Active Topics
-
maemo.org (1)
to Community by sixwheeledbeast - 1 day, 3 hrs ago -
Old stuff for Nokia 770 (0)
to Nokia 770 by teroyk - 1 day, 7 hrs ago - more...
 |
Nyrath |
2008-09-11
, 21:55
|
|
Posts: 92 |
Thanked: 50 times |
Joined on Jan 2006
@ the praeternatural tower
|
#1291
|
Ordinarily the capitalization doesn't matter. However, TrollTech made the dubious decision to call their framework Qt, which is far too close to Apple Computer's video solution "QuickTime" or QT.
 |
|
2008-09-11
, 22:34
|
|
Posts: 3,397 |
Thanked: 1,212 times |
Joined on Jul 2008
@ Netherlands
|
#1292
|
Originally Posted by Nyrath
Perhaps its the other way around.
Ordinarily the capitalization doesn't matter. However, TrollTech made the dubious decision to call their framework Qt, which is far too close to Apple Computer's video solution "QuickTime" or QT.
Qt (pronounced "cute" by its creators) [...]
Haavard Nord and Eirik Chambe-Eng (the original developers of Qt and the CEO and President, respectively, of Trolltech) began development of "Qt" in 1991, three years before the company was incorporated as Quasar Technologies, then changed the name to Troll Tech, and then to Trolltech.
The toolkit was called Qt because the letter Q looked appealing in Haavard's Emacs font, and "t" was inspired by Xt, the X toolkit
Apple released the first version of QuickTime on December 2, 1991 as a multimedia add-on for System Software 6 and later. The lead developer of QuickTime, Bruce Leak, ran the first public demonstration at the May 1991 Worldwide Developers Conference, where he played Apple's famous 1984 TV commercial on a Mac, at the time an astounding technological breakthrough. Microsoft's competing technology — Video for Windows — did not appear until November 1992.
The .qt extension is also used by Qt more often than anyone uses it for QuickTime.
__________________
Goosfraba! All text written by allnameswereout is public domain unless stated otherwise. Thank you for sharing your output!
Goosfraba! All text written by allnameswereout is public domain unless stated otherwise. Thank you for sharing your output!
| The Following User Says Thank You to allnameswereout For This Useful Post: | ||
|
|
2008-09-12
, 16:42
|
|
Posts: 92 |
Thanked: 50 times |
Joined on Jan 2006
@ the praeternatural tower
|
#1293
|
Originally Posted by allnameswereout
I stand corrected.
Perhaps its the other way around.
 |
|
2008-09-12
, 19:34
|
|
Posts: 4,930 |
Thanked: 2,272 times |
Joined on Oct 2007
|
#1294
|
Originally Posted by allnameswereout
Good point, but QuickTime sucks, too.
Besides, one of the above sucks.
| The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Benson For This Useful Post: | ||
 |
|
2008-09-12
, 20:29
|
|
Posts: 1,878 |
Thanked: 646 times |
Joined on Sep 2007
@ San Jose, CA
|
#1295
|
Originally Posted by Benson
Actually, you could do a PCMCIA or ExpressCard slot the same way you do an SD/XD card slot: you have a shallow slot that leaves the card hanging out. If you put this on the top edge of the N810, with the "top" facing the back face of the N810, then you could put various cards in, have them stick out the top, and still allow the screen to slide up (because the card's top bulge would be facing toward the back of the NIT).
As for the card slot "that can fit all card adapters", I'm not sure what that means, because none of my 3 laptops has any such thing. The union of my laptops' card slots would be: ExpressCard/34, SD/XD/MS, and type III PCMCIA, with no laptop having more than two of them. If you meant either an ExpressCard or PCMCIA, I can't see how those could be fit without substantially enlarging the device.
To support XD (which are much shorter than SD), the combo slot leaves the SD sticking out partway; none of these are suited to a pocketable device, IMO. One reasonable option would be a CF slot, which would allow a CF->PCMCIA dongle, except that PCMCIA is essentially dead; SD and USB seems like the most useful possibility without wasting a lot of space.
So, think about a PCMCIA or ExpressCard slot right where the N810's power button is. The slot's top side is the back of the N810. It runs the full depth of the N810, except for the connector space needed at the other end of the device. The rest of the card would stick out the top of the N810.
The advantage of picking PCMCIA would be that they make caddies for both CF and ExpressCard cards, so 1 PCMCIA slot could function for all 3 device formats. But, it also happens to have the largest door size, so that's a problem. And, I would argue against CF for the same reason you argue against PCMCIA -- it seems to be a dying format. I see fewer and fewer of the cards out in the wild. Especially for things like WWAN access.
The other problem is that this would probably have to do a bit a dance with the battery, and that area that the N810 WME uses for its WiMAX radio.
Such a slot would, however, give you several things like: no need for a second SD card slot, as those who want one can just plug in an SD->PCMCIA (or SD->CF or SD->ExpressCard) card reader.
Also, it would end the debate about WWAN radio access: you'd just get an ExpressCard WWAN radio, possibly an ExpressCard->PCMCIA caddy, and then just worry about having the appropriate card drivers.
Several other custom interfaces would also be taken care of ... they probably make CF IRDA devices, and things like that, for example.
I like the idea, but I also see that it has potential for being rather difficult to implement, even WITH the expectation that cards will stick out the top of the N900. It would be easier if the N900 had 2 small batteries instead of 1 medium size battery (the two smaller batteries I'm thinking of are the ones in the Nokia 6301, for example). Then you could just have the slot be center top, descending through the back of the device. And then put the two smaller batteries on either side of it. This would also give the added advantage of hot swappable batteries.
