AMD is finally looking to get into the netbook game for real. Forget about the thin-and-light NEO chipset that’s been out for a while—we’re talking about an honest, netbook-specific chipset based on the company’s Fusion initiative that’ll blend power-sipping CPUs with ATI graphics. The platform will draw between 10 and 15 watts of power and will be designed for screens 12 inches and smaller.
With all these netbooks coming out now that are powered by Intel Atom CPUs paired with either Broadcom HD graphics accelerators or NVIDIA ION GPUs, it appears that AMD must finally be thinking to itself, “These guys from all these different companies have to pair this CPU with that GPU or add this accelerator because Intel’s GPUs stink. We have our own CPUs and our own powerful ATI GPUs. We could do this much more easily and cheaply.”
AMD’s Nigel Dessau told InternetNews.com the following:
“It will have a good processor integrated with graphics, so you won’t need the Ion graphics to give it half-decent performance… If we’d had a part, we’d have been in this space. We didn’t have a part so we went and worked on a part for the thin and light space. The plan is to come to market next year with a Fusion part that fits it nicely in a netbook type thing.”
With the impending confusion that’ll be caused (or is already being caused) by all the pairings between Intel, NVIDIA, and others, AMD is in a prime position to come in with a few netbook chipsets comprised of its own AMD CPUs and respectable ATI GPUs, price them $50 less than comparable Intel offerings, and watch the sales roll in. Unfortunately by 2011, who knows what state the netbook market will be in? AMD can’t just show up and say, “Look! We have a new platform that’s better than the Intel + ION pairings from last summer!”
The company’s got a big opportunity here. Netbooks aren’t going anywhere anytime soon, but people are expecting to be able to do more and more with them—an area where Intel has purposely under delivered in order to try to convince consumers to purchase more expensive CPUs. As it turns out, most consumers don’t really care how fast the CPU is. They just want to watch HD videos and play games. If anyone can deliver that experience in a single, integrated, inexpensive package, it’s AMD.
[HardwareCentral via Liliputing]
There has always been a bit of confusion when people learn they can do a full upgrade of their distribution from the command line. Most people don’t brave such a feat. Some because they don’t use the command line, and others because they are afraid an attempt to upgrade from the command line will wind up fubaring their system. And new users aren’t quite sure what the difference between apt-get upgrade and apt-get dist-upgrade is.
In this Ghacks Linux entry, I am going t dispel the myths and fear of the dist-upgrade command. Of course, as with everything PC-related, you know their are always risks when you do a major upgrade. With that warning out in the open, let’s set out to curb a little fear.
Differences
First I want to compare the two apt-get options: upgrade and dist-upgrade. The difference between these two is very simple. The upgrade option is used only to install all of the newest versions of the packages already installed on your machine. This is what happens when you see the upgrade upgrade packages through the Update Manager (You know, when you are made aware of notification in your panel and then Update Manager opens to show you which updates are available for your system.)
The dist-upgrade option is quite different from upgrade. But just what does dist-upgrade do? Simple. The dist-upgrade option not only will upgrade all of the currently installed packages on your system it will also handle the dependency changes with new versions of packages. In other words, dist-upgrade will remove obsolete packages from your system, whereas upgrade will not. This function is out of necessity for upgrading from one distribution release to another.
But doesn’t it upgrade my distro?
Not necessarily. Although, by itself, dist-upgrade, will prepare your system for a distribution upgrade, the only way it will actually perform the upgrade to a new release is if you have changed your /etc/apt/sources.list file to reflect the change. In other words, you have to add the repositories for the new distribution in the sources.list file before this can happen.
Well that sounds simple. Yes it is. But it is not the recommended plan of attack for upgrading to a new distribution. Although it will work, there is a better way…by command. The command do-release-upgrade was created specifically for upgrading the operating system to the latest release via the command line. Of course, before you issue this command you will want to check to see if an upgrade is available with the command sudo do-release-upgrade -d. When you do this you you be informed if a new release is available. If there is a new release available issue the command sudo do-release-upgrade and the upgrade process will begin. Of course this is a rather lengthy process and there are risks involved.You could lose packages you have manually installed (that are not supported by the new release) or (worst case scenario) your system could become unstable.
Distribution upgrades are always tricky. I have had them go exceedingly well and I have had them go very awry. It’s a gamble. But now you know exactly how to manage the task from the command line. You are now, officially, dangerous. ;-)
The big story in search right now is that Microsoft's Bing search engine is steadily taking share away from Yahoo, its new search partner. (Click here to see how Microsoft is doing it.)
See Also:
Whenever readers ask for advice on writing a good complaint letter, we always suggest that they keep the letter on-point, even-keeled and as direct and brief as possible. That is not exactly what 3-time "Survivor" contestant Jerri Manthey has done. Displeased with her experience on a recent U.S. Airways flight, the reality star might have gone a little too far in penning a 3.300-word, three chapter epistle to the airline.
For a case study on how not to write an effective complaint, here's the letter in its entirety as it was posted on Jerri's Facebook page. If you plan on reading the whole thing, you might want to hit the bathroom before you start.
CHAPTER ONE: CONFUSED, ANGRY, VIOLATED The time is 2:35 AM, Eastern Standard Time on March 4th, 2010. I have been checked into a hotel near Charlotte airport in North Carolina and am still processing the overwhelming feelings of anger and confusion. I have gone over and over the horrifying scene in my head trying to figure out why the flight attendant on my flight decided to single me out, embarrass me in front of everyone and have me removed from the plane.My parents, who I just got off the phone with, are happy I am okay, but are still trying to process the fact that I won't be coming home tonight. They had been waiting at the airport at my final destination in Huntsville, AL when I called.
I feel violated and harassed. Plain and simple.
