Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Yet another misleading headline (Score 1) 109

by Avalon73 (#37714308) Attached to: Android Phones Get Dual Accounts

Android versions 2.0 and later already support multiple accounts. My own phone has 2 accounts associated with it, and would have more if I could stomach using MotoBlur. Things like securely checking (and, depending on the infrastructure, syncing) corporate email and calendar can be done without a "split personality" device, but I guess that just doesn't fly in the case of IT control freaks.

Android

Android Phones Get Dual Accounts 109

Posted by samzenpus
from the secret-account dept.
holy_calamity writes "AT&T is adopting technology that gives a person with an Android device two user profiles, enabling company email and other data to reside in an encrypted partition separate from a user's apps, games and unfettered web browsing. AT&T is calling the feature Toggle, and plans to release it later this year. Toggle is a regular app that, once installed, creates its own encrypted desktop under the control of company IT bosses. Toggle is a rebranding of an app developed by startup Enterproid, which continues to develop its own version. AT&T think this move will encourage smartphone adoption in the enterprise. Interestingly, Apple's current version of iOS and app guidelines exclude multiple profiles on one device."

Comment: Functionality already exists (Score 1) 591

by Avalon73 (#36240114) Attached to: Mozilla Labs: the URL Bar Has To Go

Why do anything with it? You can already remove the URL bar from Firefox if you want to. That's what the "Customize Toolbars" menu option is all about. If they do muck around with it, then I don't have an objection as long as there's an option to bring it back, as there are with the menu and status (er, 'scuse me, add-on) bars.

Comment: Re:Typical jumping to conclusions (Score 1) 271

by Avalon73 (#36238812) Attached to: Microsoft Kills Skype For Asterisk

Except that it isn't sufficient. There is no Skype user presence information or a way to call them with Skype Connect. You have incoming calls from Skype users, and beyond that it's an overpriced SIP termination service.

Also, "third party hack" implies that the official Skype/Asterisk integration module was a kludge, created without aid or consent from Skype. It's true that earlier solutions were like that, but that's not the case here.

Comment: Re:Typical jumping to conclusions (Score 1) 271

by Avalon73 (#36238686) Attached to: Microsoft Kills Skype For Asterisk

Indeed. There are things that you can do seamlessly (without a 3rd party hack) with Skype for Asterisk that you can't do with the SIP shoehorn that they came up with. With Skype Connect, you have no presence information and you can't call other Skype users. You can accept Skype or SkypeIn calls, or do outgoing calls with SkypeOut. That's it. If they'd add the ability to do outbound calls to other Skype users, that would at least be something.

Then there's the cost. Skype Connect comes with a per-channel monthly charge in addition to what you pay for outgoing calls. By comparison, Skype for Asterisk only includes a one-time per-channel charge for the module itself. Come to think of it, that's probably why they'd drop that over Skype Connect.

Microsoft

+ - Microsoft & Skype - The first casualty?->

Submitted by Avalon73
Avalon73 (215477) writes "I've been using Skype for Asterisk (Digium's native Skype client for their PBX software) since it was in beta 2 years ago. Today, I received an email from Digium stating that Skype (read: Microsoft) has decided to end the agreement that made the integration possible, and Digium will stop selling the module on July 26th. Support for us existing users will be there for the next 2 years, with Skype's option to renew at that time, but I'll believe that when I see it. So much for Microsoft's promise not to screw over the existing Skype user base."
Link to Original Source

Comment: Could almost do it, too... (Score 1) 686

by Avalon73 (#35963476) Attached to: EFF Advocates Leaving Wireless Routers Open

1) Uncapped business internet connection
2) Static IP outside my private network that could be assigned to a wireless router

There's still that "no illegal activity" part of the ToS, though. I doubt having a business net connection would indemnify me from anything, even if the only relevant equipment of mine is a wireless router. Frakking criminals...

Comment: Re:They wont succeed. (Score 2) 137

by Avalon73 (#35590702) Attached to: NY Times Asks Twitter To Shut Down Retweeting Feed

He's not even retweeting, though... that's the thing. All he did was mirror the list of Twitter feeds that the NYT has already published on the web as a Twitter list, so that you only have 1 thing to follow instead of 40. Nothing is being reproduced, or even forwarded.

Either the NYT lawyers don't have a clue how Twitter works, or they just don't like what the guy is saying about them. The latter is the free speech issue.

Comment: Re:The difference is... (Score 1) 427

by Avalon73 (#29364383) Attached to: Windows 7 Reintroduces Remote BSoD

On the one hand you are able to finally discard the truly broken sections of your previous implementation...

Like the buggy interpretation of SO_REUSEADDR that allows something that should never happen (namely, more than one socket listening on a port at the same time)? I've been wanting to see that one die for the last 10 years...

Surprise your boss. Get to work on time.

Working...