Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive


Forgot your password?
Compare cell phone plans using Wirefly's innovative plan comparison tool ×

Comment Re:Android hosted on Linux, not based on Linux (Score 1) 105

Beside the fact that Android Terminal Emulator was downloaded over 10 million times, so some Android Users did undoubtedly see something Linux on their Android Phone, even if they did not downloaded stuff with curl like I did on my Android tablet, but this Android is not Linux is quite annoying now. What is Linux? If I set up a firewall with a Linux kernel, busybox/toybox(like Android by the way) and a few application is it Linux or is it not in your opinion? What about my Sony bluray player? It uses Linux and other GNU stuff, but I'm sure that you'd dismiss its Linuxness as well. Probably for you Linux is Linux only when it is not as successful as other OSes, like on the desktop, but I'd like to inform you that Linux is used and was used because it is very scalable and works on everything from microcontrollers to supercomputers, obviously in different forms given the different hardware.

Comment Re:Even older systems? (Score 1) 166

I know some _new_ PLCs running on WinXP embedded or, even worse, Win CE 6.0. There are current EATON PLCs running on Windows CE 6.0, and there is a big cruise ship, that will launch this autumn, automated by a network of Win CE 6.0 machines.

At least on Linux you could patch the kernel yourself (I mean, if you're a big corporation like EATON or Siemens), but this Windows lock-in in industrial automation is one of the worst problem ready to explode: ten years ago all these insecure plants weren't connected to the Internet like they are today (remote assistance, remote diagnostics and all that stuff), but now they are and it is a terrible thing.

Comment Re:Incompetent IT (Score 2) 239

As far as I can tell the surface is a great machine. I've known like 50 people who own them and they've all said they love it.

Now tell me how many of them were aircraft pilots, air stewards or the likes.

Maybe you just have an irrational bias against anything Microsoft because you don't like some things about them?

I have a very rational bias against silly business decisions, mr. Coward.
I am pretty sure that the money spent on those 11,000 tablets could have been better spent on backup servers or other essential IT equipment, not on something that looks like a pure marketing decision.

Comment Re:Incompetent IT (Score 0) 239

Kind of amazing they haven't figured out how to make their system redundant, distributed, and/or robust.

If they're clueless enough to buy 11,000 surface tablets from Microsoft, it is not that amazing. They are (were) the poster child of Microsoft services for air lines: Microsoft Dynamics and Delta Air Lines: Innovative technology and personal service equals empowered employees and happy travelers

Comment Re:If they pay the license fee (Score 5, Interesting) 230

You cannot force a company to sell licenses for a software they don't support anymore and maintain staff to maintain a piece of software the revenues cannot justify to.

Yes, but who is saying that they need "support" and a staff? That piece of software has worked for some 25 years now, I supposed that the support they need is none and they're just happy to be able to use it.

Comment Re:Corporate lies... (Score 1) 161

Face facts. Nokia was eating shit before MS came into the picture. Stuck at feature phones.

If Nokia was so healthy and growing before MS bought them, why did they sell so cheap?

Because Elop and the M$ deal of 2011. I know that English is not my first language, but I think that what I wrote is pretty clear even if it may sound clunky: "After the Elop takeover and the M$ deal it tanked hard". I'm referring to the facts of 2011, not to the cheap acquisition of 2014: Nokia sealed its fate with the deal of 2011 when ex-Microsoft Elop burned down Qt, MeeGo and all the Symbian legacy to get in bed with M$ (perhaps a bed he had never left). As a consequence of that deal, Nokia as company was destroyed and M$ bought their IP and mobile devices stuff for a fistful of coins.

Comment Re:Corporate lies... (Score 3, Interesting) 161

If Nokia had instead become a generic Android phone shifter, their profit margins would have gone way down, and there is no way they could have continued to support such a large workforce, and they certainly would not need Symbian developers. There is no realistic scenario where these people would have kept their jobs. Microsoft certainly accelerated the implosion, but they were not the root cause.

The point is exactly that Nokia was _not_ trying to be a generic Android phone shifter, but the third contender (or fourth considering RIM) with Meego. Obviously they did not need all those Symbian developers, that's why they bought Qt and made a deal with Intel and the Linux Foundation over a Linux system for mobile devices and then hired a lot of MeeGo developers. Since MeeGo was designed to make a smooth transition from Symbian, there was indeed a realistic scenario where those people would have kept their jobs: the success of MeeGo. And since MeeGo could capitalize on the success of Symbian (it still had a 30% market share in early 2011), it had more chances at succeeding than WP.

