Not to mention the productivity losses in training and the initial slide in productivity as people are shocked by the new look and way of doing things. Still, Vista is going to be around for a long time. By this release, it would seem the Vista replacement is a good 5 years away. If productivity is to be enhanced, earlier adopters might best leverage the gains in productivity over companies that wait.
Personally, having used Vista, it probably took me 4 days just to figure out where the heck stuff was versus how things were in XP (really tearing into the OS.) It probably took another week before I finally felt like I was as productive as I was in XP. After 2 weeks, though, I finally felt like the OS was a worthwhile upgrade, becoming more productive. Unfortunately, I still don't believe it's ready for release, as driver support isn't complete for my hardware, and several software applications refuse to install. But, at least now, after a month of using the final beta, I'm pretty excited about the final release and using Vista full time.
It depends on if your "raped system resources" make you more productive. A sports car is a useless pile of scrap metal if you need a daily commuter and it's not street legal. Don't mock someone for using Windows -- for most people, it makes the most sense. And, just cause you use Microsoft products does NOT make you a "MS fanboy." I like linux. It's not perfect, but it does the job well for most tasks. I like that it's the underdog. I like the fact that the whole world can see it, contribute to it, and make it work better. Using Linux gives me the same kind of pride I get when I recycle a pop can, or drive a hybrid around town. I feel like I'm doing something different, and contributing to something greater.
But, there's plenty of times I felt frustrated, looking for something linux just didn't do. And, the linux kernel might be stable all day long, but X w/ recent versions of KDE and Gnome certainly don't seem any less resource intensive than even Vista (much less XP.) Ultimately, I grew tired of rebooting into Windows, or booting it in VMWare and just switched back to using Windows full time. Sure - it's not free. And, I certainly don't get the same proud feeling running Linux or OS X. And, it might not be the best OS for every task. But, for most home users who like a large variety of applications and tools to get the job done, who like to game now and then, and don't feel like tinkering or constantly tweaking settings files to get the most performance out of the system, Windows works well. And, like it or not, it has more applications than any other OS out there.
It's far from perfect, but it's become largely pretty good for most things. For everything else that it sucks at, I'm sure there are better alternatives. Windows isn't the universal answer. Linux isn't the universal answer. Nor is Mac OS X. Or Solaris. Or FreeBSD. Or QNX. Or BeOS... You get the idea. Believe me, I've tried almost every OS out there, from hobbiest projects like SkyOS to polished, mainstream products like Linux (and others.) They all have something to bring to the table, and all deserve some level of respect. Maybe, some day, Microsoft's "evil empire" will be seriously challenged by the likes of Linux or some other fantastic OS out there, but for now, believe it or not -- Windows works best for a most people's needs, which is why so many people use it. Don't knock someone just cause it doesn't work for you.
Asus W5Ae Notebook. Most everything worked out of the box, but plenty of things still don't have support. Interestingly, Microsoft provides a driver for my webcam, but when I try to use it with any application, it completely fails to respond, locking the application. I can't even end the task. Logging off is a simpler fix than rebooting, but unfortunate to see that it's still not working yet. Most applications install okay, but I have plenty (some that I'd need to use for work if I were running it in a business environment) that are not Vista compatible. Symantec still doesn't have a vista-ready version of Antivirus, so I went with Grisoft's AVG Antivirus (which works fine.) Groupwise, our email client, doesn't work at all. Version 6.5.4 wouldn't install. 7.01 installed, but would not run correctly. AutoCAD isn't happy. Quickbooks 2003 doesn't work (and actually doesn't work in XP after the IE7 update, either.) All in all, I'm very hopeful for the new OS. It does a lot of things a lot better. But, it's kind of like Mac OS X (10.0)... it's a big enough upgrade that a lot of things just don't work yet.
I'm sure in 6 months, all will be well - but as it stands today, I see no reason to make the big jump. XP has become largely stable, and while security is still an issue, behind my trusty firewall, I've yet to be "o3n3d." Guess all I'm saying is - I look forward to using it.. when it's ready. Dare I say it, Microsoft's actually done a pretty decent job. It's stable enough to use, a lot faster than I was expecting, and significantly overhauled from the Longhorn beta I'd used some time ago. (Though I did have the OS crash on me once with a very interesting graphics error on another machine capable of Aero Glass running with a GeForce 7900GT). At this point, it's pretty all 3rd party catchup. Just because Microsoft's done a good job doesn't me the OS is ready, however.;-)
Good luck! Better test RC1 public beta first before you buy. Driver support is still shaky and many applications simply refuse to install correctly. Personally, I wouldn't upgrade - I'd buy new hardware that I knew would actually work. All in all, though, it's a cool OS, but I largely decided I'll wait a year until software and hardware vendors have time to catch up on everything.