CHAPTER TWO: MS. [REDACTED] MAKES IT PERSONALIt started the moment I set foot on the plane. As soon as I turned onto the aisle to make my way to my seat, Ms. [Name Redacted] stopped me and told me I couldn’t take my carry-on with me and that I would have to leave it to be put underneath the plane. Her reason had something to do with it having wheels (?). I would like to point out that my carry-on is far below regulation size and has NEVER been a problem on the many flights I have taken since I bought it over a year ago - even planes that were much smaller than this one. I explained to her that I’ve never had a problem and reassured her it would fit perfectly underneath the seat in front of me and I was more than willing to show her that it did. I also reiterated what the voice over the intercom had said to all waiting to board, “All carry on luggage must be no larger than the size of a briefcase.” She immediately became argumentative and disagreeable.
I then explained that the contents were extremely valuable and that I could not comfortably part with them. The contents were as follows: my 15” laptop computer, my digital Canon still camera, my Sony digital video recorder, DV tapes from past events and vacations, my brand new iPod and iPod speakers, jewelry I have purchased from all over the world and my personal and business checkbooks and bills. Everything was irreplaceable and priceless. I carry them with me at all times and would never dream of checking them in let alone leaving them behind on an airplane walkway.
I have checked with US Airways' online information regarding what is allowed to be carried on with a passenger and found that regulation states each passenger can carry on a small carry-on (up to 14” X 9” X 22”) plus one personal item. My carry on measures: 13” X 7.5” X 17”. (Pictures are attached.)
Ms. [Redacted] then had me stand to the side in the “kitchen” while she helped a woman with a very large piece of artwork onto the plane, directing her to see the flight attendant at the back - [redacted] - for assistance in finding a place to put this very large piece of art (approx. 3 ft X 4ft) which she requested “lie flat somewhere”.
I stood and watched in dismay.
Then, I witnessed a man with a very large briefcase (with wheels), carry his item past her with no issue. I tried to point out that my piece of luggage was much smaller than his and she exclaimed in an irritated and confrontational voice, “I’m helping another person right now, you need to wait.”
The stream of people continued as I stood patiently off to the side in the “kitchen” area. Ms. [Redacted] continued to ignore me as I watched many more larger pieces of carry on baggage go by: a couple of very large backpacks - compartments unzipped, expanded, filled to capacity and more than three times the size of my carry on, and more briefcases - much larger than my piece (MOST with wheels)! It should be noted that all people who boarded took a moment to look over at me as if trying to figure out why I would be standing by, wondering if maybe I had done something wrong and was being punished in some way.
This was merely the BEGINNING of the embarrassment I was subjected to.
She finally decided to acknowledge me and made me talk to the pilot (Capt. [Redacted]). I explained to him the situation and pointed out that even his briefcase was much bigger than my piece. I then explained what was in it and why I couldn’t leave it to be put under the plane. He then muttered something to me about weight (which makes no sense whatsoever as my piece was well under 15 pounds - regulation states it can be up to 40!) and decided to call the manager. I pleaded with him to let me take my bag on, and “the last thing I wanted to do was cause any sort of problem.”
Ms. [Redacted] had taken my carry-on and placed it outside the plane while my back was turned, so when I turned to get it, it was gone. I had a moment of panic - someone took my bag when I wasn’t looking! Like I said, the items in it are IRREPLACEABLE. I couldn’t believe Ms. [Redacted] would just pick it up and move it without my consent - especially with the information I had shared regarding it’s contents. I was in a state of disbelief and sheer horror as I frantically asked where my bag was. She informed me it was outside the plane on the walkway - tagged and ready to go under the plane. At this point I was shaking and fighting off tears. I felt bullied.
I found the piece around the corner of the walkway, dwarfed by the group of larger roll on baggage outside the plane that had been checked with yellow tags and left unattended to be placed under the plane. I picked mine up and moved it back to where I could stand next to it outside the plane door as I waited for the manager. Two more passengers boarded - one with yet another large backpack that dwarfed my piece and another briefcase that was bulging and unzipped with paperwork and a laptop. Both men asked what was wrong. I told them that I wasn’t being let on with my carry-on. They both looked at it and shook their heads in disbelief as they compared it to theirs. “It’s so small” said the man with the bulging and over stuffed briefcase.
It didn’t make any sense.
The manager arrived. I gave him the full story, he assessed the bag, and went inside the plane to talk to Ms. [Redacted]. She was clearly angry and making quite a fuss - an unwarranted reaction to the situation. It was me who should be losing my cool. Not her!
Despite the fact that my blood was boiling, my heart was racing, I was fighting off tears and trying to make sense of all the confusion, I was still being one hundred percent cooperative. I even offered to show the flight attendant and the manager that my bag would fit perfectly under my seat. She refused to let me.
The manager seemed to get nowhere with Ms. [Redacted] and returned with a couple of plastic bags and asked if I would remove the contents of my bag into them. In a completely frustrated state, wanting nothing but to get on the plane and get home to my family, I chose to fill my purse with what I could fit in it and carry the rest by hand. At this point, my purse was even larger and more difficult to handle than my original bag and I was left with expensive electronics being carried by hand. My carry on had been left behind completely empty except for a few power cords and a magazine.
I muttered “this is ridiculous” on the way to my seat.
Everyone was staring at me. I was uncomfortable, embarrassed, and so angry I had to fight back tears. I was confused, I felt harassed and now violated.
The plane was nowhere near full, many seats were empty and I approached Ms. [Redacted] to ask if I could sit in the first row of seats which were unoccupied. She told me that “no one is allowed to sit in the front seats”. I let out a breath of disgust, waited for the man in the aisle seat to let me in and sat in my window seat, arms bulging with all my personal belongings. The man next to me - Victor - asked if was okay. I told him “I wasn’t allowed to bring on my small carry on I’m sorry for the mess and I’ll never fly US Airways again”.
