Posts by Eponymous Cowherd 1596 publicly visible posts • joined 28 Nov 2007
That's my usual tactic, too.
Buy something big and useful for £3k-£5k, drive it until it dies, then buy another, always for cash. I have spent under £10k on cars in the last 15 years. The price of the Ampera would pay for every car I've ever owned and give me over £10k change.
When you think of the kind of used car you could actually buy for £32k (luxury, performance, 4x4, etc), you have to wonder at the mental state of anyone who would even consider this thing.
£32,250 for a glorified Astra?
Does it make economic sense? No, because you could buy a new conventional car with equivalent spec for £10,000 less. £10,000 buys you a lot of fuel. Then there is the issue of resale value when the batteries are on their last legs.
What really irritates me about this thing is the £5k Government handout. With or without the subsidy, its still a rich nerd's toy. The subsidy would only make sense if it brought the price of e-cars down into a price range where us plebs would look at it (at or around £20k max).
"The thing is they will arrest you. They have a catch-all form of words along the lines of
"You have been arrested in order to facilitate our investigation""
They can only arrest you on suspicion of having committed a particular offence, though they can usually come up with something catch-all if they have to.
Walking on the cracks in the pavement, Wearing a loud shirt in a built up area during the hours of darkness, Being in possession of an offensive wife, that sort of thing.
"Meanwhile, Platell confessed that she visited the well-known PornHub website last night, and the Mail columnist added that she was "appalled" by what she found there."
Oh? And what did she expect to find on a site called PornHub? Reruns of Teletubbies?
Its like opening a copy of the Daily Mail and being surprised at the complete bollocks written by its columnists........
when the fake is part of your SH-60B
Hit the countermeasures button and hear "Die now, capitalist pig-dog"
"A major area of concern related to watchdogs sniffing out whether the pool of over 17,000 patents granted to Motorola (and over 7,000 still pending) would be used by Google to unfairly influence the market."
Try....
A major area of concern related to watchdogs sniffing out whether the pool of over 17,000 patents granted to Motorola (and over 7,000 still pending) would be used by Google to unfairly influence rebalance the market.
There, that fixed that for you........
Also, it appears to be pre-flashed with Android 2.3 (a phone OS), with no indication of other options. Its still an ARM11 (ARMv6) device.
Given the clock speed is only 800MHz compared to the Pi's 700MHz and they are running the same cores, the only real benefit in this over the Pi is the extra RAM.
On balance, I'd say the Pi's GPIO ports, 1080p hdmi, multiple OS options and brick-proofing make it the better bet.
The root problem with, so called, "3D" is that it isn't "3D". It's a stereoscopic system.
This means that the viewers viewpoint is fixed, placing constraints on the positions the viewer can sit to get the "3D" experience. This is OK in a cinema (though there is a certain "sweet spot" in the auditorium where the best effect is to be had), but in the domestic environment where the layout of the room is dictated by its size and shape and the available sites to place the TV and furniture, there is a good chance that the viewing position for most people will be far from ideal.
Then there is the need to wear glasses, which is a real pain if, like a large proportion of the population, you have to wear prescription glasses anyway.
So, for a solo viewing experience where you drag your armchair in front of the TV, "3D" has some attraction, it is pretty unattractive for general use.
This "Meh" factor has the knock-on effect of making "3D" titles poor sellers, which makes "3D" TVs less popular because of lack of content.
Unless a system can be developed that allows a "3D" experience without loss of picture quality, without the need for glasses and which works well with average domestic seating arrangements, then it will only ever be a nice-to-have novelty.
A Pint is a shade over 568 ml.
If we go metric I imagine we'll follow the rest of Europe and have 500ml and 250 ml servings in place of the Pint and Half.
So we'll only be getting something like 88% of a Pint or Half.
Anyone want to bet on the prices being reduced accordingly?
No?
Didn't think so.
"clearly pitched at the growing number of us who have smart TVs and want to be able to record programmes without investing in a Freeview or Freesat DVR
Who are they, then?
Those who can't afford a DVR? Shouldn't have thought so given the cost of this drive.
Those who don't want another box hanging off their TV? OK this thing is smaller than most DVRs, but not that much smaller.
Those who prefer the recording facilities on most TVs to those provided by most DVRs? Shouldn't think so as, AFAIK, there aren't any dual tuner TVs and the record-to-usb feature of all of the TVs I have seen is most definitely in the "afterthought" class.
I'm trying to get my head around the Reg ratings system. It seems to be something like:-
95%: Stupendous
90%: Great
80%: OK
75%: Meh
70%: Poor
65%: Awful
60%: Crap
55%: Total Crap
50%: Complete and utter Crap
45%: So unbelievably crap you won't believe it
40%: OK, so there is something worse than unbelievably crap
35%: Possibly the crappiest pile of crap ever invented.
30%: Definitely the crappiest pile of crap ever invented.
25%: Surely nothing can be crappier than this.
20%: Oh my GOD. I can't believe how crap this is.
15%: The reviewer killed himself because this is so crap.
10%: The Review killed himself after massacring the rest of the office in complete despair at the sheer crappiness of this thing.