We believe that everything will become much clearer in the following 6 months. Microsoft will put pressure on Google with its Vista OS, which will receive relatively high adoption just like any other new Windows release (although probably not as high as historically Microsoft has enjoyed!). As Vista's adoption increases, so will the adoption of its default search engine Live Search. From Microsoft's perspective, this will have a positive effect on all Live and MSN sites. What end users are looking for is ease-of-use and satisfactory experiences - which in a lot of cases starts from the Vista OS.
Proof positive the authors of this article haven't got a clue. Regardless of the GoogleOS speculation, assuming Vista will have a relatively high adoption rate is simply crazy. Unless you have a newer graphics card, be prepared for a dumbed down, slow not-really any more interesting than XP experience, with program compatibility issues and perhaps the steepest learning curve of any Windows OS to date. I suspect the enthusiast geek/gamer community will be the first adopters, with most individuals waiting for their current hardware to start feeling slow before moving up to a new machine (and new OS along with it.) Consider that over 50% of all computers sold are laptops, and the majority of those (especially smaller systems) don't have real, capable graphics cards. That will make Vista very unattractive for anyone who purchased a laptop somewhat recently (within the last 2 years), but not so recently to have snagged a newer Core2 system (Intel GMA945 is the first Intel integrated chip capable of running Aero Glass.) Businesses will largely steer clear from Vista until support for XP is dead. Others who can't comply to the new WGA authentication schema will either complain enough that Microsoft will be forced to change it at some point, or may look to alternative operating system options. Make no mistake - this is the biggest change in operating systems since 98-XP for users, and 3.1-NT for businesses. By and large, Windows has improved to the point that most people just don't care about upgrading (XP is reasonably stable, even if it has more holes than swiss cheese), and for many others, it means more of a financial investment than they are willing to make for the time being. Expect adoption rates to be slow, regardless of the hype.
Edge is not 3G. 3G service from Cingular comes in the form of UMTS/WCDMA, and is still in its infancy. It's now available in certain cities, but the phones to select from is limited at best.
I think you're confused. According to the fucking article, skype works over 3G networks, AKA data. The service provider in question is 3, a european cell carrier. The technology would be UMTS/WCDMA, with similar data speeds to what Cingular just released here in the US. The novelty in Europe is more that data plans are seldom unlimited, thanks to the increased cost of operating traditional GRPS services versus the technology used in CDMA networks. WCDMA, the new standard replacing GRPS, is cheaper to operate, allowing for flat rate plans otherwise uncommon. I re-read the article to be sure, but you're wrong about the way this works.
From the fucking article: "So far the only thing getting between the majority of consumers and the mobile Internet has been the cost of accessing online content and the limitations of certain sites on certain handsets. 3 says it is going to eradicate these problems by charging a set fee and making sure that its handsets support the content properly. The first handsets to be sold on the X-Series plan will be the Nokia N73 and the Sony Ericsson W950i Walkman phone."... "This isn't the first time we've seen a flat-rate plan go into action, though. T-Mobile also started its Web'n'Walk plan this year, charging users £7.50 for unlimited mobile Internet use. The main difference between these two services, though, is that 3 is planning to offer a better overall package, with more preinstalled applications than T-Mobile. The X-Series service will be available in December. Some skeptics have pointed out that these services will not work properly over a 3G connection or using the proposed handsets, but we tested it out without any major problems. It will be interesting to see if it works as well when hundreds of people are using Skype over 3G in the same cell, but we'll have to wait until Christmas to find out."
So, yeah.. nothing new. They're providing built in applications (aka, data services) that work over 3G data networks. Skeptics wonder how well it will work once millions of people start stressing the 3G networks with continual data service, choking available bandwidth, much in the same way cable networks get choked in neighborhoods where a lot of people share the same bandwidth. But, it still works over data service, and is still subject to the same problems I'd mentioned previously. Optimism and hype do not get around real world problems. Perhaps being partnered with Skype, the mobile carrier will do a better job of integrating the client such that it no longer allows incoming calls when the skype application is running. Only time will tell...
