It is possible that they were just on a trip and encountered problems with their ship. They had to stop on a habitable planet to wait for help. However, the ship crashed before it can safely land.
Laptops are much smaller than a car yet cars are still being stolen. This can probably reduce the possibilities but it is certainly not 100% stolen-proof.
I think that it is mainly about two things: size and energy. Both determine when and where you will carry it. The rest of it is just about "everything".:)
It is bigger than a cell phone or a PDA. If you like to bring a book around all the time, which is about the same size, you will be comfortable with it. If not, you will still use PDA or smartphone. In this sense, UMPC is more fitting for office and business environment since most of the time you will be carrying a bag anyway. It's defintely not something when you are excercising.
Energy saving is also crucial. However, this is so crucial as the size. Most tasks requiring long term constant-on features are communication-oriented. You are not likely going to run a long computation task on UMPC. Of course, energy-saving also depends on how the hardware and software are designed. For example, can all the unneeded parts be turned off? I still have doubts that windows xp can be very aggressive on energy efficiency since it is a PC OS anyway. Although new battery techniques are under heavy researches, time is needed to prove their acceptance.
Also, I think that the point of UMPC is to promote PC culture. Now that various portable entertainment devices are on the market. Some of them get quite powerful hardwares. It is not a surprise that people will begin to use those devices for general tasks while general tasks belong to PC field. So essentially the point of UMPC is about its "everything" and "everywhere". But that does not mean that UMPC is targetting entertainment. I think that UMPC is still to target less graphics-intensive applications.
Now back to the battery problem. General applications are less energy-demanding than graphics-intensive applications. Most of the time, most parts of a UMPC can stay asleep. So given the same battery technique, UMPC should have advantages over entertainment oriented devices. However, windows xp is a full PC operating system. Whether it can provide very aggressive energy-saving techniques remains to be seen. This also depends on how the hardware is designed.
I think that it is mainly about two things: size and energy.
Both determine when and where you will carry it. The rest of it is just about "everything".:)
It is bigger than a cell phone or a PDA. If you like to bring a book around all the time, which is about the same size, you will be comfortable with it. If not, you will still use PDA or smartphone. In this sense, UMPC is more fitting for office and business environment since most of the time you will be carrying a bag anyway. It's defintely not something when you are excercising.
Energy saving is also crucial. However, this is so crucial as the size. Most tasks requiring long term constant-on features are communication-oriented. You are not likely going to run a long computation task on UMPC. Of course, energy-saving also depends on how the hardware and software are designed. For example, can all the unneeded parts be turned off? I still have doubts that windows xp can be very aggressive on energy efficiency since it is a PC OS anyway. Although new battery techniques are under heavy researches, time is needed to prove their acceptance.
Also, I think that the point of UMPC is to promote PC culture. Now that various portable entertainment devices are on the market. Some of them get quite powerful hardwares. It is not a surprise that people will begin to use those devices for general tasks while general tasks belong to PC field. So essentially the point of UMPC is about its "everything" and "everywhere".
But that does not mean that UMPC is targetting entertainment. I think that UMPC is still to target less graphics-intensive applications.
Now back to the battery problem. General applications are less energy-demanding than graphics-intensive applications. Most of the time, most parts of a UMPC can stay asleep. So given the same battery technique, UMPC should have advantages over entertainment oriented devices. However, windows xp is a full PC operating system. Whether it can provide very aggressive energy-saving techniques remains to be seen. This also depends on how the hardware is designed.
Slashdot Mirror
getfirefox.com finally loaded, ........., with firefox 2. :D
It is on!!!
If you are only talking about "sell", I would say that privacy will never sell, because it is not for sale.
Aren't we trying to eliminate the gas engine with more efficient engines? Now we are building a way larger one? Go, detroit!!!!
It is possible that they were just on a trip and encountered problems with their ship. They had to stop on a habitable planet to wait for help. However, the ship crashed before it can safely land.
Seriously, there is nothing new with this talk. Those are just political talks. Such talks are regularly given in China.
Laptops are much smaller than a car yet cars are still being stolen. This can probably reduce the possibilities but it is certainly not 100% stolen-proof.
I think that it is mainly about two things: size and energy. Both determine when and where you will carry it. The rest of it is just about "everything". :)
It is bigger than a cell phone or a PDA. If you like to bring a book around all the time, which is about the same size, you will be comfortable with it. If not, you will still use PDA or smartphone. In this sense, UMPC is more fitting for office and business environment since most of the time you will be carrying a bag anyway. It's defintely not something when you are excercising.
Energy saving is also crucial. However, this is so crucial as the size. Most tasks requiring long term constant-on features are communication-oriented. You are not likely going to run a long computation task on UMPC. Of course, energy-saving also depends on how the hardware and software are designed. For example, can all the unneeded parts be turned off? I still have doubts that windows xp can be very aggressive on energy efficiency since it is a PC OS anyway. Although new battery techniques are under heavy researches, time is needed to prove their acceptance.
Also, I think that the point of UMPC is to promote PC culture. Now that various portable entertainment devices are on the market. Some of them get quite powerful hardwares. It is not a surprise that people will begin to use those devices for general tasks while general tasks belong to PC field. So essentially the point of UMPC is about its "everything" and "everywhere". But that does not mean that UMPC is targetting entertainment. I think that UMPC is still to target less graphics-intensive applications.
Now back to the battery problem. General applications are less energy-demanding than graphics-intensive applications. Most of the time, most parts of a UMPC can stay asleep. So given the same battery technique, UMPC should have advantages over entertainment oriented devices. However, windows xp is a full PC operating system. Whether it can provide very aggressive energy-saving techniques remains to be seen. This also depends on how the hardware is designed.
I think that it is mainly about two things: size and energy. Both determine when and where you will carry it. The rest of it is just about "everything". :)
It is bigger than a cell phone or a PDA. If you like to bring a book around all the time, which is about the same size, you will be comfortable with it. If not, you will still use PDA or smartphone. In this sense, UMPC is more fitting for office and business environment since most of the time you will be carrying a bag anyway. It's defintely not something when you are excercising.
Energy saving is also crucial. However, this is so crucial as the size. Most tasks requiring long term constant-on features are communication-oriented. You are not likely going to run a long computation task on UMPC. Of course, energy-saving also depends on how the hardware and software are designed. For example, can all the unneeded parts be turned off? I still have doubts that windows xp can be very aggressive on energy efficiency since it is a PC OS anyway. Although new battery techniques are under heavy researches, time is needed to prove their acceptance.
Also, I think that the point of UMPC is to promote PC culture. Now that various portable entertainment devices are on the market. Some of them get quite powerful hardwares. It is not a surprise that people will begin to use those devices for general tasks while general tasks belong to PC field. So essentially the point of UMPC is about its "everything" and "everywhere".
But that does not mean that UMPC is targetting entertainment. I think that UMPC is still to target less graphics-intensive applications.
Now back to the battery problem. General applications are less energy-demanding than graphics-intensive applications. Most of the time, most parts of a UMPC can stay asleep. So given the same battery technique, UMPC should have advantages over entertainment oriented devices. However, windows xp is a full PC operating system. Whether it can provide very aggressive energy-saving techniques remains to be seen. This also depends on how the hardware is designed.