already plenty usable, albeit with short comings, what does that mean? If it means latency, improvements and optimizations are coming. Per the Google developer's I've spoken with, high, immediate priorities include usability improvements, optimizations, reduced latency, improved battery, reduced footprint. And once you learn you can already create Android applications which are not possible or not allowed on the iPhone, the application future for Android gets really exciting.
The only thing I've seen which has a hope of being an iPhone killer are running Android. Right now, the G1 is about the only offering but about a half dozen others, by different carriers, will be coming out in the very near future. Additionally, the G1 already has superior hardware when compared to the iPhone 3G. Heck, even Garmin is getting into the phone business with an Android offering.
Android is already proving to be a competitor with the iPhone. The only thing holding it back is software. The next major Android release should finally place the G1 (and other Android phones) ahead of or on par with Apple's iPhone in capabilities, performance, and ease of use; which frankly really isn't that bad today. The fact that current hardware already exceeds the iPhone and applications can do thing on Android which are simply no allowed or impossible on the iPhone should give Android phones a boost for market share.
Considering Android and the limited carriers (T-Mobile), the G1 already has a pretty descent size market. Once it's available from multiple carriers with a richer selection of applications and capabilities (provided via SDK and TOS), the iPhone will finally have real competition.
Yet you seem happy to trust Slashdot with your account details.
I've had this account long before OpenID was even a whisper. And most places don't accept an OpenID unless it's through their service which leaves you in the same place.
What was your point?
Why is it some great breach of security
Reread what I said.
The only user information you release is the same information you happily provide when you sign up for an account.
Which is exactly the point.
What is your point? I fail to understand what your point is in the the first place?
And this is exactly why OpenID never caught on. You implemented it the only way it makes sense. For the vast majority of people this is too much. For companies requiring a login, they garner no information about who is visiting their site so they have no incentive.
The combination of the two means no one wants to accept OpenID and it is too painful to truly use securely. Whereby securely means, no user information released.
Slashdot Mirror
First, it is important to remember, only satellite monitoring for 121.5 ELT is stopping. Ground and air based monitoring is still ongoing. Secondly, CAP (Civil Air Patrol; Axillary Air Force) does not have equipment to track 406. Keep in mind, CAP performs the bulk of the required search and rescue operations in the US. All 406s I'm aware of have a dual mode of 121.5/406. This means it's more likely you'll actually be located by rescue crews using 121.5.
The problem is, because of the FAA, there is no competition. This means purchase plus install for a really nice 406 unit can cost in excess of $5000 for a $200-$400 ELT. Now that lower priced units, and units which are compatible with existing installs are finally starting to come onto the market you'll start to see increase in the number of installations. Yet the bulk of these installs will likely occur either during an aircraft's annual or when the existing ELT's battery requires replacement. The combination of the two means installs should start to increase sometime over the next 24-months.
In the meantime, many have elected to go with much cheaper solutions. Personal Locater Beacons (PLBs) and SPOT are very popular with pilots because they can be had at a fraction of the cost despite their reduced sized and increased capabilities.
The big advantage of the 406 ELT is the specification allows for a data component. Specifically, it allows an aircraft's GPS to continuously update the ELT with its current location. In the event of an emergency, the ELT can be manually armed or be set off from excessive G's (impact). Once set off, the ELT immediately transmits the last known location received from the GPS. This allows for very high accuracy position reporting. Of course the problem is, pilots want this capability and most existing manufacturers are attempting to rape owners.
Right now, Artex's ME406 is about the only reasonably priced unit available and it hasn't been on the market all that long.
Lastly, let's not forget satellite monitoring of 121.5 is really pretty crappy. Your typical detection window requires three satellites to pass overhead, ignoring the fact it can technically be done in two. The detection capabilities of the existing satellites are pretty crappy. And if one of the Russian satellites are in the mix, you may even require four satellite passes overhead before anyone is dispatched. This means you're looking at anywhere from 10-36 hours before someone picks up the phone to get people looking for you - unless you filed an optional flight plan. In the end, loss of satellite detection for 121.5, while certainly not good, is not really a nightmare scenario.
