Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook


Forgot your password?
Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! No Flash necessary and runs on all devices. ×

Comment Great for BB10 devices (Score 1) 79

I have a BBQ10 (long story short, I NEED the physical keyboard, is not a matter of preference).

Even though I kinda-sorta still get security updates for the BaseOS, FaceBook (and WhatsApp) abandoned the platform, and left behind ha mobile website wraped as an app.

Since BB10 runs android, and since this is planned for older android, as soon as 10.3.3 lands, I will sideload the APKs, and let you know how this behaves. Ditto for FaceBook lite, and WhatsApp.

Comment Re:It's a shame. (Score 1) 90

But if Blackberry is moving to an OS they don't write, on hardware they don't design or build - is there any reason to buy their stuff any more?

As long as some of those outsourced OS they don't write on Hardware they don't design or build combos has a physical keyboard, count me in.

I have a friend who is daltonic, and is enthusiastic about the iPhone 7 because of the filters for the colour blind. I have a essential tremor, and I need a physical Keyboard, I do not care about brand or OS. Just about Phisical Keyboard, specs and Build Quality. And, so far, only blackberry makes those (other brands make physical keyboard phones, but the specs are krap).

The BB10 in my Q10 is cool, but I would actually preffer Android (chromecast app and some other apps not present in BBworld or amazon app store).

Comment Yeah Right (Score 1) 125

At the same time he was doing IPv4, CLNS/CLNP was using 20BYTE Addresses (variable lenght). And Xerox (which Cerf himself credits with inspiration to his project) was using 12Byte Addresses. So that excuse of "could not have done it" is Bollocks.

As for encryption, that's what optional headers are for! Should have defined two or three of those fron the start: Weak encription (to handle export/munitions restrictions of the time), strong encription (either for countries which are not under US influence, or when the exports/munition restrictions were lifted) and PKC encription (for the nascent field of public key crypto).

Besides, i am not sure what was his influence on the IPv6 designers, and their ill fated idea of removing the IP checksums... :-(


Comment No trouble for the pending sale. (Score 2) 56

Remember, yahoo is selling the CORE ASSETS, but Yahoo (the company) will still exist, as a placeholder for Alibaba and YAhoo! Japan shares. So, is Yahoo (the company) that is still liable for the breach, not verizon. If push comes to shove, Yahoo can sign a MoU stating that is it, and not Verizon, the one who will carry all the brunt of the hack (lawsuits, fines, reparations, costs and any other thing derived from this hack).

The alibaba, yahoo japan and any other assets in this company shall be enough to cover that.

Comment I may not need it, but I want it (Score 1) 222

Unless Verizoncan offer a metered plan with SIGNIFICANTTLY HUMONGUS savings compared to the unlimited competition, I'll choose unlimited any time.

Otherwise, the first time I slip up with an OTA update, the choice of a slightly more expensive unlimited plan will pay for itself.

Besides, peace of mind has no price.

Besides, is more easy to do our financial planning with a constant quantity than a variable one.

Besides, who knows what services can catch my eye tomorrow, either as a passing fad (leading to a couple of months spike) or as a daily driver...

Comment Do not worry about the deal with Verizon. (Score 1) 169

This is easy to fix and there is Precedent*

They will leave the terms of the sale as they are, but a an MoU saying that all costs (legal, fines, class actions, etc) and liabilities derived from THIS PARTICULAR BREACH will be borne by the Tracking company that will remain after the sale with Yahoo!'s holding of alibaba shares.

That way the negotiation shall proceed and the shareholders receive the cash part of the deal...

* The precedent: When Siemens was trying to get rid of their Telecoms Unit They first approached motorola about the Joint Venture. this would had been better, as there was very little product or geographic overlap. As part as their due diligence process, Motorola was told of ongoing corruption investigations in the larger Siemens (it was unclear at that time if the telecom unit was involved). Motorolla backed out.

Then Siemens approached Nokia, Quite bad, as there was a lot of overlap, both in product lines, and in Geography. Nokia accepted. They set a date. A few weeks before the date (IIRC it was near the MWC of '06) the corruption cases escalated, and the efective date of the JV was postponed, and rumour had it that the JV was falling appart. So, Siemens AG signed a MoU stating that any and all liabilities and fines derived from corruption cases from the telecom unit would be assumed by Siemens AG and not the JV.

