and that goes away when the tablet is like the Transformer Prime or Xoom. ie they have laptop like docks which have the keyboard, extra battery, and touchpad all in one. The tablet is a laptop when it wants to be. A Tegra2 or even better a Tegra3 has plenty of power to run office apps too.
That student with the bluetooth/etc was very resourceful and was probably fine doing what he/she was doing. As more transformer styles of tablets show up everyone can give up the standard laptop or PC for college work.
it gets replaced with a tablet or a smartphone because they won't want or need a computer again. If they need one for work it will be provided. This is where the big loss to the PC vendors comes from. It's the growth from the college market which has been going away and Dell even brought it up.
And look at the transforming tablets too Mr Dell. With the added keyboard, some of the office apps market goes to the tablet market too.
so it's a local monopoly trying to protect their position using government pressure against a competitor. interesting. I also find it interesting there is even anything they can do given that Google does not force any vendor to use their OS let along use the OS( for free ) and license the Google software apps(gmail, maps, etc) along with the Google Market. Google doesn't even make phones.
My first reaction to the article was that SK was looking to get some $ from Google and was pissed they didn't just open the door and pour money into their hands.
maybe it's because Google does not make a phone as the headline states,("Google's Android phones") and Google does not force vendors to use their operating system. The operating system is free and open source so vendors can use it without opting to use Google's apps, market, or search defaults if they so desire. Unlike Microsoft's vast history of signing exclusionary deals and all the court documents which so they purposefully opt for designs which excluded others from competing on their platform.
So if Android, the open source/free version is not capable of using another search engine they might have something. But I doubt that is the case so WTF are they crying about? What do you expect a license from Google to use their Android applications and app store needs to provide apps and access to Microsoft's applications and app store?
And besides, Google as a search engine works great and consistently provides great service while Microsoft has always been technical laggards and in many cases technically inept yet their licensing and contracts prevented people from choosing other products. Somewhat related, a lot of my friends are complaining about their Windows Vista computers when I told them to request Windows XP instead but were told they would have to pay extra for the older software. Microsoft forced computer makers to ship Windows Vista and eliminated the option to put Windows XP on the computers without added costs. This was monopoly manipulation of the market choices even though it was the same companies product. And Microsoft allowed some OEMs to pre-load Windows XP and even paid them incentives to do it( netbooks ).
And didn't I see that Google only has 60% or so of the search market? Microsoft was at 80% of the PC market and stomped on all kinds of hardware and software companies with that share as they did with 90% market share too. There are lots of examples of this like Go Inc in the late 80s and early 90s, OS/2, Java, Netscape etc.
They are liked because they make good products and when they do throw ads at you they're not massively annoying and many times they are actually related to what you are on the web pages for. What an amazing feat. The television industry still can't realized a feminine hygiene commercial during a Saturday morning cartoon is not well targeted. They got the beer and truck thing down for football and most sports though. amazing.
I'm not sure you know much about the OLPC project and their software since you mentioned nothing about Sugar and only mentioned the Android ROM vendor. OLPC is about education and their software platform consists of an OS layer which has low power and mesh networking as it's key requirements. Then there is the application layer which is the Sugar interface and application system.
Besides, those netbook vendors who came out with devices after the OLPC XO while the press claimed they were comparable they were not. No mesh networking, not power efficient, not sunlight readable, and not ruggedized. Did you know that Intel had to ship and install a diesel generator outside of a classroom they setup as validation of their ClassMate PC because the laptops could not run for a full day of use with intermittent power?
And those other cheap devices you're reading about are also not in the ball park of any OLPC device. Cheap yes but not the same.
that would have been more of a concept model than prototype IMO. Prototypes are usually somewhat functional models and not just a fake mock up. They completely missed the thin/thickness aspect of the concept version. The solar panel option seems silly to me considering people would want to use the device during the daylight hours and having it attached to a cable and that solar panel covered lid doesn't seem to fit the use case for a tablet device. Maybe if there was a 2nd battery or something it could charge while detached from the tablet then it might work.