Comment Re:Corporate lies... (Score 2) 161

From upthread. Nokia net sales: 2008 : 50.71 2009 : 40.98 2010 : 42.45 2011 : 38.66 2012 : 30.18 2013 : 12.71

MS bought them in 2014. You are apparently using an interesting definition of 'expanding'. Care to share? We can use a laugh.

Just three facts: Elop's Burning Memo and the M$ deal are from February 2011, the financial crisis of 2008 put the world economy in recession in 2009 and we're talking about the mobile devices division.

In 2009 Nokia as a whole (it was not just a cellular phone maker, but an industrial conglomerate with many divisions) suffered from the financial crisis, so it was hit hard like many other companies, but it expected to recover and grow in 2010 and it grew in effect (operating profit was up 73%) and then they expected to grow in 2011 too because markets were recovering, but then something happened. In 2011, after a good first quarter, Nokia smartphones shipments stopped growing (i.e. "expanding"), they began losing personnel (it lost 2% of its workforce in 2009 during the crisis, but it gained a 7% in 2010, then lost more than 25% of its workforce in 2011-2012), their best selling high end smartphone MeeGo based N9 was relegated to secondary markets to bolster their WP7 line up, which totally failed.

So to put it in a way that even a M$ shill can understand: Nokia smartphone shipments were growing steadily, even if less than Apple and Samsung, until the Nokia-M$ deal, then they crumbled, while their feature phones, Symbian based Asha, were the only reason why the mobile devices division didn't get the whole company bankrupt.

Comment Re:Corporate lies... (Score 4, Informative) 161

Perhaps the Finnish shouldn't have sold Nokia in the first place.

If they hadn't, these people would have lost their jobs long ago. It's not like Nokia was prospering before the MS takeover.

It was expanding less than their main rivals (Samsung and Apple), but it was still expanding. After the Elop takeover and the M$ deal it tanked hard. It is not difficult to see how badly it was mismanaged under the Elop and then M$ rule: "we scrap Linux, Qt and all the plan we made years ago investing billions, but the WP7 models will be ready in 9 months, so for 9 months we have nothing to put on the market", six month later "WP8 is the new shit, so the WP7 models that we are selling in the next months are already obsolete, wait one year more for the serious stuff", two years later "WP8? Scrap that shit (I said it was the shit, no?), it will be all W10 in the future". Nokia was really strong in the emerging markets with their feature phones and low-end smartphones, but M$ wanted to tread the Apple route and this is the result.

Comment Re:More likely to die like a bug on a windshield (Score 2) 113

Agree on the first point, but not so much on the second one. Reading the paper, I'm a little surprised by the preliminary results. But if it can be reproduced, they might be on to something.

To say the truth, it is not really groundbreaking, there are quite old (10 years or so) studies that show a correlation between RF and anomalous activities of brain cells in rats and mice.

I've always been a proponent of expecting no cancer relation from these things, because they aren't sending out ionizing radiation. That being said, these little devices put out RF, and you are using it in the near field, so unless cell phone RF is unlike any other form of RF, there will be some tissue effects.

Sorry if I sound rude, but I have always found this stance rather silly. It is not just ionizing radiation that causes cancer, rather, the vast majority of cancer cases in men and animals and plant have other causes (virus, toxic agents etc.) and it is not just raw power that causes harm (a 400W microwave source is far more dangerous than a 400W heat source for a human being). There are mechanisms by which cellphones interferes with the usual functionality of brain cells, that was observed in laboratory; if that is a possible cause of cancer or other pathologies is an unresolved problem, but a problem that shouldn't be dismissed, especially by "uninformed" people. For the same reasons it shouldn't be a cause of unreasonable panic, even if it seems to me that western modern societies are a bit too much emotionally unstable and do not like "perhaps" and "maybe".

Comment Re:I don't get it (Score 1) 527

All religions are obviously works of fiction, according to everyone not of that religion...

That's obviously false. Christianity does not think that Judaism is work of fiction, and Islam does not think that Christianity or Judaism are work of fiction, and if you go back in time you would see that old religions (like Greek Mythology) explained other religions through their myths (Egyptian Isis was just Io transformed back to human form or Demeter). So, no, that is not true.

Slashdot Top Deals

They laughed at Einstein. They laughed at the Wright Brothers. But they also laughed at Bozo the Clown. -- Carl Sagan