Motorola should have done just that, would have been better for all involved!

In the end, there was no corruption on the Telecoms part (energy and transportation for sure, maybe others).

Comment Is actually a sensible Move from HP (Score 2) 111

Most of HP Ink (pun intended, remember that the HP of Yore split into HP Enterprise for Big Iron and Services, and HP Inc for desktops and Printers, tickers: HPE and HPI) Laser printers, even from the begining of "Laser Time" time, use laser printing Engines from other manufacturers (In the begining, mostly Canon, nowadays, they use Samsumg Engines too). So HP gets the Laser engine from a 3rd party, slaps a Microcontroller, some plastic, writes a bloated driver, and of you go.

Samsung and Canon, on the other hand, do all that, but also make the laser engines...

Also, HP Ink is not Strong in Multifunctional Lasers for SOHO/Prosumer/Office/BigCorporates. And has no presence Whatsoever in the Copier business.

For HP this deal means:
1.) Get rid of a competitor, actually, they probably got Samsung because it was the weaker of the lot, or for the other reasons detailed here. No worries, we still have Brother, Lexmark, Canon, Xerox, ... even Dell

2.) Verticaly integrate the Laser Engine into the production, with the associate cost savings. Sorry for Canon, no more HP bussiness for them in the medium term... (contracts will not be renewed, or renewed in shorter terms than without this deal, new products will be based mostly on Samsung Laser tech).

3.) In the medium term, deny other competitors (Dell, for example) of Said engines (Dell uses Samsung laser engines on many of their house brand lasers printers) or, having competitors using their engines to actually put money on HP's Pocket. Again, most likely contracts will not be renewed, or will be renewed on shorter and/or more expensive terms. If I were Dell, I'd rush to Canon's HQ and invite them some niguiri and Sake to, you know, discuss things.

4.) While the product overlap is Huuuuuge, the Market overlap is not, both Geographicaly (think, for example APAC, not only US) and client wise (enterprise vs consumer vs prosumer/soho). That means that HP Ink printers can reach places were samsung is strong, and Samsung printers can reach places where HP Ink is strong.

5.) Cross selling (Mr 500 employee office, here are your printers, can I interest you in some workstations/desktops/laptops? Mr. 800 employee office, here are your Workstations/desktops/Laptops, can I interest you in some printers to go with them?)

6.) "Cost saving synergies" (i.e Layoffs/Pinkslips/Redundancies).

7.) A nice throve of patents with which to defend from (don't even think on suing me, I have my patent's and Samsung's), or harass (hey, Sign this cross-pattent agreement with me, or we'll sue), or even get royalties money from competitors.

8.) Get a presence in the copier business.

Now, is that worth $1.05*109?

Only time will tell.

Comment Re:The way I would handle any important system (Score 1) 405

I will apply all the patches that the vendor supplies in an automated way where possible and where not, as soon as is practical. While it is true that a vendor could screw up a patch, it is also true that my hard drive could die, malware could get on my system, an other hardware or software problem could corrupt my data, or I could just screw up and delete data myself.

To protect myself from any of these occurrences, I keep regular backups. I take these backups at a frequency similar to the amount of data I am willing to lose in the event of any failure (including "evil" actions on behalf of my OS vendor.) For me the frequency of backups is generally daily.

Note that I use the term OS vendor instead of Microsoft here, this because I run several computers with several operating systems (Microsoft, Linux(s), others) and I have had them all screw up a patch.

Since I have chosen not to write or personally review the source code for all the software I use (because I don't have that kind of time), I choose to outsource that work to several vendors, one of which is Microsoft. Yes, there are risks to running software from Microsoft (or any other vendor), Microsoft may not have my best interests in mind. However their software meets my needs and I have made the calculation that the value the software provides outweighs the risks.

AMEN Nkwe!

Security only for servers, with one or two full rollups per year (in low demand periods, with full en-garde vendor support).

And full rollups monthly for desktops, but in waves, over one or two weeks, starting with less critical groups, and moving onwards in the criticality (Or, artenatively, with canaries in each and every group, and moving onwards to the rest of the respective teams).

And all this backed up (pun intended) with full backups (Baremetal recovery ones right before 'em patches)

Slashdot Top Deals

Someday somebody has got to decide whether the typewriter is the machine, or the person who operates it.