And too bad they couldn't get the $100 price with the PixelQ display. The outdoor readable display would be a must IMO. I hope they do the buy2get1 deal on this.
you must have one rare device then. Maybe you're referring to DOS as opposed to the Windows CE chain of OS's. But it is 2012 and Microsoft might have it running fine when you only run one app on it. That wasn't the case for many version years ago and I've seen many project miss shipments and even get shut down because of issues using Windows CE and the constant changes and failings with it.
Keep that device for a museum. No doubt it's a rare one.
I've seen people who have used word processors and spreadsheets ask me how to start the programs when something moved or changed the icon on the desktop. I think your use of the terms "well-written" and "meaningful" is referring to users who might be considered power users as opposed to your typical ed student just doing what it takes to get the degree and find a job teaching somewhere.
no doubt this originated as a feature from their Windows Server department. LOL
as for it "saying something", their crappy software has been yelling "we suck" for decades now but it seems corporation are hiring fans of the "we suck" software maker.
same old Windows software for sure. Simply amazing. For a laugh, I was told over the weekend that a government server system has a policy of weekly rebooting Windows servers. OMFG I can't believe people still put up with this kind of crappy software.
It'll be fun watching Microsoft massively screw up with Windows on real portable devices like tablets and phones. This built-in re-imaging feature is more proof it's the same crappy OS and they know it. IMO
then they are pretty much computer illiterate. Sure they can use Microsoft Word but would be stupefied if LibreOffice or Google Docs were put before them. They memorized what menus to click through but not the concepts of the tasks so it is no surprise the educators in Idaho would oppose more use of technology if they were anything like here. They would be unable to use the technology to teach the kids. And "here" is in one of the top 20 largest cities in America.
the OS should feel solid considering it's based on QNX which has been a real-time embedded OS for a couple of decades. I fear that what happened to BeOS with Palm will be the same for QNX and RIM. ie some very good technology goes down the drain and is lost.
lighten up Frances! This stuff is open source, unlike ActiveX(also known as CaptiveX ). And besides, even if it were technically defined as a "standard" it would still only be available in Chrome initially and other vendors would have to do the work. Since it is open source, other vendors are welcome to use it, implement it in their product(s) and even join in the development just like an official "standard".
Unlike HTML5, which you seem to think is magically a cross platform standard, Native Client is all open. HTML5 has many aspects of it which allows vendors to use proprietary components and many vendors are doing just that. MPEG4 for instance as this blogger points out: http://elearningroadtrip.typepad.com/elearning_roadtrip/2010/05/before-you-get-too-twisted-about-flash-and-html5.html
unlike the XBox actually. With the XBox, Microsoft used Windows as a base and build on top of that and beat Sony to market with the next generation of game console. Sony took a bit longer with the PS3 and it's many many cores and new hardware design so Microsoft got a jump on whole console market with XBox. They also dumped billions on it with hundreds of millions just in marketing. They are up in the $20 billion in loses on the XBox franchise and are just now pulling in single digit millions in profits.
With Windows Phone X they are years behind not one vendor but two vendors who are doing great in the market. They have little they can leverage in their desktop monopoly to help them.
You might try using how they beat Netscape in the market though. Excluding preloading on desktop OS's, they did pay vendors to use MS Internet Explorer. Not only did they pay for each unit shipped but they paid them for what it cost to for early termination of Netscape contracts those vendors had. Microsoft could try pulling this stunt and let the courts get them after they've won the market.
so that "superphone" means they will have something which supports today's hardware sometime in 2013. Remember, "super" can be a relative term and in this case it means it'll be better than the previous versions of Windows Phone( 7.x). There's little doubt that by 2013, both iOS and Android will be super duper phones compared to this Microsoft superphone.
OT: is a Windows Phone based phone called a Windows Phone phone? Android based phones are called Android phones.
I see, Nokia should wait for Windows Phone 8 and then the hardware available today can be used in a Windows phone. Put your hardware engineers in stasis chambers Nokia, it's going to be a long 2012 and longer 2013. I read somewhere that Nokia was already in a tough spot because Windows Phone 7 was not capable of using hardware available today and their marketing has to be tweeked to downplay the hardware. That's gotta really bite when you're known for great hardware and have to downplay that and only have Microsoft software to brag about.