Products scoring less than 10% will result in immediate Armageddon.
Complete and utter crap:-
"* Most importantly: The original rights owner reneged out of their deal so Sky stepped in to rescue it. At least someone is still broadcasting all the races (uninterrupted by adverts) live."
While the BBC did renege on the deal, they then proceeded to do a dirty backroom deal with Sky and Ecclestone which excluded other parties who were interested in bidding (Including C4, who would have continued FTA coverage).
"* Some additional points: There is no charge for F1 on Sky if you already have the basic subscription required to watch the channel. Anyone with an HD subscription can watch it for free - no need to get the Sports package."
There is if you don't have Sky Sports or HD (or Sky at all). There are plenty of people who enjoy F1 but cannot afford Sky's prices.
"* The coverage is at least as good as the BBC. The races and qually there's basically no difference. Coverage outside of the race is much extended."
I really wouldn't know. After following F1 for years, I haven't seen a single race this year. I simply cannot be arsed to watch half a season.
"Sky rescued this year's coverage, have done a pretty good job with it and don't charge for it. The latter point is debatable of course but if you accept that Sky were the only viable rescuer then I think the point stands. You can't expect a commercial operator to take over a franchise from a government operator without some form of revenue. Was any other operator willing to take it over? Would they have broadcast the events live and uninterrupted in HD?"
Sky did not "rescue" F1 coverage. They gutted it in their dirty backroom deal which excluded viable FTA broadcasters who could have genuinely "rescued" it. Sky do charge for it, that's what that £40-odd a month debit from your bank is for. Channel 4 were interested in F1, and have gone on record to this effect and, while their coverage would probably have been interrupted with ads this would have been a far less evil than the shit-up we have now.
Bang on.
Perhaps the next time a certain Reg writer complains about "freetards" he might like to consider that this is exactly the kind of thing that convinces people that paying for content is a fruitless exercise.
While content providers continue to treat their customers as cash-cows they can sodomise with impunity they will never "solve" the freetard issue.
"Politicians can pass laws making copyright last a million years and it wouldn't make any difference. If you can't enforce a law, it's meaningless. That's the point, and you've missed it."
Exactly.
And the current set of copyright laws is almost totally unenforceable and, therefore, not fit for purpose. The media industry are running around like headless chickens trying to clamp down on copyright "theft", but their efforts are like trying to tighten their grip on a lump of Play Doh. The harder they squeeze the more squidges through their fingers.
If they truly want to beat "piracy", they need to get the movie, music, software and e-book buying public "on-side". They can only do this by offering content at a rate and with terms that the majority see as fair and reasonable.
It's easy to make a freetard. Just rip off an honest content buyer once and he is likely to look for other sources. But once he has discovered that freetard motherlode its going to be the Devil's own job to get him to start paying again.
The problem with Britain's IP laws is that they make criminals of most of us for doing things that most of us take for granted. Britain has no "fair use" provision, so any copying of copyright material, even copying a CD for use on your own mp3 player or DVD for use on your own PMP is considered an offence.
The copying of the DVD is even considered a criminal offence because it involves circumventing copy protection.
British IP law makes no distinction between "home copiers" and serial downloaders. We are all tarred with the same brush. We are all offenders.
The point, here, is if you are considered a crook, you may as well behave like a crook. If you are considered a crook for copying your own DVDs, you may as well download them instead as you will be be considered a crook either way.
I have done both, and there is some truth in this.
I used to do a bit of clay shooting and was pretty average. After some extensive use Wii Crossbow Training I found I had actually improved. Not a lot, but noticeably.
Now I know wielding a Wii controller is nothing, at all, like a real shotgun, but it did have an effect. My assumption is that the game improved the time I took to recognise the target, giving me more time to aim and fire.
Microsoft should care.
A zonking great lump of the Windows mobile market was in enterprise devices. The sort of scanner bricks you see shelf stackers and delivery drivers carrying around.
MS, in their infinite wisdom, have made Windows phone 100% incompatible with Windows Mobile. Now the users of those Windows Mobile bricks have to decide whether to continue to use Windows Mobile (now a legacy OS), move to Windows Phone (No equipment available as yet), or move to Android. Many are using iPhones with external scanners.
There is the option of using Win CE, but that ramps up development costs, and its future is also less than certain.
Most of the people we have written Win Mob apps for in the past are moving to either Android or to iPhones with external "ring" scanners.
MS have really shit a brick with this one. They have introduced a consumer phone OS that nobody really wants and put their successful Enterprise device OS on death row.
A massive issue for Win Phone on enterprise devices is that the most popular devices are produced by Motorola. And we know which beb they are lying in.
The problem with that approach is that it also impacts genuine innovators who, for certain reasons (cost, limitations of current tech, etc) cannot, yet, implement their own innovation.
Given that the real problem is patent trolls buying up IP with the intention to use that IP solely for the purposes of extortion, then the "must implement" doctrine should really only apply to 2nd hand patents.
Something like:-
If you buy a patent you must demonstrate real and consistent progress towards implementing that patent in order to defend it
Patent trolls are, first and foremost, scum of the first order. Their business is legalised extortion and should be outlawed as a priority in order to remove this huger barrier to genuine innovation.
