Forgot your password?

Comment: Re:Yeah, probably a VGA screen (Score 4, Informative) 238

by jandrese (#46773399) Attached to: Nokia Had a Production-Ready Web Tablet 13 Years Ago
Growing up in the 90s and early 2000s, I saw Tablet Computer prototypes come up every couple of years. Sometimes they would even make it to market, where they hit with a resounding thud thanks to their horrible clunky OS choices, lack of applications, and hardware limitations. Apple tinkered with the iPad for years before finally releasing it, waiting until the infrastructure grew up to make the device practical. They actually worked on the iPad before the iPhone.

Technologies that had to mature before the tablet computers became practical:
  • Wifi networking.
  • Capacitive Touchscreens -- Most early designs used a stylus, which sucks, and had poor resolution to boot
  • Low power but still acceptably fast processors -- A huge sticking point, lots of early tablets had extremely poor battery life on top of being slow
  • A touch enabled OS -- WinCE is terrible to use with a finger, and really pretty bad with a stylus. Symbian was never great. PalmOS was too narrowly focused on Palm pilots
  • Battery capacity -- Battery technology has come a long way in the past 15 years. Early attempts would use NiCad batteries, which just aren't good enough, especially with the relatively high energy consumption figures from the old chips.

Apple didn't have a smash hit with the iPad because they were the first to the market. They won because they tinkered and waited until the technology was ready, then came out with a solid finished well integrated product instead of some halfassed "laptop without a keyboard running a cut down version of Windows".

Comment: Re:old tech (Score 5, Insightful) 165

by jandrese (#46750913) Attached to: Reviving a Commodore 64 Computer Using a Raspberry Pi
It's the first computer many people had access to, and especially the first computer they could actually program themselves. In an era where PCs cost thousands of dollars, a C64 cost only a couple hundred. Parents could afford them and the default shell was a BASIC prompt. Plus, it had built-in hardware to support making games (sound chip, sprite generator, joystick port) which made interesting to the kids first learning how to program on it.

Comment: Re:This could be cool (Score 2) 165

by jandrese (#46750837) Attached to: Reviving a Commodore 64 Computer Using a Raspberry Pi
If you love them, get them all backed up on to a HDD ASAP, and make sure your HDD is backed up regularly as well. You can fit an insane number of C64 floppies on a modern HDD, so keeping the images around won't take much space at all. The only way to really preserve data long term is to maintain it by bringing it with you as you upgrade.

Comment: Re:What kind of code that do that? (Score 1) 196

by jandrese (#46718507) Attached to: Five-Year-Old Uncovers Xbox One Login Flaw
If the system accepted any bad password, then I could believe that it's a return code checking bug. But I would also be questioning Microsoft's code review standards quite heavily. A system that accepts only a string full of spaces as a password only makes sense if one of the return codes is "Error: Bad password: all spaces" and it somehow looks like a success code. That is not likely.

Comment: Re:What all is included? (Score 2) 721

by jandrese (#46718463) Attached to: Can the ObamaCare Enrollment Numbers Be Believed?
Seriously, grasping at straws. What's the new talking point going to be when less than 1% fail to make their first payment?

I know an Obamacare success is a disaster for some people, but the administration set modest and realistic goals and largely met them.

A bunch of the really bad abuses perpetrated by insurance companies are now illegal, and many more people have access to affordable preventative care. Insurance company profit margins are effectively capped if they can't find ways to be exceptionally creative with the accounting. What a disaster.

Comment: Re:ACA was supposed to insure 42 million (Score 1) 721

by jandrese (#46718411) Attached to: Can the ObamaCare Enrollment Numbers Be Believed?
You're confused. That's the old pre-Obamacare system. With the ACA you can't be dropped just because you get sick. You can't even be denied new coverage because you're already sick. There are other ways to be injured than in your car or on the job too, and most home insurance doesn't cover medical. If you have a $50 copay for a standard visit, then your plan isn't valid under the ACA and you've lost it anyway.

It's seriously amazing how many people want to return to the halcyon days of last year, like medical coverage outside of employer provided plans was a total clusterfuck and the sheer number of uninsured people with previously treatable but now catastrophic medical conditions that they couldn't pay for contributed to a relentless double digit increase in medical costs across the country.

Comment: Re:Fuck Obamacare (Score 1) 721

by jandrese (#46718329) Attached to: Can the ObamaCare Enrollment Numbers Be Believed?
Believe it or not, some parts of the US have reverted to for-pay fire protection. If you don't pay, your house burns down. Tennessee for example. The homeowner was furious that the fire department wouldn't save his home, but that's the gamble you take when you opt out of coverage.

This case doesn't really apply to medical care however, because if you show up in the sick or injured to an ER, doctors ethically have to treat you. They can't just throw you out on the street and let you die, even though that's what would be most "fair" when you opt out of insurance.

Comment: Re:Fuck Obamacare (Score 1) 721

by jandrese (#46718255) Attached to: Can the ObamaCare Enrollment Numbers Be Believed?

I just saw the nice new box on my W2 that shows "employer health insurance" payments. It was about five times what I would have paid out of my own pocket for my health care last year. Had my employer been legally allowed to hand me that money directly and allow me to pay as I go, I'd be several thousand dollars ahead of the game.

Yep, and then you would get cancer, run out of money after two weeks, and die.

If you could guarantee that you'll never get sick or injured, then insurance would be a waste of money. It's all about risk management. Hospital bills are ruinous (fun fact: they're the #1 cause of Bankruptcy in the US) which makes going without insurance risky. Worse, if you got injured and brought into an ER they would still operate on you, and then everybody else would have to share the burden (plus a big chunk of other fees associated with the inefficiency of trying to bill someone without insurance) anyway. So you're just being a selfish jerk really. You're not paying your fair share, but still expect to be treated when you get sick or injured.

If Libertarians were willing to just die on the street properly when they ran out of money after a simple injury, then the system would be cheaper for everybody. But they never follow through on this.

Comment: Re:Just think, you could have had universal health (Score 1) 721

by jandrese (#46718093) Attached to: Can the ObamaCare Enrollment Numbers Be Believed?
The worst part is, they removed the single payer option in order to bring over some Republican votes, and in the end no Republicans voted for it. IMHO, they should have put the single payer option back in there if Republicans weren't going to go for it anyway. What would they do, vote to repeal it a 52nd time?

We are Microsoft. Unix is irrelevant. Openness is futile. Prepare to be assimilated.