I look up and see the manager coming back to my seat. “Now what?” I say under my breath. He asked Victor to let him sit by me and in a very quiet voice told me, “I am very sorry for any inconvenience you are experiencing” and that I “should avoid any and all conversation with Ms. [Redacted]. She clearly has something personal against you and I don’t understand it myself”. I began to wonder who this woman was and how she could single handedly control and instill an almost palpable state of fear (?) in so many authority figures. I agreed to keep my true feelings to myself. “I just want to get home to my family who I haven’t seen in almost a year!” I stated. He apologized again and exited the plane.
We pulled away from the gate and I sat staring out the window, trying to fight off the tears that were forming in my eyes. I was already embarrassed and humiliated enough as it was.
After I had taken a series of deep breaths and talked myself back into a calm state of mind and my heart had returned to a normal pace, Ms. [Redacted] approached me and asked me if I was holding my laptop in my lap. Being now unprotected, I had decided to hold onto it so that it wouldn’t be jarred or damaged in any way. With all my belongings in disarray and shoved under the seat in front of me there was then the danger of everything sliding around during take off and I was trying to keep everything together and safe. She insisted I place it under the seat or stow it in the above head compartment. I somehow found room to squeeze it under the seat even though I was far from comfortable doing it. I was trying my best to comply to every ridiculous request being thrown at me.
Then she looked at my jacket and insisted I stow that as well. I had a short, waist length, bomber style cotton jacket which I was using as a blanket because it was cold and blankets were not provided. She again insisted that absolutely everything must be stowed under the seat or in the above bins. “Why is this happening to me,” was all I could think in my head. I have been flying my whole life (I’m 39 years old) and have NEVER had anyone try to take my jacket from me.
At this point, everyone around me was aware of the situation at hand. She continued to berate me about my jacket over and over until I frustratingly handed it to her and exclaimed, “Fine! Take it!” I then said under my breath, “Jesus Christ!”. She gasped in horror and threw my coat back at me. “You just took the Lord’s name in vain. Hold onto your jacket because you’re going need it when I have you removed from this plane”, she stated as she stormed through the aisle of the moving plane. I saw her approach Ms. [Redacted] with what I will describe as “shear delight” to tell her what I had just said.
Next thing I knew, we were stopped on the tarmac, and the remaining passengers on the plane were growing restless and upset. We sat for almost 15 minutes. Suddenly, the door was opened and security, police and the manager I had talked to earlier were approaching me. The entire plane was now involved. People were shifting in their seats and staring at me confusingly, trying to figure out what had happened that could warrant the onslaught of security and law enforcement. There was a sudden sense of danger and confusion onboard. Even I was wondering what had happened. It all seemed way to intense to have been caused by the combination of my carry on, my laptop, my jacket and saying Jesus’ name in vain!!
The manager was apologizing profusely as he once again sat in the seat next to me. “We’re going to escort you off the plane. I’m sorry this has happened,” he said. Suddenly, Victor, who was in the seat next to me and now standing in the aisle, was explaining to the manager that I had done nothing wrong and that he was a witness. Then a man two rows in front of me - Craig Stephens - came to my defense as well. “Can I please speak to the pilot? The flight attendant is over-reacting and I want to tell him she is way out of line. This woman has done nothing and doesn’t deserve to by removed from the plane. This is ridiculous!”, he said.
Another woman - I believe her name was Melissa was absolutely livid as she explained that her grandmother was “literally on her deathbed waiting for her to get to the hospital in Huntsville” and that if she “got there to find her already dead, the airline would never hear the end of it”. There was pandemonium, confusion and a slew of apologies directed towards me from other passengers. They all wrote down their names and numbers (included in this letter) and agreed to be my witnesses to what had happened.
According to the manager, policy states that the pilot and flight attendants have the last word and had spoken. I’d been voted off the plane.
One small detail I haven’t shared is that I am a rather well-known television personality from “Survivor.” People know who I am. Because of this and the fact that everyone recognized me, I was even MORE devastated and embarrassed than your average non-recognized person. I was HUMILIATED. And for no reason whatsoever!
I got off the plane to find a group of people waiting for me as if I were some sort of criminal or terrorist. Most of them had heard over the radio that I was from “Survivor” and I felt as though they were waiting to get a glimpse of me. Daniel Hewat - a very helpful young man - retrieved my empty carry on and my checked bag from under the plane and I was escorted back to the gate. The security and police as well as the manager apologized again and stated that they were all going to “file a complaint against the flight attendant for being way out of line”. I was given a hotel voucher, rebooked on a flight for the next morning and sent on my way.
I then had to call and explain to my extremely concerned mother why I would not be coming home that night. She said that she also had negative experiences on US Airways and swore sometime in the last year she would never travel on the airline again. I was now in one hundred percent agreeance with her.
I checked myself into the hotel and quickly found that there was no food available. I hadn’t eaten all day because I was waiting to get home to eat my mom’s home cooking. All that was available was a vending machine and I had no cash.
I called my close friend, Heidi Blessing, who works for Continental Airlines at the Las Vegas airport to get her take on my story. Ironically, her job is to remove problem people off planes. After telling her the exact story I am sharing with you now, she was dumbfounded as to why I would be removed from the plane. She told me that it is very common for people to take carry-ons that don’t fit but that she at least gives them the opportunity to show her whether they do or not. Sometimes she’s right and sometimes she’s wrong. To add insult to injury she states that she has NEVER heard of anyone insisting a jacket by stowed - especially in winter when coats provide warmth in situations where blankets are not provided.
CHAPTER THREE: EXHAUSTED, BUT FINALLY HOME
It is now Thursday, March 4, 2010. I am safely home with my family just outside Huntsville, AL.
As suspected, my flight today went without a hitch. With the SAME EXACT carry-on, I boarded my flight (FLT 3557) and arrived at Huntsville, AL airport. No one questioned my carry-on, no one stopped me or gave me any grief whatsoever. As previously stated, my carry-on fit perfectly under the seat.
At this point, I am SICK TO MY STOMACH knowing that I have to fly US Airways home back to Los Angeles on the 17th of March, but I am NEVER going to fly US Airways again.