__________________
My Personal Blog
My Personal Blog
|
|
2008-09-12
, 20:32
|
|
Posts: 1,878 |
Thanked: 646 times |
Joined on Sep 2007
@ San Jose, CA
|
#1296
|
Originally Posted by geneven
And that will probably the only widely agreed upon statement wrt to 3G/WWAN on the NIT ;-)
I think that the sim was not only the most popular suggestion, it was also the most unpopular suggestion.
__________________
My Personal Blog
My Personal Blog
 |
|
2008-09-12
, 20:41
|
|
Posts: 4,672 |
Thanked: 5,455 times |
Joined on Jul 2008
@ Springfield, MA, USA
|
#1297
|
Originally Posted by Texrat
Yeah.. that's what I thought. That doesn't seem very open source at all yet. I'm not even sure that it should be in conversations about open source OS's until it actually is.
Um... maybe it's best if I just link you to a wiki article:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Symbian_OS
|
|
2008-09-12
, 20:54
|
|
Posts: 1,878 |
Thanked: 646 times |
Joined on Sep 2007
@ San Jose, CA
|
#1298
|
Originally Posted by TA-t3
Most cell phones make lousy phones, in this regard. In fact, I haven't ever seen a GOOD cell phone in this regard. Anything that isn't shaped like a landline handset is pretty much s**t in this regard (even clamshells). And THAT would require the NIT to be a bit bigger.
It's too big and clumsy to be a nice phone. If you make it smaller and more phone-shaped it'll make a bad Internet Tablet. Most people have already got a phone already (at least one - the workplace may force another on you). When I look for a phone I look for a small nice phone. When I look for an Internet Tablet I look for the biggest screen size that I can still shove into my jacket pocket. Bad phone.
Most people use a headset of some form (bluetooth, wired, whatever), and that renders the size/shape of the NIT itself completely irrelevant to the discussion of using it for making phone calls.
And, really, in this regard, it's already being used for phone calls (Gizmo and Skype). The argument that making phone calls on the NIT isn't viable is already refuted and wasted typing. The argument isn't "should we be able to make phone calls on the NIT" ... we already can. Answered and finished. The device's shape already works in this regard. Move on.
The argument is "which types of phone networks can we use for making those calls". Right now, we can use proprietary VOIP (Skype and Gizmo) and open VOIP (SIP). What's being asked for here is extending this to cover cellular/mobile voice networks.
The reason most people ask for a sim card in the NIT is to use 3G. Except for the problem with US providers and anti-tether,lock-in contracts (which wouldn't make life easy for sim-NIT owners either, mind),
I have a Nokia E61i. I also have a T-Mobile contract. The two have nothing to do with eachother, other than the fact that I have my T-Mobile SIM in my E61i. Everything works (except the Euro 3G, obviously). Lots of people make GSM compliant devices that just need a SIM card. And the carriers will happily sell you a SIM card (prepaid card only, contract with a free or cheap phone that you can use for backup, etc.).
And I could have just as easily used it with an AT&T SIM card. With their pre-paid $20/30 days unlimited data option.
If a carrier wanted to support the device, sell it as a contract discounted phone, whatever, great. Bully for them. But it's not even remotely required.
(and, by the way, if the card was plugged directly into the NIT, it wouldn't be "tethering" so "anti-tether" plans wouldn't matter)
those people tend to forget that the Way To Do It is to use your Bluetooth phone and tether the NIT.
Then keep replacing the phone when better tech comes out, instead of replacing the NIT. I've gone through 3 phones in the period I've owned my N800, moving from GPRS to 3G and now to Turbo 3G along the way. Without having to replace my N800, and not having to buy yet _another_ carrier contract.
And, let me get this straight... you're defending not having to re-buy your NIT by saying "I had to re-buy my phone". So, either way, you have to re-buy a device. But with a WWAN-NIT, you only have to carry _1_ device, instead of 2.
And "yet another carrier contract" -- you didn't have to do that with your phone? If you didn't, then you didn't get the discount. Same options if we're talking about a WWAN-NIT. You can buy the NIT off-contract and use your existing SIM card and service, no problem. If you buy on-contract, you get the discount.
Really, your arguments vary between condescending non-truths, moot statements, or self-contradictory statements that end up being the same with or without the WWAN inside the NIT.
__________________
My Personal Blog
My Personal Blog
|
|
2008-09-12
, 21:01
|
|
Posts: 1,878 |
Thanked: 646 times |
Joined on Sep 2007
@ San Jose, CA
|
#1299
|
Originally Posted by dbec10
As I pointed out, the size of the NIT is irrelevant to it's being used to make voice calls.
Just to clarify. My support of the sim slot extends to data only connections. As other people have said.
The NIT is too big for a phone,
voice plan cost
Numerous voice networks (there are less data networks)
And, it having the ability to make voice calls doesn't mean you have to use a voice calling plan. Tell your carrier "I've put my SIM card into a Data card, so give me a data calling plan". Go from there.
__________________
My Personal Blog
My Personal Blog
|
|
2008-09-12
, 21:06
|
|
Posts: 1,878 |
Thanked: 646 times |
Joined on Sep 2007
@ San Jose, CA
|
#1300
|
Originally Posted by vvaz
No. It's not.
- size; IT is too big to make good phone; I much prefer having two devices than one bulky.
In addition to what I've said already (about not holding it to your face), the N810 is only barely a little longer than the E61i, and only slightly wider (like 1 or 2 mm wider). It's form factor is already rather close to other phone offerings.
The "it's too big" argument is just flat out wrong.
__________________
My Personal Blog
My Personal Blog
 |
| Tags |
| dpads are fun, ideas, n900, n900 wishlist, revenge of the styli, stuff for nokia to read, the wrath of sty, wishlist |
«
Previous Thread
|
Next Thread
»
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 23:04.