Imagine what kind of mess is going to hit the fan when the press starts talking about Windows Phone 8 just when Windows Phone 7 gets better hardware support about a year from now. Talk about putting a fork in Nokia and calling them done. The Nokia Board of Directors choice of Elop was disastrous.
Nokia still needs a modern OS which can support multi-core chips and over 512MB of RAM. Microsoft isn't able to provide that until well into 2012 so Nokia might want a capable modern OS before the end of their world in late 2012. That's when nobody knows who Nokia is anymore.
then they would lose the money Microsoft pays them to not install Lin...oops, I mean lose the marketing program money paid for install Windows. "preinstall Xubuntu as the primary OS" just isn't so easy if you are an OEM with any kind of contract with Microsoft on any product.
there will be lots of buzz about them and then we can't actually buy anything( HP Slate or ARM netbooks ).
It's really getting to be a habit for vendors to show prototypes at CES and other shows and then never put a product on the market. I'm not a fan of that unless it specifically states it's an OEM design or something along those lines.
These 32nm and smaller Atom based devices have potential but when they spin them out at $400 and up they might just as well target them to a niche like the medical field. oh wait...
they competed with Microsoft to fund Firefox, a free browser which runs on arguably ALL platforms. WTF are you crying about.
Do you really think that it would have been better to let Mozilla be beholden to Microsoft? As if there isn't reams of court docs which show they would likely try to make it only run on Windows.
I would rather Google be there than Microsoft since Google got where they got in the search engine biz by being better than everyone else. If Google had even a pinch of the history Microsoft has I would be saying this agreement with Mozilla was bad for users but they don't and the Google search engine is still quite good.
Slashdot Mirror
and that goes away when the tablet is like the Transformer Prime or Xoom. ie they have laptop like docks which have the keyboard, extra battery, and touchpad all in one. The tablet is a laptop when it wants to be. A Tegra2 or even better a Tegra3 has plenty of power to run office apps too.
That student with the bluetooth/etc was very resourceful and was probably fine doing what he/she was doing. As more transformer styles of tablets show up everyone can give up the standard laptop or PC for college work.
LoB
it gets replaced with a tablet or a smartphone because they won't want or need a computer again. If they need one for work it will be provided. This is where the big loss to the PC vendors comes from. It's the growth from the college market which has been going away and Dell even brought it up.
And look at the transforming tablets too Mr Dell. With the added keyboard, some of the office apps market goes to the tablet market too.
LoB
so it's a local monopoly trying to protect their position using government pressure against a competitor. interesting. I also find it interesting there is even anything they can do given that Google does not force any vendor to use their OS let along use the OS( for free ) and license the Google software apps(gmail, maps, etc) along with the Google Market. Google doesn't even make phones.
My first reaction to the article was that SK was looking to get some $ from Google and was pissed they didn't just open the door and pour money into their hands.
LoB
maybe it's because Google does not make a phone as the headline states,("Google's Android phones") and Google does not force vendors to use their operating system. The operating system is free and open source so vendors can use it without opting to use Google's apps, market, or search defaults if they so desire. Unlike Microsoft's vast history of signing exclusionary deals and all the court documents which so they purposefully opt for designs which excluded others from competing on their platform.
So if Android, the open source/free version is not capable of using another search engine they might have something. But I doubt that is the case so WTF are they crying about? What do you expect a license from Google to use their Android applications and app store needs to provide apps and access to Microsoft's applications and app store?
And besides, Google as a search engine works great and consistently provides great service while Microsoft has always been technical laggards and in many cases technically inept yet their licensing and contracts prevented people from choosing other products. Somewhat related, a lot of my friends are complaining about their Windows Vista computers when I told them to request Windows XP instead but were told they would have to pay extra for the older software. Microsoft forced computer makers to ship Windows Vista and eliminated the option to put Windows XP on the computers without added costs. This was monopoly manipulation of the market choices even though it was the same companies product. And Microsoft allowed some OEMs to pre-load Windows XP and even paid them incentives to do it( netbooks ).