IN CONCLUSION:I am currently on television in the latest “Survivor” and therefore scheduled to make a large number of appearances in numerous media outlets. I have decided to make it my personal mission to share with the world this horrifying and very personal story. My plan is to post this story on the internet so that the literal thousands of people who visit my website and my Facebook Fan Page can read it and know how US Airways treats their customers. I also plan on telling this story to all of the radio stations, newspapers, magazines and television talk shows that I am scheduled to appear on in the upcoming months.
NO ONE should be treated the way I was treated. I did absolutely NOTHING wrong! I was treated like a criminal, embarrassed, harassed and unnecessarily inconvenienced.
In a time when flying has become a major inconvenience in general, airlines should be going out of their way to make people who pay hard earned money for their tickets feel comfortable, safe, and appreciated. This has been the norm for many years of travel, but as of late, customer service has clearly been compromised.
My personal recommendation would be to begin by FIRING flight attendants who become power hungry, bitter, and apparently no longer like their job. It was very clear to me that Ms. Patricia [Redacted] and Ms. [Redacted] were NOT happy with their job anymore. I believe they are far too elderly and/or weary to perform their tasks at hand in a professional, courteous, thoughtful manner. And they clearly did NOT have my safety, comfort or convenience in mind.
It is apparent that flight attendants have been given far too much power and are now abusing said power to manipulate and control those around them. I understand with the recent terrorist threats that certain choices must be made for the safety of all on board, but it is very clear that Ms. [Redacted] and Ms. [Redacted] have now begun overstepping their boundaries and punishing passengers for their own personal as well as religious issues.
I have included a list of the passengers who were seated around me who willingly and eagerly gave me their names and numbers. They are all free for comment and offered to discuss further what they witnessed.
I will also reiterate that the security, the police, as well as the manager on duty that night said they were going to file a complaint against Ms. [Redacted] for overstepping the boundaries of her job. Hopefully, they followed through and you can now add their information to my case as well.
Sincerely,
Jerri Manthey
The healthcare reform debate is more fluid than ever before. One minute it is on the road to passage, the next minute it is dead. Whatever happens over the next few weeks as President Obama tries one last time to get this massive domestic legislation passed, it is important to dispel mistruths surrounding the current healthcare system. In order to effectively reform the healthcare industry, there needs to be a baseline understanding of how it currently works. As the news media continues the coverage of the debate, it has become increasing unclear to the public what works and does not work in our system today.
The best way to highlight the confusion is to take a look at the story of the $20 aspirin. There has been a significant amount of coverage on healthcare waste with one report in particular focused on this mysterious $20 aspirin. It is worth explaining. Most insurers and people living in the country do not actually pay these prices. It is an artifact of how insurance companies have paid hospitals over time. What is dangerous about this reporting is that it does not accurately reflect how the healthcare system is wasting money. Rather, it focuses on archaic pricing models that do not truly correlate hospital reimbursement to the specific costs they incur to provide patient care.
As everyone already knows, an aspirin is very inexpensive. Certainly a whole bottle costs less than the $20 per tablet charged by the hospital. So why does that aspirin show up on a hospital bill for that $20? It is certainly a fair question. Most hospitals set charges as a percentage of cost. So in the case of an aspirin, it would charge "X" times the cost. Over time, if the charges are not reviewed on a line item basis and the overall charges get increased every year, certain items become exceedingly expensive and above what anyone would consider normal. But hospitals are not normal places. They take care of sick people who require around the clock care. Built into the cost of aspirin, and every other medical supply provided to patients in a hospital setting is the cost of staffing the hospital, including nurses, technicians, administration, security, etc. Also included in the cost of the aspirin is the overhead; the building, the beds, the towels, the power to operate the machines, and so on. One can quickly see how these costs add up. Since hospitals are not paid for most of the supplies they provide during a patient stay on a line item basis, the only way to recoup the costs is to charge higher prices for what they can bill.
What does this mean? It means that most inpatient care delivered in this country is reimbursed though insurance contracts based on an episode of care, regardless of the costs incurred for providing that care. Hospitals that are efficient and keep overall costs low can make a profit on the admission. Hospitals that treat a disproportionate amount of sicker patients, those who tend to utilize more services and supplies, will continuously struggle to generate a profit margin.
Outpatient services in hospitals can be reimbursed by insurance companies in many different ways, including global payments as described above or based on a percentage of the total amount charged for the services and supplies provided. In the same aspirin example, a hospital would get reimbursed a percentage of the charge billed, not the full $20. Many have asked the question, why don't hospitals get paid their actual costs for services, including staff, buildings, etc. plus a mark-up that way there could be transparency in the system. The answer is: they can. But it requires a fundamental change in how the reimbursement to hospitals works today. The system in place now evolved over many decades and is controlled at both the federal and state level. Given each state has the ability to regulate hospitals (along with the federal government), we have a system whereby a hospital in one state has different rules applied from a hospital in another state, even though they are providing the same care. The point is simple, it can change if the country wants and/or decides it needs to change. Simply reporting on the $20 aspirin without explaining what really happens in the healthcare system does nothing to reform the healthcare system. There are many ways to reimburse hospitals, the one we have is what has been used for decades and it can be changed The saddest part of the story above is the only people who pay $20 for the aspirin (hospital charges) are those who are uninsured.
So one can ask, why does this all matter? It matters because until this country attempts to understand how the system evolved into where it is today, it will never get fixed. Politicians will simply say, unraveling the mysteries of the current healthcare system are too complex, too big, and too expensive. The news media plays along without explaining all sides of the story, and the public gets stuck. Yes, it is confusing, and yes, it is hard to explain but that is no excuse for doing nothing. The imbalanced reporting, for whatever reason, is making the overall population more confused.
