But you kinda-sorta already know Apple's been angling at the "you're not the product" aspect for privacy the past couple of years or so as a way to compete with Google.
You're mistaken.
Although Apple has come to realize that they can "Market" their Privacy Policy, it was already in place long before people started getting sensitive to being data-raped continuously.
Apple sells hardware (primarily). They have no need nor interest in monetizing your data. And they freely admit that "iAd" is the (really, really miniscule) exception to that rule.
Yeah. This is useful for lots of automated diagnostics functions.
Also, SOME of that data (not all of it) is highly beneficial for augmenting navigation systems (most notably, vehicle speedometer and steering position). Google even explicitly mentioned how this data would be used by Android Auto in a presentation somewhere (I don't have the link to it now...) It's hinted at a bit past one minute in to https://www.youtube.com/watch?... but I'm fairly certain I saw a presentation somewhere explicitly stating that vehicle GPS, steering position, and wheel speed would be used for location sensor fusion.
Yeah, everyone wants minute by minute logging of their Coolant Temperature and Throttle Position.
If that was Apple, Slashdot's Apple-Haters would be setting the Internets on fire with the hate-posts.
That was the LapDock which ran a (crippled) Desktop Linux distro when you put the phone in the dock. The dock itself supposedly was useful for turning Raspbery Pi's into fully functional laptops when they went on clearance, but unfortunately I broke my HDMI connector on the dock and only got to try that for a few minutes . ..
Niiiice. (Not!)
Things like that make you wonder how they ever get off the lab bench.
Nope. They did not advertise a Windows PC in your pocket.
There was also Playbook which was the most poorly designed device ever.
The only really bad part of this device is that it runs universal apps. I'm coding one now and am finding file system access poorly documented and confusing. Pretty sure I'll sort it out
So, MS has a couple of DECADES of Failed Tablets that tried to run full WIndows. Apple comes out with the iPad, that had a purpose-built OS and Apps, and it sells like gangbusters.
So what does MS do? They repeat the same failed experiment, and expect a different result.
This is actually a nice innovation. I expect someone to come along and tell me there's an Android equivalent, since this is/. - but I have long wished my phone could function like a laptop - plug into a dock at work, into my home entertainment center at home... to be everything everywhere.
Wasn't Motorola advertising just exactly that a couple of years ago?
Well, I believe that that is the one "software defined" system that actually lives up to the name.
If I understand it correctly (and maybe I don't), a "software defined radio" is pretty much a DSP and an RF amplifier, and the "modulation scheme", base frequency, etc. is wholly defined in software running on the DSP.
Right, a DSP, an RF amplifier. Additionally, you are wrong, and the "base frequency" is a hardware module (otherwise any >1GHz transmission would be computationally impossible). So it's not just software. But it already goes wrong at the point where an antenna is not just software.
Ok, well I just guessed at the implementation; so I got it mostly right...;-)
But niggling that a "software defined radio" is a misnomer, simply because it relies on SOME hardware to effect the algorithms in meatspace (and what software doesn't?!?), is being overly pedantic, and completely misses the point; that being, that a "software defined radio" is much closer to describing the actual system than the term "software defined battery" (which is just another name for "Power Management" software) is to describing what Microsoft is claiming to have "invented".
And you should have used "However" instead of "Additionally". And as I said, claiming that the term "Software Defined Radio" (which basically means that the modulation scheme (and possibly the frequency-hop-sequence?) is derived in Software) "goes wrong" simply because you can't create an Antenna wholly out of software (due in part to those pesky laws of physics), is patently ridiculous.
Just as a software defined datacenter still needs lots of hardware. This is the same definition of software defined. There is plenty hardware available, But instead as using it as"just hardware", or "just a battery" you optimize it as it is used.
e.g. A Li-ion battery has more wear and tear if it is stored at 100% charge. So you only top it off if you expect the user to unplug it soon. (e.g when charging the phone in the night, you to it off an hour before wakeup).
If there are multiple batteries, with different parameters you can optimize for those parameters. And this is a "free"optimization. You get a few percentage extra capacity in the long run, just by exposing the batteries to the OS.
But you should not expect big leaps from this. Batteries are used in portable devices, which are weight and space contrained. with other words: they will have minimal specification.
There is already a bunch of back-and-forth between battery charge, user-demand, and the OS in a modern OS with advanced energy management such as OS X. I'm not sure what voodoo MS has in mind over and above the Techniques already employed by Apple for their systems. And keep in mind that that whitepaper was written against a version of OS X now two major revisions old.
This "Software Defined Batteries" is nothing more than Marketspeak for efficiency-tuning techniques like Apple has been doing for years now.