That should theoretically be possible from any handset, then, but you still run into the toll-free numbers still eating up minutes on cellular phones. It sounds like the way to go would be to build contracts with existing carriers, but how many are likely to support it?
I've been able to do this for almost a year now, using my Verizon xv6700, unlimited data plan ($45/mo) and the WM5.0 Skype Client. What's new? The problem with running 3G on your phone constantly, though, which is what you need to do in order to receive calls over skype, is that it sucks down battery life like nobody's business. Standby is simply no longer an option. 3G (EV-DO) data connections make a virtual phone call, except the battery consumption is twice the normal battery consumption for a standard phone call (1x). That 180 hours of standby, 6 talk time on the longest lasting battery you can find? Uh.. yeah, not anymore. Try like.. 3.. if you're lucky. Worse - because incoming calls trump data connections, you'd better not care about who you're talking to when you do make a skype call from your phone, cause it'll drop the second someone else calls you, as your data call gets put on hold. This can be resolved by having a data-only plan with your PDA phone, but then you run into not being able to make calls off 3G networks, having to carry two phones, and still having to deal with that whole battery life issue, constantly in search of the next wall outlet (and how useful is that for a cell phone?) At that point, why not just go with one of the smaller carriers like Cricket who provide unlimited calling for $45/mo (but you can't leave your service area.)
Still, it's useful for making outgoing calls when you have a charger nearby and are doing something like 800/866/877 dialing, and you don't want to waste minutes (which should be free for those calls anyway.) It's cool, but over-rated, at least until battery for high speed data services no longer become an issue. I'm a big fan of the possibilities, but unless they've somehow made some magical integration where it would detect a skype call in progress trumps incoming calls and somehow are able to put the battery into low consumption mode while connected to 3G networks, people are going to find the skype feature a novel, but not very useful, technology.
I pay $45 for unlimited data service on my PDA cell through Verizon. I can stream internet radio off it, and use the headset port to play it through my stereo. Only draw back is when I'm out of big cities or go through areas with no cell phone service, there are holes. That's where satallite radio fills a gap.
But then you'd be locked into Apple hardware options, which probably work in a business environment, but are somewhat limited in terms of customizability. iMac works great for most simple users, and the new MacPros are killer workstations that can handle even the most demanding customer. But, with Apple, you have vendor lock-in, and no alternative choices if the supply chain gap falls short or waiting period too long. That could be bad for businesses.
From the article, and insight from other users, it can be stated simply:
SP3 is not coming. It's a red herring to buy time for a roll up package and an EOL announcement on XP some time in 2008 or 2009.
In the mean time, you can integrate *most* of the windows updates into your installations already. Sure, it's a royal PIA, and a total waste of time, but it works. For those of you in uber-secure environments, might I suggest Windows SUS? It works well enough, and is free for the patch portion. Better, you can tightly control what patches get pushed to the masses in case there's a conflict with some existing software. (Like one of the patches recently blew up some computers at our office with a particular version of ZenWorks that we were using.)
As for commentary on Windows Genuine Advantage (WGA), it's probably true. Microsoft doesn't care what your excuse is, they want to validate everything. Thus, it's an entire LAYER of the next OS, and not just a simple patch on top that can be hacked in 30 seconds. Ultimately, in an effort to enforce tighter control on who's pirating software, they're about to alienate a whole mass of corporate consumers hell bent on keeping a tight ship. Look for Microsoft to cave on this issue sometime within the next 2 years (they eventually caved on Product Activation for corporate consumers shortly before release), or if they haven't, within 3 years after Microsoft announces EOL on support for XP SP2, watch corporate consumers with highly secure locked down environments (like credit card vendors, federal government organizations, and possibly hospitals) to start looking at viable Windows alternatives. Unfortunately, with the number of competitors shrinking, options are becoming fewer. Many companies will probably want to avoid proprietary hardware, eliminating options from Apple (unless they start allowing third party hardware -- doubtful), or Sun (unless they seriously commit to supporting x86 -- doubtful), leaving flavors of Linux or BSD as the next most likely candidates.