A recent poll showed the majority of Americans in favor of healthcare reform but by starting the legislative process over. It is easy to see why people would feel this way. They are not getting the full story. Healthcare does not work in the free market. While it operates within the spirit of American capitalism, we can see that the overall healthcare delivery and payment system has not been consistently modernized and it does not work. President Obama, through the media needs to take a greater role in explaining the nuances to the American people. Leaving it up to others to tell the full story is not working and the public is frustrated.
Hands on the ?279 camera
We nearly assigned these photos to the Recycle Bin/Trash, because we've seen this camera, or a version of it, already. But to clear up the issue, we thought we'd fill in the gaps, and let you at the photos anyway.
This is the Samsung ST5000, the lesser spec version of the ST5500. The confusion comes about because in the US this is called the TL240, whilst the bigger brother is called the CL80, which we bought you photos of here from CES?back in?January.
If you are looking for wireless sharing (Bluetooth and Wi-Fi) and a 3.7-inch AMOLED screen, you'll be wanting the ST5500/CL80. All clear?
Back to the here and now, and the ST5000 offers you a 3.5-inch capacitive touchscreen display that handles all the control of the camera. We had a good dig though the menus and found it intuitive and responsive, with added guide notes to tell you what you are selecting - which helps demystify some of those technical terms.
You get a 14.2-megapixel sensor, with an F/3.3 Schneider Kreuznach lens offering a range of 31-217mm (in 35mm terms), so reasonably wide. It's fairly compact too, given its 7x offering. The neat thing is that the lens details are upside down on the lens, reflecting the right way up on the housing when the lens is extended.
Video capture offers you 720p at 30fps as MPEG4 and you get all the normal bells and whistles of image stabilisation and scene modes. It takes microSD as the memory card of choice.
The Samsung ST5000 will be hitting stores in the UK at the end of March/beginning of April and will cost you ?279. The ST5500 will set you back ?349, although both are up for preorder with discounts on Play.com already.
Tags: Cameras Compact cameras Digital cameras Samsung 14 megapixels Samsung ST5000 Samsung ST5500 Samsung CL80 Samsung TL240
PHOTOS: Samsung ST5000 shot and priced originally appeared on http://www.pocket-lint.com on Wed, 10 Mar 2010 19:52:36 +0000
The addition of video calls to O2 UK iPhone plans was a listing error, says a company spokesman. "The iPhone section of our website states video calling is charged at the same price as voice calls," the spokesman tells MacNN. "We can confirm that this was listed in error. We will be amending our website shortly to clarify this and would like to apologise for any confusion caused."...
The addition of video calls to O2 UK iPhone plans was a listing error, says a company spokesman. "The iPhone section of our website states video calling is charged at the same price as voice calls," the spokesman tells MacNN. "We can confirm that this was listed in error. We will be amending our website shortly to clarify this and would like to apologise for any confusion caused."...
AOL ad sales are in quiet chaos thanks to January layoffs and a subsequent re-org that CFO Artie Minson says resulted in 80% of accounts switching hands.
Analyst Douglas Anmuth of Barcalys Capital says this situation -- bad news for AOL -- is one of four reasons to bet on Yahoo, even as it cedes search share to Microsoft.
See Also:
I want to make it clear from the outset that I think Opera is great. I have it installed and use it regularly, but it’s never become my default browser.
Opera currently holds 2% of the worldwide desktop market. It’s never moved significantly beyond that figure despite a constant rate of innovations from the company. The market has grown so there are more Opera users, but newer browsers such as Chrome are growing at a considerably faster rate.
Marketing is one reason. Opera could never match Google’s advertising budget and the company is based in Norway so it has less impact on the massive US market. The name and logo are not as recognizable as other web brands either.
However, this has never hindered Opera in the mobile arena. That is a different market; there are fewer competitors and Nokia has helped by pre-installing the browser on its phones. But given Opera is so well entrenched on mobile devices, it’s a little surprising more people don’t use the desktop version.
In my opinion, Opera’s biggest strength is its downfall. It’s highly configurable and offers many options — possibly too many. It takes time and effort to get the best out of the browser.
Opera is also configurable in ways which you don’t see in other applications. Perhaps that’s innovative, but it can lead to confusion. I’ve been using the application for many years but I often have difficulty locating the option I need.
For example, version 10.5 hides the menu bar but it’s easy to show it (see screenshot). That’s great — but try and find the “Hide Menu Bar” option. It’s not in the “View” menu, Appearance or Preferences dialogs. Even the help doesn’t tell you that the option appears in the “File” menu?
That may be a minor esoteric quirk, but it’s an example of how the browser annoys new users. The Opera-specific terminology rarely helps either — how many people understand that the “Personal Bar” is a bookmarks toolbar or that “Opera Link” is a synchronization tool?
Opera is usable from day 1, but you need to invest time to learn what features are available, how they work, and how they can be configured. Few people are willing to climb the steep learning curve especially when competing browsers offer an easier and less disorientating experience.
Opera does appeal to a subset of power users, although I still prefer Firefox for ultimate customization. If Opera is ever to attract a large mainstream audience, the company should:
Address the confusing terminology
That may mean copying other vendor’s naming conventions, but it’ll provide an easier user migration path.
Remove lesser-used features from the basic browser
Facilities such as Unite, Notes, some toolbars, Dragonfly, mail and chat could all be switched off by default. They could still be provided as installation options or plugins.
Simplify the configuration options
“Show Menu Bar” should certainly be moved and all options should be logically arranged … why are toolbar settings in both Preferences and Appearances? Advanced options could be hidden, but a single tickbox could bring them all back.
Opera deserves a higher market share and the company has reported a 300% increase in downloads following the introduction of the EU browser choice screen (although this could be partly because existing users are downloading the new version). However, they haven’t revealed actual figures and I suspect they remain relatively low compared with Chrome and Firefox.
Should Opera change? Should it target a larger audience? How would you improve the browser?
Related posts:
Julian Sanchez makes a strong point:
The central, celebrated cases that have established the boundaries of our most cherished civil liberties often involve bad people who are, in fact, guilty of whatever crime they’re accused of.