And didn't I see that Google only has 60% or so of the search market? Microsoft was at 80% of the PC market and stomped on all kinds of hardware and software companies with that share as they did with 90% market share too. There are lots of examples of this like Go Inc in the late 80s and early 90s, OS/2, Java, Netscape etc.
They are liked because they make good products and when they do throw ads at you they're not massively annoying and many times they are actually related to what you are on the web pages for. What an amazing feat. The television industry still can't realized a feminine hygiene commercial during a Saturday morning cartoon is not well targeted. They got the beer and truck thing down for football and most sports though. amazing.
LoB
I'm not sure you know much about the OLPC project and their software since you mentioned nothing about Sugar and only mentioned the Android ROM vendor. OLPC is about education and their software platform consists of an OS layer which has low power and mesh networking as it's key requirements. Then there is the application layer which is the Sugar interface and application system.
Besides, those netbook vendors who came out with devices after the OLPC XO while the press claimed they were comparable they were not. No mesh networking, not power efficient, not sunlight readable, and not ruggedized. Did you know that Intel had to ship and install a diesel generator outside of a classroom they setup as validation of their ClassMate PC because the laptops could not run for a full day of use with intermittent power?
And those other cheap devices you're reading about are also not in the ball park of any OLPC device. Cheap yes but not the same.
LoB
that would have been more of a concept model than prototype IMO. Prototypes are usually somewhat functional models and not just a fake mock up. They completely missed the thin/thickness aspect of the concept version. The solar panel option seems silly to me considering people would want to use the device during the daylight hours and having it attached to a cable and that solar panel covered lid doesn't seem to fit the use case for a tablet device. Maybe if there was a 2nd battery or something it could charge while detached from the tablet then it might work.
And too bad they couldn't get the $100 price with the PixelQ display. The outdoor readable display would be a must IMO. I hope they do the buy2get1 deal on this.
LoB
so 2003 then. and FYI with the DOS stuff, I was referring to the bit about a reliable embedded OS, not what was on your iPAQ.
LoB
you must have one rare device then. Maybe you're referring to DOS as opposed to the Windows CE chain of OS's. But it is 2012 and Microsoft might have it running fine when you only run one app on it. That wasn't the case for many version years ago and I've seen many project miss shipments and even get shut down because of issues using Windows CE and the constant changes and failings with it.
Keep that device for a museum. No doubt it's a rare one.
LoB
I've seen people who have used word processors and spreadsheets ask me how to start the programs when something moved or changed the icon on the desktop. I think your use of the terms "well-written" and "meaningful" is referring to users who might be considered power users as opposed to your typical ed student just doing what it takes to get the degree and find a job teaching somewhere.
LoB
it'll be next to the START button and it'll be labelled RUN.
LoB
no doubt this originated as a feature from their Windows Server department. LOL
as for it "saying something", their crappy software has been yelling "we suck" for decades now but it seems corporation are hiring fans of the "we suck" software maker.
LoB
same old Windows software for sure. Simply amazing. For a laugh, I was told over the weekend that a government server system has a policy of weekly rebooting Windows servers. OMFG I can't believe people still put up with this kind of crappy software.
It'll be fun watching Microsoft massively screw up with Windows on real portable devices like tablets and phones. This built-in re-imaging feature is more proof it's the same crappy OS and they know it. IMO
LoB
thanks for the clarification, it adds to the growing list of stories on /. which are very misleading. I'm really starting to miss CmdrTaco.
LoB
then they are pretty much computer illiterate. Sure they can use Microsoft Word but would be stupefied if LibreOffice or Google Docs were put before them. They memorized what menus to click through but not the concepts of the tasks so it is no surprise the educators in Idaho would oppose more use of technology if they were anything like here. They would be unable to use the technology to teach the kids. And "here" is in one of the top 20 largest cities in America.
LoB
the OS should feel solid considering it's based on QNX which has been a real-time embedded OS for a couple of decades. I fear that what happened to BeOS with Palm will be the same for QNX and RIM. ie some very good technology goes down the drain and is lost.