I think they're just begging for someone to buy them out. A while back, before they were delisted, I thought it'd make sense for Apple to buy them, as they held similar markets with different target customers. These days, though, it's a joke to even consider it. SGI needs cash. It needs new products. It needs innovation and direction it once had. Unfortunately, not firmly committing to any particular product line or direction ultimately killed it. A shame for essentially the pioneer of many modern computing technologies... At least Digital had the sense to get purchased by Compaq (which is now HP.) How the mighty have fallen...
True. Reading headlines and presuming the content of the article is just as good as reading the whole thing is often the case with news readers in general. A headline and title is just that - something on a general related note to get your attention.
Even laws end up this way. S.3930: Military Commissions Act of 2006 (the so-called "detainee bill") sounds pretty harmless on the surface, and the summary sounds harmless too... but then you get into the bill and find the details and how utterly scary it really is. Digging deeper into things isn't something most people have time or willingness to commit, unfortunately, in this day and age of infoglut.
Unfortunately, when we don't take/make the time, scary things happen when we don't. When's the last time the average joe actually *read* one of those licensing agreements to a piece of software they just purchased anyway? Doubtful they even ever have. In fact, most people, when learning how to operate a computer, are pretty much instructed "oh, just click accept," rather than understanding that accepting the terms is not always in your best interest. Thus the advent of spyware/malware. We're not all lawyers, but we all need to be just as cautious as if we were in a litigious society.
How so do you figure? I'm a fan of Apple, and a (mostly) comparable Dell Inspiron E1505 configured almost the same was $1848 out the door. Mind you, it's not exactly a huge difference, but I wouldn't say Apple is cheaper. You get a lot more configurable options with competitors and a much lower starting point if you just want something cheap you can throw away in a year. Mind you, with Apple, you get the flexibility of installing Windows and Mac OS X and a pretty solid company to back you. Frankly, I don't care if Apple does or does not get out of the hardware business, so long as they keep making good software. It's what makes a Mac a Mac.
Yes I have. I do desktop support for a living (slight step backwards from my previous role as Network Administrator, but I had to get the hell out of Michigan, so I took what I could find.) Out of the box, if connected to the internet without a router or infected internal network, Windows can and does get owned, even running SP2, even with Automatic Updates Enabled, even with firewall turned on by default. Multiple critical security flaws with Windows, including Windows firewall, have been found since SP2 was released. If you run a pretty tight ship, your other firewalls and routers will keep you safe long enough to get windows patched and safer, but every once in a while, someone finds a critical flaw that has yet to be patched and virii start to proliferate again. Sure, the problem is SIGNIFICANTLY improved since SP1, but a well managed *network* has a lot more in keeping windows safe than anything to do with Microsoft's day late, dollar short patches. I'm even more repulsed by the malware situation that even with EVERY SINGLE UPDATE Microsoft has made available, Windows *STILL* gets owned by just going to a wrong website with Internet Explorer. If I had my way, we'd be running Firefox with with NoScript, but our timecard system relies on ActiveX, and the boys upstairs think it best not to confuse folks. Yes, Windows can be made pretty secure - but *NOT* from Microsoft's solutions.
More like a rat that carries a disease and spreads it without ever feeling the symptoms of the disease itself. Point being, the virus came from windows, and infects windows, but the iPod itself never had a problem - it was only the host. Just like every once in a while, something taints the blood supply and someone ends up with an infectious disease, it's unfortunate, but not out of the realm of expectation. Considering how fast Windows is 0Wn3d out of the box when plugged into an infected network, I don't think it's unreasonable to be upset by the situation. Sure, Apple should have a better quality control method in place, but certainly they have a point in criticizing Windows "security," too. They should appoligize to consumers, and move on to better cloning methods that do *not* involve the use of Windows to ensure this kind of thing doesn't happen again.
It's not "environmental left wing crap." Sure, they'd pollute elsewhere, but we still polute at 5 times the average per capita. Mind you, few other nations have the economic prosperity and cheap crap from China we do. As big of a problem the US might be now, China, who has no respect for international resolutions on environmental controls, is becoming a bigger problem at a frighteningly fast pace. So, what's the solution? Stop buying cheap shit from China. It'd stop the huge trade deficit we have and send a clear message that if you want to compete in the world, you have to do so following the same environmental standards as everyone else. Sure, the US economy would take a hit in the short term, as cost of goods increase, but in the end, it's better for us all.