Well, I believe that that is the one "software defined" system that actually lives up to the name.
If I understand it correctly (and maybe I don't), a "software defined radio" is pretty much a DSP and an RF amplifier, and the "modulation scheme", base frequency, etc. is wholly defined in software running on the DSP.
It's the next step beyond spread-spectrum, as far as being both covert and noise-immune.
C'mon, lighten up! I mean, if a song can have the lyric "Outside in the cold distance, a wildcat did growl;" then I submit that I should be allowed the construction I used, too. Especially on the spur of the moment!
Americans are get so scared they shit themselves all over the Constitution whenever terrorism is mentioned..... People aren't afraid of dangerous things like cars, but shit themselves over terrists.
Wrong-headed, scatological "insight." Popular claim, but just wrong.
A friend of mine's son got expelled from school because he asked about the Haber process, and the teacher immediately called security (technically a police force with statewide jurisdiction) reporting that the kid wanted to know "terroristic knowledge".
The #1 fucking problem in the US is education. Used to be, high schools were meant to help kids get into college or vocations. Now, the only real greased path to anywhere is to the private prison system.
Good God, what an overreaction! All he was trying to do was make some Meth, not an Ammonium Nitrate device!
Why are nerds paranoids about being associated with spree killers? Because deep down, under the unwashed pasty-white skin, the flaccid chicken-flesh drooping from their bones, the filthy and hopelessly pathetic clownish clothes, the rage seethes. Well-adjusted kids do not go shooting up people. It's the weirdos, the shunned, the rightfully unloved ones. It's time to step up the social isolation and cast them out of the schools meant for Real People. Confine the geeks into special schools where they can be of no danger for us Real People. Meanwhile we'll find a way to keep them out of society too.
Strap them down while you take away their SSRIs and the madness will stop.
Every now and then, I read a comment from someone about how Apple must "hate" the jailbreakers, because they keep closing off the flaws which make jailbreaks possible. The reality -- as effectively demonstrated in this instance -- is that the flaws which allow jailbreaks also just happen to open your phone up to malware. Apple is far more concerned with what a malicious entity might do to their customer base through these flaws, then with what the jailbreakers are doing to their own phones. Would, that more people understood this.
Also, cue the drooling morons who don't know the difference between "queue" and "cue."
Well, you can CUE someone to stand in a QUEUE; so, it is POSSIBLE that the person meant that there would be a line of posters waiting to post on the subject...
And you'll see that they didn't really do a good job. Do a google for "slow _____ after update" and watch the complaints flow in.
That's one of the main things about Android -- the hardware and support software / features come in fast and hard... After two years, things start getting slower because of new features.
It pretty much follows this cycle with iOS:
Version x.0 comes out. People bitch to high-heaven about broken/slow stuff, battery drain, etc. REAL bugs are present. Only the brave and foolhardy install this version.
Version x.0.1 comes out, usually within a week. Some bitching subsides, some continues.
Version x.0.2 comes out about 2 weeks later. Most bitching stops. A few random people still have (imagined?) issues.
Version x.1 comes out about a month or so after x.0. Bitching ends from all but the small group of "Those who liked it better before [x] was changed". Cautious people start upgrading.
With iOS 9, we're at the 9.0.2 point as of last Wednesday, IIRC, with a "Beta" 9.1 release also available.
Oh Yeah, and the complaints about broken features come in fast and hard on each Major Android Version, too, just like you complained of on iOS. The problem is, the FIXES don't come out in a TIMELY manner, if at all. THAT's the difference that makes ALL the difference!!!
And if you want to REALLY see some "broken/unsupported features", just look at the comments following pretty much any of the "Custom ROMs". for Android. Wow!
Slashdot Mirror
Isn't all that information readily available via OBDII anyway?
Not to Google, it isn't.
But you kinda-sorta already know Apple's been angling at the "you're not the product" aspect for privacy the past couple of years or so as a way to compete with Google.
You're mistaken.
Although Apple has come to realize that they can "Market" their Privacy Policy, it was already in place long before people started getting sensitive to being data-raped continuously.
Apple sells hardware (primarily). They have no need nor interest in monetizing your data. And they freely admit that "iAd" is the (really, really miniscule) exception to that rule.
Information about the car is what CONSUMERS want. Google is asking for it because we are asking for it.
Umm, no. Google is asking for it because Google's CUSTOMERS want it.
Hint: You are NOT a Google customer. You are Google's PRODUCT.
Google's CUSTOMERS are INTERNET ADVERTISERS looking to strip mine your life for data.
