Where's your enterprise data now?
Where's your enterprise data now?
What about tools that cleanly shutdown an OS, and wiped RAM just before cycling the power supply? Maybe linked with the computer's bluetooth sensor (to detect that the user has moved a certain distance away). Some systems have motion sensors now too - I can see ways to integrate, say, detection of a strong shock (such as slamming the laptop lid down, or someone snatching the system and trying to run)...
Frankly - if your data security needs are so sensitive, that you're worried about someone snatching the system from you while its running. You're going to need to give up some luxuries of convenience.
Stick with the 2MP and higher resolution cameras though; don't be baited by unreasonably expensive ~600TVL cameras often found in bulk at popular electronic stores. When it comes to forensic identification requirements of 50+ pixels per foot, those lower resolution analog cameras are junk.
For us, we wanted to catch a thief, and to record their actions while onsite. If they hear a siren, maybe they'll leave sooner, maybe not. With a camera and well secured recorder, we'd hope to have a good shot at identifying a thief. Adding battery power and offsite wireless transmission of data helps even further. Pay-as-you go WiMAX services like www.yourkarma.com help keep those costs down.
Also check out www.networkcameracritic.com for an excellent list of 2MP+ PoE enabled IP cameras (they recently reviewed a nifty 10MP fisheye camera). Stay away from the wireless cameras, as they tend to be less reliable than hard-wired (and you'll still need to run power to them anyways).
Been an iPhone user since day one - best decision ever.
dragging down the Windows brand with them.
Heh - Windows is already a terrible OS, needs no help from others: only continues to survive, where its already entrenched.
Their "newish" XBox product has lost nearly three billion in the decade its been on market as well. The latest (still unreleased) model is getting really harsh reviews, for doing things such as dropping backwards compatibility, and it still hasn't even hit the market yet.
Is Microsoft successful in any market, where they're not already entrenched?
The Skiff would have been a nice start, but then NewsCorp killed that...
If this idea takes hold, can we please see a decent touch-screen e-ink reader out there too? Something akin to the iPad's functionality, but with an e-ink screen...
One more critical point - all of this math assumes current levels of energy consumption. They do NOT factor in the huge spike in consumption that'll occur when vehicles and environmental/housing systems are powered solely by electricity alone. If we even start trying to GUESS at those resulting power requirements, and that shoves solar so far out of the picture, our grandchildren will mock our consideration of it...
Intresting link about new tech, but it was established by an earlier poster that we can't consider the "theory" stuff...so let's put aside that unproven technology for a moment and look at what the Real World can actually do Today.
Under perfect conditions the Earth receives no more than 1 kW/sq-meter.
This means that my 1kW/sq-meter reference is not limited by our technological level. This means that if solar panels were 100% efficient, and operated under perfect conditions, then the maximum that anyone can hope to draw is 1kW per square meter of solar collectors...period.
Perfect conditions would effectively be high-noon on a clear day. At any other time in the day, the Sun’s rays are perpendicular to the ground. The actual amount decreases as the angle of the Sun’s rays vary from perpendicular. Any cloud cover is going to further reduce the amount of energy that is hitting the surface of the planet.
On a typical "perfect" day, one could hope to collect maybe 5kW of power per square meter. Throw in clouds, rain and other typical factors (such as panel cleaniness & existing peak 20% panel efficency levels), and now we're dropping averages to somewhere well under 1W per square meter per day over the course of a typical year.
So, you're right, using current and emerging technolgies (none of which have been proven to consistently exceed ~20% efficency), if we were able to cover somewhere around 20-30% of the direct-sun-facing surfaces of New York with solar panels, then current energy needs would be met. Let's put that into perspective: less than 1% of New York's current direct-sun-facing surfaces are covered by roads/asphalt. Multiply that coverage by 20 or 30; covering 20-30% of the state, and you can now visualize what solar panels would mean as a primary energy source.
I've said it once, so I'll repeat & clarify again, as a general or broadly-utilized energy source solar is a joke; solar has its purpose in specific and local/regional use-cases only.
Geothermal (damn, forgot that one earlier), wind & nuclear are where the math starts to yield more realistic options.