In the end, the best thing to do is to simply let someone know when you're flying, where you're going, the route you're taking, and the time you expect to arrive. Ideally, this is someone at your destination. And should you not show or be heard from, teach them to call the FAA or an official briefing station. At that time, they can immediately dispatch a search effort. Meaning, for many pilots, this is actually a better plan than filing a flight plan with the FAA. Routes which are not direct or too complicated to convey to laymen should be filed via flight plan.
And for those interested, here is a comparison of existing, alternative tracking solutions.
I've read several articles over the years about how MS' IP stack has failed to keep up with various protocol improvements and optimizations. That may account for some of it.
IIRC, there was also something about non-Pro editions being limited in both the number of concurrent connections and their throughput. I didn't notice if they said what specific version of XP was used.
And it could be duguk is correct. Perhaps the windows driver just really blows - though I find that doubtful as Windows is typically the first optimized driver target for most hardware. And even still, on modern hardware, we're likely talking about differences in latency and CPU rather than these types of huge swings.
Just get an Android phone and be done with it.
It did have to do with him being Republican, because Republicans under Bush have been wrong on nearly everything these last 8 years.
Can you be more specific. It seems most people are in a hurry to Blame GWB for things which have absolutely nothing to do with GWB. I'm often surprised how often people quote the press only to find out the press misrepresented, exaggerated, or flat out lied to the public.
BTW: Obama SUPPORTS the 2nd Amendment. That's a fact, look it up.
Its a fact he doesn't. Look up his voting record when it comes to gun related issues. He has consistently voted against guns every time he's had the option.
Saying one supports the second amendment so long as its cost prohibitive for someone to actually own or use a gun (with non-lead bullets) is not supporting the second amendment at all. Saying he does is a farce. Believing he does is to be uninformed.
Some studies have shown, for commercial aircraft, sleep deprivation may account for as much as 50% of all human error related accidents. The statistics are much higher for trans-Atlantic pilots; where it is notoriously known they don't get enough sleep.
Of course, this also accounts for the numerous reports of pilots sleeping on the job while flying on autopilot.
Don't forget a number of these are actually caused by pilot transfers. When a pilot finishes their shift, they must place the aircraft on autopilot before turning off their station and transferring control to the replacement pilot at a different console. Pilots sometimes forget to place the aircraft on auto pilot. Once they shut down their system, the aircraft has no input. This generally causes the aircraft to go into emergency mode which is forced landing mode. This throttles back the aircraft and starts a spiralling descent.
Yes, it's human error, but not the type of error where the pilot actually flies it into the ground.
I say this because of the high number of Predator crashes
Don't forget a number of these planes were actually downed from small arms fire. Even with full size aircraft, human error is often attributed to crashes when it really isn't a factor at all.
Example: A small, single engine plane on short final (low to the ground and slow airspeed) encounters wind sheer which forces it into the ground. Cause of crash may be, "Human error. Failure to maintain positive control of craft and while close to the ground. Failure to initiate a go-around." I'm not kidding, stuff like this is actually recorded in NTSB and/or FAA crash records. Of course it ignores the fact that it is impossible for some craft to escape wind sheer. And in fact, it has caused the crash of large, commercial jets before. The problem is serious enough commercial jets now have wind sheer detection systems on board and large airports now detect and report the condition.
Additionally, as many as a half dozen commericial jet crashes which were originally attributed to human error have since been determined to be attributed to humans actually doing things properly. In fact, in these cases, the cause of the crash was actually failed hydraulic valves causing the rudder to operate in reverse direction; meaning correct corrective action by humans actually cause the problem to become worse. Yet it's still dubbed, "Human error."
Long story short, don't get too caught up believing in "pilot error" claims.
Actually you're right, I was thinking of moc. It's been a while since I last did some Qt coding.
I wonder where that "Qt apps start slower" thing comes from.
Actually it's a well documented issue. Feel free to do some searches. As I originally said, I'm not sure it's still an issue. The responses seem to be a mixed bag.