Ackerman writes up the whole affair. Bill Kristol, who had his shame surgically removed years ago, feigns confusion.
Poor Newegg. They said yesterday they are dropping one of their suppliers after they inadvertently sold a bunch of fake Intel Core i7-920 processors.
[H]ard|OCP, the site that first reported the story, says that Newegg is sending the following letter to people who may have bought the fake processors:
Dear Valued Customer,
It's been brought to our attention that you may have received a Demo Version of the Intel Core i7 Processor you recently purchased. We would like to first and foremost apologize for any confusion this may have caused you. Please take a moment to examine the product you received thoroughly to determine if you in fact received the wrong product. The Demo Version of these CPUs were purchased between March 1, 2010 through March 4, 2010 and will have FPO/BATCH# 3938B006 printed on the product's packaging. Additionally, the Part Number on the heat sink will read CNFN936612 and there will be no wiring on the heat sink itself. If you have determined that you received the wrong product, please except(sic) our deepest apologies. To resolve this matter immediately, simply forward this email to both Aaron.A.Aragonez@newegg.com and Scott.A.Renwick@newegg.com and state which of the two following options best suit you: Full Refund - We are more than willing to issue an RMA for a full and complete Refund. Replacement for the Correct Product - If you are still interested in the product, we will issue an Advanced Replacement RMA to get the product to you immediately. We would like to once again extend our sincerest apologies for the inconvenience and we appreciate your cooperation in this matter. Kindest Regards.
Once You Know, You Newegg.
Your Newegg.com Customer Service Team They company also announced on their Facebook page that they would be dropping the supplier that sent the fakes, and that later called them "demo units." Intel says they are investigating where the so-called "demo" units came from.
A series of photos posted on the overclockers.com forum show what appears to be a fairly well executed fake. We especially like the part where they printed the "factory sealed" stuff on the actual box and just put clear tape over it. (Shown above)
Anyhow, the moral of this story appears to be: Don't buy stuff with typos on it. It's a pretty good indicator of a fake product. Not that this would have helped people ordering stuff on the internet -- but you can apply this knowledge to like, toothpaste at the dollar store.
Newegg Sticks with "demo boxes" - Intel Counters [[H]ard|OCP]
Newegg probes shipments of fake Intel chips [CNet]
Reported fake Intel CPU sold at Newegg [Overclockers]
What do you do when you’ve lost faith?
Perhaps it’s lost faith in your religion, in the spiritual practices that once brought you comfort..
Perhaps it’s lost faith in your community, in the people around you that once inspired you.
Perhaps it’s lost faith in yourself, looking in the public or private mirror, seeing less of what’s supposed to be there.
How do you recover your faith? How do you rebuild that energy, that belief, that conviction, the passion that drove you to impossible ends, forcing the very gossamer clouds to crystallize into bridges to the stars through your will alone?
Losing faith is losing light, losing illumination, losing your way. All seems to be darkness around you. Confusion, despair, depression, forsaken. We hope for a helping hand or someone else’s light, and for a short time, a friend may help us find the path, but darkness inevitably returns. How do you find the light that you know used to be there?
Faith, light, and hope come from within us. We lose our faith when we lose our will to search, to quest, to seek out more, to be more than we are and closer to who we can be. An apathetic jeweler who loses the will to polish a gem ends up with a pile of only rough stones, barely hinting at their potential glory. A carpenter who has lost their way builds only small huts instead of grand palaces fit for emperors. So it is with all of us.
But how do you re-ignite that fire, that light? Where do you start when all is darkness?
With a single match and a small pile of tinder, the same way you start any fire. You go back to your basics. The wonderful thing about having lost faith is that you’ve already discovered the process by which you create it. You don’t have to reinvent the wheel, just build a new one – and build it better, tempered by the experiences and wisdom of your previous efforts.
Back to the basics. Back to what you know, back to what you are proficient at, even if you don’t believe in yourself, your skills, your friends, your anything. Back to the beginning of the trail, back to the plain white belt around your uniform. That’s the wonderful beauty of the basics. You don’t have to believe. You merely have to do.
From the basics, you build momentum. You pick up that camera more frequently and take more shots. You write those blog posts a little sharper, a little fresher. You pray a little harder and share a little more with every parishioner. You polish those gems a little more crisply, build a little bit taller with every time-tested basic you know by heart.
From dimly glowing embers on a pile of tinder, you add kindling. You practice and execute your basics over and over again, seeing the results, feeling the comfort that familiar ground and old friends bring. You add twigs, sticks, branches, then logs, until the fire is rebuilt.
Before long, your fire is brighter and hotter than it’s ever been. The way is lit again for you, the furnace ready to forge your victories once more. You dare to believe again, this time better, stronger, wiser, more focused, more ready. The light inside of you illuminates the pitfalls ahead more clearly. The anvil and forge you burn away impurities with will make even stronger tools to guide your will.
At the end of the process of rekindling your faith, you may even notice that the light blazing inside of you is lighting the path for others to find you. Pass them some embers, and see where their faith will take them.
May your light shine ever brighter.
By now, a lot of people have read of the savage massacres going on in Nigeria as tribal fighting returns to a gruesome caliber.
Dennis Gartman reminds us that Nigeria is the 3rd to 5th largest exporter of crude oil to the United States, depending on the month. In December of 2009, Nigeria beat the Saudis in total US exports of oil, coming in at 3rd behind Mexico and Canada.
So when there's basically an all-out war going down in Nigeria, one must pay close attention to the price of oil with special regard to the United States. Says Gartman:
Tribal rivalries trump all other concerns when push comes to religious shove. It is now. The only good news is that the oil rich southeast is reasonably quiet, but with the north in turmoil it is reasonable to expect the southeastern separatists to ramp up their activities, exploiting the confusion that reigns in Abuja at the moment.