Google's business model is to turn your privacy upside down, shake the shit out of it, and collect everything and anything that falls out.
Then they go through your privacy's pockets looking for loose change because it's completely dead.
Precisely.
Maybe we should call them Fudgewagen . . . ?
Howabout "Fraudfenugen"?
Yeah. This is useful for lots of automated diagnostics functions.
Also, SOME of that data (not all of it) is highly beneficial for augmenting navigation systems (most notably, vehicle speedometer and steering position). Google even explicitly mentioned how this data would be used by Android Auto in a presentation somewhere (I don't have the link to it now...) It's hinted at a bit past one minute in to https://www.youtube.com/watch?... but I'm fairly certain I saw a presentation somewhere explicitly stating that vehicle GPS, steering position, and wheel speed would be used for location sensor fusion.
Yeah, everyone wants minute by minute logging of their Coolant Temperature and Throttle Position.
If that was Apple, Slashdot's Apple-Haters would be setting the Internets on fire with the hate-posts.
LOL. Apple does the same thing.
What "same thing"?
Still, a nice improvement in the OS.
I agree.
Glad to see they are finally catching up with iOS' Permissions Model from several years ago.
That was the LapDock which ran a (crippled) Desktop Linux distro when you put the phone in the dock. The dock itself supposedly was useful for turning Raspbery Pi's into fully functional laptops when they went on clearance, but unfortunately I broke my HDMI connector on the dock and only got to try that for a few minutes . . .
Niiiice. (Not!)
Things like that make you wonder how they ever get off the lab bench.
Nope. They did not advertise a Windows PC in your pocket. There was also Playbook which was the most poorly designed device ever. The only really bad part of this device is that it runs universal apps. I'm coding one now and am finding file system access poorly documented and confusing. Pretty sure I'll sort it out
So, MS has a couple of DECADES of Failed Tablets that tried to run full WIndows. Apple comes out with the iPad, that had a purpose-built OS and Apps, and it sells like gangbusters.
So what does MS do? They repeat the same failed experiment, and expect a different result.
This is actually a nice innovation. I expect someone to come along and tell me there's an Android equivalent, since this is /. - but I have long wished my phone could function like a laptop - plug into a dock at work, into my home entertainment center at home... to be everything everywhere.
Wasn't Motorola advertising just exactly that a couple of years ago?
JUST what Linux needs to be seen as "Supportable" by major peripheral manufacturers, software publishers and corporations...
Yassiree, Bub! 20216 is for SURE gonna be The Year of the Linux Desktop!
Yet Linux is still going strong, and is slowly taking over the world.
Maybe the "backroom" world; but that is all.
And no, Android doesn't count as a "Linux".
"software defined radio"
Well, I believe that that is the one "software defined" system that actually lives up to the name.
If I understand it correctly (and maybe I don't), a "software defined radio" is pretty much a DSP and an RF amplifier, and the "modulation scheme", base frequency, etc. is wholly defined in software running on the DSP.
Right, a DSP, an RF amplifier. Additionally, you are wrong, and the "base frequency" is a hardware module (otherwise any >1GHz transmission would be computationally impossible). So it's not just software. But it already goes wrong at the point where an antenna is not just software.
Ok, well I just guessed at the implementation; so I got it mostly right... ;-)
But niggling that a "software defined radio" is a misnomer, simply because it relies on SOME hardware to effect the algorithms in meatspace (and what software doesn't?!?), is being overly pedantic, and completely misses the point; that being, that a "software defined radio" is much closer to describing the actual system than the term "software defined battery" (which is just another name for "Power Management" software) is to describing what Microsoft is claiming to have "invented".
And you should have used "However" instead of "Additionally". And as I said, claiming that the term "Software Defined Radio" (which basically means that the modulation scheme (and possibly the frequency-hop-sequence?) is derived in Software) "goes wrong" simply because you can't create an Antenna wholly out of software (due in part to those pesky laws of physics), is patently ridiculous.
Just as a software defined datacenter still needs lots of hardware. This is the same definition of software defined. There is plenty hardware available, But instead as using it as"just hardware", or "just a battery" you optimize it as it is used.
e.g. A Li-ion battery has more wear and tear if it is stored at 100% charge. So you only top it off if you expect the user to unplug it soon. (e.g when charging the phone in the night, you to it off an hour before wakeup).
If there are multiple batteries, with different parameters you can optimize for those parameters. And this is a "free"optimization. You get a few percentage extra capacity in the long run, just by exposing the batteries to the OS.
But you should not expect big leaps from this. Batteries are used in portable devices, which are weight and space contrained. with other words: they will have minimal specification.