Same thing for Detroit. Once a city with over 2 million people, now around 900,000. Trouble with the rust belt: no economic opportunity. Michigan has the second worst economy in the union, and after recent and upcoming layoffs at Ford and GM, it'll mean some 25,000 more people without jobs. Who would immigrate or move to a city where you stand a good chance of ending up homeless? Answer: no one. Unless some real investors take advantage of the ridiculously cheap real estate and re-invest other industry to the rust belt, it's only a matter of time before the whole region is a virtual ghost town.
Slashdot Mirror
Not to mention the productivity losses in training and the initial slide in productivity as people are shocked by the new look and way of doing things. Still, Vista is going to be around for a long time. By this release, it would seem the Vista replacement is a good 5 years away. If productivity is to be enhanced, earlier adopters might best leverage the gains in productivity over companies that wait.
Personally, having used Vista, it probably took me 4 days just to figure out where the heck stuff was versus how things were in XP (really tearing into the OS.) It probably took another week before I finally felt like I was as productive as I was in XP. After 2 weeks, though, I finally felt like the OS was a worthwhile upgrade, becoming more productive. Unfortunately, I still don't believe it's ready for release, as driver support isn't complete for my hardware, and several software applications refuse to install. But, at least now, after a month of using the final beta, I'm pretty excited about the final release and using Vista full time.
It depends on if your "raped system resources" make you more productive. A sports car is a useless pile of scrap metal if you need a daily commuter and it's not street legal. Don't mock someone for using Windows -- for most people, it makes the most sense. And, just cause you use Microsoft products does NOT make you a "MS fanboy." I like linux. It's not perfect, but it does the job well for most tasks. I like that it's the underdog. I like the fact that the whole world can see it, contribute to it, and make it work better. Using Linux gives me the same kind of pride I get when I recycle a pop can, or drive a hybrid around town. I feel like I'm doing something different, and contributing to something greater.
But, there's plenty of times I felt frustrated, looking for something linux just didn't do. And, the linux kernel might be stable all day long, but X w/ recent versions of KDE and Gnome certainly don't seem any less resource intensive than even Vista (much less XP.) Ultimately, I grew tired of rebooting into Windows, or booting it in VMWare and just switched back to using Windows full time. Sure - it's not free. And, I certainly don't get the same proud feeling running Linux or OS X. And, it might not be the best OS for every task. But, for most home users who like a large variety of applications and tools to get the job done, who like to game now and then, and don't feel like tinkering or constantly tweaking settings files to get the most performance out of the system, Windows works well. And, like it or not, it has more applications than any other OS out there.
It's far from perfect, but it's become largely pretty good for most things. For everything else that it sucks at, I'm sure there are better alternatives. Windows isn't the universal answer. Linux isn't the universal answer. Nor is Mac OS X. Or Solaris. Or FreeBSD. Or QNX. Or BeOS... You get the idea. Believe me, I've tried almost every OS out there, from hobbiest projects like SkyOS to polished, mainstream products like Linux (and others.) They all have something to bring to the table, and all deserve some level of respect. Maybe, some day, Microsoft's "evil empire" will be seriously challenged by the likes of Linux or some other fantastic OS out there, but for now, believe it or not -- Windows works best for a most people's needs, which is why so many people use it. Don't knock someone just cause it doesn't work for you.
I'm sure in 6 months, all will be well - but as it stands today, I see no reason to make the big jump. XP has become largely stable, and while security is still an issue, behind my trusty firewall, I've yet to be "o3n3d." Guess all I'm saying is - I look forward to using it.. when it's ready. Dare I say it, Microsoft's actually done a pretty decent job. It's stable enough to use, a lot faster than I was expecting, and significantly overhauled from the Longhorn beta I'd used some time ago. (Though I did have the OS crash on me once with a very interesting graphics error on another machine capable of Aero Glass running with a GeForce 7900GT). At this point, it's pretty all 3rd party catchup. Just because Microsoft's done a good job doesn't me the OS is ready, however.
Good luck! Better test RC1 public beta first before you buy. Driver support is still shaky and many applications simply refuse to install correctly. Personally, I wouldn't upgrade - I'd buy new hardware that I knew would actually work. All in all, though, it's a cool OS, but I largely decided I'll wait a year until software and hardware vendors have time to catch up on everything.
Who needs to search for stupidity? I practically cringe every time I open my eyes with the amount of stupidity around me.