Today, oil is down 1.1% to $80.92 a barrel, but that could change overnight if this tribal fighting continues to escalate and makes its way to the oil-rich regions of the country.
Join the conversation about this story »
See Also:
Even on the web, sometimes actions really do speak louder than words.
The technology site Ars Technica has a tech-savvy group of readers, of which about 40 percent have installed ad-blocking software in their web browsers. That’s a plugin that allows you to avoid seeing most ads on a site. The financial consequence for Ars is “devastating”, editor-in-chief Ken Fisher explained in a post. Ars sells ads based on impressions, not clickthroughs — which means it takes a big financial hit because of browsing habits of its users.
On Friday evening, Ars tried an experiment: Readers running ad blockers got a blank page instead of the story they intended to read. The move was a technical success, but caused an uproar (and confusion) among users. In hindsight, Fisher told me, the site’s experiment in retribution was the “wrong approach,” causing confusion among many readers.
“What we weren’t expecting is so many people were blocking ads and didn’t even know it,” he said. “It left a lot of people very confused. They started digging around, wasting an hour trying to fix their broken computer.” There was nothing on the site to explain to readers why content had been blocked.
But the experiment still generated positive returns for the site’s bottom line. Fisher wrote a lengthy post on Ars (similar to many the site has run before) about its goals and why ad blocking was a big problem for the site:
My argument is simple: blocking ads can be devastating to the sites you love. I am not making an argument that blocking ads is a form of stealing, or is immoral, or unethical, or makes someone the son of the devil. It can result in people losing their jobs, it can result in less content on any given site, and it definitely can affect the quality of content. It can also put sites into a real advertising death spin.
And since Saturday, Fisher has received about 1,200 emails from users saying they had whitelisted the site — meaning they had told their ad-blocking software it was okay to show Ars’ ads. Based on Ars data from IP addresses, 25,000 users whitelisted the site in a 24-hour period — evidence that the goodwill the site has built up with its audience could be converted into user acts of generosity.
Another 200 users signed up for Ars’ premium accounts, which run $50 a year or $30 for six months. A subscription gets users access to an ad-free version of the site, full-text RSS feeds, printable PDFs of posts, and closed community sections of the site. (But Fisher notes that many subscribers just feel a sense of obligation, not a desire for premium features. “We get many people who subscribe just because they love us. They just want us to survive.”)
I asked if the $50-per-year subscription makes up, financially, for the loss of ad revenue on the ad-free version of the site. It depends on the user, Fisher said. For anyone who visits the site more than its user-average 89 visits per month, probably not. But he doesn’t think of the equation in those terms. Fisher views the subscription fees as covering the cost of specialized content that only the most dedicated user would want, like the online community sections. Ads alone wouldn’t generate the revenue to cover that. An advertising strategy that assumes a broad audience can cover the more general-interest content that audience wants. Having a multi-pronged revenue approach allows the site to provide different kinds of content for different audiences.
Fisher said he’s also had good experiences using a sponsorship model to support specialized content, including in-depth coverage that attracts a highly engaged, technical audience, but not huge pageviews. For instance, IBM sponsored a recent series on the future of collaboration. The writers didn’t know IBM was the backer, and IBM was told only the broad topic for the stories. Topic-specific sponsorship “delivers more value than display advertising, in my opinion,” he said. “It’s much more targeted. It takes the best of contextual advertising.”
But Ars’ bottom line still relies heavily on traditional display advertising. Its particular audience likely has a worse ad-block problem than other sites. But the benefits Fisher found from communicating directly with readers — making the ask along with a gentle but clear nudge — can apply to any site.
“It affects so many sites,” he told me. “And just getting the message out there makes a difference.”
Google has revealed the reasons behind the shut down of one of its data centres last month, citing power failure as the reason of the blackout.
Although Google's data centre was only down for a couple of hours, it did paint a picture of what it would be like if its centres failed more often.
The post-mortem of the power failure, which shut down the company's mobile apps service, showed that lack of human intervention and a failed backup server was to blame.
"The underlying cause of the outage was a power failure in our primary datacenter," explains the Google report.
"While the Google App Engine infrastructure is designed to quickly recover from these sort of failures, this type of rare problem, combined with internal procedural issues extended the time required to restore the service."
Not sufficiently trained
Explaining why there was a delay between the power failure and the system being restored, the report notes: "Recent work to migrate the datastore for better multihoming changed and improved the procedure for handling these failures significantly.
"However, some documentation detailing the procedure to support the datastore during failover incorrectly referred to the old configuration. This led to confusion during the event.
It concluded: "Although we had procedures ready for this sort of outage, the oncall staff was unfamiliar with them and had not trained sufficiently with the specific recovery procedure for this type of failure."
So, Google is human after all. For some reason this is a strangely comforting thought.
Related Stories
 |  |
We've talked about how to comment, but there's still some confusion about these mysterious #tags. What do they do? Well, to put it simply: They're the most fun you could have with a comment system.
#broken, #whitenoise, #tips, #lifechanger, #whateveryouwant. You'll see plenty of these tags in the comments. Each of them links to a corresponding tagpage which is like a forum of sorts. You can contribute to one of those pages by using the box right next to the Gizmodo logo. Just enter whatever tag you want to use, be it #tips or some silly secret tagpage you decide to create and tada! You've just made a whole new tagpage linked to your tag. If you ever want to view what's on a certain tag's page, just head to gizmodo.com/tag/TYPEATAGHERE.
How can this all be fun though? Well, I asked some of the commenters in #whitenoise to share their favorite tags and what they're for. Here's what they came up with:
I'm sure there are plenty of tags that I've yet to discover—or maybe some secret ones that small groups of commenters are keeping to themselves—and that's half the fun. The tagpages are your way to have a corner of Gizmodo to call your own. Heck, you can make a tag for #yourusername if you want.
There's more action on the Olympus-o-sphere! We stat at Zone-10 with an Olympus Rant. The photographer is hoping and waiting for an Olympus E-3 replacement, but cannot wait forever for Olympus.