Please, don't say something like that, I hate using applications made in wx
So you have the look of your native widget set? WX apps look like native applications. I'm not 100% sure that's the case on Mac, but I believe it to be true.
I voted against Obama, because I think his political views are nonsense.
Many voted against Obama because many of his views generally are nonsense and just about every significant opinion held on current affairs have proved to be the wrong opinion to hold. Many voted against Obama because they believe in the US Constitution. Obama seemingly likes to pick and choose the parts he likes. He'd rather the 2nd amendment go away. Conversely, many voted for Obama because he wasn't Republican and is black.
Many voted against McCain because he's white, Republican, and told voters the truth. McCain has been at this long enough to know better. The public doesn't want the truth, they want to feel warm and fuzzy - and that's what Obama does for many.
In short order we'll have an idea of his leadership capabilities but based on what we know so far, real solutions won't originate from him. Frankly, the fact he's trying hard to surround himself with dissenting opinions does give hope he realizes he doesn't have the answers.
The only complaint I've seen before about Qt is that it's too expensive for proprietary apps
Then you've not been listening. Many don't like the noteworthy long start up times of Qt apps compared to say Gtk. Many don't like the need for obtuse tools like SIP. I know for a while they were working to address the long start up times I've not followed where that went. Perhaps it's no longer an issue.
Frankly, the API of Qt make Gtk look like a pile of vomit, but simple fact is, Qt is not the perfect GUI programming environment.
Now that you post it, I do recall those facts. Seems I confused the first account I heard about it with the actual facts. I was hoping to look up the accident before I posted.
Thanks for setting me straight.
The wannabe-genius will simply call the clusterfuck "elegant"
And there are people living under bridges who really do believe aliens are trying to control their thoughts. It doesn't make it true. Delusions of grandeur will always exist. Thankfully I've only run into a handful of such people in my career.
I really wasn't trying to solve a problem. I was agreeing with you. The only point I had was, far too often "genius code" is far from anything anyone would call elegant, including the author.
Some of the most genius code I've ever seen was jaw dropping in its simplicity, readability, and elegance. It showed an intuitive insight into the problem domain. IMO, that's what separates good code from genius.
and you're of course a dimwit if you cannot understand it.
A bit hostile are we? Perhaps I shouldn't agree with you in the future.
I've got to ask, are you looking for programmers who have a background in web development (including perl), VB, or Java?
I'm not trying to insult anyone, and please don't read anything into what I'm saying, but in my experience, these are the types of answers I typically see from coders who have those types of backgrounds.
The code that makes me mutter "that's pure genius" is usually not the kind of code you can't understand or is winded, twisted and a worthy entry for the obfuscated C-Code contest. It's usually code that is brilliantly simple yet very functional, fast and easy to understand.
The problem is, it normally takes genius to recognize genius. This is why far too many coders see their code, as your first characterization, and assume that's the standard for genius. Which is, after all, entirely your point.
For those wanna-be geniuses out there, if you can not refer to your code as "elegant", it is unlikely your code is "genius."
Very telling you even needed to create that post.
This sounds unsafe, but this is by design - They didn't want an electrical fault to kill an engine. The radios and such will die without the battery, but as long as the engine has fuel and air, it will turn.
Ignoring the latest generation of light, single and twin piston aircraft which have dual electronic ignition, which do require a functioning power bus and battery.
There is even an accident on record of a Diamond twin engine crashing immediately after take off because of dead batteries, despite it being diesel. The fuel pumps are electric (not sure if its actually mechanical with electric axillary or fully electric) along with the retractable gear. Seems retracting the gear was enough to deplete the batteries, causing the fuel pumps to turn off. This caused both engines to simultaneously quit.
I would have provided a link to the NTSB accident report but the web site is currently unreachable for me.
How to identify managers promoted beyond their capability?
They recommend, or worse, force a migration to Clearcase; usually based on lies about the existing solution to their management.