LoB
lighten up Frances! This stuff is open source, unlike ActiveX(also known as CaptiveX ). And besides, even if it were technically defined as a "standard" it would still only be available in Chrome initially and other vendors would have to do the work. Since it is open source, other vendors are welcome to use it, implement it in their product(s) and even join in the development just like an official "standard".
Unlike HTML5, which you seem to think is magically a cross platform standard, Native Client is all open. HTML5 has many aspects of it which allows vendors to use proprietary components and many vendors are doing just that. MPEG4 for instance as this blogger points out: http://elearningroadtrip.typepad.com/elearning_roadtrip/2010/05/before-you-get-too-twisted-about-flash-and-html5.html
LoB
unlike the XBox actually. With the XBox, Microsoft used Windows as a base and build on top of that and beat Sony to market with the next generation of game console. Sony took a bit longer with the PS3 and it's many many cores and new hardware design so Microsoft got a jump on whole console market with XBox. They also dumped billions on it with hundreds of millions just in marketing. They are up in the $20 billion in loses on the XBox franchise and are just now pulling in single digit millions in profits.
With Windows Phone X they are years behind not one vendor but two vendors who are doing great in the market. They have little they can leverage in their desktop monopoly to help them.
You might try using how they beat Netscape in the market though. Excluding preloading on desktop OS's, they did pay vendors to use MS Internet Explorer. Not only did they pay for each unit shipped but they paid them for what it cost to for early termination of Netscape contracts those vendors had. Microsoft could try pulling this stunt and let the courts get them after they've won the market.
LoB
so that "superphone" means they will have something which supports today's hardware sometime in 2013. Remember, "super" can be a relative term and in this case it means it'll be better than the previous versions of Windows Phone( 7.x). There's little doubt that by 2013, both iOS and Android will be super duper phones compared to this Microsoft superphone.
OT: is a Windows Phone based phone called a Windows Phone phone? Android based phones are called Android phones.
LoB
I see, Nokia should wait for Windows Phone 8 and then the hardware available today can be used in a Windows phone. Put your hardware engineers in stasis chambers Nokia, it's going to be a long 2012 and longer 2013. I read somewhere that Nokia was already in a tough spot because Windows Phone 7 was not capable of using hardware available today and their marketing has to be tweeked to downplay the hardware. That's gotta really bite when you're known for great hardware and have to downplay that and only have Microsoft software to brag about.
Imagine what kind of mess is going to hit the fan when the press starts talking about Windows Phone 8 just when Windows Phone 7 gets better hardware support about a year from now. Talk about putting a fork in Nokia and calling them done. The Nokia Board of Directors choice of Elop was disastrous.
LoB
Nokia still needs a modern OS which can support multi-core chips and over 512MB of RAM. Microsoft isn't able to provide that until well into 2012 so Nokia might want a capable modern OS before the end of their world in late 2012. That's when nobody knows who Nokia is anymore.
LoB
root the NC and carry a webcam/mic combo and use that when you need it. it has a USB port which can be operated in host mode.
LoB
then they would lose the money Microsoft pays them to not install Lin...oops, I mean lose the marketing program money paid for install Windows. "preinstall Xubuntu as the primary OS" just isn't so easy if you are an OEM with any kind of contract with Microsoft on any product.
LoB
probably just demo's for CES.
LoB
there will be lots of buzz about them and then we can't actually buy anything( HP Slate or ARM netbooks ).
It's really getting to be a habit for vendors to show prototypes at CES and other shows and then never put a product on the market. I'm not a fan of that unless it specifically states it's an OEM design or something along those lines.
These 32nm and smaller Atom based devices have potential but when they spin them out at $400 and up they might just as well target them to a niche like the medical field. oh wait...
LoB
they competed with Microsoft to fund Firefox, a free browser which runs on arguably ALL platforms. WTF are you crying about.
Do you really think that it would have been better to let Mozilla be beholden to Microsoft? As if there isn't reams of court docs which show they would likely try to make it only run on Windows.
I would rather Google be there than Microsoft since Google got where they got in the search engine biz by being better than everyone else. If Google had even a pinch of the history Microsoft has I would be saying this agreement with Mozilla was bad for users but they don't and the Google search engine is still quite good.
LoB