There is already a bunch of back-and-forth between battery charge, user-demand, and the OS in a modern OS with advanced energy management such as OS X. I'm not sure what voodoo MS has in mind over and above the Techniques already employed by Apple for their systems. And keep in mind that that whitepaper was written against a version of OS X now two major revisions old.
This "Software Defined Batteries" is nothing more than Marketspeak for efficiency-tuning techniques like Apple has been doing for years now.
"software defined radio"
Well, I believe that that is the one "software defined" system that actually lives up to the name.
If I understand it correctly (and maybe I don't), a "software defined radio" is pretty much a DSP and an RF amplifier, and the "modulation scheme", base frequency, etc. is wholly defined in software running on the DSP.
It's the next step beyond spread-spectrum, as far as being both covert and noise-immune.
The sentence wouldn't be formed that way.
C'mon, lighten up! I mean, if a song can have the lyric "Outside in the cold distance, a wildcat did growl;" then I submit that I should be allowed the construction I used, too. Especially on the spur of the moment!
Americans are get so scared they shit themselves all over the Constitution whenever terrorism is mentioned..... People aren't afraid of dangerous things like cars, but shit themselves over terrists.
Wrong-headed, scatological "insight." Popular claim, but just wrong.
I'd say that if you are talking about the U.S., and factor out 9/11, then the claim is perfectly valid.
A friend of mine's son got expelled from school because he asked about the Haber process, and the teacher immediately called security (technically a police force with statewide jurisdiction) reporting that the kid wanted to know "terroristic knowledge".
The #1 fucking problem in the US is education. Used to be, high schools were meant to help kids get into college or vocations. Now, the only real greased path to anywhere is to the private prison system.
Good God, what an overreaction! All he was trying to do was make some Meth, not an Ammonium Nitrate device!
Why are nerds paranoids about being associated with spree killers? Because deep down, under the unwashed pasty-white skin, the flaccid chicken-flesh drooping from their bones, the filthy and hopelessly pathetic clownish clothes, the rage seethes. Well-adjusted kids do not go shooting up people. It's the weirdos, the shunned, the rightfully unloved ones. It's time to step up the social isolation and cast them out of the schools meant for Real People. Confine the geeks into special schools where they can be of no danger for us Real People. Meanwhile we'll find a way to keep them out of society too.
Strap them down while you take away their SSRIs and the madness will stop.
Meowwwwwwwww!!!
No, that's for Chinese Restaurants.
Every now and then, I read a comment from someone about how Apple must "hate" the jailbreakers, because they keep closing off the flaws which make jailbreaks possible. The reality -- as effectively demonstrated in this instance -- is that the flaws which allow jailbreaks also just happen to open your phone up to malware. Apple is far more concerned with what a malicious entity might do to their customer base through these flaws, then with what the jailbreakers are doing to their own phones. Would, that more people understood this.
Precisely!
You know how many threads there are defending / promoting the notion that i devices are impervious to malware / viruses?
...of which, 99% of them are sarcastic allusions to that "Assertion" posted by Apple Haters, NOT by Apple Users.
Prove me wrong.
How is this even news?
Because haters gotta hate, and Ol' Slashdot needs the Clicks.
Next question?
Also, cue the drooling morons who don't know the difference between "queue" and "cue."
Well, you can CUE someone to stand in a QUEUE; so, it is POSSIBLE that the person meant that there would be a line of posters waiting to post on the subject...
And you'll see that they didn't really do a good job. Do a google for "slow _____ after update" and watch the complaints flow in.
That's one of the main things about Android -- the hardware and support software / features come in fast and hard... After two years, things start getting slower because of new features.
It pretty much follows this cycle with iOS:
Version x.0 comes out. People bitch to high-heaven about broken/slow stuff, battery drain, etc. REAL bugs are present. Only the brave and foolhardy install this version.
Version x.0.1 comes out, usually within a week. Some bitching subsides, some continues. Version x.0.2 comes out about 2 weeks later. Most bitching stops. A few random people still have (imagined?) issues. Version x.1 comes out about a month or so after x.0. Bitching ends from all but the small group of "Those who liked it better before [x] was changed". Cautious people start upgrading.
With iOS 9, we're at the 9.0.2 point as of last Wednesday, IIRC, with a "Beta" 9.1 release also available.
Oh Yeah, and the complaints about broken features come in fast and hard on each Major Android Version, too, just like you complained of on iOS. The problem is, the FIXES don't come out in a TIMELY manner, if at all. THAT's the difference that makes ALL the difference!!!
And if you want to REALLY see some "broken/unsupported features", just look at the comments following pretty much any of the "Custom ROMs". for Android. Wow!