We believe that everything will become much clearer in the following 6 months. Microsoft will put pressure on Google with its Vista OS, which will receive relatively high adoption just like any other new Windows release (although probably not as high as historically Microsoft has enjoyed!). As Vista's adoption increases, so will the adoption of its default search engine Live Search. From Microsoft's perspective, this will have a positive effect on all Live and MSN sites. What end users are looking for is ease-of-use and satisfactory experiences - which in a lot of cases starts from the Vista OS. Proof positive the authors of this article haven't got a clue. Regardless of the GoogleOS speculation, assuming Vista will have a relatively high adoption rate is simply crazy. Unless you have a newer graphics card, be prepared for a dumbed down, slow not-really any more interesting than XP experience, with program compatibility issues and perhaps the steepest learning curve of any Windows OS to date. I suspect the enthusiast geek/gamer community will be the first adopters, with most individuals waiting for their current hardware to start feeling slow before moving up to a new machine (and new OS along with it.) Consider that over 50% of all computers sold are laptops, and the majority of those (especially smaller systems) don't have real, capable graphics cards. That will make Vista very unattractive for anyone who purchased a laptop somewhat recently (within the last 2 years), but not so recently to have snagged a newer Core2 system (Intel GMA945 is the first Intel integrated chip capable of running Aero Glass.) Businesses will largely steer clear from Vista until support for XP is dead. Others who can't comply to the new WGA authentication schema will either complain enough that Microsoft will be forced to change it at some point, or may look to alternative operating system options. Make no mistake - this is the biggest change in operating systems since 98-XP for users, and 3.1-NT for businesses. By and large, Windows has improved to the point that most people just don't care about upgrading (XP is reasonably stable, even if it has more holes than swiss cheese), and for many others, it means more of a financial investment than they are willing to make for the time being. Expect adoption rates to be slow, regardless of the hype.
Edge is not 3G. 3G service from Cingular comes in the form of UMTS/WCDMA, and is still in its infancy. It's now available in certain cities, but the phones to select from is limited at best.
From the fucking article: "So far the only thing getting between the majority of consumers and the mobile Internet has been the cost of accessing online content and the limitations of certain sites on certain handsets. 3 says it is going to eradicate these problems by charging a set fee and making sure that its handsets support the content properly. The first handsets to be sold on the X-Series plan will be the Nokia N73 and the Sony Ericsson W950i Walkman phone." ... "This isn't the first time we've seen a flat-rate plan go into action, though. T-Mobile also started its Web'n'Walk plan this year, charging users £7.50 for unlimited mobile Internet use. The main difference between these two services, though, is that 3 is planning to offer a better overall package, with more preinstalled applications than T-Mobile. The X-Series service will be available in December. Some skeptics have pointed out that these services will not work properly over a 3G connection or using the proposed handsets, but we tested it out without any major problems. It will be interesting to see if it works as well when hundreds of people are using Skype over 3G in the same cell, but we'll have to wait until Christmas to find out."
So, yeah.. nothing new. They're providing built in applications (aka, data services) that work over 3G data networks. Skeptics wonder how well it will work once millions of people start stressing the 3G networks with continual data service, choking available bandwidth, much in the same way cable networks get choked in neighborhoods where a lot of people share the same bandwidth. But, it still works over data service, and is still subject to the same problems I'd mentioned previously. Optimism and hype do not get around real world problems. Perhaps being partnered with Skype, the mobile carrier will do a better job of integrating the client such that it no longer allows incoming calls when the skype application is running. Only time will tell...
That should theoretically be possible from any handset, then, but you still run into the toll-free numbers still eating up minutes on cellular phones. It sounds like the way to go would be to build contracts with existing carriers, but how many are likely to support it?
I was thinking the same thing myself. When I read the post, I thought to myself "forever?" Indefinitely seems a much more appropriate word.