"Try as I might, I couldn't get the Netgear kit to interfere with either my DAB radio or the FM tranny I have in the kitchen."
Think yourself lucky the Gov snoop infrastructure isn't in place yet. You keep some poor gender-confused cow locked up in your kitchen, attempt to assault her with items of networking equipment and then write about it on a public web site?
You are bang-to-rights, sir!!!
That phrase annoys me because it is completely and utterly untrue, and I'm not talking about the "nothing to fear" bit, either.
Everybody, but everybody has something to hide. Whether its something above board like bank account details or other personal information that could be used by criminals, or some misdemeanour or embarrassment from their past.
The enquiries into phone "hacking" shows that members of organisations that will have access to this snoop data aren't above making money out of personal details, either.
It would serve Theresa May right if the first embarrassing info to be lifted from the database by some bent Met officer and published by the News of the World Sunday Sun was about her.
### Under the Human Rights Act individuals are guaranteed the right to privacy surrounding their communications other than if a public authority, such as the police, believe it necessary to interfere with that right "in the interests of national security, public safety or the economic well-being of the country, for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals, or for the protection of the rights and freedoms of others". ###
This seems to imply that the "public authorities" can snoop to their hearts content on the basis of mere belief.
Some people believe in Santa Claus, the Tooth Fairy and in honest politicians. Just "believing" isn't sufficient to justify this rape of civil liberties
living in a house with 3 females (wife and two teenage daughters), I obviously voted for the vile turdsplurt that is Twilight.
Vastly disappointed that M Night Shamawhatsit's pile of puke "The last airbender" missed the cut. Crap script, crap acting, crap casting, Even fails the "so bad it's good" test. It's just mind-numbing garbage from beginning to end.
But Sky is now so big and powerful that none can compete with it on obtaining that content.
Its all very well claiming "You buy the best content" and bemoaning that OnDigital and ITV Digital could only offer "second-tier" football, but that completely ignores the fact that nobody can compete with the kind of prices Sky will pay for that "best content".
And Sky doesn't just speculate on what it believes is the "best content". Sky regularly buy up the rights to free to air shows programmes that become popular (and sports like F1). It allows terrestrial broadcasters to take the risk, then, when their gamble on a new show pays off and it becomes popular, they see Sky outbid them for subsequent seasons.
Some will undoubtedly argue that this is just the free market in action, but a free market containing one 800lb gorilla and a bunch of bugs that said gorilla can splat at will isn't free at all.
Looking at the spec for the Bare bones option for $345
You get a case and BD drive. That's it. No motherboard, HDD, memory, cpu.
That's how the BBC's pro licence ads went, isn't it?
With commercial stations, the model is as follows:- We make programmes, you pay to watch them (or watch ads).
With the BBC the model is as follows:- You give us licence money. We use that money to commission / make programmes. You watch those programmes.
The difference is that unlike programmes made by commercial broadcasters, we, the licence fee payers pay, up front, for the programmes to be made, so for the BBC to attempt to charge us again for those same programmes is unacceptable.
Absolutely! What a lot of whiners.
This is a brilliant piece of kit for the price (Register interest at RS priced at £21.60). Even if the price does, indeed, go up by 50% (or more) it still represents brilliant value for money.
Quite happy to wait for the 2nd or 3rd batch to get my hands on one.
I recently wandered into the local Tesco and spotted this iCandy Freedom 180 bluetooth headset for sale for £20.
For £20 quid I thought it well worth a go, and I was damn glad I did. While they won't win and design awards, they sound excellent with bright treble, punchy bass and good volume without distortion. They suffer from very little leakage, so you can whack up the volume on public transport without pissing everyone off. Also work OK in phone profile (for making calls). There is an aux socket, so you can plug in another set of hedphones, or link them to your car's aux-in.
Yes, but do you just sit there after having one eye poked out and wait for the aggressor to blind you fully, or do you fight back?
While I agree that it will all end in tears, Apple has left its competitors with little choice but to join in with the corporate eye gouging war.
explain this to the UK Hydrographic office, a tentacle of the Admiralty,
The only hydrographic service in the entire world that copyrights the rising and falling of the tides.
The 10K is where DVB-T (Freeview) is fubarred by 4g and Freesat is unobtainable due to, for example, location or building aspect.
The 10K per home is to enable the affected homes to club together in order to, for example, install a relay (e.g. 100 affected home at £10k = £1 million)
For most people Freesat will be an option and you will likely get offered a low-end Freesat SD setup (about £150 including installation).
"this Reg hack's own first clear memory of Sean Connery is of a real man in an entirely plausible real situation, that's to say, strapped to a gold table while a laser beam inches its way towards his 'nads.
Happens to me all the time.
Really wasn't too keen on Casino Royale. The first bit of the film was OK-ish. But once Bond got to the casino I was bored shitless..
Not too fussed with this "gritty realism" thing in Bond films, anyway. I want absurd situations, OTT car (boat, tank, submarine, etc) chases, gadgets, one-liners, etc.
Hell, Johnny English is more Bond, than Bond, thee days......
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