Here's what they do to protect a C130 from a heat seeking missile
Flares are not very effective against modern heat seeking weapons; and that was true at least one generation of seekers ago. Modern heat seeking missiles are actually pretty good at distinguishing between the sun and exhaust, and exhaust and flares. Modern anti-heat seeking counter defensive systems actually use lasers to destroy the uber sensitive sensors contained within this class of missiles. If you notice "disco balls" on aircraft, especially helicopters, this is what they are; a heat seeking counter measure. And even then, they tend to only be fairly effective against single missile threats from the rear. Modern anti-aircraft doctrine calls for multiple missile threats against a single target. This is true for air to air engagements too.
Modern heat seekers have somewhere between 60%-90% kill statistics against modern anti-missile counter measures. As such, two missiles, statistically yields a 100+% kill ratio against all modern, KNOWN, defensive systems. Very manoeuvrable (vectored exhaust) aircraft and aircraft which have reduced heat signatures have better odds. Aircraft which employ both strategies fair significantly better, but the point remains. Few modern aircraft fall into one of those two categories, let alone both. Aircraft which are engaged from above, allowing for background radiation to assist in ones defence, also have higher survivability statistics.
Unfortunately the Android API's are an area that seems somewhat deficient in a number of places (real-time low latency PCM audio anyone - how can something so fundamental have been so badly done?!). Anyone wanting to write any half-way serious game or audio based app is stuck using a shitty "send-this-file-to-the-output" style API.
It's coming. Don't hold your breath but several serious API short comings should be addressed in the next major Android release. Android is without a doubt, very usable and easy to use. Is it an iPhone? No. Is it within reach of meeting or exceeding iPhone user's expectations? Yes, absolutely. The best thing here is, it's only software. To get ahead of Android and it's current (and forth coming) offerings will require iPhone users to buy yet another phone. That leaves current Android owners, versus current and future iPhone users, in a must better position; especially as Android continues to mature.
usability as a prime concern
That's not the first time I've read such a comment yet no one seems to be able to clearly state what that means. If you mean on screen keyboard, well, it's coming but I always wonder what stupid things people are doing that they require one handed typing. Considering the phone is already plenty usable, albeit with short comings, what does that mean? If it means latency, improvements and optimizations are coming. Per the Google developer's I've spoken with, high, immediate priorities include usability improvements, optimizations, reduced latency, improved battery, reduced footprint. And once you learn you can already create Android applications which are not possible or not allowed on the iPhone, the application future for Android gets really exciting.
The only thing I've seen which has a hope of being an iPhone killer are running Android. Right now, the G1 is about the only offering but about a half dozen others, by different carriers, will be coming out in the very near future. Additionally, the G1 already has superior hardware when compared to the iPhone 3G. Heck, even Garmin is getting into the phone business with an Android offering.
Android is already proving to be a competitor with the iPhone. The only thing holding it back is software. The next major Android release should finally place the G1 (and other Android phones) ahead of or on par with Apple's iPhone in capabilities, performance, and ease of use; which frankly really isn't that bad today. The fact that current hardware already exceeds the iPhone and applications can do thing on Android which are simply no allowed or impossible on the iPhone should give Android phones a boost for market share.
If you want to look at pros and cons, I previously posted about it.
Considering Android and the limited carriers (T-Mobile), the G1 already has a pretty descent size market. Once it's available from multiple carriers with a richer selection of applications and capabilities (provided via SDK and TOS), the iPhone will finally have real competition.
Yet you seem happy to trust Slashdot with your account details.
I've had this account long before OpenID was even a whisper. And most places don't accept an OpenID unless it's through their service which leaves you in the same place.
What was your point?
Why is it some great breach of security
Reread what I said.
The only user information you release is the same information you happily provide when you sign up for an account.
Which is exactly the point.
What is your point? I fail to understand what your point is in the the first place?
And this is exactly why OpenID never caught on. You implemented it the only way it makes sense. For the vast majority of people this is too much. For companies requiring a login, they garner no information about who is visiting their site so they have no incentive.
The combination of the two means no one wants to accept OpenID and it is too painful to truly use securely. Whereby securely means, no user information released.