*grin*
I've been able to do this for almost a year now, using my Verizon xv6700, unlimited data plan ($45/mo) and the WM5.0 Skype Client. What's new? The problem with running 3G on your phone constantly, though, which is what you need to do in order to receive calls over skype, is that it sucks down battery life like nobody's business. Standby is simply no longer an option. 3G (EV-DO) data connections make a virtual phone call, except the battery consumption is twice the normal battery consumption for a standard phone call (1x). That 180 hours of standby, 6 talk time on the longest lasting battery you can find? Uh.. yeah, not anymore. Try like.. 3.. if you're lucky. Worse - because incoming calls trump data connections, you'd better not care about who you're talking to when you do make a skype call from your phone, cause it'll drop the second someone else calls you, as your data call gets put on hold. This can be resolved by having a data-only plan with your PDA phone, but then you run into not being able to make calls off 3G networks, having to carry two phones, and still having to deal with that whole battery life issue, constantly in search of the next wall outlet (and how useful is that for a cell phone?) At that point, why not just go with one of the smaller carriers like Cricket who provide unlimited calling for $45/mo (but you can't leave your service area.) Still, it's useful for making outgoing calls when you have a charger nearby and are doing something like 800/866/877 dialing, and you don't want to waste minutes (which should be free for those calls anyway.) It's cool, but over-rated, at least until battery for high speed data services no longer become an issue. I'm a big fan of the possibilities, but unless they've somehow made some magical integration where it would detect a skype call in progress trumps incoming calls and somehow are able to put the battery into low consumption mode while connected to 3G networks, people are going to find the skype feature a novel, but not very useful, technology.
I pay $45 for unlimited data service on my PDA cell through Verizon. I can stream internet radio off it, and use the headset port to play it through my stereo. Only draw back is when I'm out of big cities or go through areas with no cell phone service, there are holes. That's where satallite radio fills a gap.
But then you'd be locked into Apple hardware options, which probably work in a business environment, but are somewhat limited in terms of customizability. iMac works great for most simple users, and the new MacPros are killer workstations that can handle even the most demanding customer. But, with Apple, you have vendor lock-in, and no alternative choices if the supply chain gap falls short or waiting period too long. That could be bad for businesses.
Excellent must read article on the matter from Wired some time ago.
Still think DeBeers isn't worried?
From the article, and insight from other users, it can be stated simply: SP3 is not coming. It's a red herring to buy time for a roll up package and an EOL announcement on XP some time in 2008 or 2009. In the mean time, you can integrate *most* of the windows updates into your installations already. Sure, it's a royal PIA, and a total waste of time, but it works. For those of you in uber-secure environments, might I suggest Windows SUS? It works well enough, and is free for the patch portion. Better, you can tightly control what patches get pushed to the masses in case there's a conflict with some existing software. (Like one of the patches recently blew up some computers at our office with a particular version of ZenWorks that we were using.) As for commentary on Windows Genuine Advantage (WGA), it's probably true. Microsoft doesn't care what your excuse is, they want to validate everything. Thus, it's an entire LAYER of the next OS, and not just a simple patch on top that can be hacked in 30 seconds. Ultimately, in an effort to enforce tighter control on who's pirating software, they're about to alienate a whole mass of corporate consumers hell bent on keeping a tight ship. Look for Microsoft to cave on this issue sometime within the next 2 years (they eventually caved on Product Activation for corporate consumers shortly before release), or if they haven't, within 3 years after Microsoft announces EOL on support for XP SP2, watch corporate consumers with highly secure locked down environments (like credit card vendors, federal government organizations, and possibly hospitals) to start looking at viable Windows alternatives. Unfortunately, with the number of competitors shrinking, options are becoming fewer. Many companies will probably want to avoid proprietary hardware, eliminating options from Apple (unless they start allowing third party hardware -- doubtful), or Sun (unless they seriously commit to supporting x86 -- doubtful), leaving flavors of Linux or BSD as the next most likely candidates.
I think they're just begging for someone to buy them out. A while back, before they were delisted, I thought it'd make sense for Apple to buy them, as they held similar markets with different target customers. These days, though, it's a joke to even consider it. SGI needs cash. It needs new products. It needs innovation and direction it once had. Unfortunately, not firmly committing to any particular product line or direction ultimately killed it. A shame for essentially the pioneer of many modern computing technologies... At least Digital had the sense to get purchased by Compaq (which is now HP.) How the mighty have fallen...