Next up, Olympus itself has a nano-rant at the Japanese launch event of their latest cameras and deny the confusion created by AP-UK about the future mirrorlessness of Four Thirds.
If anything, one could point out that Olympus went out of their way to release two stop-gap Four Thirds DSLRs (E450 and E600) to make sure people did not think they were abandoning Four Thirds while trying to launch their E-Pen line-up.
In other Olympus action, if you missed it, be sure to check out the wishlist double-feature at Blob Beebe and also at Kirk Tuck.
NEW YORK, March 5, 2010 — Let’s face it: craigslist’s
heyday as a vital and useful marketplace is past. These
days, nearly all that remains is a haven for spam, a mass of
confusion and red tape for legitimate users, and a fading
realm of influence. It’s high time for some improvements on
the "community marketplace" theme to make it more suited to
today’s truly global community and economy. That is the
perspective of http://www.GlobalListings.org, a new forum
specializing in global, national, or multi-area classified
ads that says it has arrived to fill the void.
While craigslist.org states, "If your ad is equally relevant
to all locations, your ad does not belong on local
craigslist sites at all," GlobalListings acknowledges that
there are many valid reasons for posting on a national or
even multi-national scale. If a business or service is
international in scope – or could become so in the future –
why limit its potential?
Imagine that a consulting firm needs to hire a fantastic
copywriter, but doesn’t care whether they telecommute from
London, Miami or Sydney. Or perhaps an artist or artisan
living in Madrid is seeking to sell products that can easily
be shipped anywhere in the world. While craigslist only
allows local ads by its very design, the GlobalListings team
understands and supports the idea that much of today’s
business is conducted on an international scale.
GlobalListings offers solutions to many of the problems that
have long plagued craigslist. Instead of polluting the
database with millions of low-quality ads that only attract
more spammers, GlobalListings feels that the time visitors
invest in posting and searching needs to yield results. With
quality built into the system and the cost per ad depending
on the circulation area, spammers are automatically
discouraged, and commerce has room for exponential growth.
Ads placed on GlobalListings can be set to remain online as
long as they are relevant, rather than needing to be
re-posted frequently – a fix to another key craigslist flaw.
"For Sale" listings on GlobalListings.org are a
cost-effective alternative to using eBay, a major craigslist
shareholder.
"There are thousands of postings on the Internet where
disappointed craigslist customers vent out their
frustration, so we took it upon ourselves to develop a
better platform," said Alex Konanykhin, the President of
KMGi, an internationally acclaimed interactive production
company. Founded in 1997, KMGi has provided online solutions
to such clients as Intel, Google, Boeing, Molson Coors, CNN,
DuPont, General Electric, Macromedia, Pfizer, Aventis,
Verizon, Volvo, Accenture, Energizer, CBS, MTV, Best
Western, Washington Post, and Siemens. KMGi also owns
various online portals including BidsFromLawyers.com,
AllPublicists.com and SyndicatedNews.us.
The world may be feeling smaller these days, but with
classified ads on GlobalListings.org, every business has
limitless room to expand its horizons.
Much semantic confusion around the new world of ubiquitous omindirectional communication, especially in the business/marketing world where it’s critical to understand how to capture attention and make effective, productive connections. I happened onto a post by Venessa Miemis that explores confusion about reputation (or whuffie) vs social capital.
Parenthetical: Flashing back to a meeting David Armistead and I had with a supposedly savvy social business entrepreneur where we used the term “social capital,” and she informed us that we were confused about the term, and proceeded to define it in the “social entrepreneur” sense – that social capital is microfinance, the sort of thing Muhammad Yunus is into. We realized she was confused and decided she was less than credible, but with a kind of “gold rush” around social-whatever, as we have today, Babelian weirdness is inherently part of the scene.
Okay, end paren. I was excited about Miemis’ post, quite a bit because of it’s clarity (vs the post by Brian Solis that it dissects, which is somewhat opaque). Also because it resolves a confusion of labels and contexts: reputation is not the same a social capital, and social capital is more complex than some who invoke it might allow.
I like the thinking in this paragraph:
If we decide that reputation is the new “currency” of the social economy, and decide to attach a number to it, I’m going to suggest that that would undermine the entire premise itself, instead resulting in commodity fetishism. (Neither Solis nor [Tara] Hunt directly suggests attaching a number to it, but I’m just pointing out that if we talk about this using economic words, people will be led to develop it accordingly.) I’m just trying to think ahead here. What Hunt is trying to promote is a return to human-centric practices in business and leading from underlying human values. (One of the tweets she sent me was a link to this post of hers, which indicates as much) I think that’s what we’re all trying to do – I’m just cautioning that people may abuse this premise if its meaning is cloaked in economic metaphor.
I’m not sure it’s a “return to human-centric practices,” i.e. I don’t know that we were ever especially human-centric in business, depending how that’s defined, but I’m pretty sure that markets were conversations before they were mediated by broadcast technology and became more abstract – I said as much in the early 90s, when I proposed FringeWare, Inc. as a “street market in cyberspace.” I suppose I was thinking then, too, that markets had been more “human-centric” in the past, but we have to be careful not to view the past – or the future, for that matter – with rose colored glasses. Neither the past nor the future exists, only hazy memory and hazy speculation.
What we do know is that mass media fragmented via the Internet, and mindshare in general is more focused on the personal and the conversational. We may still watch some things on television, but there’s so much more texting, tweeting, blogging and Facebooking. The business challenge is to get into that space and get a word in edgewise. Especially hard if you spent your life pushing and controlling messages that were transmitted over a limited number of channels by the few to the many.
In this context reputation is important – trust is crucial – and social capital is inherent, if not well-understood. It’s good to see writers and thinkers and even merchants trying to get their heads around all this.
The financial writers at the WSJ and NYT have suffered a string of embarrassments lately.
Here they are:
See Also:
