The UAFC

Joe Schmo wrote: Don't forget apple designed the a5/6 chip that runs their iPads and iPhones, no other company uses it. It would make no sense for apple to make their own memory as this is mass produced by companies like Samsung. The only reason apple don't make the stuff themselves is no one in America would want to work the number of hours and rate of pay they do in China. Although I think apple still make/assemble their mac pro computers in Cork.

That chip is based around an ARM CPU. ARM license their designs to companies who put together the particular chip functionality they want using ARM and other in-house and third party elements in the design then get them built by a chip fabrication plant. So yes, that chip is custom to Apple, but other major companies will also have their own custom processors based around the ARM CPU as well.

Shan wrote:

mikerob wrote:
You'd better stick with it then. From most of the reports I've read, Windows 8 looks like a turkey.

I hope not Mike. All the efforts going to get ready for its launch will be for f-ck all if it turns out to be a pile of crap. Of course it's not like previous launches in that not everybody is going to want it but should still be sizable demand. Can't be doing with another Vista.

The story behind Windows 8 is that Microsoft are paranoid about losing a large section of the consumer market to tablet devices so the major push behind Windows 8 is a new tablet-friendly user interface that Microsoft called Metro. This interface may be fine for tablets, like the forthcoming Microsoft Surface products, but they are also trying to force elements of the interface onto conventional computers with keyboard, monitor and mouse and also dropping/hiding aspect of the Windows interface that most people are used to, like the Start button.

Microsoft seem to be driven by the desire to have a common Windows interface across PCs, phones and tablets but feedback seems to be that a large number of people hate this on conventional PCs. Also, you'll need 2 versions of an application, one for the Metro interface, one for the sort-of-traditional-Windows interface.

if you take out all the fancy new interface stuff, there isn't that much in Windows 8. It is more like Windows 7.1.

Microsoft has a track record of messing up every other OS release, so Windows 8 flopping just follows the pattern.

The trend is away from these conventional big, bloated buggy operating systems as well. Tablets and smartphones don't use them and in the corporate sector anyway, less and less PCs are being purchased and they are running operating systems and applications centrally in virtualised fashion, with dumb terminals as the desktop, so almost like the mainframes of the 70s and 80s.

Yes Mike....We are expecting little enough demand in the commercial sector with Win8. In the consumer sector we'd be expecting a lot of demand in the all in ones which are pretty popular and also in the new attempt at the duo(dual laptop/tablet) which will be launching pretty soon in the US and hopefully if successful in EMEA region probably early next year. I've seen it and it looks pretty class although I haven't had any chance to get my hands on it yet.

I thought all apps were compatible with the new software though. I hadn't heard of this requirement for two versions although then again I'm not living in the Engineering or development side of the house. From a component perspective I know that the new software is creating one or two headaches but these are being resolved.

And yes I saw the numbers this week for sales of these terminal-style little boxes(I can't actually remember the name they called them) utilising the central servers and I couldn't believe how many are being sold. I am living more among the traditional portable/desktop and server side of things so wasn't even aware there was much of a market for the "empty box and monitor" as I am calling it.

From what I hear Microsoft are releasing two tablets next year. It will be interesting to see what happens when they get more and more involved in the hardware side of things.

The fecking laptop market is drying up anyway. The sales figures for Asia are terrible throughout the industry. Tablets and phones are the thing with some room for the ultrabooks as well. The new ultras look excellent and so fecking light and narrow. I wouldn't say I'm the type who is big into computers and the rest of it, despite working in it, but I do like the snazzy look of those ultras and the duos which for me would be much more user-friendly than the ordinary tablet.

Rooster wrote: they produce phones that just work and do what a phone should do, ie main function making phone calls,

Now there's a novel idea Rooster!

Only two figures that would attract me to one phones spec over another:

• Rated > IP57
• specific gravity < 1

BR wrote:

Rooster wrote: they produce phones that just work and do what a phone should do, ie main function making phone calls,

Now there's a novel idea Rooster!

Only two figures that would attract me to one phones spec over another:

• Rated > IP57
• specific gravity < 1

A simple MIL-STD-810 would suffice

Rooster wrote:

BR wrote:

Rooster wrote: they produce phones that just work and do what a phone should do, ie main function making phone calls,

Now there's a novel idea Rooster!

Only two figures that would attract me to one phones spec over another:

• Rated > IP57
• specific gravity < 1

A simple MIL-STD-810 would suffice

Didn't realise they'd introduced the 'toilet-bowl-of-puke test' to that standard - those Pentagon types think of everything

The iPhone 5 for example can operate on 4G networks across only three radio frequencies - 850MHz, 1800MHz and 2100MHz. Unlike Everything Everywhere , O2 and Vodafone are planning to use the 800 MHz and 2.6 GHz 4G LTE frequencies. Long term this should provide a better service, but the iPhone 5 won't support these two frequencies, which is very bad news for UK customers.

It is possible that Apple will produce a new version of the iPhone 5 next year which will work on O2 and Vodafone's 4G LTE networks. However, that isn't a good solution for a lot of consumers who'd have to wait a long time before buying the iPhone 5, unless they rebought another one at a later date.

All in all this has been a very bad time for all other UK operator apart from Everything Everywhere (EE) , who are now the only network offering the iPhone 5 with 4G LTE support.

Things arn't as bad for Three as they are for O2 and Vodafone because they've brought some 1800 MHz spectrum from EE . This means that customers who buy the iPhone 5 will be able to benefit from 4G LTE when Three launch the service in the second half of next year.

It also won't work on quite a few of the existing 4G networks around the world and Europe in particular as they are mostly based on 800 MHz and 2.6 GHz

It is always the case that the chip manufacturers take time to support all the different frequencies in use around the world.

I can remember when Cellnet (now O2) and Vodafone had different phones from one2one (now Tmobile) and Orange as they use different frequencies.

mikerob wrote:It is always the case that the chip manufacturers take time to support all the different frequencies in use around the world.

I can remember when Cellnet (now O2) and Vodafone had different phones from one2one (now Tmobile) and Orange as they use different frequencies.

Pretty daft though to not support some of the biggest networks in Europe and unless you are technology savvy and investigate further an expensive gadget if you chuck out the cash and buy an unlocked one from Apple, their mention of the not working on all networks is buried in the micro print.

Hang on!! You mean an Apple product doesn't do what they say it does?

Jackie Brown wrote:Hang on!! You mean an Apple product doesn't do what they says it does?

No no no Jackie, it does do what it says just not on the 2 biggest networks in the UK and probably Europe come to that .
(they don''t say it does not work with O2 or Vodafone though, just it does not work with some networks)

Rooster wrote:

mikerob wrote:It is always the case that the chip manufacturers take time to support all the different frequencies in use around the world.

I can remember when Cellnet (now O2) and Vodafone had different phones from one2one (now Tmobile) and Orange as they use different frequencies.

Pretty daft though to not support some of the biggest networks in Europe and unless you are technology savvy and investigate further an expensive gadget if you chuck out the cash and buy an unlocked one from Apple, their mention of the not working on all networks is buried in the micro print.

The phone manufacturers are reliant on the component manufacturers (companies like Qualcomm and Broadcom) and there are no component manufacturers producing silicon and radio components that work on all the frequencies used by 4G around the world.

If you buy a Samsung Galaxy or Nokia Lumia phone from EE for their 4G service, they won't work on Vodafone or O2 either.

As I said, it is just like earlier generations of technology, it takes time for the component suppliers, then time for the phone manufacturers.

In the case of O2 and Vodafone, they don't even have frequencies allocated as the government will be auctioning these off at the end of the year.

Was there a similar issue with 3G?