True. Reading headlines and presuming the content of the article is just as good as reading the whole thing is often the case with news readers in general. A headline and title is just that - something on a general related note to get your attention. Even laws end up this way. S.3930: Military Commissions Act of 2006 (the so-called "detainee bill") sounds pretty harmless on the surface, and the summary sounds harmless too... but then you get into the bill and find the details and how utterly scary it really is. Digging deeper into things isn't something most people have time or willingness to commit, unfortunately, in this day and age of infoglut. Unfortunately, when we don't take/make the time, scary things happen when we don't. When's the last time the average joe actually *read* one of those licensing agreements to a piece of software they just purchased anyway? Doubtful they even ever have. In fact, most people, when learning how to operate a computer, are pretty much instructed "oh, just click accept," rather than understanding that accepting the terms is not always in your best interest. Thus the advent of spyware/malware. We're not all lawyers, but we all need to be just as cautious as if we were in a litigious society.
It's a good thing Meucci was too poor! Imagine everyone trying to pronounce Ma Meucci. Doesn't exactly roll off the tongue. ;-)
How so do you figure? I'm a fan of Apple, and a (mostly) comparable Dell Inspiron E1505 configured almost the same was $1848 out the door. Mind you, it's not exactly a huge difference, but I wouldn't say Apple is cheaper. You get a lot more configurable options with competitors and a much lower starting point if you just want something cheap you can throw away in a year. Mind you, with Apple, you get the flexibility of installing Windows and Mac OS X and a pretty solid company to back you. Frankly, I don't care if Apple does or does not get out of the hardware business, so long as they keep making good software. It's what makes a Mac a Mac.
Yes I have. I do desktop support for a living (slight step backwards from my previous role as Network Administrator, but I had to get the hell out of Michigan, so I took what I could find.) Out of the box, if connected to the internet without a router or infected internal network, Windows can and does get owned, even running SP2, even with Automatic Updates Enabled, even with firewall turned on by default. Multiple critical security flaws with Windows, including Windows firewall, have been found since SP2 was released. If you run a pretty tight ship, your other firewalls and routers will keep you safe long enough to get windows patched and safer, but every once in a while, someone finds a critical flaw that has yet to be patched and virii start to proliferate again. Sure, the problem is SIGNIFICANTLY improved since SP1, but a well managed *network* has a lot more in keeping windows safe than anything to do with Microsoft's day late, dollar short patches. I'm even more repulsed by the malware situation that even with EVERY SINGLE UPDATE Microsoft has made available, Windows *STILL* gets owned by just going to a wrong website with Internet Explorer. If I had my way, we'd be running Firefox with with NoScript, but our timecard system relies on ActiveX, and the boys upstairs think it best not to confuse folks. Yes, Windows can be made pretty secure - but *NOT* from Microsoft's solutions.
Um.. isn't that basically what I said? Of course Apple has no excuse, but they still have the right to be pretty pissed off.
More like a rat that carries a disease and spreads it without ever feeling the symptoms of the disease itself. Point being, the virus came from windows, and infects windows, but the iPod itself never had a problem - it was only the host. Just like every once in a while, something taints the blood supply and someone ends up with an infectious disease, it's unfortunate, but not out of the realm of expectation. Considering how fast Windows is 0Wn3d out of the box when plugged into an infected network, I don't think it's unreasonable to be upset by the situation. Sure, Apple should have a better quality control method in place, but certainly they have a point in criticizing Windows "security," too. They should appoligize to consumers, and move on to better cloning methods that do *not* involve the use of Windows to ensure this kind of thing doesn't happen again.
It's not "environmental left wing crap." Sure, they'd pollute elsewhere, but we still polute at 5 times the average per capita. Mind you, few other nations have the economic prosperity and cheap crap from China we do. As big of a problem the US might be now, China, who has no respect for international resolutions on environmental controls, is becoming a bigger problem at a frighteningly fast pace. So, what's the solution? Stop buying cheap shit from China. It'd stop the huge trade deficit we have and send a clear message that if you want to compete in the world, you have to do so following the same environmental standards as everyone else. Sure, the US economy would take a hit in the short term, as cost of goods increase, but in the end, it's better for us all.
Same thing for Detroit. Once a city with over 2 million people, now around 900,000. Trouble with the rust belt: no economic opportunity. Michigan has the second worst economy in the union, and after recent and upcoming layoffs at Ford and GM, it'll mean some 25,000 more people without jobs. Who would immigrate or move to a city where you stand a good chance of ending up homeless? Answer: no one. Unless some real investors take advantage of the ridiculously cheap real estate and re-invest other industry to the rust belt, it's only a matter of time before the whole region is a virtual ghost town.